ese 


ere} 


a 
i! 
} 
ἢ 


Ss 


ear 


ee τος - - 


Seas ἐν ἧς 
τας Ὡς 











HA) 


eee 
ΤΟΥ, 








ΗΝ ij 
Vai t 


eee ξ 
athe 
ait els 


ἢ 
Δ 
ΠΥ ΣῊ 
ἐπ εὐ 



































































































Ἷ i 
j ΡΣ 
᾿ ᾿ r 
ἢ ΠΝ 
4 γ᾽ ᾿ 
} idee ’ 
Padi 
᾿ 0) 
ΐ I iy 
j 
} ! ͵ ᾽ W ‘ 
4 f ie ιν yes 
; CPS iw Si eee 
i ͵ ) zee ΝΠ hata 
wa ᾿ ῃ ἡ ἘΝῚ ύρε iS 
Wal ΤΗΝ 
! nay , PUM she  ΟΝΗ 
: Η ἐλ ΜᾺ Dats Π 
Ἦν id Maa ; ᾿ Ἵ Ἕ ἢ 
{ “| 5 7 3 et | ε ‘ t Lis ne! : ΓΕ ͵ ἐπ ry ΓΝ β 
ith) ς Ἢ Ὶ ἈΦΡῸ tt Ν ΑΝ ΜΠ MOH ELT EA IEE: M Pay at ἡ 40.) " 
ce Ι ἐν " ͵ ΠΡ ἢ) ΓΙ 
/ ἢ } δ “ἢ: J 
j ) Ἵ ἢ 
Η 1 Wi ὙΠ ὙΕ 
ἘΠ. ia 
; eae pets 
, nay Ι 14) 4 Lae dee 
‘ ! ᾿ far} ΠΝ 
, ἥ Ἱ 4” URAC RIP er) ΤΣ: 
nih Vay Ἵ is ἡ ἡ aye ΑΨ ate oi ᾿ i : fot Dil hee bap ha thi oat 
᾿ / 4 ΗΜ, ASL ER dh fi εὐ εὐ ὁ Mtge 
Ie ‘ τ κα iM TREC LOE DA 34 [dsb AbA ee est ye "γ᾽ rd 
4 , } ' ’ 
id Π {7 ι Π 4 4 
ue Ἦ Ἧ Ἧ ' Weleda aL baked 
ΠΥ νι ἢ Πυ Ἵ ΓΗ th ΔΙ 
δὴ ] ἥ ἐν Rian ene 1! PTI nu EG ἐν 
ιν NBN ITF | bcp 4.9 j {: tye ent 
Nd ᾿ ͵ ΤΥ 4. ᾿ #344 
i j ͵ be bhi hee 
ne τ ὙΠ) ΠΗ Μῃ 
᾿ ὅν} ‘ yt ἢ 2. 
a q| aie vp wy) 
‘ 
ἢ " j ν bibl ple 
μ "Ὦ ! gud 
i Sh A ene he 
ne) Ay 
' ! ᾿ 4 fu 4 4 ΓΨ» 
eit Pcl eee ὁ i ΓῚ ‘ 
wil ἢ his ri ᾿ eee | 
ii } 1 ΠΡ ΓΙ Ϊ 
τ "ἢ Ὁ) iat) ‘ 1 pie {1}. Ἷ Π 
v4 41} pitied ! ἘΠῚ ' Boa 
' " Ἰ | efit ͵ ΤΠ]: ΠΥ ΤΥ ἐν: 
he , tyre ΣΝ ἡ τὶ εν ; sq ditenaly RiP 
a | } ᾿ ’ t ΓΗ Vide μὲ H + Ue 8 
«8 aed ' {ΠῚ τ \ ῃ ὙΠ 
Ὁ ΗΝ, εν ἢ 8 ἢ ἡ is) 
a Pe Ey a et aes Re ert AL nats 
‘os , ΣΝ 
᾿ Oy ae Vn tit ROR 
4 ΠῚ ἡ ENE Bey i ΣΙ 
1 *t tf ΠῚ 
) fae ΤΥ ite 
e reese mete 
Pee gy wad 


ae 





PUL pa a at 
Had ve ia ge aies Ἢ ἢ 
ΠΥ ΜΗ 


"δ 4186) Ἵ 
ὁ ἀνε αὐ, 1} 
 ν hel aiken 


176% 
ΔῊ {hss 



























py 





᾿ τι 


Ὧν 








meat)? 





LF ee ὶ 
aie 
δὰ 










Mi Ρ , hey 
" 
il THM 
f Ἵ Ar, 
i ve 
he Ἴ ἡ τί λ 
Ι Φ Nat 
‘ 
, 
tne 
4 
1 
| i 
3 ᾿ 
ν ! 
ι , 
ἢ 
" 
i + 
} 4 
ies » Ϊ 
me PACU 
a's 4 ἢ 


Fe 
- 
ΐ 
τῇ 





ΩΝ Seeds HELA 
>» hal ) γ 

' AS 
he ‘ ἡ ν Neem 
“ἌἸἌἮ᾿4ΦἉ ‘ : ἌΣ 
ΓΑ ,, ran 
1 a Ὑ1) 
Bi ; eM 


Ἄχ. 
ἐδ ΠΝ 


δ᾽ i 


i Re 
Hh i 
‘i 


Sah 





THE 


GREEK TESTAMENT. 


VOL. IL. 


THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, 
THE EPISTLES TO THE ROMANS AND CORINTHIANS. 





ret ekg. 
4 
er ‘ ‘ 
ἃ . , 
tas ον toh yes ry 
ee wre 
=. ae 





= 


45. ἥτις ἀρχὴν λαβοῦσα λαλεῖσθαι διὰ τοῦ κυρ 
ἀκουσάντων εἰς ἡμᾶς ἐβεβαιώθη. 





— - 
—_ 


ary at Pring, t) 


THE Vm 
τ be τ 





΄ 


ΟΝ aise ise 
GREEK TESTAMENT) 


WITH A CRITICALLY REVISED TEXT: A DIGEST OF 
VARIOUS READINGS: MARGINAL REFERENCES TO VERBAL AND 
IDIOMATIC USAGE: PROLEGOMENA: 

AND A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY 


FOR THE USE OF THEOLOGICAL STUDENTS AND MINISTERS 


BY 


HENRY ALFORD, DD. 


LATE DEAN OF CANTERBURY 


IN FOUR VOLUMES 


VO. Et 
CONTAINING 
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 
THE EPISTLES TO THE ROMANS AND CORINTHIANS 


NEW IMPRESSION 


LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CoO. 
89 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON 
NEW YORK AND BOMBAY 


DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO. 


Cambritge “ 


1899 


ΝΘ 


i} Rhein 





ADVERTISEMENT 


TO THE 


SEVENTH EDITION. 


In this Edition the Digest has been revised with the help of 
Tischendorf’s 8th Edition of the Greek Testament. Some correc- 
tions and additions have also been made to the notes, mainly 
from Dean Alford’s ‘‘ New Testament for English Readers.” The 
new matter has been enclosed, as far as seemed practicable, within 


square brackets. 


November, 1876. 


ADVERTISEMENT TO THE SIXTH EDITION. 


ΤῊΣ Fourth Edition of my Second Volume passed under entire and careful 
revision as regards, 1. the critical arrangement of the text, and 2. the body of 
references. Both these labours were carried on under my own superintendence 
by my Secretaries; the former, including the re-writing of the Digest of various 
readings, and of that part of the Prolegomena which treats of the Apparatus 
Criticus, by the Rev. A. W. Grafton, now Vice-Principal of the Theological 
College at Wells: the latter, by the Rev. R. Hake, Minor Canon of Canterbury. 

The alterations in the notes were chiefly those which were rendered necessary 


vi ADVERTISEMENT TO THE SIXTH EDITION. 


by the more complete conformation of the text to the testimony of our most 
ancient Manuscripts and Versions. 

In the Fifth Edition, the Codex Sinaiticus was collated throughout, and in 
certain doubtful passages of the text its testimony decided the reading. 

The references were somewhat modified, principally with a view to render 
each volume independent in itself, and prevent constant cross reference to the 
others. 

In this Sixth Edition, the Codex Porphyrianus (P) has been collated (from 
Tischendorf’s Edition) for the Acts of the Apostles: and its readings, and those 
of the cursive ms. 47 have been inserted (from Tregelles) in the Digest, throughout 
1 and 2 Corinthians. 

My thanks are due to P. E. Pusey, Esq., for additional notices and corrections 
of the readings found in Cyril of Alexandria, and in the Syriac Versions. 


DEANERY, CANTERBURY, 
January 2, 1871. 


CONTENTS OF THE PROLEGOMENA. 


CHAPTER IL 


OF THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 


SECTION 


I. 
11. 
1Π1. 
IV. 
Υ: 
ΥΙ. 


Its Authorship . 

Its Sources 

For what Readers ad ΝΕ πἰοῦ Object = was ἘΠῚ 
At what Time and Place it was written 

Genuineness and State of the Text 

Chronology . ore 


CHAPTER IL. 


OF THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 


. Its Authorship and Integrity 

. For what Readers it was written : Ἃ : : 
. With what Object it was written =. i . ‘ ; δ 
. At what Time and Place it was written 

. Language and Style 


CHAPTER III. 


OF THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


. Its Autnorship and Integrity. 

» For what Readers it was written 

. With what Object it was written 

. Of the Number of Epistles written by Paul to the Cor ΓΗ . 
. Of the Number of Visits made by Paul to the Corinthians 

. At what Place and Time this eae was written 

- Matter and Style - . : . ἃ 


CONTENTS OF THE PROLEGOMENA. 


Vili 


CHAPTER IV. 


OF THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


BECEION 
. Its Authorship and Integrity 
1. Circumstances, Place, and Time of Writing 


III. Matter and Style ‘ ‘ : : . Ξ : ᾿ 


CHAPTER V. 
APPARATUS CRITICUS. 
I. Manuscripts referred to in this Volume. : ο 


II. Ancient Versions referred to in this Volume 
111. Fathers and Ancient Writers cited in the Digest of this φώς 


IV. List and Specification of Editions of other Books on referred ee or 


made use of in this Volume 3 : : Ξ ‘ 


PAGE 
57 
59 
61 


PROLEGOMENA. 


CHAPTER I. 


THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 


SECTION I. 
ITS AUTHORSHIP. 


1. Tue Author of this book is identical with that of the third Gospel, 
as plainly appears from the circumstance that in its address, to a certain 
Theophilus, reference is made to a former work, on the acts and words 
of Jesus, similarly addressed. Compare Acts i. 1, Luke i. 8. That 
Author is traditionally known as Lucas or Luke, spoken of Col. iv. 14, 
and again Philem. 24, and 2 Tim. iv. 11. For notices respecting him, 
see Prolegg. to Vel. I. ch. iv. § 1. 

2. Nor is there any reason to reject the testimony of tradition in this 
matter. In chapters xxvii. and xxvill. we find our Author (see below, 
par. 4) accompanying Paul to Rome. In the passages above cited, all 
written from Rome, we find that Luke was there, in the company of that 
Apostle. So far at least there is nothing inconsistent with Luke having 
written this book ; and if this book, the Gospel. 

3. That no other writer has here assumed the person of the Author of 
the Gospel, may be gathered from the diction of this book strongly 
resembling that of the other. Supposing the student to. consult the 
references in this Edition, he will be continually met by words and 
phrases either peculiar to the two books and not met with elsewhere 
(about fifty of these occur),—or mostly found in the two. 

4. That no writer other than the Author of the rest of the book has 
furnished the parts in which the narrative proceeds in the first person, 
will be plain, if the matter be thus considered. (a) We have evidence, 
both by his own assertion (Luke i. 3), and from the contents of the 
Gospel and this book, that Luke was a careful and painstaking writer. 
Now it would bespeak a degree of carelessness wholly unexampled,— 
for one who compiled a continuous memoir, to leave its component 
parts, derived from various sources, in their original fragmentary state, 

Vor. II.—1] a 


PROLEGOMENA.| THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [cn. 2. 


some in the third, others in the first person. Unquestionably such a 
writer would in such a case have translated the whole into the third 
person. (£) Seeing that Luke does use the first person in Acts i. 1, 
and that the first person is resumed ch. (xiv. 22) xvi. 1O—17 ; xx. 5— 
15 ; xxi. 1—18; xxvii. 1—xxviii. 16, it is but a fair inference that in 
one and the same book, and that book betokening considerable care of 
writing and arrangement, the speaker implied by the use of the first 
person is one and the same throughout. 

5. That the author never names himself, either as the author, or 
otherwise, can of itself not be urged as an objection to any hypothesis 
of authorship, unless by the occurrence of some mention, from which 
the authorship by another may be fairly inferred. But, if we have in 
this book no mention of Luke, we have as certainly no hint of any other 
person having furnished the narrative. On the other hand we have a 
hint by which it appears that some one other than all the specified 
companions of Paul on a certain occasion (Acts xx. 4, 5) was with 
him, and was the author of the narrative. After the mention by name 
of Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius, Timotheus, Tychicus, and 
Trophimus, we read, ‘These having gone forward waited for us at 
Troas : this pronoun including Paul and the writer, at least (see note 
there). 

6. That Paul himself, in Epistles written during the journeys here 
described, does not name Luke, cannot be alleged as any argument why 
Luke should not have been the author of our narrative. For (a), we 
have undoubted examples of Paul sometimes merely alluding generally 
to those who were with him, as Phil. iv. 21, 22 ;—sometimes sedulously 
suppressing their names while speaking of services performed by them, 
as 2 Cor. vill. 18 : sometimes not mentioning or alluding to them at all, 
as in the Epistles to the Galatians and to the Ephesians :—and 
(8) strictly speaking, no Epistles appear to have been written by Paul 
while our writer was in his company, before his Roman imprisonment. 
For he does not seem to have joined him at Corinth, ch. xviii., whence 
the two Epistles to the Thessalonians were written :—or to have been 
with him at Ephesus, ch. xix..—whence (probably) the Epistle to the 
Galatians was written ;—nor again to have wintered with him at 
Corinth, ch. xx. 8, at the time of his writing the Epistle to the Romans, 
and (possibly) that to the Galatians. 

7. But independently of the above arguments to establish the identity 
of the author throughout, we may infer the same from the similarity of 
diction and style, which do not vary through the book. Here again we 
have, as will be seen abundantly in the references, terms peculiar to the 
writer occurring in various parts of the book ;—favourite terms and. 
phrases occurring in all parts of the book ; which could not well have 
been the case, had he merely incorporated the memoirs of others. For 


~ 


2 | 





§ 1.1 ITS AUTHORSHIP: | PROLEGOMENA. 


compendious statements of these, the whole of which have been inserted 
in my references, I refer the reader to Dr. Davidson’s Introd. to the 
IN. Ts vol. 11. pp. 4, ὁ. 

8. And again, the notes will be found repeatedly to point out cases 
where the narrator takes up again (with his characteristic μὲν οὖν or 
otherwise) the thread of history previously dropped (see 6. g., and com- 
pare, ch. xi. 16,1. 5: xi. 19, viii, 1—4: xxi. 8, vi. 5, vill. 5 ff: xxii. 20, 
vii. 58, viii. 1, &c.). 

9. Another interesting source of evidence on this head is pointed out 
by Mr. Smith, in his valuable work on the Voyage and Shipwreck of 
St. Paul. He has shewn that in the various narratives of sea voyages 
in this book, and in that of the stilling of the storm in the Gospel, Luke 
has, with remarkable consistency, shewn himself to be just so much 
acquainted with the phrases and habits of seamen, as a lapdsman well 
habituated to the sea, but- himself no seaman, might be expected to 
be. To specify instances would be beyond my limits, besides that 
Mr. Smith’s very interesting and ingenious argument and illustrations 
would be spoiled by abridgment. I can only refer my reader to his 
work *. 

10. To the same class belong the intimations, slight indeed but 
interesting, discoverable here and in the Gospel in the descriptions of 
- diseases, that the author was one well acquainted with them and with 
the technical language of the medical profession. Of this kind are 
συνεχομένη πυρετῷ μεγάλῳ, Luke iv. 88 ; πυρετοῖς x. δυςεντερίῳ συνεχόμενον, 
Acts xxviii. 8 : see also Luke viii. 45, 44,—Acts iii. 7, xii. 28, xu. 11, 
and compare Col. iv. 14. 

11. It will be necessary to mention the various hypotheses which 
have substituted some other narrator for Luke in the parts of the Acts 
where the first person is used, or have merged his personality in that of 
some other companion of Paul: and, irrespective of the above argu- 
ments, to deal with them on their own merits. (a) Bleek and De 
Wette hold TimorHeus, and not Luke, to have been the companion of 
Paul and the narrator in the first person,—-and Luke to have inserted 
those portions from a journal kept by Timotheus, and without alteration. 
But this is not consistent with ch. xx. 4,5: where, when the com- 
panions of Paul have been named, and Timotheus among them, it is said 
οὗτοι προελθόντες ἔμενον ἡμᾶς ἐν Τρωάδι : the escape from this objection 
attempted by making οὗτοι refer to Tychicus and Trophimus only, being 
on all ordinary rules of construction, inadmissible. This reason is, to 
my mind, sufficient : those who wish to see others brought out, and the 
supports of the hypothesis (which are entirely negative and inferential} 


1 A second edition of Mr. Smith’s book appeared in 1856, enlarged with much 
interesting detail. See the excursus below “On the city of Lasza.” 


8] a2 


PROLEGOMENA.| THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [ CH. I. 


invalidated, may consult Dr. Davidson’s Introduction to the N. T., vol. 
ii. pp. 9 ff. 

(8) Stras was the narrator in the first person, and indeed the author 
of the latter part of the book, beginning with ch. xv. 13 (80 ?), im the form 
of personal memoirs, which then were worked up. This hypothesis, which 
has not any thing resembling evidence to support it, is sufficiently refuted 
by the way in which the mention of Silas is introduced ch. xv. 22 
(included by the hypothesis in his own work) as being a ‘chief man among 
the brethren.’ If it be answered that this notice of him was inserted 
by Luke,—Is it, I would ask, likely, that an author who was at no more 
pains in his work than to leave the jirst person standing in the narrative 
of another which he used, would have added to the mention of new 
individuals notices of this kind ? 3 

(y) More ingenious, and admitting of more plausible defence, is the 
hypothesis, which identifies Luke himself with Silas. The latest and 
ablest vindication of this view is contained in an article by the Author 
of the literary history of the N. T. in Kitto’s Journal of Sacred Lit. for 
Oct. 1850. The chief arguments by which he supports it are these :— 

(1) ‘ The author of the Acts appears, in the early part of his history, 
to have been well acquainted with the acts and sayings of Peter, as he 
was afterwards with those of Paul. Now the only persons whom this 
description would fit, are Silvanus (or Silas), and Mark (see 1 Pet. 
v. 12,13). That Mark did not after Acts xv. travel with Paul, we 
know: but Silas did, and from that time we find greater precision in 
the narrative as regards the history of that Apostle.” 

But to this it may be answered,—that the difference between the 
kind of acquaintance which the historian possesses with Peter and his 
sayings and doings, and that with Paul and his history, is very observ- 
able even to a cursory reader. No where in the first part of the book 
does he use the first person: and no where, although the testimony has 
plainly come in many parts from autoptic authority, does the narrator 
himself appear as the eye-witness. In fact, all that the above argu- 
ment insists on, is easily and naturally satisfied, by the long and inti- 
mate companionship of Luke and Silvanus as fellow-travellers with Paul, 
during which time Luke may have gathered, if Silvanus must be con- 
sidered as his authority, all that we now find in the former parts of our 
history ὅς 


2 I do not notice in the text the untenableness of the author’s hypothesis that 
Silvanus accompanied Peter from Jerusalem into the East, and became the bearer of 
his first Epistle to the Christians of Asia Minor, before the commencement of his own 
connexion with Paul: i.e. before the gospel had ever been preached to many of those 
addressed by Peter, which it had already been,—see 1 Pet. i. 12, 25, and remark the 
aorists in both places. This extraordinary hypothesis is not necessary to his theory of 
the identity of Luke and Silas: indeed that theory is better without it, as then the 

ie Ὑ' 


§ 1] ITS AUTHORSHIP. [ PROLEGOMENA. 


(2) “Luke and Silvanus (Silas) are no. where mentioned together. 
Luke is never mentioned in the Acts: Silas is never coupled with Luke 
in the addresses or salutations of the Epistles. And the two names, 
Silvanus from sz/va, and Lucanus from lucus, are so cognate that they ° 
might well be the appellations of one and the same person.” 

This ingenious argument, if well weighed, will be found to have but 
little force. As to Luke not being named in the Acts, the fact itself 
goes for nothing. If it have any prima facie weight, it would be against 
the hypothesis. That one who was careful to insert an explanatory 
notice respecting one so well known as Ξαῦλος ὁ καὶ Παῦλος, should take 
no notice at all of the fact hereafter likely to occasion so much confusion, 
—that he who was named Silas in the history, was: known by Paul, and 
mentioned in his Epistles, as Lucas,—is hardly probable. But let us 
observe the occasions on which Silvanus and Lucas have been mentioned 
by Paul. In 1 Thess. i. 1, and 2 Thess. i. 1, we have Silvanus joined 
with Paul and Timotheus. In 2 Cor. i. 19, we have an allusion to the 
preaching of Christ at Corinth by Paul, Silvanus, and Timotheus. Ac- 
cordingly in Acts xviii. 5, we find that Silas and Timotheus came from 
Macedonia and joined Paul at Corinth: this occurring in a part of the 
history when (I am speaking according to the ordinary and prima 
facie inference, from the disuse of the first person since xvi. 17) the 
author was absent from Paul. Now let us turn to Col. iv. 14, 
Philem. 24°. These Epistles belong to a time when we know by 
the latter chapters of the Acts, that the writer of the history was with 
Paul. Accordingly I find Lucas mentioned in both places. So far at 
least is in remarkable accordance with the common view that Silas and 
Lucas were not one, but two persons, and that the latter was the author 
of the Acts, and not the former. It may be said that Paul called the 
same person Lucas whom he had previously called Silvanus: and this 
may be supported by his variations between Peter and Cephas. But 
(1) I conceive that the case of Peter was too exceptional an one (both 
names having apparently been given him and used by our Lord Himself) 
to found an analogy upon: and (2) Peter’s names are forms of the 
same meaning in two different languages, not words of similar meaning 
in the same language. 

But the principal argument in my mind against this hypothesis (over 
and above that from ch. xv. 22) is, that it would introduce unaccount- 
able confusion into the form and expression of a history, which on the 
common view is lucid and accountable enough. Imagine Silas to be the 
speaker in ch. xvi., and Luke to be merged in Silas. Then ‘we,’ from 
ver. 10 to ver. 18, = Silas and Timotheus. In ver. 19, it would be 


silence of the Acts’on Peter’s proceedings after Acts xii. is accountable, which on that 
hypothesis it would not be. 
5. I omit at present 2 Tim. iv. 11. 


“1 


PROLEGOMENA.] THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. { CH. 1. 


natural to desert the first person, in order to express what happened to 
Paul and Silas, and not to Timotheus. The same specification of Paul 
and Silas might, for the same reason, be continued during the stay at 
Philippi, i. 6. to the end of that chapter. But is it conceivable, that the 
‘we’ should not be resumed when the journey begins again ch. xvii. 1, 
—that it should not be used ch. xviii. 11, seeing that from 2 Cor. i. 1¢ 
it was Paul, Silvanus, and Timotheus, who were preaching during that 
time at Corinth—in fact, that it should never be resumed till ch. xx. 4, 
at the very place (Philippi) where it was dropped before ? 

The argument from the similarity of selva and lucus is too unsub- 
stantial to deserve serious attention. And that built on the assumption 
that the author of the third Gospel and the Acts must have held a place 
of greater honour than we find assigned to Lucas, is purely arbitrary, 
and sufficiently answered by observing that he is ranked with Marcus, 
apparently his fellow-Evangelist, in Philem. 24. Rather would it seem 
probable, that the men of word and action, in those times of the living 
energy of the Spirit, would take the highest place ; and that the work of 
securing to future generations the word of God would not be fully 
honoured, till from necessity, it became duly valued. 

12. I shall now endeavour to sketch out the personal history of the 
author of the Acts, as far as it can be gathered, during the events which 
he relates. . | 

The first direct intimation of his being in the company of Paul, occurs 
ch. xvi. 10, at Troas, when Paul was endeavouring (looking for a ship) 
to sail into Macedonia. Now at this time, Paul had been apparently 
detained in Galatia by sickness, and had just passed through (preaching 
as he went, see ch. xviii. 23) that country and Phrygia. It is hardly 
probable that he had visited Colossz, as it lay far out of his route, but 
he may, in the then uncertainty of his destination, have done so. (See 
Col. ii. 1 and note.) I say this, because it is remarkable that in sending 
Luke’s salutation to the Colossians (Col. iv. 14), he calls him 6 ἰατρὸς ὁ 
ἀγαπητός. This designation might recall to their minds the relation in 
which Luke had stood to Paul when in their country ; or more probably 
may have been an effusion of the warm heart of Paul, on recollection of 
the services rendered to him on that journey by his loving care. Atall 
events such a designation, occurring in such a place, is not inconsistent 
with the idea that Luke about that time became Paul’s companion on 
account of the weak state of his health. Further to establish this is 
impossible : but what follows is not inconsistent with it. We find him 
in the Apostle’s company no further than to Philippi, the object perhaps 
of his attendance on him having been then fulfilled ἡ. 


* He may have been put in charge with the church at Philippi, but the conjecture 
is not very probable. 


6] 


Το ITS AUTHORSHIP. PROLEGOMENA, 
δ τὸ 


13. If we seek for any trace of previous connexion between Luke and 
Paul, we find nothing but the very slightest hint, and that perhaps 
hardly to be taken as such. In ch. xiv. 21, 22 we read, that Paul, after 
the stoning at Lystra, departed with Barnabas to Derbe, and returned 
through Lystra and Iconium and Antioch (in Pisidia) confirming the 
sous of the disciples, exhorting them -to remain in the faith, καὶ ὅτι διὰ 
πολλῶν θλίψεων δεῖ ἡμᾶς εἰςελθεῖν εἰς τ. βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. This 
ἡμᾶς may be, as commonly understood, spoken by the writer as a Chris- 
tian, and of ali Christians: but it may also be indicative of the writer's 
presence®: and I cannot help connecting it with the tradition that Luke 
was a native of Antioch®: though Antioch in Syria is there meant. 
Certainly, in the account (ch. xiii.) of the events at Antioch in Pisidia, 
there is remarkable particularity. Paul’s speech is fully reported: 
the account of its effect vv. 44—49 given with much earnestness of 
feeling :—and one little notice is added after the departure of Paul and 
Barnabas, ver. 52, which looks.very like the testimony of one who was 
left behind at Antioch. Whether this may have been the place of 
Luke’s own conversion, we know not ; but a peculiar interest evidently 
hangs about this preaching at Antioch in the mind of the narrator, be 
he who he may : and Mark had departed, who might have supplied the 
Cyprian events (see ver. 13). 

14. After the second junction with Paul and his company, ch. xx. 5, 
we find him remaining with the Apostle to the end of our history. It 
would not be necessary to suppose this second attachment to him to 
have had the same occasion as the first. That which weakness of body 
at first made advisable, affection may subsequently have renewed. And 
we have reason to believe that this was really the case. Not only the 
epithet ἀγαπητός, Col. iv. 14, but the fact, that very late in the life of the 
Apostle (see Prolegg. to the Pastoral Epistles, § ii.) when “all in Asia 
were turned away from him” (2 Tim. i. 15), and Demas, Crescens, and 
Titus had for various reasons left him, the faithful Luke still remained 
(2 Tim. iv. 11), bespeaks an ardent and steady attachment to the person 
of him who in all probability was his father in the faith. 

15. Of the subsequent history and death of Luke nothing is known. 


5 The idea that ἡμᾶς can by any possibility be applied to the writer has been contro- 
verted by Prof. Lightfoot in the Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology for March, 
1856, p. 95. But see note in Joc. 

6 That the two places of that name would thus be confounded, is nothing surprising 
to those who are familiar with tradition. The usual ground assigned for this idea, viz. 
the mention of Lucius (of Cyrene) as being at Antioch, ch. xiii. 1, is certainly far from 
satisfactory, 


PROLEGOMENA.] THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [ Ce. Σ, 


SECTION IL. 
ITS SOURCES. 


1. The principal enquiry respecting the sources of the narrative in the 
Acts relates to the first part as far as ch. xiii. After that, the history 
follows the Apostle Paul, of whom its writer was subsequently the con- 
stant companion. From him therefore the incidents might be derived, 
where the writer himself was not present. I shall before the end of this 
section enquire how far the appearances warrant our supposing that his 
testimony has furnished such portions. 

2. I proceed to enquire into the probable sources of the first part of 
our history. And here something will depend on our answer to another 
question, — When is it probable that Luke was engaged in drawing up 
the book? I shall endeavour to support in another section my firm 
conviction that its publication took place at the end of the two years 
mentioned in ch. xxviii. 30,31. It may be convenient for me at. present 
to assume that to have been the case, but my argument does not 
altogether depend on that assumption. I proceed on the hardly 
deniable inference, that of the last voyage and shipwreck a regular 
journal was kept by Luke—probably set down during the winter 
months at Malta. It must then be evident, that at this time the pur- 
pose of writing a δεύτερος λόγος was ripened in his mind. But how 
long had this purpose been in his mind? Am J altogether beside the 
mark in supposing, that it was with this purpose among others that he 
became one of Paul’s company on the return to Asia in ch. xx. 4, 5? 
Whether (see Prolegg. to Luke, § iv. 2, 3) the Gospel was written for 
the most part during the interval between Luke being left at Philippi in 
ch. xvi. and his being taken up at the same place in ch. xx., or after- 
wards in Palestine,—on either supposition it is not improbable that the 
writing of the Acts was at this time already designed,—either as a 
sequel to the Gospel already finished, or simultaneously with the Gospel, 
as its future sequel. 

3. It is very possible that the design may have grown under his 
hands, or more properly speaking have been by little and little sug- 
gested by the direction of the Spirit of God. He may have intended, on 
leaving Philippi with Paul (ch. xx. 4, 5), only to draw up a διήγησις of 
his own travels in company with that Apostle, to serve as a record of his 
acts and sayings in tounding the churches in Europe and Asia. However 
this may have been, we tind him recording minutely every circumstance 
of this voyage, which I take to have been the first written portion of the 
book. At any time during that or subsequent travels, or during the 
two year's at Rome, he may have filled in those parts of the narrative 


8] 


ὅπ. ITS SOURCES. [PROLEGOMENA. 


which occurred during his absence from Paul,—by the oral dictation of 
the Apostle. 

4, Let us now suppose Paul already in custody at Cesarea. The 
narrative has been brought down to that time. The circumstances of 
his apprehension,—his defence before the Jews,—their conspiracy, — 
his rescue from them and transmission to Felix,—all this has been duly 
and minutely recorded,—even the letter of Claudius Lysias having been 
obtained, probably by acquaintance with some one about Felix. An 
intention similar to that announced in παρηκολουθηκότι πᾶσιν ἀκριβῶς 
(Luke i. 3) is here evidently shewn. 

5. But now Providence interposes, and lays aside the great Apostle 
for two years. During all this time Luke appears to have been not far 
from his neighbourhood, watching the turn of events, ready to accom- 
pany him to Rome, according to the divine announcement of ch. xxiii. 
11. But “they also serve, who only stand and wait.” What so 
natural, as that he should avail himself of this important interval to 
obtain, from Cesarea and Jerusalem, and perhaps from other parts of 
Palestine, information by which he might complete his hitherto frag- 
mentary notices ? That accurate following up of every thing, or rather 
tracing down of every thing from its source,—what time so appropriate 
for it as this, when among the brethren in Judea he might find many 
eye-witnesses and ministers of the word, and might avail himself of the 
διηγήσεις Which of all places would be most likely to abound there where 
the events themselves had happened ? During this interval therefore I 
suppose Luke to have been employed in ΕΣ: materials, perhaps for 
his Gospel, but certainly for the first part of the Acts. 

6. His main source of information would be the church at Jerusalem. 
There, from James, or from some apostolic men who had been on the 
spot from the first, he would learn the second and fuller account of the 
Ascension,—the weighty events of the day of Pentecost, the following 
acts and discourses. In the fulness of the outpouring of the Holy 
Ghost on the apostles and elders at this time, which raised them above 
ordinary men in power of spirit and utterance, it would be merely an 
inference from analogy, that their remembrance of the words uttered at 
remarkable crises of the apostolic history should be something sur- 
passing mere human recollection: that these hallowed words of the 
Spirit’s own prompting should have abode with the church for its com- 
fort and instruction, and finally have been committed to writing for all 
subsequent ages. 

7. But if analogy would a priori suggest this, the phenomena of our 
history confirm it. The references (which have been on that account a 
singularly interesting labour) will shew to the attentive student in those 
speeches, quite enough peculiarities to identify them as the sentiments 
and diction of the great Apostle of the circumcision, while at the same 


9] 


Pe ol 


PROLEGOMENA.]| THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. (cH. I. 


time there is enough of Luke’s own style and expression to shew. that 
the whole material has been carefully worked over and grecized by 
his hand. 

8. It has been much disputed whether Luke used written documents 
in constructing this part of the Acts’. It may have been so. Detailed 
memoirs of some of the most important events may have been drawn up. 
If so, ch. ii. would in all probability be such a memoir. The letters, 
ch. xv. 23—29 (xxiii. 26—30), must have been of this kind: some of 
the discourses, as that of Peter ch. xi. 5—17, containing expressions 
unknown to Luke’s style (see reff.) : more or less, the other speeches of 
Peter, containing many striking points of similarity to (both) his 
Epistles, —see reff. At the same time, from the similarity of ending of 
the earlier sections (compare ch. ii. 46, 47; iv. 82 ff.; v. 42; ix. 31; 
xii. 24), from the occurrence of words and phrases peculiar to Luke in 
the midst of such speeches as those noticed above (e. g. σταθέντα ch. 
xi. 18, and see Dr. Davidson p. 30 for a list, which I have incorporated 
in the reff.), the inference must be (as in the last paragraph) that such 
documents were not adopted until their language had been revised, 
where thought necessary, by the author himself. The very minute and 
careful detail of ch. xii., evidently intended to give the highest authority 
to the narrative of Peter’s miraculous deliveranece,—so that the house 
itself of Mary the mother of John Mark is specified, the name of the 
female servant who went to the door, her remarks and the answer made 
to her, are all given,—has apparently been the result of diligent enquiry 
on the spot, from the parties concerned. We can hardly resist the 
inference that the very same persons who fifteen years before had been 
witnesses of the deliverance, now gave the details of an occurrence 
which they could never forget, and described their own feelings on it. 

9. Whether Luke at this time can Lave fallen in with Peter person- 
ally, is very questionable. That Apostle certainly does not appear to 
have been at Jerusalem when Paul visited it: and from the omission of 
all mention of him after ch. xv., the natural inference is, that he was not 
there during any part of Paul’s imprisonment. (See note on Gal. ii. 
1}, and Prolegg. to 1 Pet. ᾧ ii. 6, 7.) 

10. But one very important section of the first part of the Acts is 
concerned with events which happened at Cesarea,—and derived from 
information obtained there. There dwelt Philip the Evangelist, one of 
the seven (ch. xxi. 8): a most important authority for the contents of 
ch, vi. and viii. ὅν if not also for some events previous to ch. vi. There 


7 See the question discussed by Dr. Davidson, pp. 21 ff. 

8 De Wette (Exeget. Handb. Apostg. p. 6) objects that Philip could hardly have 
imparted ch. viii. 39 in its present form. At first sight, it seems so: but the next 
verse εὐηγγελίζετο τὰς πόλεις πάσας, K.T.A. can on the other hand hardly have been 
imparted by any but Philip: and this leads us to think whether subsequent enquiry 


10] 


§ u.] ITS SOURCES. | PROLEGOMENA. 


too, we may well believe, still dwelt, if not Cornelius himself*, yet some 
of the συνεληλυθότες πολλοί of ch. x. 27,—the persons perhaps who had 
gone to fetch Peter from Joppa,—at all events plenty who could nar- 
rate the occurrences of that memorable day, and the words which formed 
the great procem of the Gentile Gospel. 

11. Connected with the Cesarean part of our history, is one minute 
touch of truth and accuracy, which is interesting as pointing to careful 
research and information of the most trustworthy kind. The awful 
death of Herod Agrippa I. had happened on a great public occasion. 
It appears that the celebration of a festival in honour of Cesar had also 
been selected as the time of audience for an embassy of the inhabitants 
of Tyreand Sidon, and during this audience, after making an oration to 
the embassy, Herod was struck by the hand of God. Now of this latter 
particular, the Sidonian embassy, the Jewish historian knows nothing. 
(See the passage quoted, ad loc. ch. xii. 21.) But Luke, who had made 
careful enquiries on the spot, who had spent a week at Tyre, ch. xxi. 4—7, 
—and Paul, who had friends at Sidon, ch. xxvii. ὃ, were better acquainted 
with the facts of the occurrence than to overlook, as Josephus did, the 
minute details in the general character of the festival. 

12. One or two sections in the former part of the Acts require sepa- 
rate consideration. 

(a) The apology of Stephen, from its length and peculiar charac- 
teristics, naturally suggests an enquiry as to the source whence it may 
probably have been obtained by Luke. And here I should feel little 
hesitation in ascribing a principal share in the report to him who was 
so deeply implicated in Stephen’s martyrdom,—who shews by his own 
reference (ch. xxii. 20) to the part taken by him on that occasion, how 
indelibly it was fixed in his memory,—and who in more than one place 
of his recorded speeches and writings, seems to reproduce the very 
thoughts and expressions of Stephen. At the same time, it would be 
improbable that the church at Jerusalem should have preserved no 
memorial of so important a speech as that of her first martyr before his 
judges. So that, however we may be inclined to attribute much of its 
particularity and copiousness to information derived from Paul, it must 
be classed, as to its general form, among those contributions to the 
history obtained by Luke at Jerusalem. 

(8) The narrative of the conversion of Saul in ch. ix. can hardly fail 


respecting the eunuch (who as he had before come to Jerusalem to worship at the 
feast, so would again) may not have enabled Philip to add this particular, ἐπορεύετο 
γὰρ τ. ὁδὸν αὐτοῦ χαίρων, over and above what he could know at the time. 

9 It seems probable that the Roman forces never left Caesarea during the whole period 
from Augustus to Vespasian. The territory during that time (see chronological table) 
was alternately part of the province of Syria, and a dependent kingdom : but the 
garrisons do not appear to have been changed in such cases. 


11] 


΄ 


PROLEGOMENA.| THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [cu. % 


to have been derived from himself. I have shewn in the notes that 
there are no discrepancies between this and the two other relations of 
the same event, but such as may easily be accounted for by the peculiar 
circumstances under which each is given, and the necessarily varying 
expressions of narratives which were afterwards not reduced into har- 
mony with each other, but written faithfully down as delivered. 

13. Agreeable with the above suppositions is the fact, that the former 
part of the book presents more traces of Hebraistic idiom, not only in 
speeches, but in the form of the historical narrative’. 

14. I proceed now to an enquiry promised in par. 1 of this section : 
How far we have indications of the lacune in the author's personal tes- 
timony in the latter part having been filled in by that of Paul. 

Perhaps one of the best sections for the purpose of this examination 
will be that from ch. xvii. 16—xviii. 5, which relates to a time when 
Paul was left alone. Do we discover in the narrative or speech the 
traces of an unusual hand, and if so, whose is it? That some unusual 
hand has been here employed, is evident: for in the six verses 16—21 
inclusive, we have no fewer than nine expressions foreign to Luke’s 
style*, or no where else occurring : and in the speech itself, no fewer 
than nineteen*. Now of these twenty-eight expressions, five are either 
peculiar to, or employed principally by Paul‘; besides that we find the 
phrase τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ, so frequently (see reff.) used by him of his own 
spirit or feelings. That the ἅπαξ λεγόμενα in the speech exceed in 
number the expressions indicative of his style, may fairly be accounted 
for by the peculiar nature of the occasion on which he spoke. Here I 
think we can hardly fail to trace the hand of the Apostle by quite as 
many indications as we might expect to find. That Luke should, as in 
every other case, have wrought in the section into his work, and giver 
it the general form of his own narrative, would only be natural, and we 
find it has been so®. 

15, It may be instructive to carry on the examination of this part of 


1 See ch. i. 15, 23: the connexion by καί ch. ii. 1—4: ἀπὸ mposw@mov τ. συνεδρ., 
v.41: ἠκούσθη ὁ λόγος cis TA ὦτα τ. ἐκκλησίας, xi. 22: παῖς θεοῦ (of Christ), ch. 111. 
18, 26; iv. 27, 80; (of David) iv. 25: διὰ στόματος Δανείδ or τῶν προφ., i. 16,—iii. 18, 
21,—iv. 25 :—of υἱοὶ Ἴσρ., v. 21 :—7 γερουσία, ib., Ke. 

2 ἐκδεχομένου, παρωξύνετο, κατείδωλον, παρατυγχάνοντας, σπερμολόγος, ξένων (bis), 
καταγγελεύς, ξενίζοντα, ηὐκαίρουν. 

3 δεισιδαιμονεστέρους, ἀναθεωρῶν, σεβάσματα, βωμόν, ἐπεγέγραπτο, (ἀγνώστῳ,) 
εὐσεβεῖτε, ἀνθρωπίνων, (θεραπεύεται,) mposdeduevos, ὁροθεσίας, κατοικίας, (ζητεῖν 
χαράγματι, (réxvns,) ἐνθυμήσεως, τὸ θεῖον, ὑπεριδών, ἔστησεν. 

4 ἐκδέχομαι, παροξύνω, εὐκαιρέω, σέβασμα, ἀνθρώπινος.---καταγγέλλω, ὁρίζω, εἷς 
ἕκαστος with gen. partitive, are peculiar to Luke and Paul: ἀγνοέω is a favourite word 
in the Epistles of Paul. 

5 We have the characteristic διελέγετο, ἐπιλαμβάνομαι, εἰς τὰς ἀκοάς (Luke viii. 1), 
atabeis, διερχόμενος, καθότι. 


12] 


§ 1. ] ITS SOURCES. | PROLEGOMENA. 


the history somewhat further. Atch. xviii. 5, Silas and Timotheus joined 
Paul at Corinth. One at least of these, Timotheus, was afterwards for 
a considerable time in the company of Luke in the journey from Philippi 
to Jerusalem. But on his arrival at Corinth, no alteration in the style 
of the narrative is perceptible. It still remains the mixed diction of 
Paul and Luke : the az. Aeyy. are fewer, while we have some remarkable 
traces of Paul’s hand*. Again, in vv. 24—28 of the same chapter, we 
have a description of what took place with regard to Apollos at Ephe- 
sus, when Paul himself was absent. This portion it would be natural to 
suppose might have been furnished by Apollos himself, were it not for 
the laudatory description of ver. 24. If not by Apollos, then by Aquila 
and Priscilla to Paul on his return to Ephesus. And so it seems to 
have been. The general form is Luke’s: the peculiarities are mostly 
Paul’s ”. 

16. The examination of these sections may serve to shew that the 
great Apostle appears to have borne a principal part in informing Luke 
with regard to such parts of his history : the traces of this his share in 
the work being visible by the occurrence of words and phrases peculiar 
to him in the midst of the ordinary narrative from Luke’s own pen. 
These he preserved, casting the merely narrative matter into the form in 
which he usually wrote. 

17. It yet remains, before terminating this section, to say something 
of the speeches reported in the latter part of the Acts. Are they Paul’s 
own words, or has Luke in this ease also gone over the matter, and left 
the impression of his style on it ? 

These speeches are, (a) the discourse to the Ephesian elders in ch. 
xx. 18—35,—() the apology before the Jews, ch. xxii. 1—2Z1,—(y) the 
apology before Felix, ch. xxiv. 10—21,—(8) the apology before Agrippa 
and Festus, ch. xxvi. 1—29. 

(α) The discourse to the Ephesian elders is a rich storehouse of 
phrases and sentiments peculiar to Paul. These are so numerous, and 
so remarkable, that nothing short of a complete study of the passage, 
with the references, will put the reader in full possession of them. Very 
faint traces are found of the hand of Luke*®. Of those mentioned in 


6 συνείχετο, ver. 5,—Kabapds ἐγώ, 6,—mapa τὸν νόμον, 18,--- ἀδίκημα, 14 (see ch. xxiv. 
20), ῥᾳδιούργημα, ib. (see ch. xiii. 10), ἠνεσχόμην ὑμῶν, ib., λόγου, 15,—Ke. 

7 κατηχημένος, ἀκριβῶς ἤρξατο παῤῥησιάζεσθαι, ἐξέθεντο, διελθεῖν, ἀποδέξασθαι, 
παραγενόμενος, ἐὐτόνως διακατηλέγχετο (an ἅπ. A., but in Luke’s manner of using long 
~ compounds), belong to Luke’s style: ζέων τῷ πνεύματι, δημοσίᾳ (ch. xvi. 37 3 xx. 20 
only), to that of Paul. 

8. Among these may perhaps be counted the opening words ὑμεῖς ἐπίστασθε (compare 
ch. x. 28, 37)—éréBnv eis τ. ᾿Ασ. (ch. xxi. 4),---διῆλθον (ver. 25) :---προξέχετε ἑαυτοῖς 
(ver. 28),---ἀναστήσονται (ver. 80),---ὁπέδειξα (ver. 35). But most of these are such 
that we can only say Paul has not used the expressions, or not in the same sense: that 
he would not have done so, if occasion had- offered, we cannot affirm. 


13] 


PROLEGOMENA.| THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [CH. I. 


the note, scarcely any are decisive, whereas hardly a line of the whole is 
without unmistakable evidences that we have here the words of Paul. In 
the Prolegomena to the Pastoral Epistles, I hope to shew the importance 
of this discourse, as bearing on the very difficult question of the diction 
and date of those precious and to my mind indubitable relics of the 
great Apostle ὃ. 

(8) The apology before the Jews (ch. xxii. 1—21) was spoken in 
Hebrew (Syro-Chaldaic). Another interesting question is therefore 
here involved, Did Luke understand Hebrew ? ‘The answer to the two 
questions will be one and the same. We may find the diction of this 
translation either so completely Luke’s, as to render it probable that he 
was the translator ;—or it may bear traces, as usual, of Paul’s own 
phraseology set down and worked up by Luke. In the former case, we 
may confidently infer that he must have understood Hebrew : in the 
latter, we may (but not with equal confidence, for Paul may by pre- 
ference have given his own version of his own speech) conclude that that 
language was unknown to him. If again the speech is full of Hebraisms, 
it may lead us to infer that Paul himself was not the translator into 
Greek, but one who felt himself more strictly bound to a literal ren- 
dering than the speaker himself, who would be likely to give his own 
thoughts and meaning a freer and more Grecian dress. Now we do /ind, 
(1) that the speech is full of Hebraisms: (2) that while it contains 
several expressions occurring no where but in the writings of Luke’, 
not one is found in it peculiar to Paul, or even strikingly in his manner. 
Our inference then is that Luke himself has rendered this speech, from 
having heard it delivered ;—and consequently, that he was acquainted 
with Hebrew. 

(y) The short apology before Felix (ch. xxiv. 10—21) contains some 
traces of Paul’s manner’, but still they are scanty, and the evidences of 
Luke’s hand predominate, as may be seen from the reff. Its very com- 
pendious character makes it probable that it may have been drawn up 
by Luke from Paul’s own report of the substance of what he said. 

(8) The important apology before Agrippa and Festus (ch. xxvi. 1— 
29) is full of Paul’s peculiar expressions *. It was spoken in Greek, and 


9 See Vol. III. Prolegg. ch. vii. § i. 33 note. 

1 σύνειμι, εὐλαβής, αὐτῇ τῇ Spa, ἔκστασις, are peculiar to Luke: ἐπιστάς is a 
favourite word with him: and very many other expressions, as may be seen by reff., 
are in the common manner of his writings. 

2 ibn ga es)? ~ toast ἐτῶν, -- Πα perhaps ἀδίκημα. 

3 ἥγημαι (in this sense never used by Luke, but by Paul 11 times), ὄντα σε (ace. 
pendens, see reff.),—3:6,—paxpoOvuws (only used here, but the cognate words are verv 
favourite ones with Paul),—xpoyivdéonovtes,—Opnoxeia,—em ἐλπίδι K.T.A,—voKTa κ. 
ἡμέραν (see reff.),—Karavtjoa (see reff.),—kKpiverat παρ᾽ ὑμῖν, ---ἔδοξα, ---ἐναντία (com- 
pare ch. xxviii. 17),--- ἁγίων (in Acts, only ch. ix. 13, of Pawl,—and in the section ch. 
ix. 92--- 48, but in the Epistles passim),—timwp@v,—tas ἔξω πόλεις,---ὑπὲρ τ. λαμπ.--- 

14] 


§ 10. ] FOR WHAT READERS, &c. —[PROLEGOMENA. 


taken down very nearly as spoken. Some phrases however cccur in it 
which seem to belong to Luke‘; just enough to shew the hand which 
has committed the speech to writing. We must remember however that 
several of these are expressive of meanings not elsewhere occurring in 
Paul’s composition, which therefore he may well, in uttering, have thus 
expressed. 

18. Our conclusion from this examination may be thus stated: 
(1) That in all cases the diction of the speeches was more or less 
modified by Luke's hand. (2) That they are not in any case (as some 
have supposed) composed by him for the speaker, but were really in 
substance, and for the most part in very words, uttered as written. 
(8) That the differences apparent in the greater or less amount of 
editorial diction in different speeches, remarkably correspond to the 
alleged occasions and modes of their delivery:—where Paul spoke 
Hebrew, hardly any traces of his own style being discernible,—as also 
where a short compendium only of his speech is given ; while on the 
other hand speeches manifestly reported at length and which were 
spoken in Greek originally, are full of the characteristic peculiarities of 
Paul himself. 

19. For many other interesting particulars connected with the sources 
of the narrative in the Acts, I refer the student to Dr. Davidson’s 
Introduction to the N. T. vol. ii. 


SECTION III. 
FOR WHAT READERS AND WITH WHAT OBJECT IT WAS WRITTEN. 


1. The Gospel of Luke commences with a preface, in which he de- 
elares his object with sufficient precision. Dedicating it to his friend 
Theophilus, he describes it as a record of τὰ πεπληροφορημένα ἐν ἡμῖν 
mpdypara,—and asserts his purpose in writing it to be, wa ἐπιγνῷς 
rept dv κατηχήθης λόγων τὴν ἀσφάλειαν. Now there can be little ques- 
tion that both these descriptions apply to the Acts also. The book is 
introduced without preface, as a second part following on the former 
treatise : a δεύτερος λόγος to the Gospel. 

2. I have stated with regard to the Gospel, that we can hardly sup- 
pose Luke’s design to have confined itself to Theophilus, but must 
believe that he followed the common practice of dedicating his work to 
some one person of rank or influence, and describing it as written for 
him. The same applies also to the Acts: and the class of readers for 


κλῆρον ἐν τοῖς ἡγιασμένοις,---μετανοεῖν (absol.),—éextds,—mpa@tos ἐξ ἄναστ.,---σωφρο- 
σύνη,- -ἐν ὀλίγῳ,--ὁποῖος,---παρεκτός. 

4 ἐν φυλακαῖς κατέκλεισα,---ἐξουσίαν λαβών,--- ἀναιρουμένων (never used by Paul), 
---περιλάμψαν,.---καταπεσόντων,---συλλαβόμενοι,--- διαχειρίσασθαι.----ἀποφθέγγομαι. 


15] 


PROLEGOMENA.| THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [CH. I. 


whom Luke wrote is the same as before ; viz. Christians, whether Jews 
or Gentiles. 

3. If a further specification of his object in writing be required, it 
can only be furnished by an unprejudiced examination of the contents 
of the book. These are found to be, The fulfilment of the promise of 
the Father by the descent of the Holy Spirit: the results of that out- 
pouring, by the dispersion of the Gospel among Jews and Gentiles. 
Under these leading heads, all the personal and subordinate details may 
be ranged. Immediately after the ascension, Peter, the first of the 
twelve, the Rock on whom the church was to be built, the holder of 
the keys of the Kingdom, becomes the great Actor under God in the 
founding of the Church. He is the centre of the first great group of 
sayings and doings. The opening of the door to Jews (ch. ii.) and 
Gentiles (ch. x) is his office,—and by him, in the Lord’s own time, is 
accomplished. But none of the existing Twelve were (humanly speaking) 
fitted to preach the Gospel to the cultivated Gentile world. ‘To be by 
divine grace the spiritual conqueror of Asia and Europe, God raised up 
another instrument, from among the highly educated and zealous Pha- 
risees. The preparation of this instrument for the work to be done,— 
the progress in his hand of that work—his journeyings, preachings and 
perils, his stripes and imprisonments, his testifying in Jerusalem, and 
being brought to testify in Rome,—these are the subjects of the latter 
half of the book, of which the great central figure is the Apostle Paul. 

4, Nor can we attribute this with any probability to a set design of a 
comparison between the two great Apostles, or of an apology.for Paul by 
exhibiting him as acting in consonance with the principles which regu- 
lated Peter. All such hypothesis is in the highest degree unnatural 
and forced. The circumstances before the narrator’s view would, without 
any such design, have led to the arrangement of the book as we now 
find it. The writer was the companion of Paul ;—and in the land which 
had been the cradle of the Church he gathered materials for the portion 
which might join his Gospel to the narrative with which Paul’s history 
began. In that interval, Peter was the chief actor: Peter was the 
acknowledged ‘chosen vessel’ in the first days of the Gospel. But 
Luke does not confine himself to Peter’s acts. He gives at length the 
mission of Philip to the Gaza road and the conversion of the Ethiopian 
Eunuch, with which Peter had no connexion whatever. He gives at 
length the history of Stephen—the origin of the office which he held, — 
his apology,—his martyrdom,—how naturally, as leading to the narrative 
of the conversion of him who took so conspicuous a part in the transac- 
tions of that day ὅ. 


5 Schneckenburger, who (as well as Griesbach and Baur) holds the theory against 
which this paragraph is directed, is obliged to suppose that Stephen was purposely 
introduced to be exhibited as the prototype and forerunner of Paul. That Stephen 

16] 


διν. TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING. [prorecomena., 


5. Any view which attributes ulterior design to the writer, beyond 
that of faithfully recording such facts as seemed important in the 
history of the Gospel, is, I am persuaded, mistaken. Many ends are 
answered by the book in the course of this narration, but they are the 
designs of Providence, not the studied purposes of the writer :—e. g., 
the sedulous offer of the Gospel to the Jewish people,—their continual 
rejection of it,—the as continual turning to the Gentiles :—how strik- 
ingly does this come out before the reader as we advance,—and how 
easily might this be alleged as the design,—supported as the view would 
be by the final interview of Paul with the Jews at Rome, and his solemn 
application of prophecy to their unbelief and hardness of heart. Again, 
in the course of the book, more and more strongly does it appear that 
God’s purpose was to gather a people out of the Gentiles to His name: 
so that by Michaelis thzs is assigned as one of two great objects of the 
book. And so we might pass on through the whole cycle of progress 
of the faith of Christ, and hypotheses might be raised, as each great 
purpose of Providence is seen unfolding, that to narrate it was the 
object of the work. 


SECTION IV. 
AT WHAT TIME AND PLACE IT WAS WRITTEN. 


1. I see no cause for departing from the opinion already expressed 
in the Prolegomena to Luke’s Gospel (Vol. I., Prol., § iv. 1) that the Acts 
was completed and published at the expiration of the two years described 
in the last verse of chap. xxviii. No reason can be assigned, why, had 
any considerable change in the circumstances of Paul taken place, it 
should not have been mentioned by Luke. The same will hold still 
more strongly of the death of the Apostle. 

2. The prevalent opinion of recent critics in Germany has been, that 
the book was written much later than this. But this opinion is for the 
most part to be traced to their subjective leanings on the prophetic 
announcement of Luke xxi. 24. For those who hold that there is no 
such thing as prophecy (and this unhappily is the case with many of the 
modern German critics), it becomes necessary to maintain that that 
verse was written after the destruction of Jerusalem. Hence, as the 
Acts is the sequel to the Gospel, much more must the Acts have been 
written after that event. To us in England, who receive the verse in 
question as a truthful account of the words spoken by our Lord, and 


was so, in some sense, is true enough; but the assimilation of Paul to Stephen is a 
result springing naturally out of the narrative, not brought about by the writer of the 
history. Supposing the facts to have been as related, it was most natural that Paul 
should earnestly desire the whole particulars respecting Stephen to be minutely 
recorded: and so we find them. 


Vou. 11.-- 17] Ρ 


PROLEGOMENA, | THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [cH. L 


see in them a weighty prophetic declaration which is even now nct 
wholly fulfilled, this argument at least has no weight. 

8. The last-mentioned view (which is that of De Wette) differs 
from that of Meyer (Edn. 1), who saw in ch. viii. 26 (αὕτη ἐστὶν 
ἔρημος) a terminus a quo, and in the omission of all mention of the 
destruction of Jerusalem, a terminus ad quem, for the publication οἵ 
the history ; which he was therefore inclined to place at the beginning 
of the Jewish war, after the destruction of Gaza by the revolutionary 
bands of the Jews, and before the destruction of Jerusalem. But the 
notice of ch. viii. 26 cannot be fairly thus taken: see note there, in 
which I have endeavoured to give the true meaning of ἔρημος as 
applying to ὁδός and not fo Gaza, and as spoken by the angel, not added 
by the Evangelist. Meyer’s latter terminus, and the argument by 
which he fixes it, I hold to be sound. It would be beside all proba- 
bility, that so great, and for Christianity so important an eyent, as 
the overthrow of the Jewish city, temple, and nation, should have passed 
without even an allusion in a book in which that city, temple, and nation, 
bear so conspicuous a part. 

4. Meyer also (Edn. 1, Einl. p. 7) endeavoured to render a reason why 
the subsequent proceedings of Paul in Rome should not have been noticed. 
They were, he imagines, well known to Theophilus, an Italian himself, 
if nota Roman. But this is the merest caprice of conjecture. What 
convincing evidence have we that Theophilus was a Roman, or an 
Tiaiian ? And this view would hardly (though Meyer laboured to make 
it do so) account for the narration of what did take place in Rome,— 
especially for the last verse of the book. It is fair to state that in sub- 
sequent editions Meyer has abandoned this view for that impugned at 
the beginning of par. 2. 

5. De Wette attempts to account for the histery ending where it 
does, because the words of our Lord in ch. i. 8 had been accomplished, 
and so the object of the history fulfilled. But how were they more 
accomplished at that particular time than before ? Rome had not been 
specified in that command: and he who now preached at Rome was not 
formally addressed in those words. Rather, if the object of the writer 
had been merely to trace these words to their fulfilment, should he have 
followed the actual Apostles to whom they were spoken, many of whom 
we have reason to believe much more literally preached ἕως ἐσχάτου τῆς 
γῆς, than St. Paul. But no such design, or none such in so formal a 
shape, was in the mind of our Evangelist. That the Lord commanded 
and his Apostles obeyed, would be the obvious course of history ; but 
that the mere bringing of one of those Apostles to the head of the 
civilized world should have been thought to exhaust that command, 
is inconceivable as a ground for breaking off the narration. 

6. Still more futile is the view that it was broken off because the 

18] 


§ τν.] TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING. [PROLEGoMENa. 


promise of ch. xxiii. 11 was now fulfilled (οὕτως oe det καὶ εἰς Ῥώμην 
μαρτυρῆσαι). For on this view, the being brought before Cesar ought 
to have been expressly narrated : another promise having been given to 
Paul, ch. xxvii. 24, μὴ φοβοῦ, Παῦλε, Καίσαρί σε δεῖ παραστῆναι. Indeed 
this very argument tells forcibly in favour of the date commonly as- 
signed. Without attributing it as an object in the mind of the writer, 
to relate the fulfilment of every divine promise recorded by him, we 
may at least regard it as probable, that had he been able to chronicle the 
fulfilment of this promise, he would have done so, seeing that the apology 
before Cesar was so weighty an event, and that three former apologies, 
those before the Jews, before Felix, and before Festus and Agrippa, had 
been inserted. 

7. If we look at the probabilities of the matter, we shall find that the 
time commonly assigned was by very far the most likely for the publi- 
cation of the book. The arrival at Rome was an important period in 
the Apostle’s life: the quiet which succeeded it seemed to promise no 
immediate determination of his cause: a large amount of historic mate- 
rial was collected :—or perhaps, taking another view, Nero was begin- 
ning ‘in pejus mutari:’ none could tell how soon the whole outward 
repose of Roman society might be shaken, and the tacit toleration which 
now the Christians enjoyed be exchanged for bitter persecution. If 
such terrors loomed in the prospect of even those who judged from 
worldly probabilities, there would surely be in the church at Rome 
prophets and teachers, who might tell them by the Holy Ghost of the 
storm which was gathering, and might warn them that the words lying 
ready for publication must be given to the faithful before its outbreak, 
or never. It is true that such ἃ priori considerations would weigh little 
against presumptive evidence furnished by the book itself: but wher 
arrayed in aid of such evidence, they carry with them no small weight : 
when we find that the time naturally and fairly indicated in the book 
itself for its publication, is that one of all others when we should con- 
ceive that publication most likely. 

8. We thus get a.p. 63 (see the following table) for the date of the 
publication. 

9. The same arguments which establish the date, also fix the place. 
At Rome, among the Christians there, was this history first made 
public, which has since then in all parts and ages of the church formed 
a recognized and important part of the canon of Scripture. | 

10. As regards the title of the book, we may observe, that it appears 
to represent the estimate, not of one culling these out of more copious 
materials, but of an age when these were αἰ the Acts of the Apostles 
extant : and probably therefore proceeded not from the author, but from 
the transcribers. 


Le) 


19] b 


PROLEGOMENA. |] THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [cH. 1. 


SECTION V. 
GENUINENESS, AND STATE OF THE TEXT. 


1. Eusebius (H. E. iii. 25), recounting the ὁμολογούμεναι θεῖαι γραφαί, 
SAYS, τακτέον ἐν πρώτοις τὴν ἁγίαν τῶν εὐαγγελίων τετρακτὺν οἷς ἕπεται ἣ 
τῶν πράξεων τῶν ἀποστόλων γραφή. And in iii. 4.--- Λουκᾶς τὸ μὲν γένος 
av τῶν ἀπ᾽ ᾿Αντιοχείας, τὴν δὲ ἐπιστήμην ἰατρός, τὰ πλεῖστα συγγεγονὼς 
τῷ Παύλῳ, καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς δὲ οὐ περιέργως τῶν ἀποστόλων ὧμιληκώς, ἧς 
ἀπὸ τούτων προςεκτήσατο ψυχῶν θεραπευτικῆς ἐν δυσὶν ἡμῖν ὑποδείγματα 
θεοπνεύστοις καταλέλοιπε βιβλίοις: τῷ τε εὐαγγελίῳ... .. καὶ ταῖς τῶν 
ἀποστόλων πράξεσιν, ἃς οὐκέτι Ov ἀκοῆς, ὀφθαλμοῖς δὲ αὐτοῖς παραλαβὼν 
συνετάξατος And many earlier fathers, either by citation or by allusion, 
have sufficiently shewn that the book was esteemed by them part of the 
canon of Scripture. 

(a) Papias (see Euseb. H. E. iii. 39) does not mention nor refer to 
the Acts. He speaks indeed of Philip, and his daughters, but mistakes 
him (?) for Philip the Apostle: and of Justus surnamed Barsabas. 
Nor are there any references in Justin Martyr which, fairly considered, 
belong to this book. Such as are sometimes quoted may be seen in 
Lardner, vol. i. p. 122. The same may be said of Clement of Rome. 
Ignatius is supposed to allude to it (μετὰ δὲ τὴν ἀνάστασιν συνέφαγεν 
αὐτοῖς καὶ συνέπιεν. Smyrn. ὃ 8, p. 709. Compare Acts x. 41): so also 
Polycarp (ὃν ἔγειρεν 6 θεός, λύσας τὰς ὠδῖνας τοῦ ddov. Phil. ὃ 1, p. 1005. 
Compare Acts ii. 24). 

(8) The first direct quotation occurs in the Epistle of the Churches 
of Lyons and Vienne to those of Asia and Phrygia (a.p. 177) given in 
Euseb. H. E. v. 2. Speaking of the martyrs, they say, ὑπὲρ τῶν τὰ δεινὰ 
διατιθέντων ηὔχοντο, καθάπερ Στέφανος 6 τέλειος μάρτυς" κύριε, μὴ στήσῃς 
αὐτοῖς τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ταύτην. 

(γ) Irenzus frequently and expressly quotes this book : and in book 
ili. ch. 14, p. 201 f., he gives a summary of the latter part of the Acts, 
attributing it to Luke as its writer. 

(δ) Clement of Alexandria quotes it often, and as the work of Luke: 
e. g. καθὸ καὶ ὃ Λουκᾶς ἐν tals πράξεσι τῶν ἀποστόλων ἀπομνημονεύει TOV 
Παῦλον λέγοντα' "Avdpes ᾿Αθηναῖοι, x.7.A. (see Acts xvii. 22, 28) Strom. 
v. 12 (83), p. 696 P. 

(ε) Tertullian often quotes it expressly : 6. g. ‘ Adeo postea in Actis 
apostolorum invenimus, quoniam qui Joannis baptismum habebant, non 
accepissent Spiritum Sanctum, quem ne auditu quidem noverant’ (com- 
pare Acts xix. 1—3), De baptismo, ec. 10, vol. i. p. 1211. And again: 
‘cum in eodem commentario Luce, et tertia hora orationis demonstretur, 
sub qua Spiritu Sancto initiati pro ebriis habebantur, et sexta, qua Petrus 
ascendit in superiora,’ &c. De jejuniis, ο. 10, vol. ii. p. 966. 

20] 


δτ.)] GENUINENESS, AND STATE OF TEXT. [ΡΕΟΙΞΟΟΜΕΝΑ. 


2. (a) The Marcionites (cent. ili.) and the Manichzans (cent. iv.) 
rejected the Acts as contradicting some of their notions. ‘Cur Acta 
respuatis Jam apparet, ut deum scilicet non alium predicantia quam 
creatorem, nec Christum alterius quam creatoris, quando nec promissio 
Spiritus sancti aliunde probetur exhibita, quam de instrumento Ac- 
torum.” Tertull. adv. Marcion. lib. v. ὃ 2, vol. ii. p. 472. And of the 
Manichezans, Augustine says, ‘“‘ Manichezi canonicum librum cujus titulus 
est Actus Apostolorum repudiant. ‘Timent enim evidentissimam veri- 
tatem, ubi apparet, Sanctum Spiritum missum qui est a Domino Jesu 
Christo evangelica virtute preditus.” Epist. cexxxvii. 2, vol. ii. p. 1035. 

(8) Some modern critics in Germany, especially Baur, have made use 
of the hypothesis, that the Acts is an apology for Paul (see above, 
§ ii. 4), to throw discredit on the book, and to bring down its publica- 
tion to the second century. But with the hypothesis will also fall that 
which is built on it ; and from the reasoning of the preceding seetions it 
may be seen how utterly impracticable it would have been for an imitator 
to draw up narratives and speeches which should present the phenomena, 
in relation to the facts underlying them, which these do. 

ὃ. The text of the Acts, in D and E of the leading MSS., and their 
cognates in the mss. and versions, is varied by many interpolations of 
considerable length. It may suffice to point out a few of these, referring 
the student to the various readings to examine them in detail ς 

¢hap. x..25 3 xi. 2, 17°25, 26) 28% sas χιν ΒΤ συ 

12s 20:7 xvi 10,380; 35; 89,40) xvi los xvi 42 ei ee, 

ΧΗ 263 xxivii24 > xxvi 24s xxvii A xxvii 015 
Of these, some are remarkable as bearing considerable appearance of 
genuineness, e. g. those in ch. xii. 10, xvi. 10: some are unmeaning and 
absurd, as those in ch. xiv. 19, xvi. 39. Considerable uncertainty hangs 
over the whole question respecting these insertions. <A critic of emi- 
nence, Bornemann, believes that the text of the Acts originally contained 
them all, and has been abbreviated by the hand of correetors : and he 
has published an edition on this principle. 

4. The great abundance of various readings in the Acts, and the 
extent of space consequently devoted to them, will be observed by every 
reader. In no book of the N. T., with the exception of the Apocalypse, 
is the text so full of variations as in this. To this result several reasons 
may have contributed. In the many backward references to the Gospel 
history, and anticipations of statements and expressions occurring in the 
Epistles, temptations were found inducing the eorrector to try his hand 
at assimilating, and as he thought reconciling, the various accounts. In 
places where ecclesiastical order or usage was in question, insertions or 
omissions were made to suit the habits and views of the church in after 
times. Where the narrative simply related facts,—any act or word 
apparently unworthy of the apostolic agent was modified for the sake of 

21] 


PpROLEGOMENA.] THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [cu. I. 


decorum. Where St. Paul relates over again to different audiences the 
details of his miraculous conversion, the one passage was pieced from 
the other, so as to produce verbal accordance. These circumstances 
render the critical arrangement of the text in this book a task more than 
usually difficult. 


SECTION VL. 
CHRONOLOGY. 


1. The chronology of the Acts has been the subject of many learned 
disquisitions both in ancient and modern times. It must suffice here 
(1) to point out to the reader those recent works where he will find the 
whole matter thoroughly discussed, and the results of older enquiries 
stated and criticized : and (2) to furnish a table arranged according to 
years, in which the contemporary sacred and profane history may be 
placed side by side, according to the conclusions which I myself have 
~ been led to form. 

(a) The treatise of Anger, de temporum in Actis Apostolorum 
ratione, Lips. 1833, was by far the best complete discussion of the 
chronology which had appeared up to that time: and the student who 
masters this not very voluminous work, will be in entire possession of 
the state of the enquiry when it was published. 

(8) But the ground has since been again gone over, and Anger’s 
results somewhat shaken, by Wieseler, Chronologie des apostolischen 
Zeitalters, Gottingen, 1848, which is now the best and most important 
work on the subject. I have been led in several places to differ from 
Wieseler, but I do not on that account underrate the value of his re- 
searches. His work, as well as that of Anger, should be in the hands of 
every student who wishes to master the chronology of the apostolic period. 

(y) A work often referred to in these Prolegomena, Dr. Davidson’s 
Introduction to the New Testament, will be found by the English reader 
to contain a very useful résumé of the views and arguments of other 
writers as well as his own conclusions ; and is accompanied with the 
table usual in the German writers, giving at one glance the various dates 
assigned by different chronologists for the events in the apostolic history. 

2. I proceed to give the chronological table above promised. It will 
be observed that the chronology of the Acts takes us only to the end of 
the second year of St. Paul's (first) imprisonment at Rome. , With the 
important and difficult question respecting a second imprisonment, we 
are here in no way concerned. It will come before us for full discussion 
in the Prolegomena to the Pastoral Epistles, Vol. IL. (§ ii. 17 ff) 


22] 


CHRONOLOGY. [PROLEGOMENA. 


§ γι. 


"Yap 8 porspy tye sdevysod—‘(ge ἼΧ) 
(VISTA pMOIEg) [NG pv sequutiug Jo spuvy 91) Aq 
vepue UL UaIyjatq 943 01 Juas sorjddnus : (05. 1Χ) 
916 |0} 8 soisoydoad sngesy—'(-q1) surtstiyO poy[vo 
151} av sofdosip oy T— "(9% 1X) YOoNUY 18 aAvad vB 
ume AoE ‘SNIVT WoL [Neg soyojaz pur 'θουγά 
{9.8} pey Jey ye sooiofar ‘wo[esniae ye YAINYD 91} 
Aq ἀθ0}}10} 7198 81 sequuIvg “(0% 61 IX) Yoonuy ye 


S9/HUaF) 01 poyoverd Useq pry jadsoy) 94} θαι) 1891} 91} LoAO SuTyY snipne[D Aq poyurodde yadrudy)|yyuy) vddi 











*snSIv J, ΟἹ Wa1y}01q 91} Aq 7198 81 
IIT SUT JO Jasuep ut Suteq τ191} ‘sAvp [199}}}} σατθῖποι 
:(81 Ὃ ΤῸ οτος ΧΙ) 1994 βη9ϑαι pur (ITSTA 
15.111) Wojesnase 07 dn βϑοῦ Tavg ‘(Q[—EeT ‘I 100) 
shoseazg pue viqray ur βαθοκ 9911} Surpuoeds 10 VW 
— (91--,Ἰ. 1Χ) mopesnise ye Yang 911 ΟἹ ϑύι88 913 
JO JUNOIIV UB S9ALY—'(QF—]| *X) Bolvsag 718 spudty 
9119.) SIT puke Βα Π9 010.) 03 sayoroatd 9}}-ο (ον —zeE 


ἽΧ1) ἀθΊ94 JO φτπυατ0),-τ (19 Χι) soqoinyg 98} Jo sovog 





(GI—[ ΣῸ) (avok on} 
UI 970) [VY JO WOTSIAATION— "(iF “QZ {4} vauTseDy 
ΟἹ snjozy Woy sayoveid pur “youune ardor 
91) 5γητόλ τοῦ di(iyg—"(GZ—gG WA) viteureg 28 ‘uyor 
pue d9}9q splvmaoqye pur ‘diyiyg—(P 1|1Δ) βοχζάτοθιρ 


aq} jo uoisiodsig—'(gg ‘ta) uaydeyg Jo τπορα 1 ΧΙ 





"THOTUsNIO 6 UL ΠΠ1Ὲ} 971 Jo ssorsoad snosodsorg 


‘8 ὯΙ IL 5100 9191 syusaea oy} ‘ye—(E ᾿ΑὟ 


‘qtuidg AjoH 911 Jo worsnyg ‘(12 Av) LSOO 
-ALNUd 





‘“SLOV HHL NI GHLVIAU SENHA 





“*sRIayyUUg Jo uos SAWNOITY 962 seeeneitectecnatemrgtae= Si ‘arenas’ we ng ἢ 


‘ep ur eddy Aq poaomoa 
(ap ‘a'y πιζῷ Jo yoyarg ‘sns.impyy sneqry )|""****seUUY 20 UOS SVIHLLV JX 
Ὁ ‘9—‘e ᾿ς “XIX “‘MUY) snipne[D Ὁ ΑὟ 
jo diqstnsuoo pug 911 ul ‘zp Ur wopsury sty ὁ1. |‘avod oures oy ur θα Δ παν Δα 
somos : ΒΡ 10 δὰ ‘VddINNV ΠΟΉΠΗ Ρϑλοῖπϑα :sv.tayjuey poweu 
( (1 'Φ "Χιχ “71γ}} του ψγθρριθαδ |-ans ‘snyje0q jo uos NOWIG 
STY 4091.) OY} ῬΟΙΘΗ JO suorutmMOp [oq (aoe 








CZ 8 “XIX “UY 90g 
ὍΓ 69 ᾿αὙ (ς 2 “TAX “yuu ) vddiasy 0} uals 
Atpoavajo} sty pur ‘suodry 0} poysturq st ynq 
“DULY JO 9111} OY} JLOL[OS 0} a0 0} 5902 Coe 
ἽΠΑΧ “QU WY) R[NSITRO Jo avok pug 902 . ae 
-BULy AOU SIT] 0} OULOY Wolf suangor vddiasy) 
(6g ᾿αὙ ‘tLIXg JO yoozarg ‘snwnr7 i 
“adn, snewo.jogd 1) (9% Ὑζ 'χι soy ‘oyou | | 





᾿(ϑΊθθοῖλα “QT ATI) NOISNHOSV AAL 


995 ‘shoseule(] JO WoIssossod ul SuLeq st}oIy UQ)| | 








(‘S1o[LYH JO Sury opeur porszy rzoyoaq sty) 
COT ‘9 ‘LIAX 707) situa shies Osis sane ney 47) 

“NY pur ‘sijiuoyort ys, ‘vauvjeg ‘ot ‘dipiyg jo |snuruy jo uos “80 ἸΓΗΔΦΟΒΉ, 
AYIAVAZO} OY} JO SuLy ‘uoissooov 5110 10}}0 ΒΑῸΡ (6 4 “IIAX γχαν ) 38099} 

ΔΘ} Ὁ ‘vnstepy fq poywiodde 1 mddeb py powazz)|-uog ye sutpjayA Aq poorydstp 
(OT ‘9 ΠΑ͂Σ Ἅπν) yourd evevccvesee “(¢ 1 ἽΠΑΧ ‘yWuy) 

-dryy sv vapne 0} ὉΠ ΠΩ Aq yuos SATTAUV]Y|snULUW 10 uos ‘NYH@YNOS 
41 yuy) vepne jo “IOAOSSV 

suslyanrn? sntpaitA Aq poyttodde ‘sxjaoumpylayy ye 5. ΠΙΘΊΤΑ, Aq pooeydstp 








“O19Y} [LA TIIV 517 WOJOG Potp suLIaqry, (ς Ὑ 
THAX JUV) 10} i 9g UL 920] ‘suIT[oITA Aq (Gonp 
τοῦ SIY 10} LOMSUT 01) ΘΌΠΟΣ 0} JUOS ST OpETT| eee (ee TTA 

(FE ‘a'y “wit g Jo yoaJarg ‘sn27a724 )\"UV 800) oz ιαὙ ‘vapue 
"(9G ‘a'V ‘MO[oq 908 τ Ὁ ἽΠΑΧ Huy 800) 24 30 aojemmooad stqery snd] 
Ul A].{va 10 “9% "α Ὑ MOL ‘SO LV Td SALLNOd|-®A 4q poquiodde ‘synavivo 








‘OLa ‘YHanr 0 SHONUAAOGD “SLSATUd HOIH 





iy Aq pasoutailF 


yong) FZ ‘ur 


OL 


((βς “3πὴ0 


ἴπο} 


ἀραθάπι STA VIO) 


62° 


Peet meester e ees seses ΟΣ" 





GGL teas 


OL 


[62 SU ge 





( (04 ‘IA ‘aay τοῦ 1) 
ΟἹ Yolryy Woy Jot 





‘ora 


‘snYy Wolf 10rd uy 
(910s) (SNIYA AIL) 


‘OLE ‘SUVHA 





τοι = WINOLIVO 
OG, treet 
682 τ 5:98 
OL 
egy ean 
UT Θὰ 





‘ay 


23] 


μἴ [18111} PIUIOD 18 (11 ἽΠΑΧ) Jyey 8 pure avod Ὁ spuods 
: <a Se ‘IAX) 909014) PUY BlMOpaodV, ΟἹ LOUTTY AOR otto Grete εν καλεῖν 
Η ὉΙΒΥ͂ {6 Π0111-- τὴς jo τπὰ1 1118 911} 910196 you sdvytad— C(9 ‘21 ‘ul ; 
La /‘(g ἸΔΧ) snoyoumy, puv ‘(Qf ‘AX) sepig fq paruvdmosse |p “gq) ‘ox “Β11ΠΌ}7ΠΌΧ) ‘sytmoyoriy, ‘vauejyeg jo 
‘neg jo Αϑπατιοῦ Areuotsstur puooag—‘sequuarg pue δὴ oq 04 s19[eYQ Wor pojomoad 11 veddusy) *(z “IMIxx 
[neg useMjoq uoNjvtudas ρα πάθια ((Ἢ U τ 180) (TL ΧΧ [spy “ογ01 998) soygo sty 
(OoUy 18 19,9 gq YIM MOLA.194UT) οἰ ἂν ‘Ax) Suryovatd 2210.) (94 “α Ὁ) vepne JO LoxVINIOAY ΧΙΤΗ ἢ 1501 ΘΛΌΓ 01 108 stvodde 1π4 OL 
pue duryove, ‘yoorup we ἤν... pur ‘uinyor Aoyy, ~  Cuamyoo [:(ς Ὁ “xx Ἵ7 }}} aoyeano01g 
τ (οιβαθλιιοῦ 8 [neg Woy aarsnour sivak udazinoy ϑαιροοοιά 9s ‘omoy 18 posodop snuvuing))/ay} snueuny yy1M 19430504 
PTH yey : ¢ δ ᾿ΔΧ) dane 91] uo {Ista pty) —‘suryLivmeg 9η1 {21λᾺ oynd 


maesnto¢ 01 dn οὗ svqvuig pur jueg—(‘[ ‘ax) 


Ip vjo aouanbosuoo ut 5Π181 
‘O29 “UOISIDUANIAID Jo ποι} 140. 911} SuNdadsat ayndstq 


-peney Aq ag ul 90% 0} 4008 609 “ολλλμεελεαλδιβευϑ δ ἢ 














CoOL We a :Ὁ Ὁ xx “Huy 
«πα Jo yoojotg “snIDLpON?) snypruuUyy snjrz) 
C(T OT πο a) 
































"(92 “ΔΙΧ) saqdrostp 901 YUM |stoyeyyg 10 sury poyurodde zaosanof ayy padi Pp ) QR S07 eties serene banat cars 
Woonuy 78 ouiy Buoy Ὁ ureWad Ady} UANJAL Oy} ᾽ν... as ai 
((L ZI pur 
‘QP 10 Lp UL Youu oF winqar ATrUaNbosu0s = |*j19g7 0518 99g) 5910 “1070 10 Duly ‘poopy (i, elle eo | 
foyy :Avod 8 uvyy s10W βοιάποοο A[pavy foutnol siqp‘(piqt “wuy) ,.suipne[g jo avak yysta 91} 
ὉΠ... “9112 oUIeS 943 INUGW) ‘ZG ‘xXx "UY se niga 
ΡΠ JO TOWWINIOIT “SANVWAD SAIGILNA A} 41 ‘snaepoqon JO UOSSVINVNY [008 PANE STRS REE’ ΘΟ ΟΡ 
‘(JP 10 OF) AON vISy pur ‘Cpiqh) vepne ut ‘(2 ὩΣ ΣΣ 
ϑηαάζο 04 ‘(gz “ΔΙΧ---Ἴ “ΠΙΧ) (TaVg Plvatojoousy) δαιῖθα st ourmey γθθι8 ony, ᾿(ς ᾿ς Χχ αν) 4718 0} Jp ur ‘qoad “8010 
[neg Ρὰθ seqeuivg jo Aousnol Ale worsstur Ἴ5.1τ θῶρη jo Loywmootg ‘udANVXATY SAIUuaary|jo Sury potazy Aq peaoureliggs “ees 
((Φ 1 ᾽ΧΧ ‘yjuy) ons 
τῦ 511 ῬΟΙΟῸΒ 911] puv ογά 101 oi Jo ἀρογβπο oyy [7 “qt ‘IueD Jo τιος Hagsor 
pur sysoltg ΤῈ oy} Suyurodde jo zamod ayy (6 Ἵ ὙΧ “HUY) 5ι9 780 
SNIPNE[Y Wooly Βα! 0740. Β10781|00 JO σα! possyzy)|jo Sury ῬΟΙΘΗ Aq poaoutaslogy + *ARARET NS?” AMER SR NAA OD Coy 
(GZ ΠΧ) θϑαββαὼ 18 “10118 OOS CTL xx ‘uy ‘erg jo yoojorg 
Alaa ‘VddIUDY ΠΘΟΉΠΗ 40 HAVA’ “(J[—¢ ‘tx) ‘snubuory snsspg Ὃ) (% ἼΠ “ΙΧ “yuy) 
19}9q JO odvosa βπογποῦαια put (a9aosstg oy} 10) omloy 18 pourezyat sutoq evddusy ἀοδαποί Ξε: 
yuouuosttdury—"(Z ΠΧ) (ead Surpasaad oy ur ory 911 ‘vepne jo χογθαποοι 7 ‘sadvyyy sarldsag H 
sdeytod 10) uyor jo roy}01q 94) βοιπθρ 10 π0}}1 1.60}. (ἰῷ 8 “XIX “1πγ} eddusy ΡΟΙΘΉ jo 1896) Dees Gansehennanereste* 0505s 


᾿ 











“SLOV HHL NI dAaLVYTIAU ΘΙΙΝΉ ΛΗ ‘OLa ‘¥H¥anr 10 SYONUMAOD “SLSAIUd HOIH ‘on ‘OLA ‘SUVHA ἊΨ 


ee eee eee 


PROLEGOMENA.] THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 


CHRONOLOGY. [PROLEGOMENA. 


ὃ vr. ] 








(ὁ nb 784) swetddtyiqg 911 03 yea sdeyted 
pue : WOWs|IY_ pur ‘susrssolog ‘suvtsoydy 911 03 
‘ddgy oy} soztam oy (ATqeqoad) sivod omy oy Surg 
‘ainqooluos 10 UoTzIpeay st puodag 110 pur ‘aovtd soe} 
S}OY 94} 10 uoNvorfqnd ayy Ayqeqorad ouny 810} 10 
pua 91} YW (TE TY ἼΤΑΧΧ) osnoy poarq τιλλὸ 510 
ul silva OA} soyovord pur s[[amp ‘seimpeeu nepopsna 
tr ydey Snteq puv : (Arenaqayy UL) oWOY UL saattue 1084 91} UO 





ὉΠ (HMUAXX—][ ‘HAXX) suoqurAd oy ato A 

‘eq [PPA 10 poyootardiys sy—umMnyne oy} UL 930] OUT 

07 vas Aq Yo yuas pur ‘(Ze IAXX—@] *AXX) snysoq 

puv vddiidy otojoq parva si—‘(g[—] ‘axx) avsag 

01 sjeadde og ‘mojesnto¢ 18 patty vq 0} τι95} ZuIaq 10 
daduvp Ur pur ‘sMoe oy} {q Β|180.7 OLOJoq pasnooe Sulog 
‘Batesesy γ0 uosiid ul neg 


‘(og “πιχχ λα ἼΧΧ) xia Aq uostid ur ydoy pure ‘tiapoyurg oy) pue sriueuy 
Aq pasnooe 81 OY a1aqM “ΧΙ9.ΗΙ 0} VoLesRD 0} Ἵ1195 puL ‘safe ayy 10 5107 94} Woy svIsAry ouNgIdy 
9 Aq ponosat ‘UIpoyuRg 911 pue stiuruy atojoq yySnoaq ‘ajdti9} 94} UL 5λ0 0" OnVISW 91} Aq 
P9Zas ΒΘ “(QT XX JQ ὋΤ IXX—] XX) qsooaquag asojaq sdup Moy ὃ (VISTA YIJLT) Woresns9¢ γ0 
Furatty—“varvsay ΟἹ ‘sremafoyg pur ‘oti 1, ‘vavzeg ‘snqayt I ‘svoay, γ8 Saryonoy—‘e [iad W spres oy 
sony “iddtty 10 toyseqq spuads—‘uaypesnaae toy pury Aq yno 5105 91 “19210 τπιοοῷ --ο' (ὦ SURIYLTVA 
91 "Δ pur) (g¢ jo διιπιαιῦθα oy} UL) SUBMOY OY} 01 ΘΙ151 4: omy (eg  ἸΔΧ ‘Woy “Πα 
(UOJ) SO} ITA PUB (Z “ΧΧ) SIOJULM OT] d.19T]M “99991 0} Θύτι911 pur—‘( [v Z XI 0D Z) sSUBITIUTION 
9Π1 01 “Δ PU0IIY 94} ΒΘΊΤα κι Di a.TIT]AL (OTSEL ἢ ΟΦ 1 ἘΣ sie) viuopaovyy 01 sdouanol oy 
“LP 97 “XIX Jo 21π61}} 91} faye “(,.4) Jsovayuag nowy 
"A 8. Πτ “yo “mofaq das : YQULIOG 0} Aautmol papios 


-910N UB [VATOJUT 5111 τι θοῦ sn aA, “(9 “LAX “109 T) 
aNyAvdop 5ΠῚ o10J9q SUL you SUMTGAUTION 91 04 





SIIMOT[O} SUPT 


*(Q}0U pur g ‘RQ “TAX “LOD 1 ϑαθάτιοῦ 





Ὁ ΧΙΧ) PULIOD 108 Suryoraad si 
sorjody ‘aurnyneapy ‘snsoydoy ΟἹ lida vwrdiLmay v1 
ysnoryy epaary oy AQuoedde ‘ucamine oy) uj—' (Zz 
MAX) TOON NY 07 ἐπα 101 (WISTA Π7Χ 0.1) 11 018} pur 
620 Sutuds oy Ul mMapesndape ye ysovoiuag 9111 10} 
1188. 8308 ‘(SUBIUO[BSSSY YE, 91} 01 91151 1 puooeg par} 





Ὁ ‘6 ὙΧ "WUWY) tossooone 510 
50 JUSS ST SANIATY πο 18 Sutataie sMou 
‘G9 dowuins url ‘qord ‘snysaq 10 {1096 





(6 9 ΧΧ ‘UUW “27 “ΔΙΧΧῚ saxsHy satou0g 
<q popasiodus st ΧΟ 09. Jo o[ppiur oy} ynoqy 








C(¢ EI Hf“ 39 "9 “xx 
47) sodrosa yjasmmiy yng ‘xa Aq poynos ore 
‘SSOULOPTIM OY} ΟῚ opnqTy_nUT 
‘dg 15. 901} (pur gsuviyzepery 01 “day) sari orf 91 |v spvol ‘Qe ἸΧΧ 510}, ΟἹ popuy[e ‘uendssy oy) 
(( 8. “Xx ἯπνῪ}) vatog pure 
ΤΕ “XX 4n}L310L) Jo Ysooa,uaq 1{Π| snsoydy ye jneg 9010} Jo syaed YM Π eddidy syuasoad 0.19 NY) 


‘CP iqt 
‘yuYy) pojurodde sneaumeg 
0 [108 ΘΩΒῊ ρ ραν ‘(z79) “Ady 
Aq sy} ποῖα 9911} ὉΠ Ρϑου]άθιρ 919 ada cid tt bill bah ha 
eee tenner eee eee (I 6 ΧΧ αν) 

pojutodde ΘηνΝΥΝΥ pur 

‘(Z@9 Io [g) ‘asy Aq poorzdsip 


Pere ewer ees {ΠῚ 9 "xX ‘nuy) 
pajyuiodde IdvVgQ Hdasor 


puv “(19 ut) wry sq paoryd 
-sip st uddwuay ysuirese τι 1 
τ θα 02 omoy oy oud Surry 


Q[g ttt eag 
PIQ “ete eeeonng 








619. ππποηηλενηνθϑ 
see eeeeeee (3 "9 "XX ‘yuy) mal 
ὑπ πᾶν Aq "gq Ἢ poyurod 
-de Lavy 20 [109 THY WHS] 919 Se hg onegee ee SG 





LIQ tga 


OIQ ie 


G0Q gg) 


808 pest ehhh ik SR | 





(‘FE 
“XT Ol] + Gp “pnziD 
‘QONG 269 “UX πὸ 
‘ort) "eT taqowe 
Woy τοι “OYUN 


25] 


PROLEGOMENA.] THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [cu. 1 


NOTES TO THE CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE. 


I. On the identity of the Journey to Jerusalem related in Acts xv., with that 
referred to Gal. ii. 1 ff. 


Five visits of St. Paul to Jerusalem are related in the Acts. Now the visit of Gal. 
ii. 1 ff. must be either (a) one distinct from all these, or (8) identical with one or other 
of them. 

(a) This hypothesis should not be resorted to, till every attempt to identify the visit 
with one of those recorded can be shewn to fail. Then only may we endeavour, as in 
the case of the unrecorded visit to Corinth (see below, chap. ili. § v.), to imagine some 
probable place for the insertion of such a visit. So that the legitimacy of this hypothesis 
must be tried by the results arrived at in the discussion of the other. The maintainers 
of it are Beza, Paley (hesitatingly; Hor. Paul., p. 71, Birks’ edn.), Schrader (der 
Apostel Paulus, i. 74 ff.), and Tate. 

(8) The visit in question is identical with one or other of those recorded in the Acts. 

1. Zt is not the first visit. The identity of the visits of Acts ix. 26—29 and Gal. i. 18 
being assumed (and it is hardly possible to doubt it), this follows as a matter of course. 

2. It is not the second visit (Acts xi. 29, 80). For we read, Gal. ii. 7, that Paul 
was already recognized as entrusted with the Gospel of the uncircumcision, and as 
having preached vv. 8, 9 together with Barnabas among the Gentiles. Now the com- 
mission of Paul and Barnabas to preach to the Gentiles dates from Acts xiii. 1, after 
the second visit. 

Also, at the time of the second visit, it is wholly improbable that Paul should have 
held a place of such high estimation in comparison with Peter, as we find him filling in 
Gal. ii. 8 ff. 

Again, on this hypothesis, either the first visit, or his conversion, was fourteen years 
inclusive before this, which took place certainly before 46 4.D.; for then the famine was 
raging, and this relief was sent up by prophetic anticipation. This would bring, either 
the first visit, or his conversion itself, to A.D. 32: a date wholly improbable, whichever 
way we take the fourteen years of Gal. ii. 1. 

3. The question of identity with the third visit is discussed below. 

4. It is not the fourth visit. For in Gal. ii. 1, we read that Barnabas went up with 
Paul: but in Acts xv. 39, we find Paul and Barnabas separated, nor do we ever read of 
their travelling together afterwards,—and evidently Barnabas was not with him when 
he visited Jerusalem Acts xviii. 18—22. Besides, the whole character of the fourth 
visit as there related, is against the idea that any weighty matters were then transacted. 
The expression merely is ἀναβὰς καὶ ἀσπασάμενος Thy ἐκκλησίαν κατέβη εἰς ᾿Αντιόχειαν. 
Again, if we assume the identity of the visit in question with the fourth visit, the 
Apostle can hardly be acquitted of omitting, in his statement of his conferences with 
the principal Apostles in Gal. ii., an intermediate occasion when the matters arranged 
between them had been of the most solemn and important kind. This would be scarcely 
ingenuons, considering the object which he had in Gal. ii. 

5. It is not the fifth visit. For after this visit Paul did not return to Antioch, 
which he did after that in question, Gal. 11. 11. 

6. It remains therefore, that it can only, if identical with any of the five, be the 
third visit. Is this probable ? 

(a) The dates agree. See the Chronological Table, and notes on Gal. ii. 1. 

(b) The occasions agree. Both times, the important question relative to the obliga- 
tion of Christians to the Mosaic law was discussed: both times, the work of Paul and 
Barnabas among the Gentiles was recognized. What need was there for this to be 
gwice done? It is of no import whatever to the matter, that in Acts, the result is 


26] 


§ νι. EXCURSUS I. [PROLEGOMENA. 


a public decree,—whereas in Gal., no mention of such a decree is made: the history 
relates that which was important for the church,—the Epistle, that which cleared the 
Apostle personally from the charge of dependence on man: all mention of the decree 
would in Gal. have been irrelevant. Similarly we may deal with the objection, that 
in Acts, a public council is summoned, whereas in Gal., it is expressly said that Paul 
laid forth to them the Gospel which he preached to the Gentiles, but κατ᾽ ἰδίαν τοῖς 
δοκοῦσιν. This entirely agrees with Acts xv. 12, where Paul and Barnabas related to 
the multitude, not the nature of the doctrine which they preached, but only the patent 
proofs of its being from God,— ὅσα ἐποίησεν ὃ θεὸς σημεῖα kK. τέρατα ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν δὲ 
αὐτῶν. 

(c) Nor is it any objection to the identity, that in Gal. ii. 2, Paul went up κατ᾽ 
a&roxdéAvyw,—whereas in Acts xv. 2, the brethren ἔταξαν that P. and B. should go up, 
in consequence of the trouble given by the Judaizers. How do we know that this 
revelation was not made to the church, and so directed their appointment ἢ Or if it be 
understood that the revelation was made to Paul himself, who can say whether the 
determination of the brethren was not a consequence of it? Who can say again, 
whether Paul may not have been reluctant to go up, rather willing not to confer with 
flesh and blood on such a matter, and may have been commanded by a vision to do so? 
We have here again only the public and the private side of the same occurrence: the 
one, suitable to the ecclesiastical narrative: the other, to the vindication of his office by 
the Apostle. 

(d) The result is strikingly put by Mr. Conybeare, Life and Epistles of Paul, edn. 2, 
vol. i. p. 546,—* The Galatian visit could not have happened before the third visit : 
because, if so, the Apostles at Jerusalem had already granted to Paul and Barnabas 
(Gal. ii. 8—6) the liberty which was sought for the εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας : there- 
fore there would have been no need for the church to send them again to Jerusalem 
upon the same cause. Again, the Gacatian visit could not have occurred after the 
third visit: because, almost immediately after that period, Paul and Barnabas ceased 
to work together as missionaries to the Gentiles: whereas, up to the time of the 
Galatian visit, they had been working together.” 

(7) It seems then to follow, that the Galatian visit is identical with that recorded in 
Acts xv. 

Those who wish to see the whole question dealt with more in detail, and the names 
and arguments of the champions of each view recounted, may refer to Mr. Conybeare’s 
Appendix I. at the end of vol. i. of Conybeare and Howson’s Life of St. Paul: or to 
Dr. Davidson’s Introd. vol. ii. pp. 112 ff. 


11. On the discrepancy of Tacitus and Josephus regarding Feliz. 


Tacitus, Ann. xii. 54, has generally been supposed to be in erfor in stating that 
Cumanus and Felix were joint procurators before the condemnation of the former. His 
account is very circumstantial, but seems to shew an imperfect acquaintance with 
Jewish matters: whereas it is probable that Josephus was best informed in the affairs 
of his own country. The discrepancy is a very wide one, and if Tacitus is wrong, he 
has the whole history of the outbreak in Judea circumstantially misstated to correspond, 
See Wieseler, Chron. des Apost. Zeitalters, p. 67, note. ; 


EXCURSUS I. 


On “THE CiTy oF LASHA,”’ AND OTHER PARTICULARS MENTIONED IN 
Acts xxvii. 7—17. 


Since the publication of the second edition of this volume, much light has been thrown 
on the interesting questions connected with the topography of this passage, by letters. 


27] 


PROLEGOMENA.] THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. (cH. αὶ 


written to Mr. Smith from the Rev. George Brown, who accompanied the yacht 
St. Ursula, Hugh Tennent, Esq., on a eruise in the Mediterranean, in the winter of 
1855—6. I have to thank Mr. Smith for having kindly forwarded to me copies of 
these letters as they arrived. The substance of them is now printed as an extract fron: 
Mr. Brown’s Journal, in the second edition of Mr. Smith’s “ Voyage and Shipwreck of 
St. Paul,” Appendix, No. 3. I extract here such portions as regard immediately the 
geographical points in question, referring my readers to the volume itself for the whole 
account, which is most graphic and entertaining. 


I, “ We asked Nicephorus (the old Greek already mentioned) what was the ancient 
name of Lutro? He replied without hesitation, ‘Phceniki,’ but that the old city exists 
no longer. This of course proved at once the correctness of Mr. Smith’s conclusion. 
We were told further that the anchorage is excellent, and that our schuoner could enter 
the harbour without difficulty. We next enquired the ancient name of the island of 
Gozzo, and he said at once, ‘ Chlavda,’ or ‘ Chlavdanesa ’ (xAavda, or xAavda vices), a 
reply equally satisfactory. He told us also that there was a tradition in these parts 
that ἅγιος Παῦλος ἀπόστολος had visited Calolimounias (the fair havens), and had 
baptized many people there.” 


II. “Friday, Jan. 18th (Calolimounias).—Nothing now remained to be done but to 
ascertain the exact position of Lasza, a city which Luke says is nigh to the Fair 
Havens. ... I asked our friend the Guardiano, ποῦ ἐστι Λασέα (Λάσαια) ? He said 
at once, that it was two hours’ walk to the eastward, close under Cape Leonda: but 
that it is now a desert place (τόπω épjuw). Mr. Tennent was eager to examine it: so 
getting under weigh, we ran along the coast before a S.W. wind. Cape Leonda is 
called by the Greeks A¢wva, evidently from its resemblance to a lion couchant, which 
nobody could fail to observe either from the W. or the E. Its face is to the sea, forming 
a promontory 340 or 400 feet high. Just after we passed it, Miss Tennent’s quick eye 
discovered two white pillars standing on an eminence near the shore. Down went the 
helm: and putting the vessel round, we stood in close, wore, and hove to. Mr. H. 
Tennent and I landed immediately, just inside the cape, to the eastward, and I found 
the beach lined with masses of masonry. These were formed of small stones, cemented 
together with mortar so firmly, that even where the sea had undermined them, huge 
fragments layon the sand. This sea-wall extended a quarter of a mile along the beach 
from one rocky face to another, and was evidently intended for the defence of the city. 
Above we found the ruins of two temples. The steps which led up to the one remain, 
though in a shattered state: and the two white marble columns noticed by Miss Tennent, 
belonged to the other. Many shafts, and a few capitals of Grecian pillars, all of marble, 
lie scattered about, and ἃ gully worn by a torrent lays bare the substructures down to 
the rock. To the E.a conical rocky hill is girdled by the foundations of a wall: and 
on a platform between this and the sea, the pillars of another edifice lie level with the 
ground. Some peasants came down to see us from the hills above, and I asked them 
the name of the place. They said at once, ‘ Lasea:’ so there could be no doubt. Cape 
Leonda lies five miles E. of the Fair Havens: but there are no roads whatever in that 
part of Candia. We took away some specimens of marble, and boarded our vessel: at 
four P.M., sailed for Alexandria.” 


Ill. Lurro. “The health-officer told me, that though the harbour is open to the 
E., yet the easterly gales never blow home, being lifted by the high land behind, and 
that even in storms, the sea rolls in gently (‘piano piano’). He says it ἐδ the only 
secure harbour, in all winds, on the south coast of Crete: and that during the wars 
between the Venetians and the Turks (the latter took the island in 1688, I think), as 
many as twenty or twenty-four war-galleys had found shelter in its waters. He further 
shewed us an inscription on a large slab which he says was found among some ruins on 
the point, and took us up the hill to see the traces of the site of the ancient Phaniki. 


28] 


ὃ γε] EXCURSUS I. 1|. [ PROLEGOMENA. 


The outline of its ramparts is clearly discernible, and some cisterns hollowed in the 
rock: but the ploughshare has been driven over its site, and it displays ‘the line of 
confusion and the stones of emptiness.’ ” 

The inscription here alluded to was afterwards made out accurately by Mr. Brown, 
and is given by Mr. Smith in his Preface. It is interesting and important: 


JOVI . SOLI . OPTIMO . MAXIMO. 
SERAPIDI . ET . OMNIBVS . DIIS . ET. 
IMPERATORI . CAESARI . NERVAE . 
TRAJANO . AVG . GERMANICO . DACICO. 
EPICTETVS . LIBERTVS . TABVLARIVS . 
CVRAM . AGENTE . OPERIS . DIONYSIO. 
SOSTRATI . FILIO . ALEXANDRINO . @VBERNATORE . 
NAVIS . PARASEMO . ISOPHARIA . CL. THEONIS . 


i. 6. “ Epictetus, the freedman and tabularius, to Jupiter, only O. M., to Serapis and all 
the gods, and to the imperator Cesar Nerva Trajanus Augustus Germanicus Dacicus: 
the superintendent of the work being Dionysius son of Sostratus of Alexandria, guber- 
nator (κυβερνήτη5) of the ship whose sign is Isopharia, of the fleet of Theon.” 

Now as Mr. Smith points out, we have here several points of union with the text of 
the Acts. 

1. It appears that Alexandrian ships did anchor and make long stay, perhaps winter, 
at Pheenice: otherwise Epictetus, the master of one, could hardly have remained long 
enough to superintend this votive building, whatever it was. 

2. We see the accuracy of the Alexandrian nautical language employed by St. Luke. 
We have here κυβερνήτης (ch. xxvii. 11) as the designation of the master of the ship; 
and παρασήμῳ as indicating the name or sign of it (ch. xxviii. 11). 

The tabularius was the notary, or agent, of the fleet to which the Isopharia belonged. 
Mr. Smith quotes an inscription : 


CINCIO. L. F. SABINIANO . TABVLARIO . CLASS . RAVENN. 


EXCURSUS II. 
ON THE READING “E\Anviotas IN Acts xi. 20. 


My attention has been directed to a pamphlet by Dr. Kay, late Principal of Bishop’s 
College, Calcutta, “On the word Hellenist, with especial reference to Acts xi. 19 (20).” 
Dr. Kay defends the received reading Ἑλληνιστάς against the modern critical editors 
with considerable earnestness: I wish I could say that he had himself shewn the 
humility and impartial investigation which he demands from them, or abstained from 

. that assumption which substantiates nothing, and that vituperation of his opponents 
_ which shakes a reader’s confidence in even the best cause. I shall deal here simply 
“with the residuum of critical argument in his work. 

1. The MS. evidence in his favour is B (now apparently ascertained) D6EHL p 13, 
and apparently the great mass of cursives: strong, it must be admitted, but not decisive, 
with AD! against him, and the testimony of δὲ divided (NX! reading Εὐαγγελιστάς», and 
N, “EAAnvas). 

2. He states that “EAAnvas is the easier word, and therefore “ more likely to have 
supplanted Ἑλληνιστάς in a few MSS., than this latter to have supplanted it in nearly 
all.” But it is remarkable that he did not notice the bearing on such an assertion of a 
fact which he himself subsequently alleges: viz. that in ch. vi. 1, “there is no MS. 
variation at all.” Does not this circumstance shew, that the alteration here has not 


29] 


PROLEGOMENA.| THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. [on. 1. 


been to Ἕλληνας for the reason he supposes? Does it not further make it probable 
that Ἑλληνιστάς being unquestioned there,—’EAAnvas, here so difficult to fit into the 
narrative, has been changed to that other form, which presented no such difficulty ? 
But of this more below. 

3. Dr. Kay has certainly succeeded in nentralizing the testimony of some of the 
versions, by noticing that the Peschito, Vulgate, and others, read the same word here 
and in ch. vi. 1. In this respect his pamphlet has done good service, and our future 
digests should be modified by this fact being stated,—the remaining versions being 
carefully examined and discriminated. 

4. As to the testimony of Fathers, Dr. Kay’s argument is one so exceedingly loose 
and fallacious, that I can only wonder at its having satisfied himself. Chrysostom says 
Yows, διὰ τὸ μὴ εἰδέναι Ἑ βραϊστί, Ἕλληνας αὐτοὺς ἐκάλουν. Will it be credited, that 
Dr. K. here argues thus: “ I will venture to say that if you were to strike out the word 
“Ἕλληνας, and put « in its stead, simply asking a person to determine from the sentence 
itself, for which of the two, Ἑλληνιστάς or “EAAnvas, x had been substituted, the 
answer would be Ἑλληνιστάς." My answer would be the other way, seeing that the 
latter word would require no such explanation: but setting this aside, was there ever 
such a critical principle laid down, or experiment proposed, and that by one who justly 
censures Doddridge for the very same proposal in our text? “Strike out,”—not a 
dubious reading, for there is no doubt about “EAAnvas in the text of Chrysostom’s 
homily, but—“ a difficult reading,—put 2 for it, and then say, according to the measure 
of your own apprehension and private judgment, what the word ought to be!” Truly, 
we may be thankful that the text of the New Testament. has hitherto escaped the 
application of such a process. 

5. In noticing the Editions, Dr. Kay has shewn singular unfairness. He has quoted a 
rash and foolish sentence from Doddridge, which says that ‘‘common sense would require 
us to adopt Ἕλληνας, even if it were not supported by the authority of any MS. at all,” 
—and then charged all the critical Editors with having acted in this spirit, administering 
to them a severe admonition about ‘altering the Scriptures by conjectural criticisms,’ 
from Scott, who however hinself believes ‘Greeks’ to be the right reading. In this, of 
course, the whole question is begged ;—and the very reverse of our practice is charged on 
us. It is by no conjecture, which source of emendation I altogether repudiate, but owing 
to conscientious belief that “EAAnvas is the original Scripture text, that I have edited 
it; and consequently all Dr. Kay’s charges, and admonition, are out of place here. 

6. His section ‘on the meaning of the term Ἑ λληνισταί,᾽ as ‘ designating those Jews 
and proselytes who used the LXX version of the Scriptures in their synagogues,’ tells 
as no more than all knew before. But when he proceeds to ‘the suitableness of this 
meaning to the context’ in Acts xi. 20, I cannot but think that he has missed the whole 
point of the narrative; and in treating of the objectors to this view, selecting myself 
as representing them, he has exhibited, as before, remarkable unfairness, and want of 
logical apprehension. I might point out both these seriatim, as indeed any reader may 
trace them in his pamphlet: but it may suffice to deal with two or three instances. 
Against Ἑλληνιστάς, I have argued, that “the Hellenists were long ago a recognized 
part of the Christian Church :” my inference being, that, were they here referred to, 
there would be no case justifying the phenomena in the text, viz. a special notice like 
ἐλάλουν καὶ (καί is inserted by our three most ancient MSS., A, B, and δὲ) πρὸς τοὺς 
Ἑλληνιστάς, as distinguished from "Iovdalous preceding,—a special mission of an apostle, 
as (for this is also implied in the text, not an hypothesis of mine) om some unusual 
occurrence. Now observe how this is treated by Dr. Kay: | 

“ If this be an argument, it must mean something of the following kind : 

“Some Hellenists had been converted at Jerusalem: therefore St. Luke cannot be 
here narrating a wonderful extension of the Christian church among the Hellenist body 
at Antioch.” 

30] 





Vi. RCO RSUSTEL i. } PROLEGOMENA. 
§ vi.J L 


«<«Why not ὃ’ we ask. ‘Because we have made up our mind that at this precise 
period a further development of the church’s constitution took place. It is sufficient 
to reply: ‘ That is a mere arbitrary assumption : we are content to say with Newton, 
Hypotheses non fingo.’” Kay, p. 16. 

I may safely appeal to the student of Scripture, whether this be not the very height 
of unfairness. I have advanced no hypothesis, but have been led into my view simply 
by the phenomena of the sacred text itself: by that “patient, inductive criticism,” 
which Dr. Kay himself desiderates. His form of stating my argument keeps out of 
sight the very point on which it really turns. Instead of “ therefore St. Luke cannot 
be here describing,” he should have written, “ but, from the diction and character of 
this portion of St. Luke’s narrative, it is not probable that he is here describing.” 

7. The only other matter which I feel it necessary to notice is, the way in which he 
has dealt with what he has pleased to call my ‘hypothesis’ as to Barnabas being sent 
“not with the intent to sympathize with the work at Antioch, but to discourage it.” 
This last word, italicized by Dr. Kay as being mine, has neither place nor representative 
in my note, and is a pure misrepresentation. My words are, “probably from what 
follows, the intention was to ascertain the fact, and to deter these persons from the 
admission of the uncircumcised into the church ; or, at all events, to use his discretion 
in a matter on which they were as yet doubtful. The choice of such a man, ove by birth 
with the agents, and of a liberal spirit, shews sufficiently that they wished to deal, not 
harshly, but gently and cautiously, whatever their reason was.” This he designates as 
“a strange, and not very reverent hypothesis.’ What Dr. Kay may understand by 
reverent, Lam at aloss to imagine. I understand by reverence for Scripture, a patient, and 
at the same time fearless study of its text, irrespective of previously formed notions, but 
consistently with its own analogies. Now the analogy here is not with the mission of 
Peter and John to Samaria, as Dr. Kay represents it, nor was Barnabas sent from the 
Apostles and elders, as in that case: but our analogous incident is to be found in Gal. ii. 12, 
where, as here, the Church at Jerusalem sent down messengers to Antioch on an errand 
of supervision. Had any one ventured to infer the character of that mission, and its 
possible effect even on an Apostle, he would doubtless have incurred even more strongly 

from Dr. Kay the charge of irreverence. But the sacred record itself has set inference 
at rest in that instance, and thereby given us an important datum whereby to infer the 
probable character of another mission from the same Church to the same Church ; and 
our inference is, that the Jerusalem believers, whom we find ever jealous for the Judaic 
parity of the church, acted on this occasion fiom4hat motive. The whole character 
of that which is related of Barnabas’s proceeding at Antioch shews that he was acting, 
not in pursuance of his mission thither, but in accordance with the feelings of his own 
heart from seeing the work of God on his arrival. 

It were very much to be wished that able mien, like Dr. Kay, would study fairness 
in representing those who differ from them on critical points. The same motives which 
he assumes exclusively for his own side in this matter, have actuated also those who 
maintain the other reading. We deprecate as much as he can, ‘a bold alteration of 
texts, and a supercilious disregard of authority:’ had he dealt fairly with us, and. 
attributed to us owr own arguments, and not fictitious ones of his creation, he would 
have been the first to see this. 

It is only waste of precious time to spend our strength in jostling one another, when 
we have such a glorious cause to serve, and only our short lives to serve it in. Let all 
our strength and earnestness be spent over the Sacred Word itself. For sifting, eluci- 
dating, enforcing it, rivalry, if our purpose be simple and our heart single, is | the surest 
pledge of union, 


31] 


PROLEGOMENA. | THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. [cn. 11. 


CHAPTER II. 


OF THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 


SECTION I. 


ITS AUTHORSHIP AND INTEGRITY. 


1. Turs Epistle has been universally believed to be the genuine pro- 
duction of the Apostle Paul. Neither the Judaizing sects of old, who 
rejected the Pauline Epistles, nor the sceptical critics of modern Ger- 
many, have doubted this. Some of the earliest testimonies are : 

(a) Ireneus, adv. Her. iii. 16. 8, p. 205: Hoe ipsum interpreiatus 
est Paulus scribens ad Romanos: “ Paulus apostolus Jesu Christi, &c.” 
(Rom. i. 1) :—et iterum ad Romanos scribens de Israel dicit, “ Quorum 
patres, et ex quibus Christus, ὥς." Rom. ix.-51. 

(B) Clem. Alex., Padag. i. 8 (70), p. 140 P. :—.8¢ οὖν, φησὶν ὃ Παῦλος, 
χρηστότητα κ. ἀποτομίαν θεοῦ" κιτιλ. (Rom. xi. 22.) See also ib. 5 (19), 
Ρ. 109 P. And the same, Strom. iii. 11 (75), p. 544: ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ ὃ 
Παῦλος ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους ἐπ. γράφει: οἵτινες ἀπεθάνομεν TH ἁμαρτίᾳ, 
κιτιλ. (Rom. vi. 2.) See also ib. (76), p. 545, and al. freq. 

(y) Tertullian, adv. Praxeam, § xiii. vol. ii. p. 170: Deos omnino | 
nec dicam nec dominos, sed apostolum sequar, ut, si pariter nominandi 
fuerint Pater et Filius Deum Patrem appellem, et Jesum Christum 
Dominum nominem (Rom. i. 7). Solum autem Christum potero deum 
dicere, sicut idem apostolus : ex quibus Christus, qui est, inquit, Deus 
super omnia benedictus in e2vum omne (Rom. ix. 5). 

More instances need not be given: the stream of evidence is con- 
tinuous and unanimous. 

2. But critics have not been so well agreed as to the ἹΝΤΕΘΕΙΤΥ of 
the present Epistle. The last two chapters have been rejected by some : 
by others, parts of these chapters. Marcion rejected them, but on doc- 
trinal, not on critical grounds. Heumann imagined ch. xii.—xv. to bea 
later written Epistle, and ch. xvi. to be a conclusion to ch. xi. Semler 
views ch. xy. as a private memorandum, not addressed to the Romans, 
but written to be communicated by the bearers of the Epistle to those 
whom they visited on the way,—and ch. xvi., as a register of persons to 
be saluted, also on the way. Schulz imagines that ch. xvi. was written 
from Rome to the Ephesians, and Schott fancied it to be fragments 


1 See also the same chapter, § 9, where there are six express citations from the 


Epistle. 
32] , 


§ τι.} FOR WHAT READERS, ἄς.  [pro_egomena. 


of a smaller Epistle written by Paul in Corinth to some Asiatic church. 
But these notions, as Tholuck remarks (from whom these particuiars 
are for the most part taken), remain the exclusive property of their 
originators. He himself recognizes the genuineness of the portion, as 
also Neander, Credner, De Wette, and Olshausen. The more recent 
objections of Baur are mentioned and refuted, in part by De Wette, 
Comm, juxta finem,—Tholuck, Comm. pp. 2, 3,—Olsh. Comm. iii. 34, 
35, and fully, by Kling, theol. Stud. τι. Krit. 1837, p. 308 ft. 

3. Still more discrepancy of opinion has existed respecting the doxo- 
logy at the end of the Epistle. I have summarily stated and discussed 
the evidence, external and internal, in the var. readings and notes in 
loc. : and a fuller statement may be found in Dr. Davidson’s Introd. ii. 
188 ff.: Tholuck, Hinleitung, pp. 4—6 ; De Wette in loc. 


SECTION II. 
FOR WHAT READERS IT WAS WRITTEN. 


1. The Epistle itself plainly declares (ch. i. 7) that it was addressed 
to the saints who were at Rome. The omission of the words ἐν “Paun by 
some MSS. is to be traced to a desire to catholicize the Epistles of Paul ; 
—see Wieseler, Chron. des Apostol. Zeitalters, p. 438. 

With regard to the Church at Rome, some interesting questions 
present themselves. 

2. By WHOM WAS IT FOUNDED ? Here our enquiries are enwrapped 
in uncertainty. But some few landmarks stand forth to guide us, and 
may at least prevent us from adopting a wrong conclusion, however 
unable we may still be to find the right one. 

(a) It was certainly not founded by an Apostle. For in that case, the 
fact of St. Paul addressing it by letter, and expressing his intention of 
visiting it personally, would be inconsistent with his own declared reso- 
lution in ch. xv. 20, of not working where another had previously laid 
the foundation. 

(8) This same resolution may guide us to an approximation at least 
to the object of our search. Had the Roman church been founded by 
the individual exertions of any preacher of the word, or had it owed its 
existence to the confluence of the converts of any other preacher than 
Paul, he would hardly have expressed himself as he has done in this 
Epistle. We may fairly infer from ch. xv. 20, that he had, proximately, 
laid the foundation of the Roman church : that is to say, it was origi- 
nated by those to whom he had preached, who had been attracted to 
the metropolis of the world by various causes,—who had there laboured 
in the ministry with success, and gathered round them an important 
Christian community. 

Vou. Il.—33] 6 


PROLEGOMENA.]| THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. [{6Η. 1 


Of this community, though not his own immediate offspring in the 
faith, Paul takes charge as being the Apostle of the Gentiles. He 
longs to impart to them some χάρισμα (ch. i. 11): he excuses his having 
written to them τολμηρότερον ἀπὸ μέρους, by the dignity of that office, 
in which, as a priest, he was to offer the Gentiles, an acceptable and 
sanctified offering to God. 

(y) The character given in ch. i. 8 of the Roman Christians, that 
their faith was spoken of in all the world, has been taken as pointing to 
a far earlier origin than the preaching of Paul. But, even granting 
that some among the Roman Jews may have carried the faith of Christ 
thither soon after the Ascension (see Acts ii. 10; and Rom. xvi. 7, where 
Andronicus and Junias are stated to have been in Christ before the Apos- 
tle),—-such a concession is not necessary to explain Rom, i. 8. What- 
ever happened at Rome is likely to have been very soon announced in 
the provinces, and to have had more reporters, wherever the journeys of 
the Apostle led him, than events occurring elsewhere. He could hardly 
fail to meet, in every considerable city which he had visited for the 
second time, in Judea, Asia, Macedonia, and Greece (see Acts xviii. 
22,23; xix. 1; xx. 1, 2), believers who had received tidings of the 
increase and flourishing state of the Roman church. This occurrence 
of good news respecting them in all the cities might well suggest the 
expression, ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν καταγγέλλεται ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ. 

3. The above considerations lead me to the conclusion, that the 
Roman Church owed its origin, partly perhaps to believing Jews, who 
had returned or been attracted thither in the first days of Christianity, 
but mainly to persons converted under Paul’s own preaching. This 
conclusion is strengthened by the long list of salutations in ch. xvi. to 
Christian brethren and sisters with whose previous course in many cases 
he had been acquainted. 

4, It is not within the province of these Prolegomena to discuss the 
question respecting the presence, preaching, and martyrdom of Peter at 
Rome. That he did not found the Roman church, is plain from the 
above considerations, and is conceded by many of the ablest among the 
modern Romanists*. Nor have we any ground to suppose that he was 
at Rome up to, or at the date of this Epistle. No mention is made of 
him,—no salutation sent to him. At present therefore we may dismiss 
the question as not pertinent. In the prolegg. to the Epistles of Peter, 
it will reeur, and require full discussion. 

5. That the Roman church was composed of Jews and Gentiles, is 
manifest from several passages in our Epistle. In ch. ii. 17, iv. 1, 12, 


? Tholuck, Einl. § 2, mentions Valesius, Pagi, Baluz, Hug, Klee: and an article in 
the Tubingen Theological Quarterly for 1824 (written according to Dr. Davidson by 
Feilmoser) which concludes that though Peter taught and suffered martyrdom in Rome, 
his stay there could not have much exceeded one year. 


34] 


§ 11. FOR WHAT READERS, ὅθ.  [PROLEGOMENA. 


Jews are addressed, or implied: in ch. i. 18,—in the similitude of en- 
grafting in ch. xi., and in xv. 15, 16,—Gentiles are addressed. In what 
proportion these elements co-existed, can only be determined from indi- 
cations furnished by the Epistle itself. And from it the general 
impression is, that zt 7s addressed to Gentiles, as the greater and more 
important part of its readers. Among them would be mostly found the 
‘strong’ of ch. xiv., to whom principally the precepts and cautions 
concerning forbearance are written. To them certainly the expression 
τὰ ἔθνη in ch.i. 5, 18, xv. 15, 16, is to be applied, in the strict sense; and 
in those places it represents the persons to whom the Epistle is mainly 
aildressed. The same may be said of ch. xi. 18, 14, where ὑμεῖς τὰ ἔθνη 
are evidently the majority of the readers, as contrasted with the τινὲς ἐξ 
αὐτῶν, the Jewish believers. 

6. It may be interesting to add testimonies from profane writers 
which are connected with the spread of Christianity at Rome. 

That the Jews were found in great numbers there, is evident. 

(a) Josephus, Antt. xvii. 11. 1, mentioning an embassy which came 
to Rome from Judea under Varus, in the time of Augustus, says, καὶ 
ἦσαν οἱ μὲν πρέσβεις οἱ ἀποσταλέντες γνώμῃ τοῦ ἔθνους πεντήκοντα, συν- 
ίσταντο δὲ αὐτοῖς τῶν ἐπὶ ἹΡώμης ᾿Ιουδαίων ὑπὲρ ὀκτακιςχιλίους. 

(8) Philo, leg. ad Caium, § 28, vol. ii. p. 569, in a passage too long 
for citation, says that. Augustus gave them the free exercise of their 
religion, and a quarter beyond the Tiber for their habitation. 

(y) Dio Cassius xxxvii. 17, καὶ ἔστι καὶ παρὰ τοῖς Ῥωμαίοις τὸ γένος 
τοῦτο, κολουσθὲν μὲν πολλάκις, αὐξηθὲν δὲ ἐπὶ πλεῖστον, ὥςτε καὶ ἐς παῤ- 
ῥησίαν τῆς νομίσεως ἐκνικῆσαι. 

(δὴ) So far relates to Judaism proper : in the following it is impossible 
to say how far Christianity may have been ignorantly confounded 
with it. 

Augustine, de Civ. Dei vi. 11, vol. vii. p. 192, cites from Seneca, ‘in 
eo libro quem contra superstitiones condidit,’—De illis sane Judzis cum 
loqueretur, ait :—‘ Cum interim usque eo sceleratissime gentis consuetudo 
convaluit, ut per omnes jam terras recepta sit: victi victoribus leges 
dederunt.’ 

(ec) Tacitus, in the same place where he relates the persecution of the 
Christians by Nero on occasion of the fire at Rome, adds, ‘ repressaque in 
presens exitiabilis superstitio rursus erumpebat, non modo per Judzam, 
originem ejus mali, sed per urbem etiam’... . 

(2) Juvenal describes the Judaizing Romans at a later period in a 
strain of bitter satire, Sat. xiv. 96 ff. 

(yn) On the passages in Sueton. Claud. 25, and Dio Cass. Ix. 6, re- 
lating to the expulsion or coercion of the Jews at Rome, see note on 
Acts xviii. 2. 

7. It yet remains to consider the supposed discrepancy between our 

35 | c 2 


PROLEGOMENA.] THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. [π΄ π΄, 


Epistle, and the state of the Christian church at Rome implied some 
years subsequent to it in Acts xxviii. This discrepancy has been made 
the most of by Dr. Baur, and by him pronounced irreconcileable. The 
flourishing state of the Roman church set forth in this Epistle seems to 
him to be inconsistent with the tone used by the Jews in their speech 
to Paul, Acts xxviii. 22: ἀξιοῦμεν δὲ παρὰ σοῦ ἀκοῦσαι ἃ φρονεῖς" περὶ μὲν 
γὰρ τῆς αἱρέσεως ταύτης γνωστὸν ἡμῖν ἐστιν ὅτι πανταχοῦ ἀντιλέγεται. 
Olshausen and Tholuck have been at much pains to give a solution of 
the difficulty: the former referring the circumstance to the entire 
severance between Christians and Jews at Rome made necessary by 
Claudius’s persecutions of the Jews,—the latter, following many other 
Commentators, to an affected ignorance of the Christian sect on the part 
of the Jews. 

On this I will remark,—that the difficulty itself does not seem to 
me so serious as the German writers generally have regarded it. The 
answer of the Jews was to a speech of Paul in which he had given a 
remarkable instance of his becoming to the Jews asa Jew. He repre- 
sents, that he had no real quarrel with his nation: that in fact he was a 
prisoner for the hope of Israel. This hope they certainly knew, either 
from previous acquaintance with his name and character, or from his 
own lips in words which have not been recorded, to be bound up with 
belief in Jesus as the Messiah. They had received (see note in loc.) 
no message respecting him from Judza laying any thing πονηρόν to his 
charge : and they were anxious to have an account from himself of his 
opinions and their ground: for as for this sect, they were well aware 
that every where it was a thing ἀντιλεγόμενον : the very word, be 
it observed, used in ver. 19 (and ch. xiii. 45), respecting the opposition 
raised by the Jews to Paul. Now we may avail ourselves of both 
Olshausen’s and Tholuck’s suppositions. On the one hand it was very 
likely that the intercourse between Jews and Christians at Rome would 
be exceedingly small. The Christian church, consisting mostly of Gen- 
tiles, would absorb into itself the Jews who joined it, and who would, 
for the reason assigned by Olshausen, studiously separate themselves 
from their unbelieving countrymen. Again, it would not be likely that 
the Roman Jews, in their speech to Paul, would enter into any particu- 
Jars respecting the sect,—only informing him, since he had professed 
himself in heart at peace with his nation and bound on behalf of their 
hope, that they were well aware of the general unpopularity among 
Jews of the sect to which he had attached himself, and wished from him 
an explanation on this head. Something also must be allowed for the 
restraint with which they spoke to one under the special custody, as a 
state prisoner, of the highest power in Rome, and in the presence of a 
representative of that power. 

Thus the difficulty is much lessened: and it belongs indeed to that 

36 | 


§ π|.] WITH WHAT OBJECT, &c. [PROLEGOMENA. 


class, the occurrence of which in the sacred text is to be regarded far 
rather as a confirmation of our faith, by shewing us how simple and 
veracious is the narrative of things said and done, than as a hindrance 
to it by setting one statement against another. 

With respect to that part of it which concerns the notoriety of the 
Roman church,—I may remark that its praise for faith in all the world, 
being a matter reported by Christians to Christians, and probably 
unknown to ‘those without,’ need not enter as a disturbing element into 
our consideration. 

8. For a judicious and clear statement of the subsequent history of 
the early Roman church, I cannot do better than refer my readers to 
the former part of the work of Mr. Shepherd, “The History of the 
Church of Rome.” 


SECTION IIL 
WITH WHAT OBJECT IT WAS WRITTEN. 


1. In answering this question, critics have been divided between the 
claims of the unquestionably most important doctrinal portion of the 
Epistle, and the particular matters treated in the parenthetical section 
(ch. ix.—xi.) and the conclusion (ch. xiv.—xvi.). It has not enough 
been borne in mind, that the occasion of writing an Epistle is one thing, 
—the great object of the Epistle itself, another. The ill-adjusted ques- 
tions between the Jewish and Gentile believers, of which St. Paul had 
doubtless heard from Rome, may have prompted him originally to write 
to them: but when this resolve was once formed,—the importance of 
Rome as the centre of the Gentile world would naturally lead him to 
lay forth in this more than in any other Epistle the statement of the 
divine dealings with regard to Jew and Gentile, now one in Christ. I 
will therefore speak separately of the prompting occasion, and the main 
object, of the Epistle. 

2. The enlogy of the faith of the Roman Christians which Paul met 
with in all his travels, could hardiy fail to be accompanied with notices 
respecting their peculiar difficulties. These might soon have been set at 
rest by his presence and oral teaching: and he had accordingly resolved 
long since to visit them (ch. i. 10—13). Hindrances however had 
occurred : and that advice which he was not as yet permitted to give by 
word of mouth, he was prompted to send to them in a letter. 

3. The contents of that letter plainly shew what their difficulties 
were. Mixed as the church was of Jew and Gentile, the relative posi- 
tion in God’s favour of each of these would, in defect of solid and broad 
views of the universality of man’s guilt and God’s grace, furnish a sub- 
ject of continual jealousy and irritation. And if we assume that the 


Gentile believers much preponderated in numbers, we shall readily infer 
37 | 


PROLEGOMENA.| THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. [ca 11. 


that the religious scruples of the Jews as to times and meats would be 
likely to be with too little consideration overborne. 

4. From such circumstances we may well conceive that, under divine 
guidance, the present form of the Epistle was suggested to the Aposile. 
The main security for a proper estimate being formed of both Jew and 
Gentile, would be, the possession of right and adequate convictions of 
the universality of man’s guilt and God’s free justifying grace. This 
accordingly it was Paul’s great object to furnish ; and on it he expends 
by far the greatest portion of his labour and space. But while so doing, 
we may trace his continued anxiety to steer his way cautiously among 
the strong feelings and prejudices which beset the path on either hand. 
If by a vivid description of the depravity of Heathendom he might be 
likely to minister to the pride of the Jew, he forthwith turns to him and 
abases him before God equally with the others. But when this is 
accomplished, lest he should seem to have lost sight of the pre-eminence 
of God’s chosen people, and to have exposed the privileges of the Jew 
to the slight of the Gentile, he enumerates those privileges, and dwells 
on the true nature of that pre-eminence. Again when the great argu- 
ment is brought to a close in ch. viii., by the completion of the bringing 
in of life by Christ Jesus, and the absolute union in time and after time 
of every believer with him,—for fear he should seem amidst the glories 
of redemption to have forgotten his own people, now as a nation 
rejected, he devotes three weighty chapters to an earnest and affec- 
tionate consideration of their case—to a deprecation of all triumph 
over them on the part of the Gentile, and a clear setting forth of the 
real mutual position of the two great classes of his readers. Then, after 
binding them all together again, in ch. xii. xiii., by precepts respecting 
Christian life, conduct towards their civil superiors, and mutual love, he 
proceeds in ch. xiv. to adjust those peculiar matters of doubt,—now 
rendered comparatively easy after the settlement of the great principle 
involving them,—respecting which they were divided. He recommends 
forbearance towards the weak and scrupulous,—at the same time class- 
ing himself among the strong, and manifestly implying on which side his 
own apostolic judgment lay. Having done this, he again places before 
them their mutual position as co-heirs of the divine promises and mercy 
(ch. xv. 1—13), and concludes the Epistle with matters of personal 
import to himself and them, and with salutations in the Lord. And 
probably on re-perusing his work, either at the time, or, as the altered 
style seems to import, in after years at Rome, he subjoins the fervid and 
characteristic doxology with which it closes. 

5. There seems quite enough in the circumstances of the Rite 
Church to have led naturally to such an Epistle, without supposing with 
some critics, that an elaborate plan of written doctrinal teaching, to 
supply the want of oral, was present to the mind of the Apostle. We 

38 ] 


§ 1v.] AT WHAT TIME, &c. [ PROLEGOMENA. 


must not forget to whom he was writing, nor fail to allow for the 
greater importance naturally attaching to an Epistle which would be 
the cherished possession and exemplar of the greatest of the Gentile 
churches. It was an Epistle to all Gentiles, from the Apostle of the 
Gentiles : ὑμῖν λέγω τοῖς ἔθνεσιν᾽ ἐφ᾽ ὅσον μὲν [οὖν εἰμι ἐγὼ ἐθνῶν ἀπόστο- 
dos, τὴν διακονίαν μου δοξάζω. It had for its end the settlement, on the 
broad principles of God’s truth and love, of the mutual relations, and 
union in Christ, of God’s ancient people, and the recently engrafted 
world. What wonder then, if it be found to contain an exposition of 
man’s unworthiness and God’s redeeming love, such as not even Holy 
Scripture itself elsewhere furnishes ? 


SECTION IV. 
AT WHAT TIME AND PLACE IT WAS WRITTEN. 


1. This is more plainly pointed out in our Epistle than in most of 
the others. The Apostle was about to set out for Jerusalem with a 
contribution from the churches of Macedonia and Achaia (ch. xv. 25 ff.) 
To make this contribution he had exhorted the Corinthian church, 1 Cor. 
xvi. 1 ff, and hinted the possibility of his carrying it to Jerusalem in 
person, after wintering with them. And again in 2 Cor. viii. ix. he 
recurs to the subject, blames the tardiness of the Corinthians in pre- 
paring the contribution, and (ib. xiii. 1) describes himself as coming to 
them immediately. Comparing these notices with Acts xx. 1 ff, we find 
that Paul left Ephesus (after Pentecost, see notes there) for Mace- 
donia, wintered at Corinth, and thence went to Jerusalem accom- 
panied by several brethren, bearing (ib. xxiv. 17) alms to his nation 
and offerings. 

2. Thus far it would appear that it was written close upon, or during 
his journey to bear alms to Jerusalem. But the very place is pointed 
out by evidence which can hardly be misapplied. We have a special 
commendation of Pheebe, a deaconess of the church at Kenchrea, to the 
kindness and attention of the Roman Christians : such a commendation 
‘as could hardly have been sent, had she not been, as generally believed, 
the bearer of the letter. Again, greetings are sent (ch. xvi. 23) from 
Gaius, evidently a resident, for he is called 6 ἕένος μου καὶ ὅλης τῆς 
ἐκκλησίας. But on comparing 1 Cor. i. 14, we find Paul telling the 
Corinthians that he baptized among them one Gaius. ‘These persons 
ean hardly but be one and the same. Again, Erastus is mentioned as 
steward of the city. Therefore, as Tholuck remarks, of some city well 
known to the Romans, and one in which he must have been some time 
resident, so to speak of it. I may add, that after the mention of 

39 | ; 


PROLEGOMENA.] THE EPISTLE TO THE-ROMANS. [ca 1. 


Kenchrea, ἡ πόλις can be no other than Corinth : just as, if the Peireus 
had been mentioned, ἡ πόλις would necessarily mean Athens. (An 
Erastus is said to have remained at Corinth, 2 Tim. iv. 20, but the 
identity is too uncertain for the notice to be more than a possible 
corroboration. ) 

3. From the above evidence it is placed almost beyond question that 
the Epistle was written from Corinth, at the close’ of the three months’ 
residence there of Acts xx. 3,—the παραχειμασία of 1 Cor. xvi. 6,—when 
Paul was just about to depart (νυνὶ δὲ πορεύομαι, ch. xv. 25) for Jeru- 
salem on his errand of charity. 

4. By consulting the chronological table appended to the Prolegg. 
to the Acts, it will be seen that I place this visit in the winter of a.v. 
57—58. The Epistle accordingly was sent in the spring of a.p. 58, the 
fourth of the reign of Nero. 


SECTION V. 
LANGUAGE AND STYLE. 


1. It might perhaps have been expected, that an Epistle to Romans 
would have been written in Latin. But Greek had become so far 
the general language of the world, that there is no ground for sur- 
prise in the Apostle having employed it. Not to cite at length the 
passages in the classics (Tacit. de Orator. c. 29: Martial, Epig. xiv. 56: 
Juvenal, Sat. vi. 184—189) which point to the universal adoption of 
Greek habits and language at Rome, we have the similar instances of 
Tgnatius, Dionysius of Corinth, Irenzus, all of whom wrote to the 
Roman Christians in Greek. Clement, Bishop of Rome, wrote in Greek. 
Justin Martyr addressed his apologies to the Roman Emperors in 
Greek. And if it be objected, that the greater number of the Christian 
converts would belong to the lower classes, we may answer, that a 
great proportion of these were native Greeks: see Juvenal, Sat. iii. 
60—80. 

2. In speaking of the style of the Epistle, the following general 
remarks on the style of the Apostle Paul, taken from Tholuck’s Intro- 
duction to his Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, p. 26 ff., are of 
considerable interest : ‘‘ As in general we can best apprehend and esti- 
mate the style of a writer in connexion with his character, so is it with 
the Apostle Paul. The attributes which especially characterize the 
originality of Paul as an Author, are Power, Fulness, and Warmth. 
If to these attributes is added Perspicuity of unfolding thought, we have 
all united, which ennobles an orator. But fulness of ideas and warmth 
of feelings often bring with them a certain informality of expression : 
the very wealth of the productive power does not always leave time to 

40] 


δ ᾿ς LANGUAGE AND STYLE.  [PROLEGOMENA. 


educate (as Hamann expresses it) the thoughts which are born into the 
light,—to arrange and select the feelings. Together with the excel- 
lences above mentioned, something of this defect is found in the style 
of the great Apostle of the Gentiles. Something of that which Diony- 
sius of Halicarnassus de Comp. Verb. 6. 22 says of ‘compositio austera,’ 
is applicable to the Apostle’s method of expression. οὔτε πάρισα βού- 
λεται τὰ κῶλα ἀλλήλοις εἶναι, οὔτε παρόμοια, οὔτε ἀναγκαίᾳ δουλεύοντα 
ἀκολουθίᾳ, ἀλλ᾽ εὐγενῆ x. ἅπλᾶ κ. ἐλεύθερα: φύσει T ἐοικέναι μᾶλλον αὐτὰ 
βούλεται, ἢ τέχνῃ, K. κατὰ πάθος λέγεσθαι μᾶλλον, ἢ κατ᾽ ἦθος. περιόδους 
δὲ συντιθέναι συναρτιζούσας τὸν νοῦν τὰ πολλὰ μὲν οὔτε βούλεται" εἰ δέ 
ποτε αὐτομάτως ἐπὶ τοῦτο κατενεχθείη, τὸ ἐνεπιτήδευτον ἐμφαίνειν ἐθέλει 
καὶ ἀφελές, k.7.A. The high claims of St. Paul to the reputation of elo- 
quence were acknowledged by remote Christian antiquity. Nay, we 
have in all probability an honourable testimony to the same effect from 
one of the most celebrated critics of heathen Rome,—that namely of the 
fragment of Longinus, where he ranks Paul with the first orators of 
aucient times, adding however the remark, that he appears more to 
persuade than to demonstrate*. From Christian antiquity we will 
adduce the testimony of Jerome, Ep. 48, ad Pammachium, c. 13, vol. i. 
p. 223:—‘ Paulum Apostolum proferam, quem quotiescunque lego, videor 
mihi non verba audire, sed tonitrua . . . . videntur quidem verba sim- 
plicia et quasi innocentis hominis ac rusticani, et qui nec facere nec decli- 
nare noverit insidias, sed quocunque respexeris, fulmina sunt. Heret in 
causa, capit omne quod tetigerit, tergum vertit, ut superet: fugam 
simulat, ut occidat.’ Add to this the words of Chrysostom de Sacer- 
dotio iv. 7, vol. i. p. 481: ὥσπερ yap τεῖχος ἐξ ἀδάμαντος κατασκευασθέν, 
οὕτω τὰς πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐκκλησίας τὰ τούτου τειχίζει γράμματα" 
καὶ καθάπερ τις ἀριστεὺς γενναιότατος ἕστηκε καὶ νῦν μέσος, αἰχμαλωτίζων 
πᾶν νόημα εἰς τὴν ὑπακοὴν τοῦ χριστοῦ, καὶ καθαίρων λογισμοὺς καὶ πᾶν 
ὕψωμα ἐπαιρόμενον κατὰ τῆς γνώσεως τοῦ θεοῦ. 

3. After having stated, and visited with severe and deserved censure, 
the disparaging estimate formed by Riickert in his Commentary, and 
criticized in a friendly spirit the other extreme, taken by Rothe 
and Glickler, of regarding all ellipses, anacolutha, and defects of 
style, only as so many. hidden but intended excellences, Tholuck 
proceeds : 

“ We have then this question to ask ourselves : with what ideas as to 
the ability of the Apostle as a writer ought the believing Christian to 


3 The genuineness of this fragment has been defended by Hug, Einl. ins N. T. ii. 334 
(342 of Wait’s transl.), on grounds well worthy of consideration. (The passage runs 
thus: κορωνὶς δ᾽ ἔστω λόγου παντὸς καὶ φρονήματος Ἑλληνικοῦ Δημοσθένης, Λυσίας, 
Αἰσχίνης, Ὑπερίδης, Ἰσαῖος, Δείναρχος (Δημοσθένης ὁ ΚρίθινοΞ), Ἰσοκράτης, ᾿Αντίφων" 
πρὸς τούτοις Παῦλος ὁ Ταρσεύς, ὅντινα καὶ πρῶτόν φημι προιστάμενον δόγματος ἄναπο- 
δείκτου.) ᾽ 


41] 


PROLEGOMENA.] THE EPISTLE TO THE ΒΌΜΑΝΒ. [ca. ἢ. 


approach his works? And what is the result, when we examine in 
detail the Epistles of Paul in this bearing? The Fathers themselves 
frequently confess, that the whole character of Christianity forbids us 
from seeking classical elegance in the outward style of the New Testa- 
ment :—as the Son or Gop appeared in His life on earth in a state of 
humiliation, so also the word of God. In this sense, to cite one example 
out of many, Calvin says (on Rom. v. 15) :—‘Quum autem multoties 
discriminis mentionem repetat, nulla tamen est repetitio, in qua non 
sit ἀνανταπόδοτον, vel saltem ellipsis aliqua: Que sunt quidem orationis 
vitia, sed quibus nihil majestati decedit celestis sapientie, que nobis 
per apostolum traditur. Quin potius singulari Dei providentia factum 
est, ut sub contemptibili verborum humilitate altissima hee mysteria 
nobis traderentur; ut non humane eloquentie potentia, sed sola spi- 
ritus efficacia niteretur nostra fides.” But it must be borne in mind, 
that this our concession with regard to the formal perfection of the 
apostolic writings has its limits : for were we to concede that imperfec- 
tion of form amounted to absolute informality, the subject-matter itself 
would be involved in the surrender. If the aim of the apostolic teach- 
ing is not to be altogether frustrated, we can hardly object to the 
assumption, that the divine ideas have been propounded in such a form, 
that by a correct use of the requisite means they may be discovered, and 
their full meaning recognized. Assuming this, it is impossible to form 
so low an estimate as Riickert’s of the style of the Apostle: while at 
the same time we cannot see that the believing Christian is entitled to 
assume in him an academic correctness of syllogistic form, a conscious 
and perfect appreciation of adequacy of expression, reaching to the use 
of every particle. If we are to require these excellences from an 
apostolic writer, why not also entire conformity to classical idiom of 
expression? And if we besides take into account the peculiarity of the 
Apostle’s character above pointed out, are we not obliged to confess, 
that so universal a reflection, such a calculation, as Rothe’s theory sup- 
poses, is altogether inconsistent with that character,—that such a pre- 
cisely measured style would be inexplicable from a spirit like that of 
the Apostle, except on the assumption of a passive inspiration? and 
as regards the point itself, I cannot see, that the writings of Paul, 
examined in detail, justify this prejudice in their favour, éven according 
to the ingenious and minute exegesis of Rothe himself. (This he 
instances by examining Rothe’s account of the defective constructions 
in Rom. v. 12 f.) ** * * That the great Apostle was no ordinary 
thinker,—that he did not, after the manner of enthusiasts, carried away 
by warmth of feeling, write down what he himself did not understand, 
is beyond question :—but that all which hitherto has been accounted in 
him negligence or inaccuracy of expression, proceeded from conscious 
42] 


§ v.] LANGUAGE AND STYLE.  [proLecomena. 


intention of the writer,—can neither be justly assumed a priori, nor 
convincingly shown a posteriori.” 

4, To these general remarks of Tholuck I may add some notice of the 
peculiarities of the argumentative style of the Apostle, with which we 
are so much concerned in this Epistle. 

(a) It is his constant habit to cnsulate the one matter which he is 
considering, and regard it irrespective of any qualifications of which it 
may admit, or objections to which it lies open,—up to a certain point. 
Much of the difficulty in ch. v. vi. vii. has arisen from not bearing this 
in mind. 

(6) After thus treating the subject till the main result is gained, he 
then takes into account the qualifications and objections, but in a man- 
ner peculiar to himself; introducing them by putting the overstrained 
use, or the abuse, of the proposition just proved, in an interrogative 
form, and answering the question just asked. On a superficial view of 
these passages, they assume a sort of dramatic character, and have led 
many Commentators to suppose an objector to be present in the mind of 
the Apostle, to whom such questions are to be ascribed. But a further 
and deeper acquaintance with St. Paul’s argumentative style removes 
this impression, and with it, much of the obscurity arising from sup- 
posing, or not knowing when to suppose, an interchange of speakers in 
the argument. We find that it is the Apostle himself speaking 
throughout, and in his vivid rhetorical manner proposing the fallacies 
which might be derived from his conclusions as matters of parenthetical 
enquiry. 

(y) Perhaps one of the most wonderful phenomena of St. Paul’s 
arguments, is the manner in which all such parenthetical enquiries are 
interwoven into the great subject; in which while he pursues and 
annihilates the off-branching fallacy, at the same time he has been 
advancing in the main path,—whereas in most human arguments each 
digression must have its definite termination, and we must resume the 
thesis where we left it. A notable instance of this is seen in ch. vi. of 
our Epistle ; in which while the mischievous fallacy of ver. 1 is dis- 
cussed and annihilated, the great subject of the introduction of Life 
by Christ is carried on through another step—viz. the establishment of | 
that life as one of sanctification. 

Among the minor characteristics of the Apostle’s style, may be 
enumerated, 

(δ) Frequent and complicated antitheses, requiring great caution and 
discrimination in exegesis. For often the different members of the 
antithesis are not to be taken in the same extent of meaning ; some- 
times the literal and metaphorical significations are interchanged in a 
curious and intricate manner, so that perhaps in the first member of two 

43 | 


PROLEGOMENA.| THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. _ [ca. π- 


antithetical clauses, the subject may be literal and the predicate meta- 
phorical, and in the second, vice versa, the subject metaphorical and the 
predicate literal. Sometimes again, the terms of one member are to be 
amplified to their fullest possible, almost to an exaggerated meaning : 
whereas those of the second are to be reduced down to their least 
possible, almost to a depreciated meaning. To retain such antitheses 
in a version or exegesis is of course, generally speaking, impossible : the 
appropriateness of the terms depends very much on their conventional 
value in the original language. Then comes the difficult task of break- 
ing up the sentence, and expressing neither more nor less than the real 
meaning under a different grammatical form : an attempt almost always 
sure fo fail even in the ablest hands. 

(e) Frequent plays upon words, or rather perhaps, choice of words 
from their similarity of sound. Much of the terseness and force of the 
Apostle’s expressions is necessarily lost in rendering them into another 
language, owing to the impossibility of expressing these paronomasiz ; 
and without them, it becomes exceedingly difficult to ascertain the real 
weight of the expression itself; to be sure that we do not give more 
than due importance in the context to a clause whose aptness was 
perhaps its chief characteristic, and on the other hand to take care that 
we do not overlook the real importance of clauses whose value is not 
their mere aptness, but a deep insight into the philosophy of the 
cognate words made use of, as exponents of lines of human thought 
ultimately convergent. 

(ζ) Accumulation of prepositions, often with the same or very slightly 
different meanings. ‘That this is a characteristic of St. Paul’s style 
there can be no doubt: and the difficulty created by it is easily obviated 
if this be borne in mind. The temptation of an expositor is to 
endeavour to give precise meaning and separate force to each pre- 
position, thereby exceeding the intention of the sentence, and distorting 
the context by elevating into importance clauses of comparative in- 
difference. 

(η) The frequency and peculiarity of his parenthetical passages. 
The difficulty presented by this characteristic is, in few words, that of 
disentangling with precision such clauses and passages. The danger is 
twofold: 1. lest we too hastily assume an irregular construction, not 
perceiving the parenthetical interruption: 2. lest we err on the other 
hand, which has more commonly been the case, in assuming the 
existence of parenthetical clauses where none exist. St. Paul’s paren- 
theses are generally well marked to the careful observer ; and it must be 
remembered that the instances of anacoluthon and irregular construc- 
tion are at least as frequent : so that we are not, for the sake of clearing 
up a construction, to throw in parentheses, as is often done, to the 
detriment of the sense. 


44] 


CH. II. | 1 CORINTHIANS. [ PROLEGOMENA. 


The peculiarity of his parentheses consists in this, that owing to the 
fervency and rapidity of his composition he frequently deserts, in a 
clause apparently intended to be parenthetical, the construction of the 
main sentence, and instead of resuming it again, proceeds with the 
parenthesis as if it were the main sentence. 

Instances of almost all these characteristic difficulties will be found in 
chap. v. of this Epistle, where, so to speak, they reach their culminating 
point. 

5. Two cautions are necessary, on account of the lax renderings of 
our authorized version, by which the details of the argument of this and 
other Epistles have been so disguised, that it is almost impossible for the 
mere English student intelligently to apprehend them. 

(a) The emphatic position of words is of the highest importance. 
Pages might be filled with an account of misrenderings of versions and 
Commentators from disregard to the rules of emphasis. The student 
will continually find such instances alleged and criticized in these notes ; 
and will be surprised that so momentous a matter should have been 
generally overlooked. 

(b) The distinction between the aorist and perfect tenses is in our 
authorized version very commonly disregarded, and thereby the point of 
the sentence altogether missed. Instances are continually occurring in 
the Epistles: and it has been my endeavour in the notes to draw the 
student’s attention to them with a view to their correction. 

6. For much interesting matter on this subject the student is referred 
to Tholuck, Rémerbrief, Einleitung: and to Dr. Davidson, Introd. 
vol, ii. p. 144 ff 


CHAPTER III. 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


SECTION I. 


ITS AUTHORSHIP AND INTEGRITY. 


1. As far as I am aware, the first of these has never been doubted by 
any critic of note. Indeed he who would do so, must be prepared to 
dispute the historical truth of the character of St. Paul. For no more 
complete transcript of that character, as we find it set forth to us in the 
Acts, can be imagined, than that which we find in this and the second 
Epistle. Of this I shall speak further below (ᾧ vii.). 

45] 


PROLEGOMENA. | 1 CORINTHIANS. [cH Τ᾿ 


2. But external testimonies to the Authorship are by no means 
wanting. 

(a) Clement of Rome, in his Epistle to this very Church of Corinth, 
says, 6. 47, p. 805 ἢ, :—dvadaBere τὴν ἐπιστολὴν τοῦ μακαρίου Παύλου τοῦ 
ἀποστόλον. τί πρῶτον ὑμῖν ἐν ἀρχῇ εὐαγγελίου ἔγραψεν ; ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας 
πνευματικῶς ἐπέστειλεν ὑμῖν, περὶ αὐτοῦ τε καὶ Κηφᾶ καὶ ᾿Απολλώ, διὰ τὸ καὶ 
τότε προςκλίσεις ὑμᾶς πεποιῆσθαι". 

(8) Polycarp, ad Philippenses, 6. 11, p. 1020 :---““Θαϊ autem ignorant 
judicium Domini? An nescimus, quia sancti mundum judicabunt *? 
sicut Paulus docet.” 

(y) Irenezus adv. Her. iv. 27 (45). 3, p. 264 :—“ Et hoe autem apos- 
tolum in epistola que est ad Corinthios manifestissime ostendisse, dicen- 
tem: Nolo enim vos ignorare, fratres, quoniam patres nostri omnes sub 
nube fuerunt® &c.” And almost in the same words Cyprian, Testim. 
i. 4, citing the same passage. 

(5) Athenagoras, de resurrect. mort. 18, p. 331 :---εὔδηλον παντὶ τὸ 
λειπόμενον, ὅτι δεῖ, κατὰ τὸν ἀπόστολον, τὸ φθαρτὸν τοῦτο καὶ διασκεδαστὸν 
ἐνδύσασθαι ἀφθαρσίαν ἡ, ἵνα κ-τ.λ. 

(ε) Clement of Alexandria cites this epistle very frequently and 
explicitly : e. g. Pedag. i. 6 (33), p. 117 P. :---σαφέστατα γοῦν ὁ μακάριος 
Παῦλος ἀπήλλαξεν ἡμᾶς τῆς ζητήσεως ἐν TH προτέρᾳ πρὸς Κορινθίους ὧδέ πως 
γράφων" ᾿Αδελφοί, μὴ παιδία γίνεσθε ταῖς φρεσὶν «.7.X.°—And he proceeds 
to quote also 1 Cor. xiii. 11, with πάλιν 6 Παῦλος λέγει. 

(ζ) Tertullian de Prescript. adv. Her. 6. 33, vol. ii. p. 46,—“ Paulus 
in prima ad Corinthios notat negatores et dubitatores resurrectionis.” 

See Lardner: and Davidson’s Introd. vol. ii. p. 253 f., where more 
testimonies are given. 

3. The integrity of this Epistle has not been disputed. The whole of 
it springs naturally out of the circumstances, and there are no difficulties 
arising from discontinuousness or change of ded as in some passages 
of the Epistle to the Romans. 


SECTION II. 


FOR WHAT READERS IT WAS WRITTEN. 


1. “ CortntH (formerly Ephyre, Apollod. i. 9,—which afterwards was 
its poetic name, Ovid, Met. ii. 240. Virg. Georg. ii. 264. Propert. ii. 
5.1 al.) was a renowned, wealthy (Il. 8.570. Hor. ii. 16, Dio Chrysest. 
xxxvii. p. 464), and beautiful commercial city (Thue. i. 13. Cie. rep. 
i. 4), and in the Roman times the capital of Achaia propria (Apul. Met. 
x. p. 239, Bipont), situated on the isthmus of the Peloponnese between 


1 1 Cor. i. 10 f. 2 1 Cor. vi. 2. #1 Cor. x. ΤῈ 


4.1 Cor.. xv. 53. 5 1 Cor. xiv. 20. 
46] 


§ 1. | FOR WHAT READERS, &e.  [PROLEGOMENA. 


the Ionian and Atgean seas (hence bimaris, Ovid, Met. v. 407 ; Hor. 
Od. i. 7. 2,---ἀμφιθάλασσος, διθάλασσος) and at the foot of a rock which 
bore the fortress Acrocorinthus (Strabo, viii. 379 ; Plut. vit. Arat. 16; Liv. 
xlv. 28),—forty stadia in circumference. It had two ports, of which the 
western (twelve stadia distant) was called Lechzon (Λέχαιον, Lecheum, 
Lechex, Plin. iv. 5), the eastern (seventy stadia distant) Kenchree 
(Strabo, viii. 380 ; Paus. ii. 2,3 ; Liv. xxxii.17 ; al.). The former was 
for the Italian, the latter for the Oriental commerce: so Strabo, l. 6. : 
Keyxpeat κώμη καὶ λιμὴν ἀπέχων τῆς πόλεως ὅσον ἑβδομήκοντα στάδια. 
τούτῳ μὲν χρῶνται πρὸς τοὺς ἐκ τῆς ᾿Ασίας, πρὸς δὲ τοὺς ἐκ τῆς Ἰταλίας 
τῷ Λεχαίῳ. Arts and sciences flourished notably in Corinth (Pindar, 
Ol. xiii. 21 ; Herod. ii. 167; Plin. xxxiv. 3. xxxv. 5 ; Cie. Verr. ii. 19; 
Suet. Tiber. 34). The Corinthian plate was especially celebrated. But 
these advantages were accompanied by much wantonness, luxury, and 
gross corruption of morals (Athenzus, vii. 281. xiii. 543 ; Alciphr. 
iii. 60; Strabo, viii. 878; Eustath. Iliad 8. p. 220). (These vices were 
increased by the periodical influx of visitors owing to the Isthmian 
games, and by the abandoned and unclean worship of Aphrodite, to 
whose temple more than a thousand priestesses of loose character were 
attached. See testimonials in Wetst.) The city (lumen totius Greciz, 
Cie. Manil. 5) was taken, pillaged, and destroyed by L. Mummius (Flor. 
ii. 16; Liv. Epitome lii.) in a.u.c. 608, 146 8.0. (ef. Plin. xxxiv. 3),— 
but re-established (as the colony Julia Corinthus) by Julius Cesar, 
A.u.c. 710, B.c. 44,—and soon recovered its former splendour (Aristid, 
Or. 3, p. 23, ed. Jebb), and was accordingly in St. Paul’s time the seat 
of the Roman proconsul of Achaia (Acts xviii. 18). See, on the whole, 
Strabo, viii. 978 ff.; Paus. ii. 1 ff.” Winer, Realwérterbuch. An inter- 
esting description of the present remains of Corinth will be found in 
Leake’s Morea, vol. iii. ch. xxviii. 

2. The Christian church at Corinth was founded by St. Paul on his 
first visit, related in Acts xviii.(1—18). He spent there a year and a 
half, and his labours seem to have been rewarded with considerable 
success. His converts were for the most part Gentiles (1 Cor. xii. 2), 
but comprised also many Jews (Acts xviii. 8: see too ver. 5, and note) ; 
both however, though the Christian body at Corinth was numerous 
(Acts ib. 4, 8,10), were principally from the poorer classes (1 Cor.i. 26 ff). 
To this Crispus the ruler of the synagogue (Acts xviii. 8 ; 1 Cor. i. 14) 
formed an exception, as also Erastus the chamberlain (οἰκονόμος) of the 
city (Rom. xvi. 23), and Gaius, whom the Apostle calls 6 ἕένος pov «. 
ὅλης τῆς ἐκκλησίας. And we find traces of a considerable mixture of 
classes of society in the agape (1 Cor. xi. 22). 

3. The method of the Apostle i in preaching at Corinth is described by 
himself, 1 Cor. ii. 1 ff. He used great simplicity, declaring to them 
only the cross of Christ, without any adventitious helps of rhetoric or 


47] 


PROLEGOMENA. | 1 CORINTHIANS. [ cn. amy 


worldly wisdom. The opposition of the Jews had been to him a source 
of no ordinary anxiety : see the remarkable expression Acts xviii. 5, and 
note there. The situation likewise of his Gentile converts was full 
of danger. Surrounded by habits of gross immorality and intellectual 
pride, they were liable to be corrupted in their conduct, or tempted to 
despise the simplicity of their first teacher. 

4. Of this latter there was the more risk, since the Apostle had been 
followed by one whose teaching might make his appear in their eyes 
meagre and scanty. Apollos is described in Acts xviii. 24 ff. as a learned 
Hellenist of Alexandria, mighty in the Scriptures, and fervent in zeal. 
And though by the honourable testimony there given* to his work at 
Corinth, it is evident that his doctrine was essentially the same with that 
of Paul, yet there is reason to think that there was difference enough in 
the outward character and expression of the two ’ to provoke comparison 
to the Apostle’s disadvantage, and attract the lovers of eloquence and 
philosophy rather to Apollos. 

5. We discover very plain signs of an influence antagonistic to the 
Apostle having been at work in Corinth. Teachers had come, of Jewish 
extraction (2 Cor. xi. 22), bringing with them letters of recommendation 
from other churches (2 Cor. iii. 1), and had built on the foundation laid 
by Paul (1 Cor. iii. 1O—18; 2 Cor. x. 183—18) a worthless building, on 
which they prided themselves. These teachers gave out themselves for 
Apostles (2 Cor. xi. 5, 13), rejecting the apostleship of Paul (1 Cor. 
ix. 2; 2 Cor. x. 7, 8), encouraging disobedience to his commands 
(2 Cor. x. 1,6), and disparaging in every way his character, and work 
for the Gospel (see for the former, 2 Cor. iv. 1, 2 ff.; v. 11 ff., and notes 
in both places: for the latter, 2 Cor. xi. 16—xii. 12). It is probable, as 
De Wette suggests, that these persons were excited to greater rage 
against Paul, by the contents of the first Epistle; for we find the 
plainest mention of them in the second. But their practices had com- 
menced before, and traces of them are very evident in ch. ix. of this 
Epistle. 

6. The ground taken by these persons, as regarded their Jewish posi- 
tion, is manifest from these Epistles. They did not, as the false teachers 
among the Galatians, insist on circumcision and keeping the law: for 
not a word occurs on that question, nor a hint which can be construed 
as pointing to it. Some think that they kept back this point in a 
church consisting principally of Gentiles, and contented themselves 
with first setting aside the authority and influence of Paul. But I 
should rather believe them to have looked on this question as closed, 


6 ὃς παραγενόμενος συνεβάλετο πολὺ τοῖς πεπιστευκόσιν διὰ τῆς χάριτος, yer. 27. 
See also 1 Cor. iii. 6. 


7 See especially 1 Cor. xvi. 12, and note. 
48 | 


§ 11.} FOR WHAT READERS, &e.  [PKoLEGomENA. 


and to have carried on more a negative than a positive warfare with the 
Apostle, upholding, as against him, the authority of the regularly con- 
stituted Twelve, and of Peter as the Apostle of the circumcision, and 
impugning Paul as an interloper and innovator, and no autoptic witness 
of the events of the Gospel history : as not daring to prove his apostle- 
ship by claiming sustenance from the Christian churches, or by leading 
about a wife, as the other Apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and 
Cephas. What their positive teaching had been, it is difficult to decide, 
except that, although founded on a recognition of Jesus the Christ, it 
was of an inconsistent and unsubstantial kind, and such as would not 
stand in the coming day of fiery trial (1 Cor. iii. 11 ff). 

7. That some of these teachers may have described themselves as 
peculiarly belonging to Christ, is a priori very probable. St. Paul had 
had no connexion with our Lord while He lived and taught on earth. 
His Christian life and apostolic calling began at so late a period, that 
those who had seen the Lord on earth might claim a superiority over 
him. And this is all that seems to be meant by the ἐγὼ δὲ χριστοῦ of 
1 Cor. i. 12, especially if we compare it with 2 Cor. x. 7 ff, the only 
other passage where the expression is alluded to. There certainly per- 
sons are pointed out, who boasted themselves in some peculiar connexion 
with Christ which, it was presumed, Paul had not; and were igno- 
rant that the weapons of the apostolic warfare were not carnal, but 
spiritual. 

8. It would also be natural that some should avow themselves the 
followers of Paul himself, and set perhaps an undue value on him as 
God’s appointed minister among them, forgetting that.all ministers were 
but God’s servants for their benefit. 

9. It will be seen from the foregoing remarks, as well as from the 
notes, that I do not believe these tendencies to have developed them- 
selves into distinctly marked parties, either before the writing of our 
Epistle or at any other time. In the Epistle of Clement of Rome, 
written some years after, we find the same contentious spirit blamed 
(c. 47, p. 308), but it appears that by that time its ground was altogether 
different : we have no traces of the Paul-party, or Apollos-party, or 
Cephas-party, or Christ-party : ecclesiastical insubordination and ambition 
were then the faults of the Corinthian church. 

10. Much ingenuity and labour has been spent in Germany on the four 
supposed distinct parties at Corinth, and the most eminent theologians 
have endeavoured, with very different results, to allot to each its definite 
place in tenets and practice. I refer the student for a complete account 
of the principal theories, to Dr. Davidson’s Introduction, vol. ii. 
p. 224 ff., and Conybeare and Howson’s Life of St. Paul, vol. i. 
chap. xiii. :—and for separate expositions, to Neander, Pfl. u. Leit., 4th 
edn. pp. 375—397: Olshausen, Bibl. Comm. iii. 475 ff.: Schaff, Gesch. 

Vou. 1.—49} d 


‘PROLEGOMENA. | 1 CORINTHIANS. [cn. τῇ, 


‘d. christlichen Kirche, ὃ 64: Stanley, Epistle to the Corinthians, 
Introduction. 


SECTION III. 
WITH WHAT OBJECT IT WAS WRITTEN. 


1, The object of writing this Epistle was twofold. ‘The Apostle had 
‘been applied to by the Corinthians to advise them on matters connected 
with their practice in the relations of life (ch. vii. 1), and with their liberty 
of action as regarded meats offered to idols (ch. viii—x.) ; they had ap- 
parently also referred to him the question whether their women should 
‘be veiled in the public assemblies of the church (ch. xi. 3—16): and had 
laid before him some difficulties respecting the exercise of spiritual gifis 
(ch. xii.—xiv.). He had enjoined them to make a collection for the 
poor saints at Jerusalem: and they had requested directions, how this 
might best be done (ch. xvi. 1 ff.). 

‘2. These enquiries would have elicited at all events an answer from 
‘St. Paul. But there were other and even more weighty reasons why an 
Epistle should be sent to them just now from their father in the faith. 
Intelligence had been brought him by the family of Chloe (ch. i. 11) of 
their contentious spirit. From the same, or from other sources, he had 
learned the occurrence among them of a gross case of incest, in which the 
delinquent was upheld in impunity by the church (ch. v. 1 ff.). He had 
further understood that the Christian brethren were in the habit of 
carrying their disputes before heathen tribunals (ch. vi. 1 ff.). And it 
had been represented to him that. there were zrregularities requiring 
reprehension in their manner of celebrating the Agape, which indeed 
they had so abused, that they could now be no longer called the Supper 
of the Lord. Such were their weighty errors in practice: and among 
these it would have been hardly possible that Christian doctrine should 
remain sound. So far was this from being the case, that some among 
them had even gone to the length of denying the Resurrection itself. 
Against these he triumphantly argues in ch. xv. 

3. It has been questioned whether St. Paul had the defence of his own 
apostolic authority in view in this Epistle. The answer must certainly 
be in the affirmative. We cannot read chapters iv. and ix. without per- 
ceiving this. At the same time, it is most provable that the hostility of 
the false teachers had not yet assumed the definite force of personal 
slander and disparagement,—or not so prominently and notoriously as 
afterwards. That which is the primary subject of the 2nd Epistle, is 
but incidentally touched on here. But we plainly see that his authority 
had been already impugned (see especially ch. iv. 17—21), and his 
apostleship questioned (ch. ix. 1, 2). 

50 ] 


§ iv. | NUMBER OF EPISTLES. | PROLEGOMENA. 


SECTION IV. 
OF THE NUMBER OF EPISTLES WRITTEN BY PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


1. If we were left to infer a priori, it would be exceedingly probable 
that an Epistle had been sent to the Corinthians before this, which we 
call the first. It appears from ch. xvi. 1 that they wanted some direc- 
tions as to the method of making “ the collection for the saints.” We 
may ask,—when enjoined and how? If by the Apostle in person, the 
directions would doubtless have been asked for and given at the time. 
It would seem then to follow, that a command to make the collection 
had been sent them either by some messenger, or in an epistle. 

2. The uncertainty, however, which would rest upon this inference, is 
removed by the express words of the Apostle himself. In ch. v. 9 he says, 
ἔγραψα ὑμῖν ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ, μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι πόρνοις. In my note on 
those words, I have endeavoured to shew that the only meaning which 
in their context they will legitimately bear, is, that this command, not to 
associate with fornicators, was contained in a previous Epistle to them, 
which has not been preserved to us. Those who maintain that the 
reference is to the present Epistle, have never been able to produce a 
passage bearing the slightest resemblance to the command mentioned °. 

3. The opinions of Commentators on this point have been strangely 
warped by a notion conceived a priori, that it would be wrong to 
suppose any apostolic Epistle to have been lost. Those who regard, not 
preconceived theories, but the facts and analogies of the case, will rather 
come to the conclusion that very many have been lost. The Epistle to 
Philemon, for example, is the only one remaining to us of a class, which 
if we take into account the affectionate disposition of St. Paul, and the 
frequency of intercourse between the metropolis and the provinces, must 
have been numerous during his captivity in Rome. We find him also 
declaring, 1 Cor. xvi. 8 (see note there), his intention of giving recom- 
mendatory letters, if necessary, to the bearers of the collection from 
Corinth to Jerusalem: from which proposal we may safely infer that 
on other occasions, he was in the habit of writing such Epistles to indivi- 
duals or to churches. To imagine that every writing of an inspired 
Apostle must necessarily have been preserved to us, is as absurd as 


8 Perhaps the most extraordinary theory ever propounded by one who has evidently 
spent some pains on his subject, is that of Mr. Paget, in his “ Unity and Order of the 
Epistles of St. Paul,” in which, on account of a fancied resemblance of this command to 
that in Heb. xii. 16 (which if examined proves to be no resemblance), he maintains ἡ 
ἐπιστολή here to be the Epistle to the Hebrews, which he imagines to have been a sort 
of general circular epistle to all the churches, written previously to those addressed to 
particular congregations. I need hardly remind the student, how entirely all the data 
of every kind furnished by that Epistle are against such a supposition. 


51] d2 


PROLEGOMENA. | 1 CORINTHIANS. [cH. 11. 


it would be to imagine that all his say/ngs must necessarily have been 
recorded. The Providence of God, which has preserved so many pre- 
cious portions both of one and the other, has also allowed many, perhaps 
equally precious, of both, to pass into oblivion. 

4. The time of writing this lost Epistle is fixed, by the history, between 
Paul’s leaving Corinth Acts xviii. 18, and the sending of our present 
Epistle. But we shall be able to approximate nearer, when we have 
discussed the question of the Apostle’s visits to Corinth °. 

5. Its contents may be in some measure surmised from the data 
‘furnished in our two canonical Epistles. 

He had in it given them a command, μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι πόρνοις, 
which being taken by them in too strict and literal a sense, and on that 
account perhaps overlooked, as impossible to be observed, is explained in 
its true sense by him, 1 Cor. v. 9—12. 

It also contained, in all probability, an announcement of a plan of 
visiting them on his way to Macedonia, and again on his return from 
Macedonia (2 Cor. i. 15, 16), which he changed in consequence of the 
news heard from Cihloe’s household (1 Cor. xvi. 5—7), for which altera- 
tion he was accused of lightness of purpose (ἐλαφρία, 2 Cor. i. 17). 

We may safely say also (see above) that it contained a command to 
make a collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem. Further than this 
we cannot with any safety surmise. 

It was evidently a short letter, containing perhaps little or nothing 
more than the above announcement and injunctions, given probably in 
the pithy and sententious manner so common with the Apostle’. 


SECTION Y. 
OF THE NUMBER OF VISITS MADE BY PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


1. The controversy on this point will be cut very short, if the inter- 
pretation given in the notes of 2 Cor. xii. 14, xiii. 1, be assumed as 
correct :—and, as I have there maintained, I believe that neither the 
words nor the context will admit any other. The Apostle had paid 
two visits to Corinth before the sending of that, and conte of 
this Epistle. 

2. The difficulty in this inference, which has led Commentators to 
adopt an unnatural rendering of the above passages, is, that but one 
visit is recorded, viz. that in Acts xviii. 1 ff. For both Epistles were 
written before the second visit in Acts xx. 2,8. (Compare Acts xix. 
with 1 Cor, xvi. 8, and 2 Cor. ix. 2 with Acts xx. 1, 2.) 

3. But manifestly, the history of St. Paul’s apostolie eareer in the 


5. See below, ὃ v. 1 See Rom. xii. 9 ff.: 1 Thess. v. 16 ff 
52] . 


§ v.] NUMBER OF VISITS. | PROLEGOMENA. 


Acts is very fragmentary and imperfect. Long and important journeys 
are dismissed in a few words*: some, e.g. that to Arabia, and the 
missionary tour in Syria and Cilicia, Gal. i. 21 ff., not being even men- 
tioned. No notice is taken of the foundation of the churches of Galatia, 
unless the cursory mention of Acts xvi. 6, be taken as such :—and of the 
copious catalogue of perils undergone by him in 2 Cor. xi. 24 ff., but few 
can be identified in the history. That a journey to Corinth should have 
escaped mention, where more extensive journeys and more important 
events have been omitted or slightly touched on, would uot be at all 
improbable. 

4. Such a journey must of course be inserted between Aets xviii. 18, 
when his first visit to Corinth ended, and xx. 2, when the second Epistle 
was sent from Macedonia. But these limits are further narrowed by 
the history itself. From xvilil. 18 to xix. 9, when we find the Apostle 
established at Ephesus, is evidently a continuous narrative. And as 
plainly, no visit took place between the sending of the first and second 
Epistle, as is decisively proved by 2 Cor.i. 15—238. Now the first Epistle 
was sent from Ephesus, in the early part of the year in which he left 
that city, 1 Cor. xvi. 8. So that our terminus a quo is the settling at 
Ephesus, Acts xix. 10, and our terminus ad quem the spring preceding 
the departure from Ephesus, Acts xx. 1. During this time, a visit to 
Corinth took place. 

5. Let us see whether any hints of his own throw light on this 
necessary inference. In 2 Cor. xi. 25 we read τρὶς ἐναυάγησα, and this 
in a description of his apostolic labours: so that we must not go back 
beyond his conversion for any of these shipwrecks. Now his recorded 
voyages are these: (1) From Cesarea to Tarsus, Acts ix. 80. (2) Pos- 
sibly, from Tarsus to Antioch, xi. 25: but more probably this was a 
land-journey. (8) From Seleucia to Cyprus, xiii. 4. (4) From Paphos 
to Perga, xiii. 13. (5) From Attalia to Antioch, xiv. 26. (6) From 
- Troas to Philippi, xvi. 11, 12. (7) From Macedonia to Athens, xvii. 
14, 15. (8) From Kenchree to Ephesus, ‘xviii. 18, 19. (9) From 
Ephesus to Caesarea, ib. 21, 22. (10) From Ephesus to Macedonia, 
xx. 1. Of these, it is certain that no shipwreck took place during (6), 
for it is minutely detailed : it is extremely improbable that any took 
place during (3), (4), and (5), as the account of the first missionary 
tour is circumstantial and precise. The same may be said of (7), in 
which the words οἱ δὲ καθιστάνοντες τὸν Παῦλον ἤγαγον ἕως ᾿Αθηνῶν 
will scarcely admit of such an interruption. It is hardly probable that 
any shipwreck took place in those voyages the purpose of which is 
described as being at once attained, to which class belong (8) and (9), 
and, if it is to be counted as a voyage, (2). The two left, of which 


2 E. g., ch. xv. 41, xvi. 6, xviii. 23, xix. 1, xx. 2, ὃ. 


53] 


PROLEGOMENA. | 1 CORINTHIANS. [cH. ΠΙ. 


we have absolutely no account given, are (1) and (10). It is quite 
possible that he may have been shipwrecked on both these occasions, 
and such an assumption- with regard to (10) would suggest another 
interpretation of the difficult allusion, 2 Cor. 1. 8—10. But even 
assuming this, more voyages seem to be required to account for three 
shipwrecks. It is true that the evidence thus acquired is very slight— 
but however trifling, it is at least in favour of, and not against, the 
hypothesis of an unrecorded visit to Corinth. 

6. The nature of the visit may be gathered in some measure from 
extant hints. It was one made ἐν λύπῃ, 2 Cor. ii. 1, where see note : 
why, we might well suppose, but are not left to conjecture : for he tells 
them (2 Cor. xiii. 2 and note) that during it he warned them, that if 
he came again, he would not spare (the sinners among them); and 2 Cor. 
xii. 21, there is a hint given that God had, on this oceasion, humbled 
him among them. It was a visit unpleasant in the process and in recol- 
jection : perhaps very short, and as sad as short: in which he seems 
merely to have thrown out solemn warnings of the consequences of a 
future visit of apostolic severity if the abuses were persisted in, —and 
possibly to have received insult from some among them on account of 
such warnings. 

7. If we enquire what sort of sin had occasioned the visit, the answer 
seems to be furnished by 2 Cor. xii. 21, μὴ πάλιν ἐλθόντος μου ταπεινώσει 
με ὃ Geos μου πρὸς ὑμᾶς, καὶ πενθήσω πολλοὺς TOV προημαρτηκότων καὶ μὴ 
μετανοησάντων ἐπὶ τῇ ἀκαθαρσίᾳ καὶ πορνείᾳ καὶ ἀσελγείᾳ ἣἧ ἔπραξαν. It 
was probably on account of these, the besetting sins of the place, that 
his second visit had been made in grief ; it was to abstain from these 
sins and the company of those who committed them, that he had en- 
joined them in his lost Epistle: and accordingly, while we find in our 
first Epistle detailed notice of the special case of sin which he had 
recently heard of as occurring among them, the subject of πορνεία is 
alluded to (vi. 12—20) only in a summary way, and in one which shews — 


that he is rather replying to an excuse set up after rebuke in the matter, 
than introducing it for the first time. 


SECTION VI. 
AT WHAT PLACE AND TIME THIS EPISTLE WAS WRITTEN. 


1. The place of writing it is pointed out in ch. xvi, 8,---ἐπιμενῶ δὲ ἐν 
᾿Εφέσῳ ἕως τῆς πεντηκοστῆς, to have been EpuEsus. 

A mistaken rendering of the words (ib. ver. 5) Μακεδονίαν yap δι- 
έρχομαι, as if they signified ‘for I am passing through Macedonia,’—led 
probably to the subscription in the ree. and our English Bibles, ἐγράφη 


ἀπὸ Φιλίππων. But the idea has never been seriously entertained. 
54] 


§ vi. | TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING. [PRoLEGOMENA.. 


2. The above notice from ch. xvi. 8 also shews, that at the time of 
writing, the Apostle intended to quit Ephesus after Pentecost of that year. 
And on connecting this with Acts xix., xx., it appears (see notes, and 
chronological table in Prolegg. to Acts) that he really did leave Ephesus 
about Pentecost in the year 57. We may assume therefore (as we have 
no ground for supposing that he referred to a previous year and after- 
wards changed his purpose) that the Epistle was written in the former 
part of the year 57. 

3. It will be seen by my notes on ἢ Cor. v. 7, that I cannot see in 
the words καθώς ἐστε ἄζυμοι any allusion to the fact of the days of 
unleavened bread being then present. I have endeavoured te shew 
that external probability, as well as spiritual analogy, is against the 
idea that St. Paul would have so expressed himself. But there still is 
no reason, why the nearness or presence of that season may not have 
suggested to him the whole train of thought there occurring,—especially 
when we know independently that he was writing during the former 
part of the year. } 

4, It is almost certain then that the Epistle was written before Pente- 
cost, A.D. 57: and probable, that somewhat about Easter was the exact 
time. 

5. The Apostle had at this time already sent off Timotheus and Erastus. 
to Macedonia (cf. Acts xix. 22, and 1 Cor. iv. 17), the former (1 Cor. 
ib.) with the intention of his proceeding on to Corinth, if possible 
(1 Cor. xvi. 10), and preparing the way for his own apostolic visit (iv. 
17). Possibly also his mission had reference to the colleetion for the 
saints at Jerusalem (see 2 Cor. viii., and xii. 18); but the language 
used is ambiguous, and we cannot pronounce positively that Timotheus 
reached Corinth on this journey. (See below, ch. iv. § ii. 4.) 

6. The Epistle is addressed in the name of Sosthenes 6 ddeAdds, as 
well as in that of the Apostle. It is hardly possible that this Sosthenes 
should be the same as the person of that name mentioned Acts xviii. 
17°: see note there. ‘The conjectures respecting him I have given on 
1 Cor. i. 1. He bears no part in the Epistle itself, any more than 
Timotheus in 2 Cor.: the Apostle, after mentioning him, immediately 
proceeds εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ pov. 

7. It is uncertain, who were the bearers of the Epistle: but perhaps 
the common subscription is right in assigning that office to Stephanas, 
Fortunatus, and Achaicus. For they are mentioned as being present 
with the Apostle (1 Cor. xvi. 17) from Corinth: and as an injunction is. 
given (ib. 18) that they should be honourably regarded by the. Corin- 
thians, it is highly probable that they were intending to. return, 


3 Unless indeed, as Mr. Birks supposes, Hore Apostolice, p. 215 f., he was converted 
subsequently to that occurrence. ι 


66] 


PROLEGOMENA. | 1 CORINTHIANS. [cH. 111. 


SECTION VII. 
MATTER AND STYLE. 


1. As might have been expected from the occasion of writing, the 
matter of this epistle is very various. It is admirably characterized by 
Mr. Conybeare, in Conybeare and Howson’s Life and Epistles of St. 
Paul, vol. ii. p. 28 (2nd edn.) :— 

“This letter is, in its contents, the most diversified of all St. Paul’s 
Epistles : and in proportion to the variety of its topics, is the depth of 
its interest for ourselves. For by it we are introduced as it were behind 
the scenes of the apostolic Chureh, and its minutest features are revealed 
to us under the light of daily life. We see the picture of a Christian 
congregation as it met for worship in some upper chamber, such as the 
house of Aquila or of Gaius could furnish. We see that these seasons 
of pure devotion were not unalloyed by human vanity and excitement : 
yet, on the other hand, we behold the heathen auditor pierced to the 
heart by the inspired eloquence of the Christian prophets, the secrets of 
his conscience laid bare to him, and himself constrained to fal! down on 
his face and worship God: we hear the fervent thanksgiving echoed 
by the unanimous Amen: we see the administration of the Holy Com- 
munion terminating the feast of love. Again, we become familiar with 
the perplexities of domestic life, the corrupting proximity of heathen 
immorality, the lingering superstition, the rash speculation, the lawless 
perversion of Christian liberty : we witness the strife of theological 
factions, the party names, the sectarian animosities. We perceive the 
difficulty of the task imposed upon the Apostle, who must guard from 
so many perils, and guide through so many difficulties, his children in 
the faith, whom else he had begotten in vain : and we learn to appre- 
ciate more fully the magnitude of that laborious responsibility under 
which he describes himself as almost ready to sink, ‘the care of all the 
churches.’ 

“But while we rejoice that so many details of the deepest historical 
interest have been preserved to us by this Epistle, let us not forget to 
thank God, who so inspired His Apostle, that in his answers to questions 
of transitory interest he has laid down principles of eternal obligation. 
Let us trace with gratitude the providence of Him, who ‘out of darkness 
calls up light ;’ by whose mercy it was provided, that the unchastity of 
the Corinthians should occasion the sacred laws of moral purity to be 
established for ever through the Christian world ;—that their denial of 
the resurrection should cause those words to be recorded whereon 
reposes, as upon a rock that cannot be shaken, our sure and certain 
hope of immortality.” 

2. In style, this Epistle ranks perhaps the foremost of all as to sub- 


limity, and earnest and impassioned eloquence. Of the former, the 
56 | 


ΘΕ. τγ-]} 2. CORINTHIANS. [PROLEGOMENA. 


description of the simplicity of the Gospel in ch. ii.,—the concluding 
apostrophe of ch. iii. (ver. 16—end),—the same in ch. vi. (ver. 9—end), 
—the reminiscence of the shortness of the time, ch. vii. 29—381,—the 
whole argument in ch. xv.,—are examples unsurpassed in Scripture 
itself: and of the latter, ch. iv. 8—15, and the whole of ch. ix. ; while 
the panegyric of Love, in ch. xiii., stands, a pure and perfect gem, per- 
haps the noblest assemblage of beautiful thoughts in beautiful language 
extant in this our world. About the whole Epistle there is a character 
of lofty and sustained solemnity,—an absence of tortuousness of con- 
struction, and an apologetic plainness, which contrast remarkably with 
the personal portions of the second Epistle. 

3. No Epistle raises in us a higher estimate of the varied and wonder- 
ful gifts with which God was pleased to endow the man whom He 
selected for the Apostle of the Gentile world : or shews us how large a 
portion of the Spirit, who worketh in each man severally as He will, 
was given to him for our edification. ‘The depths of the spiritual, the 
moral, the intellectual, the physical world are open to him. He sum- 
mons to his aid the analogies of nature. He enters minutely into the 
varieties of human infirmity and prejudice. He draws warning from 
the history of the chosen people : example, from the Isthmian foot-race. 

He refers an apparently trifling question of costume to the first great 
-proprieties and relations of Creation and Redemption. He praises, 
reproves, exhorts, and teaches. Where he strikes, he heals. His large 
heart holding all, where he has grieved any, he grieves likewise ; where 
it is in his power to give joy, he first overflows with joy himself. We 
may form some idea from this Epistle better perhaps than from any one 
other,—because this embraces the widest range of topics,—what mar- 
vellous power such a man must have had to persuade, to rebuke, to 
attract and fasten the affections of men. 





CHAPTER IV. 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 


SECTION I. 


ITS AUTHORSHIP AND INTEGRITY. 


1. Tue former of these is undoubted. No Epistle more clearly marks 
itself out as the work of the Author whose name it bears. It is in- 
separably connected with the First, following it up, and only differing 
from it as circumstances since occurring had affected the mind of the 

δ᾽; 


᾿ῬΕΟΙΕΘΟΜΕΝΑ. | 2 CORINTHIANS. [ en. Iv. 


writer. See this more dwelt on, when I speak of its style and matter, 
below, § iii. 

2. The external testimonies are, 

(a) Ireneus, Her. iii. 7. 1, p. 182: 

Quod autem dicunt, aperte Paulum in secunda ad Corinthios dixisse : 
In quibus Deus sxculi hujus excecavit mentes infidelium. 

(8) Athenagoras, de resurr. mort. xviii. p. 331 : 

εὔδηλον παντὶ τὸ λειπόμενον. . . . ἕκαστος κομίσηται δικαίως ἃ διὰ τοῦ 
σώματος ἔπραξεν, εἴτε ἀγαθὰ εἴτε κακά. 

(y) Clement of Alexandria very frequently cites eur epistle: 6. 5.» 
Strom. iii. 14 (9+), p. 553, P.: 

αὐτίκα βιάζεται τὸν Παῦλον ἐκ τῆς ἀπάτης τὴν γένεσιν συνιστάναι. λέγειν 
διὰ τούτων φοβοῦμαι δὲ μὴ, ὡς ὁ ὄφις Εὔαν ἐξηπάτησεν, κιτ.λ. (2 Cor. xi. 3.) 

And again, Strom. iv. 16 (102), p. 607, Ρ.: 

ὁ ἀπόστολος (specified as Παῦλος previously) . . . . εἰρηκεν ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ 
πρὸς τοὺς Κορινθίους" ἄχρι yap τῆς σήμερον ἡμέρας τὸ αὐτὸ κάλυμμα τοῖς 
πολλοῖς ἐπὶ τῇ ἀναγνώσει τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης μένει, 

(δ) Tertullian, de Pudicitia, ch. 13 init. vol. ii. p. 1008: 

Nvvimus plane et hic suspiciones eorum. Revera enim suspieantur 
apostolum Paulum in secunda ad Corinthios eidem fornicatori veniam 
dedisse, quem in prima dedendum Satane in interitum carnis pronun- 
tiarit, ὅς. He then cites 2 Cor. ii. 5—11. 

See more testimonies in Davidson, vol. ii. p. 279. 

3. The cntegrity of this Epistle has not however been unquestioned. 
Semler (in 1767) imagined it to consist of three separate epistles,—(1) 
chapters i. to vill. Rom. xvi. 1 to 20+ ch. xiii. 11 to 18. This he sup- 
poses to have been the letter which Titus bore on his second mission to 
Corinth. (2) On receiving intelligence of the effect produced at Corinth, 
the Apostle writes a second Epistle in justification of himself, chap. 
x. 1 to xiii. 10. (8) An Epistle sent to the other churches in Achaia 
on the subject of the collection for the saints at Jerusalem, ch. ix. 
To this curious theory a convineing refutation was furnished by Gabler 
(De capp. ult. ix.—xiii. poster. ep. P. ad Corr. ab eadem haud separan- 
dis, Gotting. 1782). Weber ayain (de numero Epp. P. ad Corr. rectius 
constituendo, 1798) thought it had been originally two Epistles, (1) 
chapters i. to ix.+ xiii. 11 to 18,—(2) ch. x. 1 to xiii. 10, But Meyer 
(from whom the foregoing particulars are taken) quotes respecting all 
such fanciful discussions a good remark of Hug (Einl. ii. p. 376), that 
it would be just as reasonable to suppose the περὶ στεφάνου of Demos- 
thenes to be two orations, because in the former part the orator defends 
himself calmly and in detail, and in the latter breaks out into fierce and 
bitter invective. Certainly, on the principle which these critics have 
adopted, the first Epistle to the Corinthians might be divided into at least 
eight separate epistles, marked off by the successive changes of subject. 

68] 


§ 11 CIRCUMSTANCES, &c., OF WRITING. [pRoLecomena. 


SECTION II. 
CIRCUMSTANCES, PLACE, AND TIME OF WRITING. 


1. At the time of writing this Epistle, Paul had recently left Asia 
(2 Cor. i. 8): in doing so had come by Troas (ii. 12) : and thence had 
sailed to Macedonia (ibid. ; οὗ Acts xx. 1, 2), where he still was (ch. viil. 
1 ; ix.2, where notice especially the present xavy@mar,—ix. 4). In Asia, 
he had undergone some great peril of his life (2 Cor. i. 8, 9), which (see 
note there) can hardly be referred to the tumult at Ephesus (Acts xix. 
23—41',—but from the nature of his expressions was probably a 
grievous sickness, not unaccompanied with deep and wearing anxiety. 
At Troas, he had expected to meet Titus (2 Cor. ii. 13), with intelli- 
gence respecting the effect produced at Corinth by the first Epistle. In 
this he was disappointed (ii. 13), but the meeting took place in Mace- 
donia (vii. 5, 6), where the expected tidings were announced to him 
(vii. 7—16). They were for the most part favourable, but not alto- 
gether. All who were well disposed had been humbled by his reproofs : 
but evidently his adversaries had been further embittered. He wished 
to express to them the comfort which the news of their submission had 
brought to him, and at the same time to defend his apostolic efficiency 
and personal character against the impugners of both. Under these 
circumstances, and with these objects, he wrote this Epistle, and sent it 
before him to break the severity with which he contemplated having to 
act against the rebellious (ch. xiii. 10), by winning them over if possible 
before his arrival. ᾿ 

2. The place of writing is no where clearly pointed out. There is no 
ground for supposing it to have been Philippi, as commonly imagined *. 
Nay such a supposition is of itself improbable. In ch. viii. 1 Paul 
announces to the Corinthians the generosity which had been the result 
of God’s grace given ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς Μακεδονίας. It is hardly 
likely that he would make such announcement, if he had hitherto been 
stationary at Philippi, the first of those churches on his way from Asia. 
All that we can say is, that the Epistle was written at one of the Mace- 
donian churches ; more probably at the last which he visited than at the 
first. The principal of those churches were at Philippi, Thessalonica, and 
Berea. We know from 1 Thess. ii. 17, 18, how anxious the Apostle was 
again to visit the Thessalonian church : and in the absence of all detail 

1 I cannot help being surprised that any one who has studied the character and his- 
tory of the Apostle should still refer this passage to that tumult. The supposition lays 
to his charge a meanness of spirit and cowardice, which certainly never characterized 
him, and to avow which would have been in the highest degree out of place in an 
Epistle, one object of which was to vindicate his apostolic efficiency. 

2 The common subscription assigns Philippi: but whether from tradition, or mere 
hasty inference, is quite uncertain. ; 


59] 


PROLEGOMENA. | 2 CORINTHIANS. [CH. IV. 


respecting this journey in Acts xx. 1, 2, we may well believe that he 
would have spent some time at Thessalonica. If then Philippi from its 
situation is improbable, it would seem likely that Thessalonica was the 
place. But all is conjecture, beyond the fact that it was written from 
Macedonia. 

3. The time of writing is fixed within very narrow limits. About 
Pentecost A.D. 57 (see chronological table in Prolegg. to Acts) Paul left 
Ephesus for Troas: there he stayed some little time : thence went to 
Macedonia ; and sufficient time had elapsed for him to have ascertained 
the mind of the Macedonian churches and to have made the eollection. 
Here falls in our Epistle : after which (Acts xx. 2) he came into Greece 
(Corinth) and abode there three months : and then is found, after tra- 
velling by land through Macedonia, at Philippi on his return at Easter, 
58. So that the Epistle was written in the summer or autumn of 57. 

4. Two questions belong to this part of our subject, which it is not 
very easy to answer. From 1 Cor. iv. 17, we learn that Timotheus had 
been sent to Corinth by Paul (see also Acts xix. 22, where he is said to 
have been sent with Erastus to Macedonia) to prepare the Corinthians for 
his own coming by reminding them of his ways and teaching. And in 
1 Cor. xvi. 10, 11, we find directions given to them for their reception of 
Timotheus and speeding his return : “ for,” adds the Apostle, “1 expect 
him with the brethren.” Here, however, some little uncertainty is 
expressed as to his visiting them, the words being ἐὰν δὲ ἔλθῃ Τιμόθεος. 
Now at the time of writing this second Epistle, we find Timatheus with 
Paul in Macedonia (2 Cor. i. 1), without any hint given of his having 
been at Corinth, or of any tidings respecting the church there having 
come through him. Nay there is an apparent presumption that he had 
not been at Corinth: for in 2 Cor. xii. 18 where speaking of those 
whom he had sent to Corinth he mentions Titus by name, no allusion is 
made to Timotheus. Had he been at Corinth, or not ? 

1 believe, in spite of these apparent obstacles to the view, that he had 
been there. The purpose of his mission, as stated in 1 Cor. iv. 17, is too 
plain and precise to have been lightly given up. And, as Meyer 
suggests, the relinquishing of the intended journey of Timotheus as well 
as that of the Apostle, would have furnished to the adversaries another 
ground for the charge of fickleness of purpose, which they would not 
fail to use against him. Had therefore the journey been abandoned, 
some notice and apology would probably have been found in this Epistle. 
That Timotheus is not mentioned in this Epistle as having gone to them, 
is easily accounted for by the circumstance that he is associated with the 
Apostle in the writing of the Epistle. 

Meyer believes that tidings had been brought by him from Corinth of 
an unfavourable kind respecting the effect of the first Epistle ; and that 
the state of the Apostle’s mind described in 2 Cor. ii. 12, vii. 5, is to be 

60] : 


§ πι. MATTER AND STYLE. | PROLEGOMENA. 


traced to the reception of these tidings, not merely to the anxiety of 
suspense. 

5. The second question regards the mission of Titus to Corinth, which 
took place subsequently to our first Epistle, and on the return from 
which he brought to the Apostle the further tidings of the effect of that 
letter, referred to 2 Cor. vii. 6. The most natural supposition is that he 
was sent to ascertain this matter : and this is the view of De Wette and 
others. Bleek however, with whom agree Credner, Olshausen, and 
Neander, makes a totally different hypothesis, which is thus expressed by 
the latter, Pfl. u. Leit. p. 437: ‘ Timotheus had brought to the Apostle 
painful tidings which excited his anxiety, especially respecting the 
agitation caused by one individual, who insolently set himself against 
Paul and endeavoured to oppose his apostolic authority. (This latter 
view he defends by explaining 2 Cor. ii. 5, vii. 12, not of the incestuous 
person of 1 Cor. v. but of some adversary of the Apostle.) On this 
account Paul sent Titus to Corinth with a letter (now lost), in which 
he expressed himself very strongly on these circumstances; so that after 
Titus had set out, his heart, full as it was of paternal love towards the 
Corinthian church, was distressed with fear lest he had written some- 
what too harshly, and been too severe upon them.” This ingenious 
conjecture, while it might serve to clear up some expressions in 2 Cor. 
ii. 1—4, which seem too strong for the first Epistle, can perhaps hardly 
be admitted in the absence of any allusion whatever of a clearer cha- 
racter. All we can say is, it may have been so: and after all that has 
been written on the visits of Timotheus and Titus, we shall hardly 
arrive nearer the truth than a happy conjecture. 


SECTION III. 
MATTER AND STYLE. 


1. In no other Epistle are these so various, and so rapidly shifting 
from one character to another. Consolation and rebuke, gentleness and 
severity, earnestness and irony, succeed one another at very short inter- 
vals and without notice. Meyer remarks: “ The excitement and in- 
terchange of the affections, and probably also the haste under which Paul 
wrote this Epistle, certainly render the expressions often obscure and 
the constructions difficult, but serve only to exalt our admiration of the 
great oratorical delicacy, art, and power, with which this outpouring of 
Paul’s spirit, especially interesting as a self-defensive apology, flows and 
streams onward, till at length in the sequel its billows completely over- 
flow the opposition of the adversaries. Erasmus strikingly says, Para- 
phr. Dedicat.,—‘ Sudatur ab eruditissimis viris in explicandis poetarum 


ac rhetorum consiliis, at in hoc rhetore longe plus sudoris est, ut depre- 
61] 


PROLEGOMENA.] APPARATUS CRITICUS. fou. v. 


hendas quid agat, quo tendat, quid vetet : adeo stropharum plenus est 
undique, absit invidia verbis. Tanta vafrities est, non credas eundem 
hominem loqui. Nune ut limpidus quidam fons sensim ebullit, mox 
torrentis in morem ingenti fragore devolvitur, multa obiter secum 
rapiens, nunc placide leniterque fluit, nune late, velut in lacum diffusus, 
exspatiatur. Rursum alicubi se condit, ac diverso loco subitus emicat, 
cum visum est, miris mzandris nunc has nunc illas lambit ripas, aliquoties 
procul digressus, reciprocato flexu in sese redit.’ We may also apply 
to our Epistle the words in which Dionys. Hal., de admiranda vi dicendi 
in Demosthene, 6. 8, designates the style of that ογδίογ,---- μεγαλοπρεπῆ, 
λιτήν᾽ περιττήν, arépurtov’ ἐξηλλαγμένην, συνήθη" πανηγυρικήν, ἀληθινήν" 
αὐστηρήν, ἱλαράν" σύντονον, ἀνειμένην᾽ ἡδεῖαν, πικράν᾽ ἠθικήν, παθητικήν.᾽ 

2. The matter of the Epistle divides itself naturally into three parts : 

1. ch. i. to vii. 16. Here he sets forth to them his apostolic walk and 
character, not only with regard to them, though he frequently refers to 
this, but zm general. 

2. viii. 1 to ix. 15. He reminds them of their duty to complete the 
collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem. 

3.x. 1 to xili. 10. Polemical justification of his apostolic dignity and 
efficiency against his disparagers. 


CHAPTER V. 


APPARATUS CRITICUS. 


SECTION I. 


1. Manuscripts written in uncial letters. 

A. The Copex ALExanprinus, Cent. V. (See Vol. I.) 

B. The Copex Varticanus, Cent. IV. (See Vol. I.) 

C. The Copex Epnremt, Cent. V. (See Vol. I.) 

D. (Of the Acts.) The Copex Breza, Cent. V. or VI. (See Vol. I.) 

D. (Of St. Paul's Episties.) The Copex CraromonTanvs in the Im- 
perial library at Paris, No. 107: a graco-latin MS., of, as Tischen- 
dorf believes, the sixth century. It contains all the Epistles of Paul, 
except Rom. i. 1 wavdos . . . . to ἀγαπητοις θεου, ver. 7. Another 
hand, but an ancient one, has supplied 1 Cor. xiv. 13 S10 0 AaAw . . « 
to σημειον εἰσιν, ver. 22. Similarly Rom. i. 27—30. Tischendorf 
remarks : “It is very difficult to distinguish the correctors who 
have at different times touched this codex. The second corrector (D*, 
about the eighth century), whom I have oftenest cited, found most of 
the passages which he touched already corrected : hence D* denotes 


generally two persons, of whom the former (D*) seldom differs from 
62] 


δ 1} 


MANUSCRIPTS REFERRED TO. [rrotecomena. 


the latter (D*), so that the difference can be noted. D? touched a 
few places, and correctors subsequent to D’about as many. Some- 
times when it is hard to say which has corrected, I have marked it 
Doo.” This codex was published by Tischendorf in 1852. “10 is 
one of the most valuable MSS. extant: none of the texts published 
by Tischendorf is so important, with the single exception of the 
palimpsest Codex Ephrmi.”—Tregelles. Horne’s Introd. iv. p.193'. 


E. (Of the Acts.) The Copex Lauptanus (greco-latin: the latin being 


(E. 


in the left hand column, the greek in the right hand) in the Bod- 
leian library at Oxford, It is written without accents, in rather 
clumsy uncial letters, by a Greek scholar, but probably among the 
Latins. Its place of writing has been imagined to have been 
Sardinia, from the preamble of an edict, which is written at the 
end: Φλαύιος Παγκράτιος σὺν Ged ἀποεπάρχων δοὺξ Σαρδινίας δῆλα 
ποιῶ τὰ ὑποτεταγμένα : but this, as Dr. Tregelles remarks, only 
shews it to have been in that island during the period of the duces. 
Now the Duces of Sardinia were first constituted by Justinian in 
534 (Wetst.): and if, as Michaelis infers from the writing (see 
also Marsh’s note), the MS. is more ancient than this Dux Sar- 
diniz, its date might be at the earliest the end of the fifth or 
beginning of the sixth century. But Bp. Marsh (note, as above) 
has shewn by the writing that it is more recent than the Codex 
Bezz : which circumstance, if the date now usually assigned to the 
Codex Bezz be correct (the middle of the sixth century), would 
bring it down about a century later. It was brought to England 
from Sardinia, became, it is supposed by Wetstein, the property of 
the Venerable Bede, as it, and no other Greek MS., contains the 
various readings which he has noted in his commentary in the 
Acts. It was lost sight of for a long time, till Abp. Laud became 
its possessor, and. gave it to the Bodleian library. Michaelis 
characterizes it as a MS. of the utmost importance, and ascribes 
to it the merit of having decided him against the notion that 
the greco-latin MSS. have been corrupted from the.latin. See 
Michaelis, Marsh’s ed. vol. ii. pt. i. pp. 269—274 ; Horne’s In- 
trod. vol. iv. pp. 187—189, where there is a facsimile of the greek 
and latin of this MS. It was published by Hearne in 1715, 
but the edn. is very scarce, only 120 copies having been printed. 
Tischendorf has re-examined the MS. and is going to republish it’. 
(Of St. Paul’s Epistles.) The Copex SaNGERMANENSIS, ΠΟῪ 
Petropolitanus (having been rescued from the fire of the abbey of 


[} The text of this MS. as well as those of the preceding is exhibited in “ Novum 
Testamentum Greece, Oxonii 1864,” referred to in the foot-note on δὲ in Proleg. to 
Vol. I. ch. vii. § i. p. 116.] 

[2 The MS, was published by Tischendorf in 1870 in Monumenta Sacra inedita, 
Nova Collectio, Vol. IX.] 


63] 


PROLEGOMENA. | APPARATUS CRITICUS. fou. ¥, 


St. Germain near Paris and taken to St. Petersburg), appears to 
be only a copy, and that a faulty one, of D, the Codex Claro- 
montanus, with its occasional corrections. It abounds with mis- 
takes, and has some monstrous readings made up of the various 
corrections of D: Tischendorf instances dxawownvy, Rom. iv. 25 ; 
pera taveita τοῖς Swevdexa, 1 Cor. Xv. 5; νιδιζομενο θεατριζομενοι, 
Heb. x. 38. “Probably not older than the ninth or tenth cen- 
tury.” (Tregelles.) Only quoted in the lacune of D.) : 


F. The Copex AvGIENs!s, now in the library of Trinity College, Cam- 


[6. 


bridge. It is a greco-latin MS., which formerly belonged to the 
Monastery of Augia Major in Switzerland, and was probably written 
in the latter half of the ninth century (Tregelles thinks, the eighth). 
Published by Scrivener in 1859. 

(Of the Acts.) FRAGMENTUM PETROPOLITANUM, brought from 
the East by Tischendorf in 1859: contains Acts ii. 45—iii. 8. Of 
the seventh century. | 


G. [Of St. Paul’s Epistles.] The Copex BoERNERIANUS, also a graeco- 


latin MS., now in the Royal library at Dresden. ‘This MS., which 
was also written in the ninth century, has a singular affinity with 
the Codex Augiensis, without being a copy of it. “It may be 
deemed certain that the Greek of each of these MSS. was a copy 
(mediate or immediate) of a more ancient codex ; from which the 
copyist of each of these departed at times by mere error. The 
general description of the Codex Sangallensis (A of the Gospels) 
applies equally to this MS., to which it was once joined : and what- 
ever shews the history of the one will apply equally to that of the 
others..." οἷς This MS. of course is not a distinct authority from F 
as to the readings of St. Paul’s Epistles : together, however, they are 
valuable as a united testimony to the readings of the ancient and 
valuable codex from which they must have alike sprung.” (Tre- 
gelles.) In this edition we have only quoted this MS. when it 
differs from F, or when F is defective. 


H. (Of the Acts.) “The Codex Mutinensis 196 [ii.G 3°]: of the ninth 


century. It begins ch. v. 28, καὶ βουλεσθαι : is deficient from at 
xnpa, ch. ix. 39, to ov, ch. x. 19: from wdia, xiii. 36, to τέρατα, 
xiv. 3. From κακειθεν, xxvii. 4, to the end, is supplied in uncial 
letters by some hand of about the eleventh century. The other 
omissions have been supplied by a more recent hand, in the fifteenth 
or sixteenth century.” It was collated by Scholz, and since then 
more completely by Tischendorf and by Tregelles. 


H. (Of St. Paul's Epistles.) The Coprx Corsiinranus No. 202 in 


the Royal library at Paris, apparently (Tischdf.) of the sixth century. 


[3 This correction, with several in the list of cursive mss., is taken from Dean 
Burgon’s letters on “ Manuscript Evangelia in Foreign Libraries,” published in the 
Guardian Newspaper, 1873, 4.] 


64] 


δ 1.1 MANUSCRIPTS REFERRED ΤΌ.  [PROLEGOMENa. 


It once contained 14 leaves, but, as is noted in the codex itself,— 
“post incendium librorum impressorum et subitaneam translatio- 
nem manuscriptorum non inventa sunt nisi xii folia.” The two 
missing leaves are in the Imperial library at St. Petersburg. [Four 
more were found in the collection of Porphyrius Antonius by 
Tischdf., who identifies as a portion of this MS., Matthzi’s Frag. 
Mosq. (Heb. x. 1—7, 32—388).| Edited by Montfaucon and 
accurately transcribed by Tischendorf. 

J. Fragmenta Palimpsesta Tischendorfiana, Cent. V. to VII. (See Vol. J.) 

K. Codex Mosquensis, Library of the Holy Synod No. xeviii. Cent. TX. 
(Matthei’s g). Formerly belonged to the monastery of St. Dio- 
nysius on Mount Athos. Contains the Catholic Epistles with a 
catena and the Epistles of Paul with scholia by Damascene. It is 
on parchment and in folio. Each page is divided into two columns; 
the text being written in large square uncials ; the commentary, in 
round letters joined to one another. Collated by Matthzi, who 
gives a facsimile of part of the text in the volume of his Gr. Test. 
which contains the Cath. Epistles, and describes it in that con- 
taining the Ep. to Rom. pp. 265-7. Scholz inserted this MS. by 
mistake in his list of Cursives, as Acts 102, Epp. Paul 117. 

L. Codex Angelicus Romanus, a MS. in the Angelican library of Augus- 
tinian monks at Rome, formerly the property of Cardinal Passionei. 
It contains the Acts, beginning viii. 10, μὶς του Geov,—the Catholic 
Epistles, and the Epistles of Paul to Heb. xiii. 10. ‘‘ It cannot have 
beeu written,” says Tischendorf, “ before the middle of the ninth 
century.” Formerly called G of the Acts—J of St. Paul’s Epistles. 

M. The Codex Uffenbachianus,: Cent. X. Consists of fragments at 
Hamburg and in the British Museum. The former contains the 
beginning and end of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Published by 
Tischendorf in his “‘Anecdota Sacra et Profana.” 

[O. Fragmentum Petropolitanum. Contains 2 Cor. i. 20—ii.12. Cited 
from Tischdf. N. T. ed. 8. ] 

P. Codex Porphyrianus, Cent. IX. Published by Tischendorf, who 
found it in the possession of the Russian Archimandrite Porfiri, 
Monumenta Sacra inedita, Voll. V. VI. It contains the Acts, 
Epistles, and Apocalypse. The Acts has been collated for this 
edition, and the readings in 1 and 2 Cor. taken from Tregelles. 

[Q. Fragmenta quedam. Cent. V. Only cited on 1 Cor. vi. 14; vii. 3,13. 

R. A fragment cited by Tischdf. on 2 Cor. xi. 14—18. ] 

Ν The Copex Srvaiticus, Cent. ΓΝ. (See Vol. I.) 

Frag. Coisl. In the scholia of a MS. of part of the O. T. in the Bene- 
dictine library at St."Germain, Wetstein found Acts ix. 24, 25, 
written by the transcriber of the MS., i. 6. in the beginning of the 
seventh century. To this discovery Tischendorf has added several 

Vor. 11.---66] δ 


PROLEGOMENA. | APPARATUS CRITICUS. [CH. Vv. 


more passages; ch. iv. 88, 34: x. 18, 15: xxii. 22, and some from 
the Gospels. The MS. itself is called the Codex Coislinianus 1, 
from Coislin, Bp. of Metz, its earliest known possessor. See 
Wetstein, Michaelis, and Tischendorf. 

Frag. Tischdf. (See “ I.” above.) 


2. Manuscripts written in cursive letters. 


Norer.—It is intended to include in this Table mention of those MSS. only which 
contain, and of those particulars which concern, the portion of the N. T. comprehended 
in this Volume. The missing numbers will be found in the Prolegomena to Vol. IV., 


pt. ii.; those in the Acts column being designated Cath., and those in the Paul column 
Heb. 


a. Lambeth No. 1182. “Dates from the twelfth century at the 
earliest *.” 


b. Lambeth No. 1183. Written a.p. 1358. 

c. A manuscript once in the possession of Professor Carlyle; re- 
turned to the Patriarch of Jerusalem in 1817. It was numbered 
1184 in the Lambeth Catalogue. Mr. Scrivener gives its readings 
from “a scholarlike and seemingly accurate collation of it with the 
Greek text of Mill, made by the Rev. W. Sanderson of Morpeth, 
in or about the year 1804.” Ascribed to the fifteenth century. 

ἃ. Lambeth No. 1185. “ Might also be considered a series of frag- 
ments in several different hands*.” Assigned to the fifteenth cen- 
tury or somewhat earlier. . 

e. in Acts, Lambeth 1255. Contains Acts and Past. Epp.—in Paul, 
(=a. of the Apocalypse,) Lambeth No. 1186. Contains the 
Pauline Epistles and the Apocalypse. Hleventh century. 

f. Codex Theodori. Bears date a.p. 1295 

g. Codex Wordsworthianus. Thirteenth century. 


h. (= b. of the Apocalypse.) Codex Butler 2. British Museum, 
Additional MS. No. 11837. It bears date a.p. 1157 °. 


k. Trin. Coll. Cantab. B. x. 16. Written a.p. 1316. 


1. (Scholz’s Act. 24, Paul. 29.) Chr. Coll. Cantab. F.i. 18, Written 
about the end of the twelfth century. 


4 Scrivener. The readings of mss. “a” too” are cited from the Appendix to 
Mr. Scrivener’s edn. of the “ Codex Augiensis.” It has not been thought worth while 
to encumber the page with every various reading found in these manuscripts; but 
whenever any variation of the uncials is mentioned, the testimony of these accurately 
collated documents is added. 

5 Formerly Cod. Pradicatorum S. Marci 701. 

66] 


γε. 





;.1.} 


Acts, 











. Seholz’s Act. 31, Paul. 37.) Coprx LE&ICESTRENSIS. 


MANUSCRIPTS REFERRED TO. 


Cited as 


“69” in the Gospels, and as “f” in the Apocalypse. (See Vol. I.) 


. (Scholz’s Act. 53, Paul. 30.) Emm. Coll. Cantab. i. 4. 35. Of 


about the twelfth century. 


. (Scholz’s Act. 61 and 111, Paul. 61 and 221.) University Library, 


Cambridge, Mm. 6.9. Of the twelfth or thirteenth century. 


. (Tischendorf’s “lo” [(edn. 7), Tregelles’ and Tischdf.’s (edn. 8) 


61].) CopEx LONDINENSIS TISCHENDORFIANUS. British Museum, 
Additional MS. 20,003. “Unquestionably the most valuable 
eursive MS. of the Acts yet known.” (Seriv.) ‘Can hardly be 
estimated too highly.” (Treg.) ‘‘ Haud dubie antiquissimi codicis 





| PROLEGOMENA. 


uncialis, qui ipse periit, exemplum est.” (Tischdf.) 





ΞΕ th S| 8 
| as Designation. Cent. Collator, &c. S a 
[9] - 
1 | Reuchlini. Basle K. iii. 3 (late | X. Wetstein “ bis atque accurate.” | 1 | — 
B. vi. 27). 
2 | Basle (late B. ix. ult.) [A. N. | XV. | Mill (B. 2). = 
iv. 4. Burgon ]. 
3 | Corsendoncensis. Vienna, Theol. | XII. | Walker and Alter. ΟΝ ΕἾΞΞΞ 
5. (Kol.) 
4 | Basle (late B. x. 20) [A. N.iv 5].| XV. | Mill (B. 3). Wetstein through- 
out Epp. [Written by several 
hands. } pau 
5 | Paris 106 (formerly 2871). XII. | Stephens (5’) Wetst. Scholz. 5 | — 
6 | Paris 112 (formerly 3425). XILL.| Steph. (e’) Wetst. 6 | — 
7 | Basle (late B.vi.17)[A.N.iii.11].| X? | Readings given in Wetstein. 
Text surrounded by various 
Scholia. from Gennad., (c., 
Sevrn., ὅθ. On parchment. --  [ - 
[57 — | Steph. (¢’) = Acts 50. Identified 
by some with 132 (Paul) below. | — | — 
9 | Paris 102 (formerly 2870). X. Steph. (:’) Wetst. —|— 
(10)| Not identified. — | Stephens (:a’). aed fee 
11 | Cambridge Univ. Lib. MS. Kk. | ΧΙ. | Steph. (ιγ) Wetst. (Def. Acts 
6. 4 (also numbered Acts 112, iii, 6—17.) i 
Paul 225). ° 
12 | Paris 237 (formerly 2869). Χ, Steph. (ce’) Wetst. “de integro.” | — | 2 
.- | Paris 103 (formerly 2872). X. Wetstein (Acts). Reiche (Paul). 
(Def. Acts ii. 20—31; 1 Cor. 
xii. 17—xiii. 2.) = Paul 140. | -— | — 
(13)| See Vol. ITT. — 
(14)| See Vol. III. (= Acts 47.) XVI. 90 |΄-- 
(15)| See Vol. 11]. -- 
16 | Paris 219 (formerly 1886), XI. | Wetstein. —/| 4 
17 | Paris 14 (CoLBERTINUS 2844). | XI. | Tregelles. 33 | — 
18 | Paris, Coislinianus 199, XI. | Wetstein. 35. 1-12 
— | Paris, Coislinianus 25. XI. | Wetstein. 
19 | Paris, Coislinianus 26, XI. | Wetstein. 
20 | Paris, Coisl, 27 (formerly 247). | X. Wetstein. (mutilated.) 
21 | Paris, Coislinianus 205. XI. | Wetstein. (1 Cor. xvi. 17— 
2 Cor. i. 7, &e., supplied in a 
P ! later hand.) — [19 
22 | Paris, Coislinianus 202 A. XITI.| Wetstein. —|18 
23 | Paris, Coislinianus 200, XIII.| Steph. (6°) Wetst. 38 | — 
24 | Bodleian, Miso. 186. Ebneri- | XII. | Described by Schcenleben, occa- 
anus. sionally quoted by Wetstein. | 
= Acts 48. 105 | — 
67 | e 2 7 










PROLEGOMENA. | APPARATUS CRITICUS. 





Designation. Collator, &c. 








25 | Westmonasteriensis (935). Bri- | XIV.| Wetstein. 
tish Museum. King’s Library 





Pe : ee 
21 {| 26 | Cambridge Univ. Lib. MS. Dd. | XIII.| (Def. Acts i.—xii.1; xiv. 23—xv. 
11. 90. 10; Rom. xv. 14—16, 24—26 ; 
xvi. 4—20; 1 Cor. i. 15—iii. 
12, &c.) — 
22! .. | British Museum Additional MSS. | 1826?! (Epp., Cent. xii, Scrivener) 
5115-7. “ Obiter inspectus a Wetstenio. 
Lectiones cap. xx. Act. mecum 
communicavit Rev. Paulus.” 
(Griesbach.) = Paul 75. 109 
23 | 28 | Bodleian, Baroccianus 3. XIII.| Mill (Baroc.). (Def. up to Acts | 
xi. 13.) 1 Cor. xv. collated by ᾿ 
Griesb. ἌΣ --- 
94. 29 | See above, “1.” 
-- | 30 | See above, “n.” 
25 | 31 Brit. Mus. Harleian 5537. 1087 | Mill. (Cov. 2.) Acts xiv.—xviii. 
Rom. i.—iv. collated by Griesb. | — 
26 | 32 | Brit. Mus. Harl. 5557. XII. | Mill. (Cov.3.) Readings of Acts | 
i.— iii. in Griesb. (Def. Actsi. 
1—11; 1 Cor. i, 7—xv./56,)0) == oe 
27 | 33 | Brit. Mus. Harl. 5620. XV. | Mill. (Cov. 4.) Perhaps a copy Ϊ 
οἵ 29. 
28 | 34 | Brit. Mus. Harl. 5778. XII. | Mill. (Stn.) (Def. Acts i. 1—20.) | — 
29 | 35 | Geneva 20. ΧΙ]. | Mill. (Genev.) 
30 | 36 | Bodleian, Misc. 74. XII | Mill. (Hunt. 1.) Begins Acts xv. 


19. “Perlegi Rom. v., viii. ; 
: 1 Cor. xv... .” (Griesbach). —! 9 
31 | 37 | See above, “m.” 


32 | 38 | Bodleian, Laud. 31. XIII.; Mill. (Zaud. 2.) Rom. i.—v. re- 

examined by Griesb. 51 | — 
33 | 39 | Lincoln Coll. Oxford, 82. XI. | Mill. (Zin. 2.) Acts collated by 

Dobbin. (Def. Rom. i. 1— 20.) | — | — 
34 40 | Trin. Coll. Dublin. Montfortianus.| XVI.| Barrett and Dobbin. 61 ' 99 
85. 41 | Magdalen Coll. Oxford, 9. XI. | Mill. (Magd. 1.) 57 |. <a 
36 | — | New Coll. Oxford, 58. XIII.| Mill. (Δ. 1.) Apparently the : 


MS. from which Cramer’s 
Catena is printed. 
— | (42); Magdalen Coll. Oxford. Has | XI. | Mill. (Magd.2.) Contains only 





been ascertained to be part of Rom. Corr. 

the same MS, as Paul 27. See 

Vol. ἼΣΙ, > 
37 | 43 | New Coll. Oxford, 59. XIII.} Mill. (W. 2.) —\|— 
38 | 44 | Leyden 77, Voss. XII1I.| Sarrau. Mill’s Pet. 1. Wetstein. 
(39) (45) Situation unknown. — | Sarrau. Mill’s Pet. 2. Be- 


longed (with Pet. 1 and 3) to 
Paul Petavius. (Def. Acts i. 
1—xviii. 22; 1 Cor. iii. 16—x. 


13.) =e 
40 | 46) Vatican Alex. 179. XI. | Zacagniand Birch, Mill’s Pet.3.| — | 12 ᾿ 
41 .. | Vatican 2080. XII. | Inspected by Birch and Scholz. Ἢ 
= Paul 194. 175 | 208 


᾿ 


— | 47 | Bodleian, Roe. [165, not] 2. XII. | Mill. Treg. Rom. and 1 Cor. 
xiv., collatefl by Griesbach. 

[© This correction is due to the Rev. W. D. Macray, of the Bodleian Library, who states that, 
the ms. was brought from Turkey by Sir Thomas Roe, and given by him to the Library in 1628, 
Several readings have been verified for this edition, some by Mr. Macray, others by Mr. E. D, 
Hake of Ch. Ch. ] 

68 | ; 








MANUSCRIPTS REFERRED TO. 


Designation. 





42 | 4g | Frankfort on the Oder. Seide- 


43 | 49 


—| 53 
—j| 54 


(47)| .. 
ABC ee 
ΕΠ | 85 
— | (56 
a Bi; 
(50)| .. 
227) «58 
= | 59 
== | (60) 
6 ΤΟΙ 
BE 1. a 
Go aa 
bo é 
54, Ἧ ee 
56 | 

ῃ 
BS: 
59 | 62 
60 | 63 
ἘΠ ΝΘΕΣ 
.. | (64) 
62 | 65 
Ξ- ‘|| (66) 

67 
63 | 68 
64 | 69 
Ae eae 

66 
67 | 70 
pal ΕΥ̓]: 
ΕΟ 9 
68 | 73 
69 | 74 
hl. 75 


(50) 
(61) See Vol. 11]. 
45 | 52 | Hamburg. Uffenbachianus. 





lianus. 
Vienna. Theol. 300 (Nessel.). 
See Vol. ITI. 
Munich 375 (= Baul 55). 


See above, “ M.” 
Munich 412 (formerly Augsburg 
5 


The same MS. as Paul 14 above. 


The same MS. as Paul 24 above. 
The same MS. as Acts 46 above. 
See Vol. 1171. 

Vienna. Theol. 23 (Nessel.). 
The same MS. as Paul 8 above. 
Vatican 165. 


Paris Coisl. 204. 
See Vol. 11]. 
See above, “0.” 
Paris 56. 


The same MS. as Paul 50 above. 
See above, “τ. 
Paris, Arsenal 4. 


Bodleian, Clark 4. 


Copenhagen 1. 
Bodleian, Clark 9. 


Brit. Mus. Harl. 5588. 


Brit. Mus. Harl. 5613. 


See above, “0.” 

See above, “M.” 

Paris 60. 

See Vol. III. 

Vienna. Theol. 302 (Nessel.). 
Vienna. Theol. 313 (Nessel.). 
Vienna. Theol. 303 (Nessel.). 
The same MS. as Paul 57 above. 
The same MS. as Paul 67 above. 
Vienna. Theol. 221 (Nessel.). 
Vienna. Theol. 10 (Kollar). 


The same MS. as Acts 57 above. 
Upsala, Sparwenfeld 42. 


Wolfenbiittel xvi. 7. 
The same MS. as Acts 22 
above. 








[PROLEGOMENA. 














Ω, oO 
Cent. Collator, &c. 8 Ξ 
XI. | Middeldorpf, in Rosenmiiller’s 
Comm. Theol. (Def. Acts ii. 
3—34.) ἘΞ Ν 
XII. | Mill. (Vien.) and Alter. 76 -- 
XV. | Wetstein and Bengel. — | 16 
XI. | Bengel (Aug.6). Cc.’s comm. 
(Does not contain the Acts.) —|— 
XII. | Bengel. (Contains only Rom. 
vii. 7—xvi. 24.) 
XIII. | Edited by Alter. = Acts 65. 218 | 33 
XII. | Edited by Zacagni. Called 
Cryptoferratensis. —|— 
XI. | Inspected. Catena. —|— 
Mill’s Hal. 
XII. | Inspected by Scholz. = Paul 
133. — | 52 
XI. | Inspected by Simon and Scholz. 
= Paul 130. 43 -- 
XII. | Inspected by Scholz. = Paul 
22/7. 
1278 | Hensler in Birch. = Paul 72. 234 | — 
XIIL.| Inspected by Scholz. = Paul | 
224. —|-— 
XIII.) Acts xi. xii. xtii., Rom. and 1 
Cor. i.—vii., collated by Gries- 
bach. 
1407 | Actsi.—viii., Rom.,1 Cor., 2 Cor. 
iii.,—collated by Griesbach. —je 
XIV. | Inspected by Griesbach and Scholz. 
XII. | Alter and Birch. = Acts 66. — | 34 
XII1.| Alter and Birch. 
XIII.| Alter and Birch. 
1331 | Alter and Birch. 
XII. | Alter and Birch. [Def. Rom. i. 
1—9, &e. | 
XII. | (2 Cor. XIth cent.) Aurivillius. 
(Def. up to Acts viti. 14. 1 Cor. 
xiii. 6—xv. 38 twice over.) --Ῥ [:.-- 
XII. | Knittel. in Matthei. — | 30 





ΓΙ This number is assigned by Tischendorf (edn. 8) and Tregelles to Ser.’s “p.” See above. | 


69] 

















PROLEGOMENA. | APPARATUS CRITICUS. 
a as Ω, 
iS | es Designation. Cent. Collator, &c. 6 
< ποι Ὁ 
— | [761 Leipsic. XII 1.| Matthzi. Contains Rom., 1 Cor. 
up to v. 3, . . with Thl.’s 
comm. 
7C | 77 | Vatican 360. XI. | “ Rom., 1 Cor. i.—iy. accurate 
examinavi; reliqua cursim modo 
perlustravi.” Birch. 131 
71 | 78 | Vatican 363. XI. _ | Birch (cursorily inspected). 133 
72 | 79 | Vatican 366. XIII.| Birch (cursorily inspected). -- 
73 | 80 Vatican 367. XI. | Birch (“ Per omnia contuli’”) — 
G4 | — | Vatican 760. XII. | A MS. of the Acts inspected by 
Birch and Scholz. Catena. --- 
— | 81 | Vatican 761. XII. | Inspected by Birch. (é£c.’s 
comm. -- 
— | 82 Vatican 762. XII. | Inspected by Birch. Contains 
Rom., Corr., with Catena. -- 
— | 88 Vatican 765. XI. | Inspected by Birch, Comm. on 
marg. -- 
—| 84: Vatican 766. XII. | Inspected by Birch. Comm. on 
marg. -- 
— | 85 | Vatican 1136. XIII.} Epp. inspected by Birch. 
75 | 86 | Vatican 1160. XIII.| Inspected by Birch and Scholz. |141 
76 | 87 | Vatican 1210. XI. | Birch (Acts, Rom., al. “exacte”). 142 
77 | 88 | Vatican, Palat. 171. XIV. | Examined in select places by 
Birch. Zacagni. 149 
78 | 89 | Vatican, Alex. 29. XII. | Birch (“ Per omnia accurate ex- 
aminavi”). (Def. 2 Cor. xi. 15 
—xii. 1.) 
79 | 90 | Vatican, Urb. 3. XI. | Inspected by Birch. -- 
80) 91 | Vatican, Pio 50. XII. | Birch (“ Per omnia diligenter bis 
collatus ’’). -- 
81, --ὀ Barberinus 377. ΧΙ. | Inspected by Birch. -- 
82 | 92 | Rome, Propaganda 250. 1274 | Zoega in Birch. 180 
83 | 93 | Naples 1. B. 12. (See below | XI. | Inspected by Birch. 
Acts 173, Paul 211.) 
84 | 94 | Florence, Laur. Lib. iv. 1. X. Inspected by Birch. τος 
85 | 95 | Florence, Laur. Lib. iv. 5. XIII.) Inspected by Birch. — 
86 | 96 | Florence, Laur. Lib, iv. 20. XI. | Inspected by Birch. a= 
87 | 97 | Florence, Laur. Lib. iv. 29. X. Inspected by Birch. — 
88 98. Florence, Laur. Lib. iv. 31. XI. | Inspected by Birch. — 
89 | 99 | Florence, Laur. Lib. iv. 32. 1093 | Inspected by Birch. — 
— | 100 | Florence, Laur. Lib. x. 4. XII. | Inspected by Birch. Comm. — 
— | 101 | Florence, Laur. Lib. x. 6. XI. | Inspected by Birch. Comm. — 
— | 102 | Florence, Laur. Lib. x. 7. XI. | Inspected by Birch. Var. comm. | — 
— | 103 | Florence, Laur. Lib. x. 19. XII. | Inspected by Birch. Catena. — 
91 | 104 | See above, “ h.” 
92 | 105% Bologna, Can. Reg. 640. XI. | Inspected by Scholz. 204 
93 | 106 | Venice 5. XV. | Rinck. 205 
94 | 107 | Venice 6. XV. | Rinck. 206 
95 | 108 | Venice 10. XV. | Rinck. 
96 | 109 | Venice 11. XI. | Rinck. (Def. Acts i. 1—12; 
xxv. 21—xxvi. 18.) 
97 | — | Wolfenbiittel Gud.Gr. 104 A. | XII. | (Scholz?) (Def. Acts xvi. 39— 
xviii. 18.) = Paul 24]. 
98 | 113 | (Moscow ?) (Cod. Stauronicet.) | XI. | Matthei (a). 
99 | 114 | Moscow 5. 1445 | Matthei (6). 
100 | 115 | Moscow 334. XI. | Matthei (d). 
101 | 116 | Moscow 333. XIII.| Matthei (Ὁ). 


[3 Burgon’s memorandum, letter 3, to Rev. F. H. Scrivener, implies that this MS. does not 


contain any portion of St. Paul’s Epistles. ] 
70 


MANUSCRIPTS REFERRED ΤΟ. 


[ PROLEGOMENA, 





@ | ea 
4 las 
102 | 117 
103 | 118 
— | 119 
104 | 120 
105 | 121 
106 | 122 
== se 
— | 14 





(108)} .. 
(109)| 
σι 
(12)} .. 
- 125 
— | 126 
— |(127) 
Sul es 
— | 129 
tao 
ese 131 
113 | 132 
Anke 
114 | 184 
115 | 135 
116 | 136 
117 | 137 
118 | 138 
119 | 139 
.. | 140 
120! 141 
121 | 142 
122 | 143 
123 | 144 
— 146 
- | 1a 





Designation. 


ΤΣ Αἰ δεϊοα « K above. 


Moscow 193. 

Moscow 292. 

Dresden. (Cod. Matth.) 
Moscow 380. 

Moscow 328. 

Moscow 99. 

Moscow 250. 

Escurial x. iv. 17. 
Escurial χ. iv. 12. 


Camb. Univ. Lib. MS. Nn. 5. 27. 


The same MS. as “0” and 61 
above. 


The MS. numbered Acts 9 above. 


Munich 504. 
Munich 455. 


Munich 110. 


Munich 211. 
Munich 35. 


The same MS. as Acts 54 above. 

Paris, Coisl. 196. 

Paris 47. 

The same MS. as Acts 51 
above. 

Paris 57. 

Paris 58. 


Paris 59. 
Paris 61. 
Paris 101. 
Paris 102 A. 


The same MS. as Acts 11 above. 
Paris 103 A. 


Paris 104. 
Paris 105. 


Paris 106 A. 
Paris 109. 


Paris 110. 


Cent. 





XIII. 


XIV. 
mE. 


1511 


Collator, &c. 





Matthei (h). Scholia, but Acts 
i. 1—ix. 12 given continuously. 

Matthei (i). Contains 1 and 
2 Cor., with Thl.’s comm. 

Matthzi (k). 

Matthei (1). 

Matthzi (m). 

Matthzi (n). Scholia. 

Matthzi(q). Contains Rom. i.— 
xiii. with Thl.’s comm. 


Moldenhauer. See Birch, Gos- 
pels. = Paul 228. 
Moldenhauer. See Birch, Gos- 


pels. = Paul 229. 

A folio copy of the Greek Bible 
printed “Basilee per Joan. 
Hervagium 1545.” A _ few 
notes are written on the mar- 
gin. = Paul 222. 


Inspected by Scholz. 

Inspected by Scholz. Prob. 
copied from the same MS. as 
preceding. 

A transcript of Rom. vii. 7—ix. 
1, as written in MS. Paul 54. 
Inspected by Scholz. = Acts 179. 
Inspected by Scholz. Thl.’s 

comm. (So Hardt.) 


Inspected by Scholz.= Acts 132. 
Reiche. 


.| Reiche. 


Inspected by Scholz. (Def. Acts 
i. 1—xiv. 27.) 

Inspected by Scholz. 

Reiche. 

Parts collated by Scholz. (Def. 
Acts xix. 8—xxii. 17.) 

Inspected by Scholz. (Def. 2Cor. 
i. 8—ii. 4.) 


Scholz. (Def. Acts xxviii. 23— 
Rom. ii. 26.) 

Inspected by Scholz. 

Scholz. Contains only (in this 
vol.) Acts xiii. 48—xv. 22; xv. 
29—xvi. 36; xvii. 4—xviii. 26; 
xx. 16—xxviii. 17; Rom. i. 1— 
iv. 16. 

Inspected by Scholz. 


Inspected by Scholz. Contains 
Rom.,, 1 Cor. 

Inspected by Scholz. Contains 
1 and 2 Cor. 





She 
δ 4 
241 | 47 
242 | 48 
226 | — 
228 | — 
441 | — 
— | 82 
πεν as 
330 | — 
18 | 51 
— | 53 
263 | — 
+ |e 
— | 56 


























PROLEGOMENA. | APPARATUS CRITICUS. [cH. Υ. 
a s 2 ΓΙ 
Ls BE Designation. Cent. Collator, &c. | 8 Ξ 

124 | 149 | Paris 124. XVI. | Inspected by Scholz — | 57 
125 | 150 | Paris 125. XIV. | Inspected by Scholz. 
— | 151 | ‘Paris 126. XVI.| Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
126 | 153 | Paris 216. X. Inspected by Scholz. 
127 | 154 | Paris 217. XI. | Inspected by Scholz. Reiche. 
Thdrt.’s comm. on Epp. Paul. 
128 | 155 | Paris 218. XI. | Inspected by Scholz. Catena. | — | — 
129 | 156 | Paris 220. XIII.| Inspected by Scholz. Comm., 
txt often omitted. --ἰ ] - 
130 | — | Paris 221. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. (Def. Acts 
xx. 88—xxii. 3.) --ἔ ᾿] - 
— | 157 | Paris 222. XI. | “Coll. magna codicis pars,” 
Scholz. (Def. Rom. i. 1—11, 
21—29, iii. 26—iv. 8, ix. 11— 
22; 1 Cor. xv. 22—43.) © —|— 
131 | 158 | Paris 223. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. (Epistles 
A.D. 1045.) 2 
— | 159 | Paris 224. XI. | Inspected by Scholz. Catena. | — | 64 
ἘΤῚ 160 | Paris 225. XVI. | Inspected by Scholz. Fragments | 
with Thl.’s comm. ;—|— 
— | 161 | Paris 226. XVI.;| Inspected by Scholz. Contains 
| | Rom., with comm. —|— 
— | 162 | Paris 227 XVI.| Inspected by Scholz. Contains . 
| 1 Cor. xvi., with Cat. --Ἠς:-  -- 
— | 164 | Paris 849. XVI.| Inspected by Scholz. Thdrt.’s 
comm., with text on marg. 
132 | .. | Thesame MS.as Paul 131 above. 
133 | 166 | Turin C. i. 40 (285). XIII.) Scholz, “accurate coll.” —~\— 
134 | 167 | Turin C. ii. 17 (19). ΧΙ. | Colld. Acts iii—viii.; Rom. x., 
seq., byScholz. (Def. Actsi.,ii.) | — | — 
— | 168 | Turin C. ii. 38 (825). XII. | Inspected by Scholz. Comm. | 
(Def. Rom. i. 1—iii. 19.) Koewy eee 
135 | .. | Turin C. ii. 5 (302). XII. | Inspected by Scholz.=Paul 170. 339 | 83 
136 | 169 | Turin C. ii. 31 (1). XII. | Inspected by Scholz. -- -- 
170 | The same 1 δ. α5 Acts 1985 above. 
— | 171 | Ambros. Lib. Milan 6. [B.6inf.] | XIII.| Inspected by Scholz. Rom., 
1 Cor., 2 Cor. τ δέ 1S; 
written by a later hand. —|— 
— | 172 | Milan 15. [A. 51 sup. ?] XII. | Inspected by Scholz. Comm. 
' after Chr. —|— 
137 | .- | Milan 97. [E. 97 sup.] XI. | Inspected by Scholz.= Paul 176. 
138 | 173 | Milan 102. [E. 102 sup. ] XIV. | Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
139 | 174 | Milan 104. [H. 104 sup] 1434 | Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
— | 175 | Milan 125. [| F. 125 sup.] XV. | Inspected by Scholz. Continuous 
comm. --  - 
.. | 176 | The same MS. as Acts 187 above. 
140 .. | Venice 546. XI. | (Part Cent. xiii.) Inspectea by 
Scholz. Catena. = Paul 215. | — | 74 
141 | .. | Florence, Laur. Lib. vi. 27. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. = Paul 
239. 189 | — 
177 | Modena 14. (MS. 11. a. 14.) XV. | Inspected by Scholz. 
142 | 178 | Modena 243. (MS. III. 8.17.) | XII. | Inspected by Scholz. 
179 | Part (written in cursive letters) 
of the MS. called “H of the 
Acts.” 
144 | 180 | Florence, Laur. Lib. vi. 18. XIII.| Inspected by Scholz. 363 | — 
145 | 181 | Florence, Laur. Lib. vi. 36. XIII.| Inspected by Scholz. [Does not 
exist. Burgon. | 365 | — 
146 | 182 | Florence, Laur. Lib. 2708 (?). | 1332 | Inspected by Scholz. 367 | — 
147 | 183 | Florence, Laur. Lib. iv. 30. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. το ὅδ 


72] 




















§ 1.] MANUSCRIPTS REFERRED TO. [ PROLEGOMENA, 
8 Be Designation. Cent. Collator, &c. 2 Ξ 
< | BA ; Sas 

148 | 184 | Florence, Laur. Lib. 2574 (Ὁ). 984. | Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
150 | .. | Florence, Riccardi Lib. 84. XV. | Inspected by Scholz.= Paul 280 
= lect. 37. 368 | 84 
151 Vatican, Ottob. 66. XV. | Inspected by Scholz.= Paul 199. |386 | 70 
(152) Camb. Univ. Lib. MS. Nn. 3. A copy of the printed Greek Test. 
20, 21. 8vo. London, 1728, interleaved 
and bound up in two volumes; 
contains MS. notes by John 
Taylor. = Paul 228. 442 | — 
153 | .. | Brit. Mus. Harl. 5796. XV. | Inspected by Scholz.= Paul 240. |444 | — 
.- | 185 | Rome, Vallicella Lib. EK. 22. XVI. | Inspected by Scholz.= Acts 167. |393 | — 
.. | 186 | Rome, Vallicella Lib. F. 17 1330 | Inspected by Scholz.= Acts 170. |394 | — 
154 | 187 | Vatican 1270. XV. | Inspected by Scholz. Comm. 
contains (of St. Paul) only 
Rom., 1 Cor. <5 ee 
155 | 188 | Vatican 1430. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. =—— | — 
— | 189 | Vatican 1649. XIII.| Inspected: by Scholz. Thdrt.’s 
: comm. = ee 
156 | 190 | Vatican 1650. 1073 | Inspected by Scholz. (Def. Acts 
i, 1—v. 4, Comm. on Epp. 
Paul.) 
157 | 191 | Vatican 1714. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. Contains 
fragments of Acts, Rom., and 
1 Cor. —|— 
158 | 192 | Vatican 1761. XI. | Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
159 | — | Vatican 1968. ΧΙ. | “Cursim coll. Cod. integer,” 
Scholz. (Def. Acts i. 1—v. 28, 
vi. 14—vii. 11.) ——4| ee 
160 | 193 | Vatican 2062. XI. | Inspected by Scholz. Scholia. 
Begins Acts xxviii. 19. —|— 
.. | 194 | The same MS. as Acts 41 above. 
— | 195 | Vatican, Ottob. 31. X. Inspected by Scholz. Comm. 
(Def. Rom. and greater part of 
1 Cor.) ΞΟ 
— | 196 | Vatican, Ottob. 61. XV. | Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
— | 197 | Vatican, Ottob. 176. XV. | Inspected by Scholz. νι 
161 | 198 | Vatican, Ottob. 258. XIII.; Inspected by Scholz. Latin 
Version. Begins Acts ii. 27. | — | 69 
.- | 199 | The same MS. as Acts 151 above. 
162 200 | Vatican, Ottob. 298. XV. | Inspected by Scholz. Latin Ver- 
sion. —|— 
163 | 201 | Vatican, Ottob. 325. XIV. | Inspected by Scholz. (Def. Acts 
iv. 19—v. 1.) 
— | 202 | Vatican, Ottob. 356. XV. | Inspected by Scholz.’ Contains 
Rom. with Catena. —|— 
164 | 203 | Vatican, Ottob. 381. 1252 | Inspected by Scholz. 390 | 71 
166 | 204 | Rome, Vallicella Lib. B. 86. XIII.| Inspected by Scholz. — | 22 
1607. .. | Thesame MS. as Paul 185 above. 
168 205 | Rome, Vallicella Lib. F. 13. XIV. | Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
169 | 206 | Rome, Ghigi Lib. R. v. 29. 1394 | Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
— | 207 | Rome, Ghigi Lib. R. v. 32. XV. | Inspected by Scholz. Comm. —|— 
— | 208 | Rome, Ghigi Lib. R. viii. 55. XI. | Inspected by Scholz. Thdrt.’s 
comm. —|— 
110 .. | The same MS. as Paul186 above. 
171 | 209 Two MSS. in the Library of | XVI.| Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
172 | 210 |{ — the Collegio Romano. XVI.| Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
(178) (211)| Naples (no number). <Appa- 
rently the same MS. as Acts 
83, Paul 93 above. — | Inspected by Scholz. —|— 
174 | 212 | Naples 1, C. 26. XV. | Inspected by Scholz. —|— 


73] 




















PROLEGOMENA. | APPARATUS CRITICUS. [cH. v. 
g | ἐπ ΕΣ | eis 
8 = Designation. Cent. | Collator, &c. & = 
— | 213 | Rome, Barberini Lib. 29. 1338 | Inspected by Scholz. Scholia. | — | — 
— | 214 | Vienna 167 (Lambec 46). XV. | Inspected by Scholz. Contains 

Rom., 1 Cor., with comm. =e | .--- 
.. | 215 | The same MS. as Acts 140 above. 
175 | 216 | Mon. of S. Bas. Messana, 2. XII. | Inspected by Munter. —|— 
— | 217 | Palermo. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. Begins 
| 2. (νυ i set | ees 
176 | 218 | Syracuse. XII. | Inspected by Munter. 421 | — 
177 | 219 | Leyden. Meermann 116. XII. | Dermout. (Def. Acts i. 1—14, 
xxi. 14—xxii. 28; Rom. i. 1— 
vii. 13.) 99} ee 
178 | .. | Middlehill, Worcestershire 1461. | XI. | (Inspected by Scholz?) Once 
| See “ Apoc. m,” Vol. IV. Meermann 118. = Paul 242. 27 Se 
179 Ἢ The same MS.as Paul 128 above. 
180 | .. | Strasburg. Molsheimensis. XII. | Readings of Acts and Epp. com- 
municated to Scholz. = Paul 
238. 431 | 
181 | 220 | Berlin, Diez. 10. XV. | (Def. Acts i. L11—ii. 11; Rom. i. 
1—27; 1 Cor. xiv. 12—xv. 46; 
2 Cor. i. 1—viii. 5.) 400 | — 
e+ |(221)| Thesame MS.as “0” and 61 above. 
.. |(222)| See Acts [110] above. 
«- |(223)| See Acts [152] above. 
2. | 224 | Thesame MS. as Acts 58 above. 
e- |(225)| The same MS. as Acts 9, Paul 
11 above. 
«. | 227 | Thesame MS. as Acts 56 above. 
° 228 | The same MS. as Acts108 above. 
-. | 229 | The same MS. as Acts 109 above, 
.- | 230 | Thesame MS.as Acts150 above. | 
7 ae Two MSS. in a Monastery on {| XII. 
182a) .. the Island of Patmos. ῖ ᾿ XIII. Inspectedby Scholz. =Paul243. | —  — 
183 231 | Gr. Mon. Jerusalem 8. XIV.| Inspected by Scholz. A es 
184 | 232 | Gr. Mon. Jerusalem 9. XIII.) Inspected by Scholz. Comm. — | 85 
185 | 233 | Mon. S. Saba, nr. Jerusalem 1. ἈΠ: Inspected by Scholz. -- : - 
186 | 234 | Mon. S. Saba, nr. Jerusalem 2. | XIII. Inspected by Scholz. 457 | — 
187 | 235 | Mon. S. Saba, nr. Jerusalem 10. | XIII.) Inspected by Scholz. 462 | 86 
188 | 236 | Mon. S. Saba, nr. Jerusalem 15. | XII. | Inspected by Scholz. —j;— 
189 | 237 | Mon. S. Saba, nr. Jerusalem 20. | XIII. Inspected by Scholz. 466 89 
-- | 238 | Thesame MS. as Acts 180 above. 
-- | 239 | Thesame MS. as Acts 141 above. 
-- | 240 | Thesame MS. as Acts 153 above. 
-- | 241 | The same MS. as Acts 97 above. 
e- | 242 | Thesame MS. as Acts 178 above. 
. . ThesameMSS.asActs 182 above. 
190 | 244 | Christ Church, Oxford, Wake 34 | XI. | Acts xviiii—xx. collated by με 
(2 Scholz). Scholz. 27 
191 | 245 | Christ Church, Oxford, Wake 38 | XI. | Def. Acts i. 1—11. 
(3 Scholz). 
192 | 246 | Christ Church, Oxford, Wake 37 | XI. | Def. Acts xii. 4—xxiii. 32. 
(4 Scholz). 
8-pe | 8-pe| St. Petersburg xi. 1. 2. 230. XII. | Muralt. 





ih Abeta bi ee 


74] 


§ 1. LIST OF LECTIONARIES. — [PRoLEGoMENs. 


ii. 


lil. 


iv. 


Xi. 


[ Other manuscripts recently discovered ὃ :— 


. Monasterium Ilavroxpatopos, Mt. Athos (not numbered). Contains 


the (Acts ? and) Epistles with a Catena, chiefly from Cicumenius, 
excepton 1 and 2 Cor. Early half of tenth century. 

Monastery ef St. Catherine, Mt. Sinai. Catena on St. Paul’s 
Epistles, apparently differing little from Cicumenius. Probably 
eleventh or twelfth century. 

Ferrara 187. N.A.7 (Vol. III.). A well-written Codex, containing 
the whole of the N. T. (Vols. I. and II. containing the O. T.), 
apparently of the fourteenth century. 

Milan Ambros. Z. 34 sup. A small 4to paper ms. Contains the 
Cath. Epp., St. Paul’s Epp., and a Synaxarium; followed by the 
four Gospels. Of the thirteenth or fourteenth century. 

Milan Ambros. N. 272 sup. S. Pauli Epp. cum notis marginalibus. 


il. Florence Riccardi 85. Small 8vo. St. Paul’s Epistles. 

i. Modena (xiii.) ii, A.13. Contains the Acts and Catholic Epistles. 
- Modena (lxxi.) ii. C. 4. Contains the Acts and Catholic Epistles. 
- Modena (cexliii.) iii. B. 17. Contains the Acts and Epistles 


(Catholic and Pauline). 

Modena (cii.) ii. D. 8. Contains the Acts and Epistles (Catholic 
and Pauline). 

Modena (xiv.) ii. A. 14. Contains St. Paul’s Epistles. | 


The following is a List of Lectionaries. 





Designation. Date. | Name of Collator, and other information. 





lect-1 | Leyden 243. Scaliger1. XI. | Wetstein and Dermout. Contains (of 


this Vol.) Acts i. 156—26 ; ii. 22—47 ; 
ii. 12, 13, 18; iv. 1—21; \id. 23— 
31; x.3448; xiii. 3442; xxviii. 
11—31; Rom. v. 6—19; 1 Cor. xi. 
25—32; xv. (= ev-6) 


lect-2 | Brit. Mus., Cotton Vesp. | XI. “Contains the portions of Acts and 


B. 18. Epp. appointed to be read through- 
out the whole year. Casley collated 
it in 1735, and Wetstein inserted his 
extracts.” (Michaelis.) Mutilated 
at beg. and end, 


lect-3 | Bodleian, Baroc. 202 ? 995 
lect-4 | Brit. Mus., Harl. 5731. XIV. | Griesbach. Contains the following 


fragments :—Acts vi. 8—vii. 5; vii. 
47—60; 1 Cor. i. 18—24; iv. 9—16; 
xii, 27—xiii. 8. (= Gosp. 117) 


lect-5 | Bodleian, Cromwell. 11. | 1225 | Griesbach, who says “ Variantes lec- 

(Olim 296.) A liturgy | tiones collegi e Rom. vi. 3—11; xiii. 

book, containing 5thly l1—xiv. 4; xiv. 19—23; xvi. 25— 

(pp. 149—290), evay- | 27; 1 Cor. i. 18—24; ix. 19—x. 4; 
γελοαποστόλων τῶν xi. 283—32, &ec.” 





μεγάλων ἑωρτών. 


_ 9 The notice of the first two mss, has been furnished by Mr. P. E. Pusey, that of the 
others has been derived from Dean Burgon’s letters on Manuscript “ Evangelia ” 
in the Guardian, 1873-4. . 


75] 


FROLEGOMENA. | 


APPARATUS CRITICUS. 


[CH. Ve. 





| Date. | Name of Collator, and other information. 











Designation. 
lect-6 Gottingen (Ὁ. de Missy). | XV. | Matthei (v). See his appendix to 
Thess. Contains a large number of 
the usual lections. 
lect-7 Copenhagen 3. XV. | Hensler in Birch. = ev-44) 
lect-9 | Paris 32. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. (= ev-84) 
lect-10 | Paris 33. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. (= ev-85) 
lect-11 | Paris 34. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. 
ject-12 | Paris 375. 1022 | Scholz. An important MS. (= ev-60) 
lect-13 | Moscow Synod, 4. x Matthai (b). 
lect-14 | Moscow Synod, 291. XII. | Matthei (e). 
lect-16 | Moscow Synod, 266. XV. | Mattheei (¢). Contains Acts xiii. 25— 
32; xix. 1—8; Rom. v. 6—9; vi. 
18—23; 1 Cor. iv. 9—16; x. 1—4; 
xii, 27—xiii. 7. (= ev-52) 
Contain seve-) 
ral lections 
in Acts, and 
lect-17 | Moscow Synod, 267. XV. | Matthei(x)j some in | (=ev-53) 
lect-18 | Moscow Synod, 268. 1470 | Matthei(p)) Rom.; 1((=ev-54) 
Cor.; in 2 
Cor. only xi. 
21—xii. 9. 
lect-19 | Moscow, Typogr. 47. 1602 | Matthei (w). Contains Acts xii. 1— 
11; xiii. 25—32; xxvi. 1—20; Rom. 
xiii. 1J—xiv. 4; xv. 1—7; 1 Cor. 
i. 18—ii. 1; iv. 9—16; ix. 2—12; 
x. 1—4; xii. 27—xili. 7; xv. 1—11; 
2 Cor. i. 8—11; xi. 21—xii. 9. 
! (= ev-55) 
lect-20 | Moscow, Typogr. 9. XVI. | Matthei (16). Contains Acts ii. 1—11. 
(= ev-56) 
lect-21 | Paris 294. XI. | Inspected by Scholz. (= ev-83) 
lect-22 | Paris 304, XIII.| Inspected by Scholz. 
lect-23 | Paris 306. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. 
lect-24 | Paris 308. XIII.| Mostly O. T. lections; only a few from 
ΝΣ 
lect-25 | Paris 319. XI. | Inspected by Scholz. 
lect-26 | Paris 320. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. Mutilated. 
lect-27 | Paris 321. XIII.} Inspected by Scholz. Defective. 
lect-28 | Bodleian, Selden 2. XV. | Griesbach. (= ev-26) 
lect-29 | Paris 370. XII. | Some lections from Gospp. and Epp. 
(= ev-94) 
lect-30 | Paris 373. XIII 
lect-31 | Paris 276. XV. | Inspected by Scholz. (= ev-82) 
lect-32 | Paris 376. XIII.| Entered in list of MSS. of Gospels as 
324. 
lect-33 | Paris 382. XIII.| “Cursim coll. magna codicis pars,” 
Scholz. 
lect-34 | Paris 383. XV. | Inspected by Scholz. 
lect-35 | Paris 324. XIII.| Inspected by Scholz. (= ev-92) 
lect-36 | Paris 326. XIV.| Inspected by Scholz. (= ev-93) 
lect-37 | Riccardi Lib. Florence 84.| XV. | See Acts 150, Paul 230 above. 
lect-38 | Vatican 1528. KV 
Ject-39 | Vatican, Ottob. 416. LY = evy-133) 
lect-40 | Barberini Lib. Rome 18. XIV.} Some parts of Cent. X. 
lect-41 | Barberini Lib. Rome (no | XI. | The first 114 leaves are lost. 
number). 
lect-42 | Vallicella Lib. Rome, C. 46. | XVI. 
lect-43 ry Lib. Florence | ? (Inspected by Scholz ?) 
2742. 


76] 


§ π.] 


lect-44 
lect-45 
lect-46 
lect-4.7 
lect-48 
lect-49 
lect-50 
lect-51 
lect-52 
lect-53 
lect-54. 
lect-56 


lect-57 
lect-58 





VERSIONS REFERRED TO. [PROLEGOMENA. 











Designation. Date. | Name of Colator, and other information. 
Glasgow (Missy BB). ? | Manuscript collations by Missy were 
Glasgow (Missy CC), 1199 § once in Michaelis’ possession. 
Ambros. Lib. Milan 63. XIV. Inspected by Scholz. 

Ambros. Lib. Milan 72. XII. | Inspected by Scholz. (= ev-104) 
Laur. Lib. Florence 2742(?).| XIII. Inspected by Scholz. (= ev-112) 
Mon. St.Saba, nr. Jerus.,16., XIV. (Inspected by Scholz ὃ) 

St. Saba 18. XV. | Inspected by Scholz. 

St. Saba 26. XIV. Inspected by Scholz. 
St. Saba (no number). 1059 | Inspected by Scholz. 

St. Saba (no number). XIV. | Inspected by Scholz. (= ev-160) 
St. Saba (no number). XII1T,| 
Frankfort on Oder, Seideli. A leaf of a lectionary bound up with 

ms. Acts 42, Paul 48. Contains 1 Cor. 

Ch. Ch. Oxf., Wake 12 (1 | XI. | (= ms. 26 Apoc.) 

Scholz). 
Ch. Ch. Oxf., Wake 33 (5 | 1172 

Scholz). 

SECTION II. 


ANCIENT VERSIONS REFERRED TO IN THIS VOLUME. (vVSS.) 


The Latin Versions (latt). 
vulg. The vulgate, usually quoted from the Clementine edition 
(vulg-ed.). The Sixtine edition (vulg-sixt.) is occasionally cited 
when it differs from the others ; as also are the following mss. :— 


am. amiatinus, written about a.p. 541. Tischendorf has 
edited it, and considers it the oldest and most valuable 
extant. 

demid. demidovianus. Published by Matthei. Written 
in the XIIth century. 

fuld. fuldensis. Readings given in Lachmann’s N. T. 
Written in the VIth century. 

flor. floriacensis. p 

harl. harleianus, No. 1772. Collation given by Griesbach 
' Symb. Crit. 

lux. luxoviensis. A lectionary cited by Mabillon and Sa- 
batier. 

[reg. Cited from Tischdf. on Acts iii. 8.7 

tol. toletanus. -A collation was published by Blanchini in 
his ““ Vindiciz Can. Script.” 

F-lat. The Latin column of the Codex Augiensis. Cent. 
Ex: 


old-lat. The Old Latin Version in use before Jerome’s revision is 
cited from the following manuscripts :— 


11] 


PROLEGOMENA. | APPARATUS CRITICUS. [cuH. v. 


D-lat. (Acts.) The Latin of the Codex Beze. Cent. VI. 
D-lat. (Paul.) The Latin of the Codex Claromontanus. 
Cent. VI. 
E-lat. (Acts.) The Latin of the Codex Laudianus. Cent. VI. 
G-lat. The Latin written word by word over the correspond- 
ing Greek words in the Codex Boernerianus. 
fri. Fragments of St. Paul’s Epistles in the covers of certain 
Codices Frisingenses at Munich. Written Cent. V. or VI. 
Deciphered by Tischendorf. 
guelph. Fragmenta guelpherbytana. Fragments of the Ep. 
to Rom. in Knittel’s Wolfenbiittel Gothic palimpsests. 
Edited by Tischdf. in his “ Aneedota sacra.” 
spec. Mai’s Speculum. 
The Syriac Versions (syrr). 
Syr. The Peschito. Supposed to have been made as early as the 
second century. 
syr. The later or Philoxenian. Cent. V. Revised by Thomas 
of Harkell, a.p. 616, who probably introduced the asterisks and 
obeli *, and the notes in the margin. 
The Egyptian or Coptic Versions (coptt). 
copt. The Coptic or Memphitie. 
copt-dz. Codex Diez. Written about the tenth century. 
copt-schw. Schwartze’s edition. 
copt-wilk. Wilkins’ edition. 
[copt-boett. Boetticher’s edition. | 
sah. The Thebaic or Sahidiec. 
sah-ming. Mingarel’s edition. 
sah-mnt. Munter’s edition. 
sah-woide. Woide’s MS. Published in the Appendix to Cod. Alex. 
basm. The Bashmuric so closely follows sah as to be of no critieal 
value except where sah is deficient. 
The Goruic version (goth) : made from the Greek by Uphilas about 
the middle of the fourth century. | 
The ΖΕΤΒΕΙΟΡΙΟ version (zth): assigned to the fourth century. 
eth-rom. The edition given in the Roman polyglott. 
zth-pl. Pell Platt’s edition. 
The ARMENIAN version (arm) : made in the fifth century. 
arm-use. Uscan’s edition. 
arm-zoh. Zohrab’s edition. 
[arm-rieu. Cited on Acts xx. 25.] 


1 It is Mr. Pusey’s impression that many of the readings thus marked correspond to 
the words in Italie characters in our English version, indicating a necessity of the 
idiom. The same remark applies to certain of the readings of the Syriae versions. 
which we have enclosed in brackets. 


78] 


§ ττι.] ANCIENT WRITERS CITED. [PROLEGOMENA, 


SECTION ITI. 


FATHERS AND ANCIENT WRITERS CITED IN THE DIGEST OF THIS 
VOLUME ”, 


(N.B.—The abbreviation is designated by the thick type. In the remainder of the 
word or sentence Latin writers are described in Italics.) 


Acacius, Cent’. IV. or V. (from | Cesarius, Episc. Arelatensis, 502— 


Catene. ) 544 
Acta Concilii Chalcedonensis, a.p. | Canons Apostolic, Cent’. IIL. 
451 Cassiodorus, b. 479, d. 575 
Aleimus Ecdicius Avitus.. (See | Chromatius, Bp. of Aquileia, 402 
Avit.) Chronicon Paschale, Cent’. VII. 
Ambrose, Bp. of Milan, a.v. 374— | Chrysologus, Peter, Bp. of Ravenna, 
397 | 433—450 
Ambrosvaster, i. e. Hilary the Dea- | Chrysostom, Bp. of Constantinople, 


Ammonius of Alexandria, 220 Tischdf. from Matthei ; -montf, 
Amphilochius, Bp. of Iconium, 374 
Anastasius Sinaita, Cent’. VI. Wolfenbiittel ms. of Chr written 
Andreas of Crete, 635 in Cent’. VI. 
Antiochus of Ptolemais, 614 | Clement of Alexandria, fl. 194 

| 

| 


con, ἢ. 884 | 397—407 ; Chr-mss as cited by 


from Montfaucon; Chr-wlf, 


Antonius Monachus, b. 251, d.356 | Clement, Bp. of Rome, 91—101 
Apollinarius, Bp. of Laodicea, 362 | Cosmas Indicopleustes, 535 
Archelaus of Mesopotamia, 278 Constitutions, Apostolic, Cent’. III. 
Arnobius of Africa, 306 Cyprian, Bp. of Carthage, 248—258 
Athanasius, Bp. of Alexandria, | Cyril,Bp. of Alexandria, 412—444, 


326—373 Cyr-p denotes readings supplied 
Athenagoras of Athens, 177 by Mr. Pusey [Cyr is used 
Augustine, Bp. of Hippo, 395—430 when the citation is apparently 
Avitus, Bp. of Vienne, 490—523 uniform | 
Barnabas, Cent’. I. or 1]. Cyril, Bp. of Jerusalem, 348—3886 
Basil, Bp. of Caesarea, 370—379 Damascenus, Johannes, 730 
Basil of Seleucia, fl. 440 Dialogue against the Marcionites 
Bede, the Venerable, 731 ; Bede- printed amongst the works of 


gr,a Greek MS. cited by Bede, Origen 

nearly identical with Cod. “Ἐν, | “ Dialogi de Trinitate,” variously 

mentioned in this edn only when ascribed to Ath Thdrt Max 

it differs from E. Didymus of Alexandria, 370 
Ceesarius of Constantinople, 368 Diodorus, Bp. of Tarsus, 378—394 


2 Orig-c or Chr-cat means Orig or Chr as given in Cramer’s Catena. Orig-schol, 
scholium ascribed to Origen. Chry1., Chr foc loco. Hippolytus is cited sometimes as 
Hip, sometimes as Hippol; Gregory of Nyssa, as Nys, Nyss, and Nyssen: in all cases 
the abbreviation marked in the above list is the shortest nsed in this volume, 


79] 


PROLEGOMENA. | 


Dionysius, Bp. of Alexandria, 247 
—265 

Dionysius Areopagita, Cent’. V. 

Ennodius, Bp. of Pavia, ἃ. 521 

Ephrem Syrus, b. 299, d. 378 

Epiphanius, Bp. of Salamis in Cy- 
prus, 8368—403 

[Epistle of the Church of Lyons, 
171] 


APPARATUS 





Eucherius, Bp. of Lyons, 484—454 | 


Eulogius, Bp. of Alexandria, 581— 
608 

Eusebius, Bp. of Cesarea,315—320 

Eustathius, Bp. of Antioch, 323 

Euthalius, Bp. of Sulci, 458 

Eutherius, Bp. of Tyana, 431 

Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116 

Faustinus, 383 

Fulgentius, Bp. of Africa, 508 —- 533 

Gaudentius, Bp. of Brescia, 387 

Gennadius, Bp. of Constantinople, 
458—471 

Gildas, fil. 581 

Helvidius (cited by Jer.), 383 

Hesychius of Jerusalem, Cent’. IV. 
or VI. 

Hilary, Bp. of Poictiers, 354—368 

Hippolytus,disciple of Ireneus,220 

Homilies ascribed to Clement, 
Cent’. III. 


CRITICUS. [cu. Vv: 


| Leo, Bp. of Rome, 440—461 


Leontius Scholasticus, 580 

Lucifer, Bp. of Cagliari, 354—367 

Macarius of Egypt, 301—391 

Manes, cited by Epiphanius 

Marcellus, cited by Eus. 

Marcion, 130; fragments in Epiph. 
(Mcion-e) and Tert. (Mcion-t) 

Marcosii, cited by Iren. 

Marcus Monachus, 390 


_ Marius Mercator, 418 


Martyrium Clementis 


| Maximus Taurinensis, 4830—466 

_ Maximus Confessor, fi. 630—662 
| Maximin, the Arian, cited by Aug. 
| Meletius, Bp. of Antioch, 381 





Methodius, fl. 290—312 

Michael Psellus of Constantinople, 
d. 1078 

Nazianzum, Gregory, Bp. of, fi. 
370—389 

Nestorius, Bp. of Constantinople, 
428—431 


| Nonnus of Panopolis, Cent’. V. 
᾿ Novatian, 251 


Nyssa, Gregory, Bp. of, 371 


_ (cumenius of Tricca in Thrace, 


Cent’. XI. ? 
Origen, b. 185, d. 254 


_ “ Queestiones et Responsiones ad 


Idaciue, the name under which [ was | | 
—«Orosius, 416 


published | the] work “de Trinitate” 
[ formerly ascribed to| Vig. [now 
to Αἰ}. 
Ignatius, Bp. of Antioch, d. 107 
Irenzus, Bp. of Lyons, 178 
Isidore of Pelusium, 412 
Jacobus, Bp. of Nisibis, cir. 320— 
340 
Jerome, fi. 378—420 
Julian, Emperor, 331—363 
Julian (cited by Aug.), Pelagian 
Bp. in Italy, 416 
Justin Martyr, fl. 140—164 
80 | 


Orthodoxos’ ascribed toJ ustinM. 


Orsiesius the Egyptian, 345 
Pacianus, Bp. of Barcelona, 370 
Palladius, Bp. of Hellenopolis, 368 
—401 
Pamphilus of Palestine, fl. 294 
Paulinus, Bp. of Aquileia,776—804 
Pelagit Ep. ad Demetr. 4Ἰᾷ ? 
Peter, Bp. of Alexandria, 300—311 
Philastrius, Bp. of Brescia, ἢ. 380 
Philo Carpasius, 400 
Photius, Bp. of Connten nent 
858—891 


§ i. | 


Photinus, Bp. of Sirmium (cited 
by Epiphanius), d. 379 

Polycarp, Bp. of Smyrna, d. 169 

Porphyry, ἃ. 804 

‘“Preedestinatus.” A work ascribed 
to Vincent of Lerins (484) 

Primaszus, Cent’. VI. 

Proclus, Bp. of Constantinople, 434 

Procopius of Gaza, 520 

“« De Promissionibus dimid. temp.” 

“ Queestiones ex vet. et nov. Testt.” 
Printed among the works of Aug. 

“ De Rebaptismate.” Among Cypr’s 
works 

Rufinus of Aquileia, 397 

Salvianus, 440 

Sedulivs, 430 

Senicres, quoted by Iren., Cent’. 
ΤΡ, 

Serapion of Egypt, 345 

Severus of Antioch, Cent’. VI. 

Severianus, Bp. in Syria, 400 

“De Singularitate Clericorum.” 
Among Cypr’s works 

Smyrnzxorum Epistola de Martyrio 
Polycarpi, 167 

Synopsis ascribed to Athanasius 

Tarasius, Bp.of Constantinople,786 

Tatian of Syria, 172 


ABBREVIATIONS. 


[ PROLEGOMENA. 


Tertullian, 200 

Thaumaturgus, Gregory, Bp. of 
Neocesarea, 243 

Theodore, Bp. of Heraclea, 394 

Theodore, Bp. of Mopsuestia, 399 
—428 

Theodore of the Studium, 795— 
826 

Theodoret, Bp. of Cyrus, 420—458 

Theodotus the Gnostic. Extracts 
made by Clement of Alexandria 

Theodotus of Ancyra, 433 

Pseudo Theodulus, Cent’. XIT. 

Theophylact, Abp. of Bulgaria, 
1071; Thl-sif, as edited by Sifa- 
nius; Thl-fin, by Finettius, from 
a Vatican MS. 

Tichonius, 390 

Timothy, Bp. of Alexandria, 380 

Titus, Bp. of Bostra, cir. 360— 
377 

Victor Vitensis, an African Bp., 
Cent’. V. , 

Victor of Antioch, 401 

Victorinus, 380 

Victor, Episc. Tununensis, 565 

Vigilius of Thapsus, 484 * 


| Zeno, Bp. of Verona, 362—3880 
| Zonaras of Constantinople, 1118 


To this list may be added the following ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE 


DIGEST :— 
aft, after. 
al, alii. 
appy, apparently. 
bef, before. 
beg, beginning. 


comm, commentary—when appended to the name of a Father, de- 
notes that the reading referred to is found in the body of his com- 
mentary, and not in the text (txt) printed at the head of the com- 
mentary. This last is often very much tampered with. 


corr, corrector. 
ctra, contra. 


corrd, corrected. 


[$A work on the Trinity formerly ascribed to Vigilius is now assigned to 


Athanasius. ] 
Vou. IL—81] 


f 


PROLEGOMENA. | APPARATUS CRITICUS. [Gu wr, 


def, defective. 

ed or edn, edition. 

elsw, elsewhere. 

elz, elzevir edition of the Greek Test. 

e sil, e silentio collatorum. 

exc, except. 

expr, expressly. 

follg or filg, the following words. 

er, Giese er-lat-ff, Greek and Latin Fathers. 

ins, insert—“ ins καὶ AB” means that the MSS. A and B insert και. 

int, interpreter or interpretation—appended to the name of a Father 
means that the citation is made from a translation, not from the 
original. 

marg, margin. 

om, omit—‘*‘om καὶ AB” means that the MSS. A and B omit the καὶ 
given in the text or inserted by other MSS. 

Ps, Pseudo—used in citing the spurious works ascribed to Ath. and 
other Fathers. 

pref, prefix. 

rec, the textus receptus, or received text of the Greek Testament. 
This is used when Steph and elz agree. 

rel, reliqui—means that all the other manuscripts named on the 
margin have the reading to which it is appended. 

simly, similarly. 

Steph, Stephens’ Greek Testament. 

transp, transpose. 

txt, text—when followed by a list of MSS., versions, &c., means that 
the reading adopted in this edition is supported by those MSS., 
versions, &c. (See also under comm above.) 

ver, verse. 

vss, versions. 

Vv, verses. 

The figures 2, 3, &¢., inserted above the line to the right hand, imply 
a second, third, &c., hand ina MS. Thus B’ means the original 
scribe of B ; C’, the first corrector of C ; C*, the second; 1)", a 
recent scribe in D, by whom corrections were made or parts not 
originally in the MS. supplied. 

The same figures below the line, imply recurrence of the reading 2, ὃ, 
&c. times in the author mentioned ; 6. g. Aug,, Orig;, Bas;: similarly 
are used the words sepe, aliq, or alic (aliquoties or alicubi), ubique *. 

Words printed in the digest in the larger type used for the text 


4 .2-mss appended to the name of a Father means that the reading cited is contained 
in two mss. of that Father. 
Chr-5-mss, means that in 5 mss. of Chrysostom the reading cited occurs 3 times. 


82] 


§ iv. ] BOOKS QUOTED. [ PROLEGOMENA. 


itself are to be taken as of equal authority with the reading printed in 
the text : the place in the text where such readings occur being indicated 
by an asterisk. 

Notice referred to on pp. 15, &e. 


amas would seem to be the true reading in 56 passages of the N. T., 
in only 14 however of these is it found without any variation in the 
uncial MSS. In the 42 remaining cases some one or more uncials have 
substituted was. On the other hand πὰς occurs upwards of 1100 times, 
and in no more than 4, or at the most 10 cases have uncial mss. put 
απας in its stead—so that the tendency of the transcribers has clearly 
been to alter amas into was ; on examination it also appears that this 
tendency has been alike yielded to by the scribes of the recent and of 
the ancient MSS. In cases, therefore, where the rarer word is supported 
by any trustworthy MSS., however few in number and however great 
the array in favour of zas, azas has been accepted as the true reading. 


SECTION IV. 


' LIST, AND SPECIFICATION OF EDITIONS OF OTHER BOOKS QUOTED, 
REFERRED TO, OR MADE USE OF IN THIS VOLUME. 


N.B. Works mentioned in the list given in the Prolegg. to Vol. 1. 
are not here again noticed. 


A.V. R. The Authorized Version revised by five Clergymen. Rom., 
1 and 2 Cor. London 1858-60. 

Biscor, History of the Acts of the Holy Apostles confirmed &c., Oxf. 
1840. 

Bispine, Erklirung des Briefes an die Rémer, Minster 1854. Rom. 
Catholic. . 

Bornemann, Acta Apostolorum ad fidem codicis Cantabrigiensis &c., 
Grossenhain et Lond. 1848. 

CaTENA in Acta Apostolorum, ed. Cramer, Oxf. 1838. 

Curysostom, Opera, cited by Benedictine pages in Migne’s Patrologia 
Greca, voll. xlvii.i—lxiv. The homilies on the Acts and Rom. 
are in vol. ix, (Ix.), those on 1 and 2 Cor. in vol. x. (1xi.). 

CoNYBEARE AND Howson, Life and Epistles of St. Paul, with maps, 
plates, coins, &e., 2 voll. -tto. London 1850-52: 2nd edn., 2 voll. 
8vo., Lond. 1856. 

Davipson, Dr. S., Introduction to the New Testament, vol. ii., Acts— 
2 Thess.; Lond. 1849. 

De Werte, Exegetisches Handbuch u.s.w.--Apostelgeschichte, 2nd 
edn., Leipzig 1841: Rémer, 4th edn., Leipzig 1847 : Corinther, 
2nd edn., Leipzig 18-45. 

83] : f 2 


PROLEGOMENA. | APPARATUS CRITICUS. [cH. v. 


Estrus, Comment. in omnes Pauli Epistolas, 2 voll. folio, Douay 1614. 
Ewsank, W. W., Commentary on the Ep. to the Romans, Lond. 1850. 
FrirzscHE, Pauli ad Romanos Epistola, 3 voll., Hal. Sax. 1836. 
Hackett, Pror., Commentary on the Acts, Boston, U.S. 1852. 
Hemsen, Der Apostel Paulus u.s.w., Gottingen 1850. 

Hopes, Pror. C., Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, 3rd edn., 
London: The Religious Tract Society. 

Humpury, W. G., Commentary on the Acts, Lond. 1847. 

J OWETT, Pror., The Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, Galatians, 
Romans : with critical Notes and Illustrations : Lond. 1856. (See 
Vol. III. Prolegg. ch. v. § i. par. 1, note.) 

LACHMANN AND Buttmann, Novum Testamentum grece et latine &c., 
vol. ii., Berlin 1850. ) 

Lewin, T., Life and Epistles of St. Paul, 2 vols., London 1851. 

Meyer, H. A. W., Kritisch-exegetischer Commentar tiber das Neue 
Testament :—Apostg., Gottingen 1835: 1 Corinth., 2nd edn., do. 
1849 : 2 Cor., 2nd edn., do. 1850. 

Neanper, AvuG., Geschichte der Pflanzung τι. Leitung der christlichen 
Kirche durch die Apostel, 4th edn., Hamburg 1847. 

CEcuMENIUS, Commentaria, &c., in Migne’s Patrologia Greea, voll. 
CXVill. ΟΧΙΧ. 

Pa ey, Hore Pauline: ed. Birks, Lond. 1850. 

Ῥεῖ, Dr., Annotations on the Apostolic Epistles, vol. 1, Rom.—Corr. 
Lond. 1848. 

Puiirri, Dr. F. A., Commentar tiber den Brief Pauli an die Romer, 
vol. i., Frankf. 1855. 

ScHraDER, Der Apostel Paulus, u.s.w., 5 voll. Leipzig 1829-36. 

SmitH, James, Esq., On the Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul, Lond. 
1848 : 2nd edn., Lond. 1856. 

SraNLEY, Dean, The Epistles of St. Paul to the Corinthians: with 
Critical Notes and Illustrations ὅ, 

StiER, Dr. Rupotr, Die Reden der Apostel, Leipzig 1829.—Andeu- 
tungen fiir gliubiges Schriftverstiindniss: zweite Sammlung, 
Leipzig 1828. 

Stuart, Moses, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Lond. 1838. 

TERTULLIANUS, in Migne’s Patrologia Latina, voll. i.—iii. 

THEODORET, Opera, in Migne’s Patrologia Greea, voll. Ixxx.—lxxxiv. 

TTHEOPHYLACT, in Migne’s Patrologia Greea, voll. exxiii.—exxVi. 

TuoLuck, Rémerbrief, u.s.w., Halle 1842: 5th edn., 1856. 


δ The reader will observe that I have worked with Dean Stanley’s book, and have 
often extracted from, and referred to it. It is a valuable contribution to the literature 
of these important Epistles: not so much in its scholarship, as in the power of illustra- 
tion, and graphic description of usage and circumstance, which pervade the notes. The 
second edition is referred to in this present volume. 


84 j 


§ 1v.] CODEX VATICANUS. [ PROLEGOMENA. 


TREGELLES, Dr., An Account of the printed Text of the Greek New 
Testament, London 1854; Greek Testament, Part iv., Rom.— 
2 Thess., 1869. 

UmpreiT, Dr., Der Brief an die Romer auf dem Grunde des Alten 
Testamentes ausgelegt, Gotha 1856. 

Winer, G. B., A Treatise on the Grammar of N. Test. Greek. 
Translated with additions, &c., by Rev. W. F. Moulton, M.A., 
Edinburgh. 

WorpswortH, BisHor, The Greek Testament, &c. Part ii., Lond. 
1857. 


Readings of the Codex Vaticanus (B) in the text of this volume, which have been 
ascertained by the Editor’s personal inspection of the MS. at Rome, February, 1861. 





Acts i. 11. ovtos, not ovtws as Bentley. | Acts vii. 39. αλλα, not αλλ᾽ as Mai. This 
ii, 7. in ἀπαντε5, the first α is written was wrongly extracted from 
over the line by 1. m. my notes of B in my-last 
34. o bef κυριος is added by 1. and [fifth] edition. 
2. m. 47. ovxod. a prima manu. 
38. aft auaptiwy ins vuwy, not 51. καρδιας, not -αν as Bentley. 
μων as Bch. Vili. 25. ευηγγελιζοντο, not eveyyeAn. 
iii. 2. the ro after εβασταζε is super- as Birch. 
added by 1. m. 28. tov mpod. qo., not yo. Tov 
21. the των before am αἰωνος ix προφ. as Birch. 
written in the margin by 34. τουτο is ὦ prima manu. 
2. m. ix. 6. adda. 
iv. 4. ws, not wset, as in Mai. 13. σου is in codex, not omitted, 
6. ο ἀρχιερεὺς is the reading of as in Bentley. 
the codex [not as Tischdf. }. 25. after καθηκεν, avrov, not -ou 
14. τεθαραπ. and τεθεραπ. are both as Bentley. 
from the 1. τη. 26. ets ιερουσ., not ev as Birch. 
18. tov before incov is added by 36. Tis ἣν μαθ., not Tis pad. as 
1. m. and 2. m. Bentley. 
20. eSapev : over the εἰ is written x. 45. mv. του ay., not my. ay. as 
o by 1. m., over the a@ is Bentley. 
written o by 2. m. (not both xi. 3. εἰσηλθεν, not -θες as Bentley. 
by Tischdf.’s B3). 12. diaxpewwavta not -vovta as 
v. 2. συνιδυιης, but ε is written Bentley. 
over by 1. m. and 2. m. 13. arnyy., not avnyy.as Bentley. 
21. The codex has παραγενόμενον 18. apa kat, not apa γε και as Mai. 
@ prima manu, not -vorv as 24, Tw kup is in margin a 2. m. 
Tischdf. (sic). 
25. prima manus has εθεσθαι. xiii. 1. σύυμεων, not om. as Bentley. 
38. τα is added by 1. τη. and 2. τη. 11. eweoev, not ἐπέπεσεν ac Mai, 
vii. 10. 2. m. has εξελ., not ef:A. as 13. ἀνεχθ. is 1. m., not avaxé. as 
Bentley and Tischdf. Mai. 
11. ηυρισκον is in codex. 26. μιν, as in Mai ed. 1, not 
17. ηγγιΐεν, not -ἰσεν as Birch. υμιν, as in ed. 2. 
22. doy. K. Epy., not epy. K. Avy. 29. mavta Ta γεγρ., not παντα 
as Bentley. γὙεΎρ. as Bentley. 


85] 


PROLEGOMENA. | 


Acts xiii. 39. 


xiv. 10 


12. 
xv. 


xvi. 12. 


xvii. 7. 


20. 
94. 


xix. 2. 


13. 
29. 


40. 


xx. 4. 
16. 


23. 


26. 


32. 


“54, 9, 


13. 


24. 


Xxii. 5. 


. (6 ed. Verc.) zposevt., 


ev vouw, not Tw vouw as 
Birch. 

the 2nd καὶ is written over 
by 1. m. 

μεν Bapy.,not Bapv.as Bentley. 

περιθμητε is 1. m., but the ad- 
dition is 1.m. also. (Tischdf. 
wrongly assignsit to his B%.) 

κακειθεν εἰς, as in Mai ed. 1, 
not x. Te εἰς, as in ed. 2 5, 

λεγογτες εἰναι, not εἰν. Acy. 
as Bentley. 

θελει, not θελοι as Mai ed. 1. 

apeom. is 1. m., -w7. is 2. m. 

ovd, not οὐδε as Mai. 

vpas, not μεν yuasas Bentley. 

της OVYX., not cvyx. as Bent- 
ley. 

ov ov δυνησ. as Mai ed. 2, 
not ov δυνησ. as ed. 1. 

βεροιαιος, ποῦ -ροαι- as Birch. 

κεκρεν 1. m., κεκρικει 2. m. 

Aeyov as Mai ed. 1, not -ων 
as ed. 2. 

διοτι as Mai ed. 2, not διο as 
ed. 1. 

τὴν κληρονομίαν, not KAnp. 
as Muralto. 

avapavavtes is 2.m. So in 
my collation: but Tischdf., 
who has examined this place 
with care, says that B! 
wrote NA; then his B3 
wrote € upon the A, and 
afterwards placed an A over 
the line. Sothat it would 
now appear as if Bb! had 
read -evTes. 


. 1. m. repeats edeyay after 


πνευματοξ. 
not 
-nvé. as Bentley. 


. adAnAovs καὶ, not καὶ as 


Bentley. 

o before mavAos is added by 
1. m. 

tupnoovta is 1. τη. as Ru- 
lotta and Vercellone. 

1. m. has πρεσβυτερειον : 2. 
m., τριον. 


APPARATUS CRITICUS. 
Acts xxii. 24. 


28. 
xxiii. 7. 


18. 
28. 


35. 


xxv. 25. 


[ cH. v. 


ανεταΐεσθαι, not -ταξ- as 
Bentley. 

1. τη. has πολειτειαν. 

λαλουντος as Bentley, not 
-noavtosas Mai. This was 
wrongly extracted from my 
notes of B in my last 
[fifth | edition. 

σοι is written over by 1. m. 

kaTnyayov to avTwy is in 
marg. a 1. m. 

KeAevoas, Not KeAevoas τε aS 
Bentley. 

in αὐτου δε Tov παυλου, παυ- 
λου has dots over it ἃ 1. τη. 


xxvii. 14, 1.m.decidedly wrote ευρακυ- 


28. 


xxvii. 11. 


8. 


xiii. 2. 


11: 
xiv. 6. 


λων: 2. m. placed v over the 
a,and A between the cand 
v, and altered the A to A, 
but in so doing, he has left 
the right foot of the A of 1. 
m. visible beyond the corner 
of his own A. 

ευρον οργνιας εἰκοσι, not ev- 
ρον ειἰκοσι as Bentley. 

αλεξανδρινω has ἡ written 
over the ἐς but ποέ by 1. m. 
as Rulotta, and Mai ed. 1. 


. ἐπετραπή, not -πει as Birch. 
. xv w, not w xu as Mai. 

. 2. m. has συμπ., not συνπ. 

- ἐχωμεν is 1.m.: exouer 2. m. 
. TW vou., NOt TL vou. AS Mis- 


printed in Mai ed. 2. 


. σε απο, not απο. 
. τὰ του πν. as Mai οα.1, not 


του mv. as ed. 2. 


. τι is added by 1. m. 


. συγγενων is in the original 


text, there has been no era- 
sure: the words αδελφων 
μου των are in the margin 
by the 2nd hand) 7. 
τουτεστιν ott ἃ 1. τῇ. (τι 
over the line). 
ανθεστ., not αθεστ. as mis- 
printed in Mai ed. 2. 
vuas, not nuas as Bentley. 
και o εσθ., not o εσθ. as 


Bentley. 


6 Tischdf.’s “ male M. in utraque ed. repetiit receptam” is altogether wrong. Mai 
has not printed the rec. in either edn. 
7 Supplied by the Rev. C. Cure. 

86 | 


§ 1v.| 


Rom. xv. 26. 


xvi. 7. 


CODEX VATICANUS. 


ποιήσασθε 1. and 2. m.: no | 


correction. 
yeyovav, not -ασιν as Mai. 


1 Cor. i. 2. τη εκκλ., not exxA. as Bent- 


1 


15. 
Vil. Ρ: 
ἼΠ7. 
id. 


vill. 11. 


x 9: 


xii. 24. 


xiv. 16. 


87] 


ley. 
otis 1.m.: μου 2. m., not 
as Vere. 
διδακτοις, not -Tw. 
Suvacde, not εδυν. 


. συνεργοι 1. m. 


1. m. yuuvert.: 2. m. -ver. 
This was wrongly extracted 
from my notes of B in my 
last [fifth ] edition. 

εγεννησα, not -evy- as Bent- 
ley. 

There is no writing in the 
margin,asassertedby Woide 
from Mico. 

μεμερικεν O KUPLOS, NOt o Geos. 

ουτως περιπατειτω Kal, Not 
omitted, as Bentley. 

© adeAdos, not adeAdos as 
Bentley. 

απωλλ., not απολλ. as Bent- 
ley. 

TL περισσότερον, Not περισσο- 
τερον as Bentley. 

evAoyns εν πνευματι, not ev- 
Aoyns Tw πνευματι as Mai. 


[ PROLEGOMENA, 


1 Cor. xiv. 39. μου is not expunged as Mai, 


but left faint (as 1. m. wrote 
it) by 2. m., with a dot 
over each letter. 

xv. 19. ηλπικοτες eopev povov, not 
as Bentley. 


2 Cor. i. 4. emt macy τὴ θλιψει, not επι 


παση θλιψει as Bentley. 


11, 15. αναγεινωσκῆται, not -eTa as 


Mai. 

iv. 6. ott Geos, not oT: o Geos as 
Mai. 

v. 15. ort evs, not οτι εἰ εἰς as Mai. 

vii. 4. ev τη χαρα, not τη xapa as 
Mai. 

ix. 2. περυσι, not mepior as Mai. 
It was stated in my former 
table that 2. m. had cor- 
rected it to mepyor. But 
this was wrongly copied 
from my MS. notes upon 
the codex, and refers to the 
next item. 

3. vuwy is 1. m. ἡ is written 
above the line by 2. m. 

x. 12. ἐνκρειναι πα cvyKpevai,with- 
out any erasures of the ε by 
1. m. as stated by Rulotta. 

xii, 1. Se ov, with no punctuation 
as in Mai. 


᾿"» 
. 
yr 
ν᾿» 
4 ‘ 
' 
. 
‘ 
) a oss . 
, , 
ἢ RAMS i 7 
΄ . ‘ 
ὅτι . i 
s ᾿ . 4 
ba Pe @Pisio εἰς 4 4 
fa ἴ ao) 1 a ia rs ; : 
ἵν vip ° ae ΓΝ 7 ἣν 
Σ ‘ / 
ἘΠ. Bis O14 Ι i 
4 5 
bel i UT bi 49 SIS (ΑἹ ? 4 i 
IAL TH0tz 


ΔΤ ie at ek ne «ἢ 
tS τὰ ἀμ al ατόϊᾷ 
‘insane δῊ νά ΣΤ ἃ 
pute ἡ. 10 rennin yd Joo 
ΤΣ ΓΗ τὰ νὰ on αἴ 
porn icug Or δ ie TE ὡς 
«ΠΑΝ οἱ τὴ 


Ce rie ee ..,.ν.ὺ7Ὺτ7ὺς|νϑ.νϑ,Ὰ΄΄ῸᾷῦῸ΄’’ρ- τ θΘ -ΞΡΟΡρ ».΄ὦὮὃὸὲ.΄... ,. . .... ᾿ο., 


το Mat ae 


aoa | al 2) 


4 Σ΄... να ὦ 


iT σοι ow 


εὐμ ἢ CB. ‘ADTS 


-Ybaryrt loi aa 

a Birt 7 
«ὦ Jon Ων, 
Ena sap NEES. 7 






"" Lag ere 74 ; 
.--- ἣν 
Nom’ ; δ. Ρ 
ae ΝΣ 
ΕΣ 


‘oo Ae 


Ἢ ᾿ 












pts 
ας ses quay 


ΤῊ εἰ 


“"ε 3 
1 y, é ‘ 
“ἶσα ye 
tid 
ene ag 
4 ἐφ 
ἕω . j 


ou ἫΝ 


















C πνευ- 
ματος... 
ABCD 
Exabe 
dfghk 
nop 13 


TPAZEIS AMOSTOAQN. 


1 ‘ a \ b la) c , d2 , \ , , ἌΝ 
I. 1 Τὸν ὃ μὲν ἢ πρῶτον “ λόγον ἃ ἐποιησάμην περὶ πάντων, eee 


vii. 12 reff. 


5 , a 7 A a ΄, 
ὦ Θεόφιλε, ὁ ὧν ἤρξατο ᾿Ιησοῦς ποιεῖν τε καὶ διδάσκειν κ τὸ shit. 


2 Saype ξ ἧς δ ἡμέρας " ἐντειλάμενος τοῖς ἀποστόλοις 
ἐξελέξατο, 


i ὃ \ , e , aA 
ta σῖνευματος αγίον, ους 


xxi. 28, 31. 
Heb. viii. 7. 
ἔχ τ. ποὺ 
2 Kings 
XViii. 27. 

c = here 


K ἀνελήμφθη. 


only. 2 Mace. xv. 37. ὁ μὲν πρότ. λόγος ἦν ἡμῖν, ὦ Θεόδοτε, wept K.T.A. Philo. Q. om. prob. liber, 


81, vol. ii. p. 444. See 1 Chron, xxix. 29. 

γράμματα, Herodian vii. 6. 6. 

1.6. 1 John iii. 24. Gen.ii.3. Zeph. iii. 11. 

xiii. 25. see Gen. il. 3. g Lukei. 
i traject., see ch. xix. 4 al. ci— wv. tl, 


ἃ = here only. Xen. Cyr. i. 6.13. ἐποίησε δημόσια 


e attr., Matt. xviit. 19. ver. 22. ch. ii. 22. iii. 25. vii. 16. 2 Cor. 
Winer, $ 24. 1. 
20. xvii. 27. 

. Mark xvi.19. 4 Kingsii.9. (-λημψις, Luke ix. 51.) 


Mark i. 45. Luke 
John xiv. 31. 


f = Matt. iv. 17. 
h constr., ch. xiii. 47. 


TITLE: rec ins των αγιων bef αποστ., with a bd g hk 13 and the subscriptions of 
A?EGH ; των m p Orig Chr Synop: om B D(-é:s) : om ἀποστόλων also δὲ and the margins 
of B(Tischdf).—pref Aovea 0, λουκα evayyeAtoTtou Ὁ 13. 40, πραξαποστολος συν θὼ των 
ayiwy αποστολων" λουκα Tou ευαγγελιστον ἃ, αἱ g h.—apxn σὺν θεω πραξαποστολος f. 


Cuap. I. 1. rec ins o bef ino. (the ο of ἤρξατο was probably mistaken for the ar- 
ticle), with AEX p 13. 36 rel Constt [Orig, Did, Bas, Chr, Euthal, Antch,|: om BD. 


2. avednudén bef evretAauevos . . 


. ἐξελεξατο D [Syr syr-mg sah}. 


at end add και 


εκελευσε κηρυσσειν To εναγγελιον D syr-mg Augs, simly sah [ Vig, |. 


On the title. see Prolegomena. 1-- 9. 
INTRODUCTION. | 1. τὸν μὲν mp. A. | 
The latter member of this sentence, τανῦν 
dé€,...is wanting (see Winer, § 63, I. 2, 
e. y), and the author proceeds at once to 
his narration, binding this second history 
to the first by recapitulating and en- 
larging the account given in the conclu- 
sion of the Gospel. πάντων) What- 
ever latitude may be given to this word, it 
must at all events exclude the notion that 
Luke had at this time seen the Gospels of 
Matt. or Mark, inwhich many things which 


_ Jesus did and taught are contained, which 


he had noé related in his πρῶτος λύγυς. 
On Theophilus, see notes, Luke i. 3. 

ὧν ἤρξατο “Inc.| I cannot think ἤρξατο 
here to be merely pleonastic. Its posi- 
tion here shews that it is emphatic, and 
the parallel cases (see reff.) all point to a 
distinct and appropriate meaning for the 
word. That meaning here seeins to be, that 
the Gospel contained the ἀρχάς, the out- 
set, of all the doings and teachings of our 
Lord, as distinguished from this second 
treatise, which was to relate their sequel 
and results. Meyer understands it—zwhich 
Jesus first of all men did, &c. But this 


Vor. Il. 


introduces a meaning irrelevant to the 
context, besides not giving the emphasis to 
ἤρξατο, but to Ἰησοῦς. The position of 
emphasis given to the verb shews, that the 
beginning of the doing and teaching of 
Jesus must be contrasted with the con- 
tinuance of the same, now about to be 
related. 2. ἐντειλ. τ. ἀπ.) See Luke 
xxiv. 48 ff., and ver. 4 below. διὰ πν. 
ay. may be joined either with ἐντει- 
λάμενος (as in vulg copt Chr Thl) ; or with 
ἐξελέξατο (as in syrr eth Cyr Aug Vig). 
In the former case, our Lord is said to 
have given His commands to the Apostles 
through, or in the power of, the Holy 
Ghost. Similarly He is said, Heb. ix. 14, 
διὰ πνεύματος αἰωνίου ἑαυτὸν προσενέγ- 
και ἄμωμον τῷ θεῷ. In the latter, He is 
said to have chosen the Apostles by the 
power of the Holy Ghost. Similarly, in ch. 
xx. 28, Paul tells the Ephesian elders, that 
the Holy Ghost had made them overseers in 
the Church of God. The former construc- 
tion however appears much the best, as ex- 
pressing not, as might at first seem, a mere 
common-place, but the propriety of the 
fact,—that His last commands were given 
in the power of (see John xx. 22) the 
B 


2 TIPASELS ATOXTOAQON. ὁ μὲ 
: 3 ® | ΄ Ἶ e Ν un \ . ΤῊ ἂν ΜΕΝ" 
ι- ἐνεῖναι, ° οἷς Kal | παρέστησεν ἑαυτὸν ζῶντα μετὰ TO™ παθεῖν αὐτὸν 
Rom. vi. 13, ΒΑ. 3 Ξ = ; 
16,19. κἱϊ, ὦ. ἢ ἐν πολλοῖς ° τεκμηρίοις P δι ἡμερῶν τεσσεράκοντα 
Gen, χἰνῖϊ. 2. q > f > a \ Xx 4 \ \ a r ΄ 
(Ald.). OTTAVOMEVOS αὐτοῖς Kal λέγων τὰ περὶ τῆς * βασιλείας 


m abs., Luke a A 
xxii.15.(xxiv. τοῦ θεοῦ. 


\ ~ , A ’ 
+ καὶ " συναλιζόμενος αὐτοῖς παρήγγειλεν ἀπὸ 


46.) ch. iii. 18. 

Heb. ix. 26 al. © , \ / > \ ͵ ᾿ 
ΝΣ 7, LepocoAvpoy yy © χωρίζεσθαι, ἀλλὰ ὕπεριμενειν τὴν 
1 Cor. iv. 4. ἢ ͵ -“ ‘ A » 7 / ΄ “ies »“ ,’ , 
ohere only τ. “ επγζαγγελίαν τοῦ πατρος “ἣν ἠκούσατε * μου, ὃ OT - 
here only +. YY pos “ἣν ἢ € * μου, ὃ ὅτι wav 

xix. 13. 3 Macc. iii. 24. Xen. Μοπ,. i. 1. 2. = Heb. ii. 15. (ch. v. 19. xvi. 9. xvii. 10 ὃ) q here 
only. 3 Kings viii.8. Tobit xii. 19(& def.) only. r Luke ix. 11. ch. viii. 12. xix. 8, s here only +. (Ps. 
exl, 5 alius in Hexapl.) Herod. i. 62. Xen. Anab. vii. 3. 48. συναυλις., Prov. xxii. 24. = Luke 
viii. 56. ch. iv. 18. v. 28,40. 1 Kings xxiii. 8. u = ch. xviii. 1,2. 1 Chron. xii. & vy here 
only. Gen. xlix. 18. Wisd. viii. 12 only. w = Luke xxiv. 49. ch. is. 33, Gal. iii. 14,22. Eph. iii.6. Heb. 
iv. let passim. Amos ix. 6, x constr., Matt. vii. 24, 26. τάδε μου ἄκουσον, Lucian Dial. Deor. 
xx. 13. Winer, $ 30.7. ἃ. 

3. [for os, ors C.] τεσσ. bef nuep., omg δια, D(d&: is written over the line by 
D-corr'). οπτανομενοις D!. τας DI, 


4. συναλισκομενος D!: συναλισγομενος D8: συναυλιζόμενος b? ὁ d! e πὶ 36!. 40, the 
Greek fathers are confused between this reading and txt (see Tischdf): convescens vulg 
E-lat? [Syr coptt arm] Bede: convivens D-lat [salem sumens syr |. aft συναλ. ins 
μετ αὐτων D [ellis lux syrr coptt eth arm ]. rec wapnyy. bef avrois, with B D(see 
above) δὲ rel 36 vulg coptt [syrr arm Eus, Euthal, 1 (Ἐς Th] Aug: txt ACE Chr,.—7apny- 
γελλεν E-gr ἢ ἃ [ Eus, Euthal, }. nv nkovoate(so D3 [ἠκουσα D!}) φησιν δια του 
otouatos μου D vulg{ with lux } eth Hil Aug; am [fuld] D-lat om φησιν; and in D-gr 
φησιν δια Tov στοματος are marked for erasure by a Jater hand, 


Holy Ghost. To take διὰ mv. ay. with 
ἀνελήμφθη (see Olsh. i. 629) seems to me 
inadmissible; as also is Dr. Burton’s ren- 
dering, “having told His Apostles that 
His commands would be more fully made 
known to them by the Holy Ghost.” 

avednpd.| = ἀνεφέρετο eis τὸν 
οὐρ., Luke xxiv. 51. The use of the verb 
in this abbreviated form, without the eis 
τ. ovp., testifies to the familiarity of the 
apostolic church with the Ascension as a 
formal and recognized event in our Lord’s 
course. 3. ἐν mw. texp.| See Luke 
xxiv. 31, 39,43. The ἐν is in its significa- 
tion of investiture. in which it introduces 
the element or condition in which, and thus 
the means by which, an agent operates. 

ὀπτανόμενος) ov yap ὥςπερ mpd 
τῆς ἀναστάσεως ws Gel μετ᾽ αὐτῶν ἦν, 
οὕτω καὶ τότε" οὐ γὰρ εἶπε τεσσεράκοντα 
ἡμέρας, ἀλλὰ δι᾿ ἡμερῶν τεσσεράκοντα᾽ 
ἐφίστατο γὰρ καὶ ἀφίστατο πάλιν, Chry- 
sostom. ‘This is the only place where the 
interval between the Resurrection and the 
Ascension is specified. τὰ περ. τ. B. 
τ. θ.7 τά, in the widest sense; not ῥήματα 
merely :—the matters. The article has 
been taken to imply (and so in some of my 
earlier editions), that during this period 
they received from our Lord the whole 
substance of the doctrine of ‘the Kingdom 
of God.’ But this remark seems to lose its 
propriety owing to the present participle 
λέγων. Both the participles, orravduevos 
and λέγων, carry with them a ratiocinative 
force, in dependence on τεκμηρίοις : ‘proofs, 
consisting in this, that He” &e. And 
thus the art. τά gives the sentence the 


meaning, “and inasmuch as the things 
which he said were those pertaining to 
the Kingdom of God ;” thus serving only 
to define λεγόμενα. [| What things these 
were, we are not told. Certainly, not 
future events in their detail,—as the 
next portion of the narrative shews us. 
I should rather believe them to have 
concerned the future founding and govern- 
inent of the Church: though even here 
the greatest Apostles were apparently left 
to the unfolding of the teaching of the 
Holy Spirit as years went on. | 

4—14.] THE LAST DISCOURSES AND 
ASCENSION OF THE LORD. RETURN OF 
THE APOSTLES TO JERUSALEM; RECA- 
PITULATION OF THEIR NAMES. 4. 
συναλιΐζ.} not middle, ‘assembling them,’ 
as Calv. (congregans eos), Grot., Olsh., 
and others, which is without example; but 
passive, = συναλισθείς, Hesych., as Εἰ. V. 
Chrys., the Vulg., &e., interpret it ‘eating 
aad drinking ;’ so &. V. marg., Thl., e., 
&e., κοινωνῶν ἁλῶν, mistaking the ety- 
mology. ‘The conjecture of Hemsterhuis, - 
συναλιζομένοις (which however is found 
in Didymus), is quite unnecessary. 
ἀπὸ ‘lep. μὴ xwp.| See Luke xxiv. 49. 
‘Simul manere jussi sunt, quoniam uno 
omnes Spiritu donandi erant. Si fuis- 
sent dispersi, unitas minus cognita fuisset.’ 
Calvin. περιμ.} to await, i. 6. wait 
till the completion of: the περι implies 
this. The ancient idea mentioned by 
Wordsw. that our Lord commanded the 
Apostles to remain at Jerusalem for twelve 
years after the Ascension, is sufficiently 
refuted by His own words here, and by 


ABCD 
EN δὺς 
dfghk 
mopl3 


9.---. 





\ Ba “ὃ 
νης μεν εβαπτίισεν ὕδατι, 


τισθήσεσθε ἁγίῳ οὐ XY πολλὰς 5 ταύτας ἡμέ 

ἥσεσθε ayim οὐ μετὰ T ς ταῦτας ἡμέρᾶς. 
‘ 3 a θό b , , ’ ἣ ‘ Ἃ 

μὲν οὖν ἃ συνελθόντες ὃ ἠρώτων αὐτὸν λέγοντες Κύριε, 


ITPABEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 9 


ὑμεῖς δὲ " ἐν πνεύματι ¥ βαπ- y Matt. iin 


"ΜΚ... John 
1. 33. 

z constr., here 
only. see 
note, and 
Exod. ii. 23. 


6 of 


a / / ΄ Fr 
εἰ ἐν τῷ ypovm τούτῳ " ἀποκαθιστάνεις THY βασιλείαν " - ch ii-6. 


“΄ 3 gy 3 \ \ ᾽ \ Ε] ς A 
τῷ Ἴσραηλ; 7 εἶπεν δὲ πρὸς αὐτοὺς Οὐχ fipov ἐστιν ὃ 


xxxiii. 30. 
2. xxi. 37 al. 
xiii. 19 only. 


3 Kings i. 27. 
Ley. xiii. 16. pres., Matt. xi. 3. 


b Matt. xv. 23 al. fr. 
d = Matt. ii. 7 al. 


xvi. 13. xix. 
1 Cor. xu 
17 al. Ezek. 
ce = Matt. xii. 10. ch. vii. 1. xix. 
e Mark iii. 5 |. viii. 25. ix. 12." Mt. Heb. 
f gen., 2 Thess. iii, 2. see Matt. xx. 23. 


5. rec βαπτισθ. bef ev mvevu., with ACEN® 13. 36 rel [vss | Orig, [int, Did, Cyr-jer, 
Chr, Cyr-p, Euthal, |] dic Thl Ambr Rebapt, Gaud: av. ay. Barr. D Did, Hil, Victorin, 
-AUugtsepey: txt BR? p.—add kat o μελλετε AauBavew T)(and lat) tol Hil, Aug, [ Max- 


taur, |. 
6. for συνελθ., ελθοντες NX), 


aft nuepas add ews της πεντηκοστη5 D'(and lat) sah Augeatiga. 
rec emnpwrwy, with DE rel 36(Chr-txt Euthal,] Ec, 
-τουν C3, -rov ἃ 18 : txt ABC!X Chr-comm,. 


αποκαταστανει5 es THY B. του top. D: 


om εἰς D8(and Jat); for tov, tw D8(appy): Aug has sometimes representaberis ? et 
quando regnum Israel? sometimes presentabis regnum Israel. 
7. εἰπεν, omg δε, B! Syr sah [arm-zoh]: εἰπὲν ovy B-corr: ὁ δὲ εἰπεν ( [arm-mss 


Orig-int, |] Aug, : 
for mp. avtous, avtas EK vulg coptt. 


the subsequent history: ef. ch. vill. &e. 
That, in the main, they confined them- 
selves to cireuits in Palestine for some 
years, appears to be true ; but surely would 
not be in compliance with such a command. 
τ. ἐπαγγ. τ. πατρός] See note on 
Luke xxiv, 49, 5.| ‘The Lord cites 
these words from the mouth of John him- 
self, reff. Matt. ;—and thus announces to 
them that, as John’s mission was accom- 
plished in baptizing with water, so now 
the great end of His own mission, the 
Baptism with the Holy Ghost, was on 
the point of being accomplished. Calvin 
remarks, that He speaks of the Pentecostal 
effusion as being the Baptism with the 
Holy Ghost, because it was a great repre- 
sentation on the whole Church of the sub- 
sequent continued work of regeneration on 
individuals: ‘Quasi totius Ecclesiz com- 
munis baptismus.’ I may add, also be- 
cause it was the beginning of ἃ new period 
of spiritual influence, totally unlike any 
which had preceded. See-ch. ii. 17. 
ὕδατι and ἐν mv. ay. are slightly distin- 
guished. The insertion of the preposition 
bef. mv. ay. seems to give a dignity which 
the inere instrumental dative, ὕδατι, wants. 
ταύτας serves to bind on the οὐ 
πολλ. hu. to the day then current; as we 
siy, ‘one of these days.’ See Winer, 
§ 23. 5, who instances ‘ante hos quinque 
dies’ in Lat, and quotes mpd πολλῶν 
τῶνδε ἡμερῶν, from Heliod. ii. 22. 97. 
‘ Numerus dieruwn non definitus exercebat 
fidem discipulorum,’ Bengel. 6.1 This 
συνελθόντες does not belong to another 
assembling, different from the former ; 
but takes up again the συναλιζόμενος of 
ver. 4. Olsh. has mistaken the sense of 
the μὲν οὖν, which refers, not to another 


και εἰπεν D, ο δε αποκριθεις exw. Εἰ wth: txt AN rel vulg syrcopt Thl. 


zncident, but to other actors ; they, as dis- 
tinguished from Him who had been speak- 
ing. Κύριε, εἰ... | The stress of 
this question is in the words, prefixed for 
emphasis, ἐν τῷ χρόνῳ τούτῳ. That the 
Kingdom was, in some sense, and at some 
time, to be restored to Israel, was plain ; 
nor does the Lord deny this implication 
(see on ver. 8). Their fault was, a too 
curious enquiry on a point reserved among 
the arcana of God. Lightfoot’s idea, that 
the disciples wondered at the Kingdom 
heing abcut to be restored to the ungrate- 
ful Jews, at this time, now that they had 
crucified Him, &c., would make our Lord’s 
answer irreievant. See Micah iv. 8, 
LXX. Meyer would refer ἐν τῷ xp. 
τού. to the interval designated by οὐ μετὰ 
πολλ. ταύ. ἡμ., ‘during this time.’ But 
this does not seem natural: I should rather 
understand it, at this present period, — 
now. The pres. ἀποκαθιστάνεις, is that 
so often used in speaking with reference 
to matters of prophecy. importing fixed 
determination: as in 6 ἐρχόμενος (ref. 
Mt.) and the like. So that we must not 
render, “‘ Art thou restoring?” but “ ew7/é”’ 
or “dost thou restore?” As to the word 
itself, καθιστάνω (= στημι) is to establish 
or set up, and ἀπό gives the sense of com- 
pleteness, or the coznate one of entire 
restitution. See Wordsw.’s note. 

7.) This is a general reproof and asser- 
tion, spoken with reference to men, as for- 
bidden to search curiously into a point 
which Omniscience has reserved — the 
times and seasons of the future divine 
dealings. But it is remarkable that not 
θεός, but ὁ πατήρ, is here used ; and this 
cannot fail to remind us of that saying 
(Mark xiii. 32), wept δὲ τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης 


B2 


4 ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATIOZTOAON, 


gh 


ie 


A , xX \ ἃ e \ ae Π - 
giThes. πσγνῶναι ὃ χρόνους ἢ ὅδ᾽ καιροὺς ovs ὁ πατὴρ ἔθετο ‘ev τῇ ABCD 
Υ. 1. Dan. sar ; 5 : 8 , \ 7 k / 2 , “ EX abe 
ite, , ἰδίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ: 8 ἀλλὰ λήμψεσθε δύναμιν | ἐπελθόντος τοῦ Af ghk 
3. 2 Tim. iii. mopl3 


1. see ch. xiv. 
17 


e / / > je "3 “-“ \ ” θέ m / ” 
aylou TTVEULATOS ἐῷ υμας, Kab εσέεέσσε ase ite cen εν 


i= c h. v. 4. 

Peers, τε ἹἹερουσαλὴμ καὶ [ἐν] πάσῃ Ἰουδαιᾳ καὶ Σαμαρείᾳ καὶ 
peobuke ix. παι δίς πα ἐσχάτου σῆς το ψῆς.. «ὃ καὶ ταῦτα εἰπὼν βλεπόντων 
sh. v. 4. xix. 

21. i aha k = Luke iv. 36. ix. lal. Ps. Ixvii. 35. ] Luke i. 35. 1 Kings xi. 7. m = Luke 
xxiv. 48. ver. 22 and Acts passim. 1 Pet. v. 1. Isa. xiii. 10, n ch, xiil. 47 only, from Isa. xlix. 6. 
Ὁ constr., see Heb. 1.2. 1-Pet.i.20. Jude 18. 


8. rec μοι (corr to the common constr ἐσεσθε μοι), with E rel 36! vss (eth has both) | 


Orig,[int,] Epiph Chr, [Cyr,] Tht: txt A BCD Orig, [Cyr-p 
ins BC3EN rel 36 v ulg syrr [arm } Orig 

καυτα eLTovTos autou νεφελη ἘΣ AA αυτον και arnpen “αὶ (ins” 
των 1)3) οφθ. aut. D,simly sah Augaiq; e¢ cum hee D-lat. 


coptt Orig, Hil: 
i ddareenia XN! im. 


ἢ τῆς ὥρας οὐδεὶς οἶδεν, οὐδὲ ἄγγελος ἐν 
οὐρανῷ, οὐδὲ ὁ vids, εἰ μὴ ὃ πατήρ. It 
may be observed however, that the same 
assertion is not made here: only the times 
and seasons said to be in the power of the 
Almighty Father, Who ordereth all things 
κατὰ τὴν βουλὴν τοῦ θελήματος αὐτοῦ. 
The Knowledge of the Son is not here in 
question, only that of the disciples. It is 
an enquiry intimately connected with the 
interpretation of the two passages, but 
one beyond our power to resolve, how far, 
among the things not yet put under His 
feet, may be this very thing, the knowledge 
of that day and hour. Bengel attempts 
to evade the generality of the οὐχ ὑμῶν 
eotiv:—‘ que apostolorum nondum erat 
nosse, per Apocalypsin postea sunt signifi- 
cata.” But signitied fo whom? What in- 
dividual, or portion of the Church, has ever 
read plainly these χρόνους ἢ καιρούς in 
that mysterious book ? There is truth in 
Olsh.’s remark, that the Apostles were to be 
less prophets of the future, than witnesses 
of the past; but we must not so limit the 
ὑμῶν, nor forget that the γνῶναι χρόνους 
Ὦ καιρ. has very seldom been imparted by 
prophecy, which generally has formed a 
testimony to this very fact, that God has 
them in His foreknowledge, and, while He 
announces the events, conceals for the most 
part in obscurity the times. χρ. ἢ 
katp.| ποῦ Synonymous ; as Meyer ob- 
serves, Καιρός is always a definite limited 
space of time, aud involves the idea of 
transitoriness. See also Tittmann, N. “8; 
Synonymes, pp. 39—495. ἔθ. ἐν τῇ ἰδ. 
ἐξ. Some (De Wette, al.) render chath 
appointed 6y His own power;’ I should 
rather take ἐν éf.as in ch. v. 4, in His 
own power, and understand by ἔθετο kept, 
‘(hath) placed, as E. ἡ. But the aor. 

sense should be preserved: the period 
referred to being that of the arrangement 
of the divine counsels of Redemption. 

~ 8.7 *Quod optimum frenande cu- 
riositati remedium erat, Christus eos revo- 
cat tam ad Dei promissionem, quam ad 


p,]. om ev AC'Dah p40 
ι Chr, {Euthal,] Did-int, ‘Th. 


autwy bef βλεποντων B. 


mandatum.? Calvin. adhd, ‘ antithe- 
ton inter id quod discipulorum erat, vel 
non erat; tum inter id quod illo tempore 
futurum erat, et inter id quod in ulteriora 
reservatum erat.’ Bengel. δύναμιν, 
that power, especially, spoken of ch. iv. 33, 
connected with their office of witnessing to 
the resurrection; but also all other spiritual 
power. See Luke xxiv. 49. μου, not 
einphatic, as Wordsw. here and often else- 
where: see note on Matt. xvi. 18. The 
emphasis would be extremely out of place 
here: it was not their subordination to 
Him, but their office as witnesses, which 
was the contrast to their ambitious as- 
pirings. μάρτυρες) This was the 
peculiar work of the Apostles|: so they 
say of themselves, ch. v. 82, ἡμεῖς ἐσμὲν 
αὐτοῦ μάρτυρες τῶν ῥημάτων τούτων). See 
on vy. 21,22, and Prolegg. Vol. I. ch. i. § iii. 
ὅ. ἔν τε ‘Iep...... | By the exten- 
sion of their testimony, from Jerusalem to 
Samaria, and then indefinitely over tne 
world, He reproves, by implication, their 
carnal anticipation of the restoration of the 
Kingdom to Zsrael thus understood. The 
Kingdom was to be one founded on pap- 
τυρία, and therefore reigning in the con- 
victions of men’s hearts ; and not confined 
to Juda, but coextensive with the world. 


They understood this-command only > 


of Jews scattered through the world, see ch. 
xi. 19. De Wette observes, that these 
words contain the whole plan of the Acts: 
λήμψεσθε δύναμιν κιτ.λ., ch. 11. 1—end; 
ἐν Ἱερουσαλήμ, ch. iii. 1—vi. 7; then the 
martyrdom of Stephen dispersed them 
through Judea, vi. 8—viii. 3; they preach 
in Samaria, viii. 4—40; and, from that 
point, the conversion of the Apostle of the 
Gentiles, the vision of Peter, the preaching 
and journeys of Paul. In their former 
mission, Matt. x. 5, 6, they had been ex- 
pressly forbidden from preaching either to 
Samaritans or Gentiles. 9.1 This ap- 
pears (see Prolegg. Vol. I. ch. iv. ὃ iv. 2) to 
be an account of the Ascension given to 
Luke subsequently to the publication of hes 


] εμβλε- 
ποῦτες 
ABCD 
Exabe 
dtghk 
lmop 


8—12. 


WPASEIZ AMTOSTOAON. 5 


-" / \ e ‘ \ A 
αὐτῶν " ἐπήρθη, καὶ νεφέλη « ὑπέλαβεν αὐτὸν * ἀπὸ TOV p Luke xxiv. 


ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν. 


10 \ ΄ s ἢ / > ᾽ \ 
Kal ὡς SateviovTes ἦσαν εἰς TOV 
b] \ t , ’ D 1 \ ὃ \ ” ὃ δύ Vv 
οὐρανὸν ‘ πορευομένου αὐτοῦ, “Kal ἰδοὺ ἄνδρες δύο ἡ Tap- q 
εἰστήκεισαν αὐτοῖς ἐν ᾿ὶ ἐσθήσεσιν * λευκαῖς, |! of καὶ εἶπαν 
lal e / , 
"Avopes Τ᾽αλιλαῖοι, τί ἑστήκατε Y ἐμβλέποντες εἰς Tov" 


50. John xiii, 
18 al. met., 
2 Cor. x. d. 
Prov. iii. 5. 
= here ‘ch 
ii. 15 reff.) 
only. Ps. 
XXIXs Lv 

= Luke xxiv. 
3l. 


r ® ces κ᾿ ς > \ ILE a ets . εἰς, ch. 
οὐρανόν ; οὗτος ὁ ‘Incovs ὁ “ ἀναλημφθεὶς ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰς "τι 4 010. 


\ > δ. er ? , 
τὸν οὐρανὸν οὕτως ἐελεύσεταν 


9 al. fr. see esp. John xvi. 7. 
w here (Luke xxiv. 4 rec.) only. 

8. 2 Macc. xi. 8. 

xxiii. 97 11. ch. vil. 28. 


2 Tim. iii. 8 only. 
ο ch. vili. 25 reff. 


ἃ , , 

δὸν τρόπον ἐθεάσασθε 
3 \ : b , ’ Ν b » , 12 ΄ c ΄ s 

autor» πορευόμενον εἰς TOV» οὐρανόν. 13 τότε “ ὑπέστρεψαν 


Ὁ red., Luke ii. 21. vii. 12 (ch. x. 17]. 
2 Mace. iii. 33 only. 
y w. εἰς, Matt. vi. 26. Isa. li. 1, 2. 
Gen. xxvi. 29. see ch. xv. 1], 


t abs., Matt. ii. 

Ι v ver. 8 Χο, ch. xxvii. 23. 
x = Matt. xvil.2 |. John xx.12. Eccl. ix. 
z= ver, 2 reff. a Matt. 
b 1 Pet. iii. 22. 


10. τος εσθητι Aeven, with C3DE rel 36 syr [eth Euthal, 1 Chr, Cosm, Orig-int Aug, : 
txt ΑΒΟΙΝ p vulg Syr coptt arm (Hus,) [| Epiph, Promiss Bede, }. 


11. (ειπαν, so ABC! DN p. | 


βλεποντες B ΕΓ -οΥν] 8! dg ko p13 Eus, [Cyr-p,! 


Thart, Thl-sif': Chr-mss vary: txt ACDN* rel 36(sic) Thdrt, | Cyr, Cosm,] Thl-fin, 


aspicientes vulg K-lat Augaiiq. 


Gospel, more particular in detail than that 
found in it. He has not repeated here 
details found there; see Luke xxiv. 50—52. 
On the Ascension in general, see note on 
Juke, 1. 6. ἐπήρθη) “was taken 
up,—we may understand of the com- 
niencing ascent . .. ὑπέλαβεν by a pregn. 
constr. involves the idea of away as well as 
wp, and hence takes after it ἀπό. This 
verb describes the close of the scene, as 
far as it was visible to the spectators.” 
Hackett. νεφέλη] There was a 
manifest propriety in the last withdrawal 
of the Lord, while ascending, not consist- 
ing in a disappearance of His Body, as on 
former occasions since the Resurrection ; 
for thus might His abiding Humanity 
have been czx}led in question. As it was, 
He went up, past the visible boundary of 
Heaven, the cloud,—in human form, and 
so we think of and pray to Him. 

10. ἀτενίζ. ἦσαν | they were gazing, stood 
gazing. εἰς τ. ovp. belongs to ateviC., 
not to mopevou., see reff. πορευομένου, 
not πορευθέντος: implying that the 
cloud remained visible for some time. pro- 
bably ascending with Him. παρειστή- 
κεισαν, 7mperf. in sense, as the perf. is pre- 
sent : were standing by them. ἄνδρες] 
evidently angels. See Luke xxiv. 4; John 
xx, 12, 11. ot καὶ εἶπαν) who (not 
only appeared but) also said. There is a 
propriety in the address, ἄνδρ. Γαλιλαῖοι. 
It served to remind them of their origin, 
their call to be His disciples, and the duty 
of obedience to Him resting on them in 
consequence. ὃν τρόπον] in the same 
manner as;—to be taken in all cases 
literally, not as implying mere certainty : 
see reff. οὕτως, i.e. ἐν νεφέλῃ, Luke 
xxi. 27 [in the clouds of heaven: and in the 
same human form]. His corporeat identity 


om 2nd εἰς τὸν ovp. D 331-4. 105 tol Aug, Vig Avit. 


is implied in οὗτος 6 Ἰησοῦ. ἐλεύ- 
σεται] ‘Non ii, qui ascendentem viderunt, 
dicuntur venturum visuri. Inter ascen- 
sionem et inter adventum gloriosum nullus 
interponitur eventus eorum utrique par: 
ideo hi duo conjunguntur. Merito igitur 
Apostoli ante datam Apocalypsin diem 
Christi ut valde propinquum proposuerunt. 
Et congruit majestati Christi, ut toto inter 
ascensionem et inter adventum tempore 
sine intermissione expectetur.’ Bengel. 

12.] In so careful a writer (see Luke i. 3) 
there must be some reason why this minute 
specification of distance should be here in- 
serted, when no such appears in the Gospel. 
And I believe this will be found, by com- 
bining the hint dropped by Chrysostom,— 
δοκεῖ δέ μοι καὶ σαββάτῳ γεγονέναι ταῦτα" 
οὐ γὰρ ἂν οὕτω τὸ διάστημα ἐδήλωσεν 
. εἰ μὴ ὡρισμένον τι μῆκος ἐβάδιζον 
ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ caBBdarov,—with the 
declaration in the Gospel (xxiv. 50) that 
he led them out as far as to Bethany. 
This latter was (John xi. 18) fifteen 
stadia from Jerusalem, which is more than 
twice the Sabbath-day’s journey (2000 
cubits = about six furlongs). Now if the 
Ascension happened on the Sabbath, it is 
very possible that offence may have arisen 
at the statement in the Gospel: and that 
therefore the Evangelist gives here the 
more exact notice, that the spot, although 
forming part of the district of Bethany, 
was yet on that part of the Mount of 
Olives which fell within the limits of the 
Sabbath-day’s journey. This of course 
must be a mere conjecture ; but it will not 
be impugned by the fact of the Ascension 
being kept by the Church in after ages on 
a Thursday. This formed no hindrance to 
Chrysostom in making the above suppo- 
sitiou: although the festival was certainly 


eo a ὦ 


6 TIPAZEIS AIOXTOAON, 


Le 


. ey ΣῈ \ Ἂς ee a , a2 a 
d Luke xix.29. εἰς Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἀπὸ ὄρους τοῦ καλουμενου “ ἐλαιῶνος, O 


xxi 37 only. 


= ΘῈ \ c ΄ ‘ / « , 
Jos Antt. vi. ἐστιν ἐγγὺς “Ἱερουσαλήμ, σαββάτου " ἔχον ἴ ὁδόν. 18 καὶ 
“a τ σ 3. ψο , Ν ς “A ΟῚ , ΠῚ = 
ge τῶν ὅτε 8 εἰςῆλθον, εἰς TO" ὑπερῷον ἀνέβησαν οὗ ' ἦσαν ὃ KaTa- 
ἘΞ συ , , \ > / \ » , 
τὰκε χὶχ 57 μένοντες, ὅ τε Πέτρος καὶ ᾿Ιωαννης καὶ ᾿Ιάκωβος καὶ 
6 566 John viii. 94 , " \ rn A 
_oi.ix.21,2 ᾿Ανδρέας, Φίλιππος καὶ Θωμᾶς, Βαρθολομαῖος καὶ Μαθ- 
Saree rites κι ὅἷ7 " 5) ' \ , ε , 
sKingsxix. Matos, Ιάκωβος ᾿Αλφαίου καὶ Σίμων ὁ ζηλωτής, Kab 
g=ch.ix.6. 9 ΄, ? e , ee : 
Matt, wil. ὃ Ἰούδας ᾿Ιακώβου. | οὗτοι, πάντες ᾿ἦσαν | προςκαρτε- 
al. e 1PS-, es e A a A \ \ A 
,hereonly-. ροῦντες τὸ ὁμοθυμαδὸν τῇ " προςευχῇ σὺν γυναιξὶν καὶ 
χχ. 8 only. — / »“" \ an 3 “ Ν lal , “ > - 
2 Kings svi. Μαρίᾳ τῇ μητρὶ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ καὶ τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς αὐτοῦ. 
xli. re ; i constr., ch. ii. 5 reff. k here only. Num. xx. 1 al. 1] = ch. vi. 4 414. Rom. 
xii. 12. xiii. 6. Col iv. 2 (Mark iii. 9) only. Num. xiii. 31 only. Sus. 6 Theod. m ch. ii. 46 a8. Rom. 
xy. 6only. L.P. Num. xxiv. 24 al. n abs., Matt. xxi. 13 ||, from Isa. lvi. 7. Ps. iv. 2 al. 


13. e:snA@ev D-gr. 


eismA@. εἰς To υπ.), With DENS rel 36 tol syrr coptt [arm-zoh 
ABC! p vulg [eth arm-use] (Orig,) Chr, Thl-fin-comm, Bede-gr. 


rec aveBnoar bef εἰς τ. ὑπ. (corn to avoid the ambiguity of 


Aug, |: 


om aveB. δὲ! : txt 
rec transp iwav. 


and :ax., with (E) rel 36 syr [arm-zoh Chr, Thl]: txt ABCDN p vulg Syr [coptt xth 
arm-usc] Aug.—x«. avdp. bet «. wav. E Bede-gr: petr. et joh. et andr. et jac. Bede- 


lat. om 3rd και 1). 
(bef (Awrns) N?. 


ins o Tou bef αλφαιου D d. 


om 7th και D. om 0 


14. & has ομοθυμαδὸν both before and after mposapt., & disapproving the 2nd. 
rec (aft mposevxn) ins καὶ τη δεησει (Phil iv. 6), with C% rel 36 (Orig,) [Chr 1 ; καὶ 
denver, omg τη, m: om ABC!DER p ΗΙ vuig syrr coptt eth arm Chr, Thl-fin-comm 


Cypr, Aug Jer Bede. 


ins tats bef yur 1). 


uapiap. BE p 40 sah [eth]: txt ACD rel 36 [copt]. 


aft yuv. ins καὶ τεκνοις D. 
om τη D'(ins D2). om του B. 


rec ins σὺν bef τοις ad. aut. (corrn, to avoid connecting the brethren of our Lord 


with His mother), with BCSE rel syrr Chr, : 


observed in his time (see Bingham, Orig. 
Eecl. xx. 6.5. There is no inention of it 
in the Fathers of the first three centuries). 
Forty days from the Resurrection is an ex- 
pression which would suit as well the Satur- 
day of the seventh week as the Thursday. 

The distance of the Mount of Olives 
from Jerusalem is stated by Josephus at 
tive stadia, Antt. xx. 8. 6,—at six stadia, 
RB. J. v. 2.3; different points being taken 
as the limit. The present church of the 
Ascension rather exceeds the distance of six 
stadia from the city. The use of ἐλαιών, 
-@vos, here (and in reff.) by Luke only is 
remarkable, especially as the whole passage 
is so much in his own distinctive style as to 
preclude the idea of his having transferred 
a written document. ἔχον is not for 
ἀπέχον, but as in τριάκ. κ. OKT. ἔτη ἔχων, 
John v. 5, and in reff. ; the space or time 
mentioned being regarded as an attribute 
ot the subject. 13. εἰςὴλθ.} ‘into the 
city;’ see reff. τὸ ὑπερῷ. The idea 
that this was a chamber in the Temple has 
originated in low literal-harmonistic views, 
Luke having stated (Luke xxiv. 53) that 
they were διὰ παντὸς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ. As if such 
an expression could be literally understood, 
or taken to mean more than that they were 
there at all appointed times (see ch. iii. 1). 
It is in the highest degree improbable 
that the disciples would be found assem- 
bled in any public place at this time. 


om AC! DX vulg coptt eth arm Cypr, Augs. 


The upper chamber was perhaps that in 
which the last Supper had been taken ; 
probably that in which they had been since 
then assembled (John xx. 19, 26), but cer- 
tainly one ina private house. Lightf. shews 
that it was the practice of the Jews to 
retire into a large chamber under the flat 
roof for purposes of deliberation or prayer. 
See Neander, Pfl. u. Leit., p. 13, note. 
Epiphanius, de ponderibus, ¢. 14 (vol. iii. p. 
170), relates that when Hadrian came to 


ABCD 
ENabe 
dfghk 
lmop 
13 


Jerusalem, εὗρε τὴν πόλιν πᾶσαν ἠδαφισμέ- — 


νὴν καὶ τὸ ἱερὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καταπεπατημένων, 
παρεκτὸς ὀλίγων οἰκημάτων καὶ τῆς τοῦ 
θεοῦ ἐκκλησίας μικρᾶς οὔσης, ἔνθα ὑπο- 
στρέψαντες οἱ μαθηταί, ὅτε 6 σωτὴρ ἂν- 
ελήφθη ἀπὸ τοῦ ᾿Ελαιῶνος, ἀνέβησαν εἰς 
τὸ ὑπερῷον. ἐκεῖ γὰρ φκοδόμητο, τουτ- 
ἔστιν ἐν τῷ μέρει Σιών. ἥτις ἀπὸ τῆς 
ἐρημώσεως mepieAnpOn, .... ἕως χρόνου 
Μαξίμου τοῦ ἐπισκόπου καὶ Κωνσταντίνου 
τοῦ βασιλέως, ὡς σκηνὴ ἐν ἀμπελῶνι, 
κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον. And Nicephorus 
viii. 30 (see Wordsw.) says that the Em- 
press Helena enclosed in her larger church 
the chamber where took place 4 τοῦ 
ἁγίου πνεύματος Kabodus ἐν τῷ ὑπερῴῳ. 

οὗ ἦσαν kat.! not to be taken as 
in E. V. ‘where abode both Peter, &c.; 
which gives the idea that Peter, &c. were 
already in the chamber, and the rest joined 
them there :—but, on entering the city, 
they went up into the upper chamber, 


15--16. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ AMOSTOAON. 7 


15 \ oO 5 a c , ΄ ’ \ ’ Ε] Seeteth 
9 Kat ἐν ταῖς nuepats ταύταις P avaotas Iletpos ἐν om sid. 


vi. 12 al. 


f Lap ? la 3 oO 5) 5 | ΄ ’ \ 
μέσῳ Itav 4 ἀδελφῶν εἶπεν (ἣν TE * ὄχλος § ὀνομάτων * ἐπὶ p εν. xv. 7 

. > ec ς \ > eC) A ref. 
τὸ αὐτὸ * ὡς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσι) 15 ¥”"Avdpes ἀδελφοί, " ἔδει ἡ TAH- 4 = gh ix. 30 


67 Α x \ va A y a \ Ζ n 
ρωθῆναι τὴν * γραφὴν [tauvtnv| Hv προεῖπεν 10 ὅπνευμα §~ Rev iii. 4. 


xxvi 53. 

uch. vii. 2 al. fr. 
10. Luke iv. 21. 
Rom. ix. 29 al. 


v = ch. iv: 12 refi. 
John xix. 24. 


15. for καὶ ev, ev δε DE sah syr-mg Aug). 


2 ΤΊ χα. 111. 19. 
z Heb. iii 7. ix. 8. x. 15. see 2 Pet. 1. 21. 


rch. vi.7 reff. 


xi. 13. Num 


t ch. ii, 1, 44, 47 (iii, 1). iv. 26 (from Ps. 11. 8). 1 Cor. xi. 20. Ps. xxxvi. 38. 


w = ch. ini. 18 reff. x = Mark xii. 
y Gal. v.21. 1 Thess. iv. 6 only t+. ™poetp., 


ins o bef πετρ. D. epucow ACH. 


rec for αδελφων, μαθητων (corrn, to avoid the triple recurrence of αδελφ. in vv. 
14, 15,16. Meyer and De W. take a8. to have been a corrn to suit avip. ἀδελφοι in 
ver. 16, but the other is much more prob), with C3DK rel 386 syrr Chr Thl Cypr, Aug): 


txt ABCIX 13 vulg coptt eth arm Aug. 
copt Cypr, Aug,: yap preterea 1)} : 


Thl-fin : ws BDE rel [ Chr, }. 


om sah eth. 


ovouatwy, ανδρων E: hominum vulg(not fuld) Syr wth [Cypr-ms, }. 
rec εἰκόσιν, with rel: txt ABCEN f m p 13. 36: px’ D. 


for τε, δε CD? vulg D7-lat E-lat syrr 
ins o bef oxAos D. for 
*eset ACR 40 


16. dec D(txt D-com!) vulg feopt arm-ms] Iren-int,(principal-mss: given nomina- 


tim by Stieren) Aug, Vig, Gild. (Iren-int has oportebat apud Harvey.) 


where they (usually) sojourned (not 
‘dwelt? they did not all dwell in one 
house ; see John xix. 27, note), namely, 
Peter, &e. On the catalogue of thie 
Apostles, see Matt. x. 2, note. 14. | 
σὺν γυναιξίν has been rendered ‘ with their 
wives, to which sense Bp. Middleton in- 
clines, justifying it by σὺν γυναιξὶν καὶ 
τέκνοις, ch, xxi. 5. But the omission of 
the articles there may be accounted for on 
the same principle as in Matt. xix. 29, viz. 
that which Bp. M. ealls enumeration, ch. 
vi. $2. Here 1 think we must take σὺν yur. 
not as meaning ‘ wth women,’ as Hackett, 
but, the art. not being expressed after the 
preposition σύν, as = σὺν ταῖς yur. (see 
Middl. ch. vi. § 1), and interpret γυν., 
the women, viz. those spoken of by Luke 
himself, Luke viii. 2, 3,—where, besides 
those named, he mentions ἕτεραι πολλαί. 
Many of these were certainly not wives of 
the Apostles ; and that those women who 
were ‘last at the Cross and earliest at the 
tomb’ should not have been assembled 
with the company now, is very improbable. 
καὶ Μαρίᾳ] The καί gives eminence 
to ove among those previously mentioned, 
So τῶνδε εἵνεκα, καὶ γῆς ἱμέρῳ, Herod. i. 73. 
See Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 145. 
This is the last mention of her in the 
N. T. The traditions, which describe her 
as (1) dying at the age of fifty-nine, in the 
fifth year of Claudius (Niceph. H. E. ii. 21), 
or (2) accompanying John to Ephesus, and 
being buried there (sée Winer, Real- 
worterb. art. Maria), are untrustworthy. 
Other accounts, with the authorities, may 
be seen in Butler’s Lives of the Saints, 
Aug. 15. The fable of the Assumption 
‘has no foundation even in tradition. 
‘ois ἀδελφῷ. αὐτ.Ἴ This clearly shews, as 
does Jobn vii. 5 compared with vi. 69. 70, 


‘that none of the brethren of our Lord 


om ταυτὴν 


were of the number of the Twelve. When 
they were converted, is quite uncertain. 
See the whole subject discussed in note on 
Matt. xili. 55, and in the Prolegomena to 
the Epistle of James. In both cases of one 
being distinguished from a number, cited 
here by Wordsw. to shew that James the 
Less may have been one of these brethren, 
viz. that of Mapia, as distinguished among 
the women here, and that of Joseph, 
ch. vii. 9, he does not observe that the 
general statement precedes the individual 
distinction, as indeed it naturally must. 
15—26.] ExecTrion oF A TWELFTH 
APOSTLE TO FILL THE ROOM OF JUDAS 
IscarIorT. 15. ἐν τ. mp. τ. In the 
days between the Ascension and Pente- 
cost; during which it appears that the 
number of the assembly had increased, not 
probably by fresh conversions, but by the 
gathering round the Apostles of those who 
had previously been disciples. ἦν τε] 
The very freqnent use of τε is ἃ pecu- 
liarity of the Acts, and should have its 
weight in determining the reading, even 
where, as here, δέ seems more appropriate. 
It occurs in the Gospel 5 times: in the 
Acts, 121. ὀνομάτων] [that is, of 
persons: but the term would hardly be 
used except where the number is small. ] 
See note on Rev. ili. 4. ἑκατὸν 
εἴκοσι De Wette asks, ‘ where were the 
500 brethren of 1 Cor. xv. 6?’ We 
surely may answer, ‘not in Jerusalem,’ 
See Neander, Pfl. u. Leit., p. 72, note. 
16.] We imay enquire, by what change in 
mind and power Peter was able, before 
the descent of the Spirit, thus authorita- 


‘tively to speak of Scripture and the di- 


vine purposes? The answer will be found 
in the peculiar. gift of the Spirit to the 
Apostles, John xx. 21, 23; where see note. 

The pre-eminency of Peter here is the 


8 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ: 1g 


Ἂ ΄ κ , \ , , a 
τὸ *ayiov διὰ * στόματος Δαυεὶδ περὶ ᾿Ιούδα τοῦ γενομένου 


a = Lukei.70. 


ch. iii. 19,21. | ¢ $ . ie ᾿ δ 
iv.25. xv.7. Ὁ ὁδηγοῦ τοῖς “ συλλαβοῦσιν ᾿Ιησοῦν, 1ἴ ὅτι 4 κατηριθμη- 
yi. 21, 22. 7 Ὁ 3 CA \ » \ a a 
ὁ Matt. wy Id. μένος “ἦν ἐν ἡμῖν καὶ ᾿ἔλαχεν Tov ὃ κλῆρον τῆς ™ δια- 
Rom. iis’ κονίας ταύτης. 18 οὗτος μὲν οὖν 'éxtnaato * χωρίον * ἐκ 
τὴν is ms σι > / A ‘ ’ Ψ 
vi Los, ™ μισθοῦ τῆς τ᾿ ἀδικίας, καὶ Ῥ πρηνὴς 4 γενόμενος ' ἐλάκησεν 


2 Chron. xxxi. 19. 
(1 Kings xiv. 47. Wisd. 
ich. xxii. 28 reff. 


al. 

c = Matt. xxvi. 55 ||. ch. xii. 8.41, Judg. vii. 25. 
e w. perf. part., ch. xxii. 29 reff. f = 2 Pet. i. 1 (Lukei. 9. John xix. 24) only. 
viii. 19 only.) 3 Mace. vi. 1. g ch. viii. 21 reff. h = ch. xx. 14 reff. 

k = John iv. 5. ch. iv. 34. v. 3,8. xxviii. 7. 1 Chron. xxvii. 27. = Matt. xx. 2. xxvii. 7. 

iv. 4 reff, n 2 Pet. ii. 18, 15. see 2 Macc. vill. 33. o = Luke xiii. 27. 
p here only +. Wisd. iv. 19 only. q = ch. xvi. 27 al. r here only t+. 


ABC!X p Hr vulg coptt zth arm Orig, Eus, Ath, Did,[int,] Vig, Gild (omitted by 

homeotel: or erased as unnecessary with nv, and perhaps, as Mey. and De W., be- 

cause no citation immediately follows): ins C3DE rel 36 syrr Chr, Iren-int, Aug,. 
rec ins τὸν bef ισουν, with C*DE rel 36 Chr Thl: om ABC'R Eus, Did). 

17. om ny X?. rec for ev, συν (corrn to better Greek; see ref 2 Chron), with rel 


ἃ here only. Gen. 1. 3. 


m = Kom. 
1 Kings iii. 13, 14. 


syrr [eth arm] Chr: txt ABCDEN p 13 Hr vulg coptt Kus, Iren-int, Aug,.. 
ins ὑπερβα (but in reference to ecel lection: see Tischdf 


kat, os D)-or(txt D4). 


for 


ΓΝ. Τ. Vat. proleg. p. xxxii]) bef τ. διακ. Bt-marg. 
18. rec ins του bef μισθ. (corrn in ignorance of the usage which omits the art afta 
preposition ; see Middleton, ch. vi. 1), with o [18(6 sil, Treg) } Thl-fin: om ABCDEX 


rel HT Eus, Chry. 


commencement of the fulfilment of Matt. 
xvi. 18, 19 (see note there). 17.] 
ὅτι, not ‘although’ (Kuinoel), but be- 
cause: it gives the reason of the previous 
assertion, viz. that Judas held, and had 
betrayed, that place of high trust of which 
the prophecy spoke. Thus the ὅτι has re- 
ference to the substance of the prophecy, 
already in Peter’s mind, and serves to ex- 
plain ἡ ἔπαυλις αὐτοῦ and ἡ ἐπισκοπὴ αὐτοῦ. 

ἔλαχεν τὸν κλῆρον) not literally, 
but inasmuch as the Jot of every man is 
regarded as being cast and appointed by 
God. κλῆρος, tirst, the ἰοέ itself; then, 
that apportioned by lot; then, any species 
of apportionment, whether possession, or 
office, as here. 18.} This verse can- 
not be regarded as inserted by Luke ; for, 
1. the place of its insertion would be most 
unnatural for an historical notice : 2. the 
μὲν οὖν forbids the supposition: 3. the 
whole style of the verse is rhetorical, and 
not nartative, e.g. οὗτος, μισθοῦ τῆς ἀδικίας. 

The ἐκτήσατο χωρίον does not 
appear to agree with the account in Matt. 
xxvii. 6—8; nor, consistently with com- 
mon honesty, can they be reconciled, unless 
we knew more of the facts than we do. If 
we compare the two, that of Matthew is 
the more particular, and more likely to 
give rise to this one, as a general inference 
from the buying of the field, than vice 
versa. Whether Judas, as Bengel sup- 
poses, ‘initio emtionis facto, occasionem 
dederat ut Sacerdotes eam consummarent,’ 
we cannot say : such a thing is of course 
possible[, but is certainly not contemplated 
by St. Matthew’s account, where the 
priests settle to buy the field, on delibe- 
ration, what they should do with the 


aft adic. ins αὐτου D [syr-w-ast sah eth Eus, Aug, ]. 


money]. At all events we hence clearly 
see that Luke could not have been ac- 
quainted with the Gospel of Matthew at 
this time, or surely (not, he would have 
repeated St. Matt.’s account, as Wordsw. 
unfairly represents me to say, but) this 
apparent discrepancy would not have been 
found. The various attempts to reconcile 
the two narratives, which may be seen in 
most of our English commentaries, are 
among the saddest examples of the shifts 
to which otherwise high-minded men are 
driven by an unworthy system. See as a 
notable example, Wordsw.’s note, written 
since the above. I need hardly say to 
any intelligent and ingenuous reader, 
that his way of harmonizing,—viz. that 
as the Jews are said to have crucified 
our Lord when they were only the occa- 
sion of his being crucified, so Judas may be 
said to have bought the field when he only 
gave occasion to its being bought by the 
Chief Priests,—is entirely precluded here 
by the words ἐκ μισθοῦ τῆς ἀδικία, ‘out 
of the wages of his iniquity,’ which plainly 
bind on the purchase to Judas as his per- 
sonal act. καὶ mp. γεν. The con- 
nexion of this with the former clause 
would seem to point to the death of Judas 
having taken place ix the field which he 
bought. See also ver. 19. πρηνὴς 
γενόμενος will hardly bear the meaning 
assigned to it by those who wish to har- 
monize thetwo accounts,—viz. that, having 
hanged himself, he fell by the breaking of 
the rope. πρηνήξ᾽ ἐπὶ mpdswrov πεπτω- 
κώς, Hesych. ὅλον μὲν τὸ σῶμα κεῖσθαι 
πρηνὲς λέγομεν, ὅταν ἣ μὲν γαστὴρ 
κάτωθεν, ἄνωθεν δὲ ἢ τὸ νῶτον, Galen, 
cited by Wetstein. πρηνή5, εἰς τοὔμ- 


ABCD 
EXabec 
dfghk 
lmop 
13 


17—20. TIPASEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 9 


‘péoos Kal " ἐξεχύθη πάντα τὰ " σπλάγχνα αὐτοῦ, 19 καὶ sconstr., Luke 
; xxiii. 45. 


ν Ἶ ΞΕ a δὴν “ ᾿ Ξ Gen. xv. 10. 
γνωστὸν ἐγένετο πᾶσιν τοῖς " κατοικοῦσιν “Ἱερουσαλήμ, “νι 
Matt. ix. 17.) 
ee Xx. 
Υ αὐτῶν ᾿Ακελδαμάχ, * τουτέστιν * χωρίον αἵματος. 50 γέ- ulitehere only. 


2 Cor. vi. 12 


ὥςτε κληθῆναι τὸ * χωρίον ἐκεῖνο τῇ [Ὁ ἰδίᾳ) 5 διαλέκτῳ 


reff.) 2 Macc. ix. 5 (6?) only. v = John xviii. 15, 16. ch. ix. 42. xv. 18. xix.17. Ps. Ixxv. 1. 

w constr., ch. 11.9.11 al5. Matt. xxiii. 21. Luke xiii. 4. Rev. (xii. 12, v. r.) xvii. 2only. Hos. x.5. 1 Macc. 
iii. 34. x ver, 18. y so John x. 12, 2 Pet. iii. 16. z ch, ii. 6,8 al3. Acts 
only. Esth. ix. 26. ach. xix. 4 reff. 


om παντὰ A Thi-sif, Gaud,. 

19. ins o bef και D-gr X(but erased) 18 Aug,: καὶ τουτο sah. om ιδια B!DN arm: 
ins AB°CE rel [Eus, Chr]. avtwy bef διαλ. E 163 Aug). rec ἀκελδαμα, with C 
13 rel vulg syrr copt{-wilk arm] Chr: eth-mss are appy divided: txt(-ax) ABD E(-ak) 
& p 40 am demid fuld tol lux sah Eus, Aug, Bede.—ayedd. AN p 40, haceldamach tol, 


acheldamac am fuld lux Bede, akyldamach sah{-ed], -demach xth-pl.—akeAdaipax Ὁ. 


προσθεν, ἐπὶ στόματος, Etymol. Nor 
again is it at all probable that the Apostle 
would recount what was a mere accident 
accompanying his death, when that death 
itself was the accursed one of hanging. 
What then are we to decide respecting the 
two accounts? That there should have 
been a double account actually current of 
the death of Judas at this early period is 
in the highest degree improbable, and 
will only be assumed by those (De Wette, 
ἄς.) who take a very low view of the accu- 
racy of the Evangelists. Dismissing then 
this solution, let us compare the accounts 
themselves. In this case, that in watt. 
XXVil. is general,—ours particular. That 
depends entirely on the exact sense to be 
assigned to ἀπήγξατο (p20), Kal ἀπήγξατο, 
2 Sam. xvii. 23): whereas this distinctly 
assigns the manner of his death, without 
stating any cause for the falling on his 
face. It is obvious that, while the gene- 
ral term used by Matthew points mainly 
αὖ self-murder, the account given here 
does not preclude the catastrophe related 
having happened, in some way, as a divine 
judgment, during the suicidal attempt. 
Further than this, with our present know- 
ledge, we cannot go. dn accurate ac- 
quaintance with the actual circumstances 
would account for the discrepancy, but 
nothing else. Another kind of death 
is assigned to Judas by Gicumenius, quot- 
ing from Papias: ἱστορεῖ Παπίας 6 τοῦ 
᾿Ιωάννου Tod ἄποστ. μαθητὴς λέγων" μέγα 
τῆς ἀσεβείας ὑπόδειγμα ἐν τούτῳ τῷ κόσμῳ 
περιεπάτησεν ᾿Ιούδας" πρησθεὶς γὰρ ἐπὶ τὴν 
σάρκα, ὥςτε μὴ δύνασθαι διελθεῖν, ἁμάξης 
ῥᾳδίως διερχομένης, ὑπὸ τῆς ἁμάξης ἐπιέσθη, 
ὥςτε τὰ ἔγκατα αὐτοῦ ἐκκενωθῆναι. Theo- 
phylact quotes the same on Matt. xxvii., 
but without the last words, ὑπὸ τῆς au. 
k.T.A., Which De Wette supposes to have 
been inserted from (cumenius having 
misunderstood Papias. If so, the tradi- 
tion is in accordance with, and has arisen 
from an exaggerated amplification of, our 
text. See the whole passage from Theo- 


phylact cited, and a discussion whether it 
is rightly ascribed to Papias, in Routh, 
Reliquize Sacre, vol. i. p. 9, and notes. 

éX\akyoev | cracked asunder: it im- 
plies bursting with a noise. It is quite 
possible that this catastrophe happening 
in the field, as our narrative implies, may 
have suggested its employment as a burial- 
place for strangers, as being defiled. So 
Stier, Reden der Apostel, i. 10. 19.] 
It is principally from this verse that it has 
been inferred that the two vv. 18, 19 are 
inserted by Luke. But it is impossible to 
separate it from ver. 18; and I am dis- 
posed to regard both as belonging to 
Peter’s speech, but freely Grecized by 
Luke, inserting into the speech itself the 
explanations τῇ 1 ἰδίᾳ] διαλ. αὐτ., and τουτ- 
έστιν x. αἵμ., as if the speech had been 
spoken in Greek originally. This is much 
more natural, than to parenthesize these 
clauses; it is, in fact, what must be more 
or less done by all who report in a lan- 
guage different from that actually used by 
the speaker. The words and idioms of 
another tongue contain allusions and na- 
tional peculiarities which never could have 
been in the mind of one speaking in a dif- 
ferent language; but the ear tolerates 
these, or easily separates them, if critically 
exercised. γνωστὸν ...} See Luke 
xxiv. 18. ὥςτε) in Matt. xxvii. 8, the 
name ‘the field of blood’ is referred to 
the fact of its having been bought with the 
price of blood: here, to the fact of Judas 
having there met with a signal and bloody 
death. On the whole, I believe the result 
to which I have above inclined will be found 
the best to suit the phenomena of the two 
passages,—viz. that, with regard to the 
purchase of the field, the more circum- 
stantial account in Matthew is to be 
adopted; with regard to the death of 
Judas, the more circumstantial account of 
Luke. The clue which joins these has 
been lost to us: and in this, only those 
will find any stumbling-block, whose faith 
in the veracity of the Evangelists is very 


10 


b Luke xx. 42. 

c here only. 
Psa, lxviil. 
20, 


iv. 3 al. 
e == 1 Tim. iii. f 


(Mark xiv. 
53.) 

ξ Eurip. Phen. 
534,5. see 


k attr., ver. 1 reff. 
Phil. iii. 10. 


iv. 17. 
ὁ = ch. ii. 31. iv. 33. Rom. vi. 5. 


TPASEI> ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΟΥ 


ol οἷ Ἂς e ~ > A 

αὐτοῦ ἔρημος, καὶ μὴ ἔστω 40 κατοικῶν ἐν αὐτῆ. 
\ \ al , ld 

Τὴν “ἐπισκοπὴν αὐτοῦ λαβέτω ἕτερος. 


» la \ ς “-“ / “ ΄ 
αὐτου σὺυν MLV γενέσθαι EVA τοῦυτων. 
h = Luke ii. 8. xii. 14. Heb. ας. Ὁ, 


1 Pet. i. 3. iii. 21 ἢ. 


if 


γραπται yap ἐν » βίθλῳ "ἡ ψαλμῶν Γενηθήτω ἡ ° ἔπαυλις 


Ἂς 


καὶ 
51 δεῖ οὖν τῶν 


, id “-“ ᾽ “ » \ , e 7 A 
συνελθόντων ἡμῖν ἀνδρῶν ἐν παντὶ χρόνῳ ᾧ & eishrOev 
καὶ ὃ ἐξῆλθεν ὃ ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς ὁ κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς, 2? i ἀρξάμενος 
ἀπὸ τοῦ βαπτίσματος “Iwavvov ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας * ἧς 
Ι ἀνελή θ me eke ae n ee - eo 7 f 

ἀνελημφθη "ad ἡμῶν, "μάρτυρα τῆς ° ἀναστάσεως 


59. καὶ Ῥ ἔστησαν 


iw. ἀπό, Matt. xx. 8. ch. viii, 35. x. 37. 1 Pet. 
1 = ver. % reff. m = ver. 9. n ver. 8 reff, 
p ch. vi. 6. xvii. 31. 


20. for 150 avrov, avtwy in! o p vulg(not am demid &c) D}-lat eth-rom arm [Chr, ]. 


for ἐστω, ἡ D!(txt D3). 
21. ins tw bef χρονω D. 


syr eth Aug). 
22. for ews, αχρι AN p. 


28. aft καὶ ins τουτων λεχθεντων EK. 


weak indeed. *AxeABapay | NDT PT. 
The field originally belonged to a potter, 
and was probably a piece of land which 
had been exhausted. of its clay fit for his 
purposes, and so was useless. Jerome re- 
lates that it was still shewn on the S. side 
of Mount Sion (ἐν βορείοις τοῦ Σιὼν ὄρους, 
but by mistake, Eusebius), in which neigh- 
bourhood there is even now a bed of white 
clay (see Winer, Realw., art. ‘ Blutacker’). 
20. | yap, the connexion being, “ all 
this happened and became known,’ c., ‘in 
accordance with the prophecy, &e. Ps. 
]xix. is eminently a Messianie psalin,— 
spoken in the first place of David and his 
kingdom and its enemies, and so, accord- 
ing to the universal canon of O. ἽΝ. inter- 
pretation, of Him in whom that kingdom 
found its true fultilment, and of His ene- 
mies. And Judas being the first and most 
notable of these, the Apostle applies emi- 
nently to him the words which in the 
Psalin are spoken in the plural of all such 
enemies. The same is true of Ps. cix., and 
there one adversary is even more pointedly 
marked out. See also Ps. lv. ἐπι- 
σκοπήν = ΤΕ, office, or charge. The 
citations are freely from the LXX. 
21.] οὖν, since all this has happened to 
Judas, and since it is the divine will that 
another should take the charge which was 
his. ἐν παντὶ χρόνῳ] This definition 
of the necessary qualification of an apostle 
exactly agrees with our Lord’s saying in 
John xv. 27: καὶ ὑμεῖς δὲ μαρτυρεῖτε, ὅτι 
ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἐστε. See Prolegg. 
Vol. 1. ch. i. § iii. 5? εἰςῆλθ. x. ἐξῆλθ. 
ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς) An abridged construction for 
εἰσῆλθ. ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς K. ἐξῆλθ. ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν. 


rec for λαβετω, λαβοι (corrn to suit LXX), with K 
rel [Eus, ]: txt ABCD p [arm] Eus, Chr. 

rec ins ev bef w, with C3(and appy C?) EX? rel Chr: . 
om ABC! D-corr δ᾽ p vulg Aug,.—os D! ; 


quoniam D'-lat. at end add χριστος 1) 


rec γενεσθαι bef συν nu., with Εἰ 13 rel [syrr eth} Thl,: 
txt ABCDN k m p 40 vulg arm Chr, Aug). 
eotnoev D}(and lat: txt D-corr!) eth-rom 


22. βαπτ. Ἰωάν.} Not ‘ His being baptized 
by John’ (as Wolf, Kuin., &e.); but the 
baptism of John, as a well-known date, 
including of course the opening event of 
our Lord’s ministry, His own baptism. 
That John continued to baptize for some 
time after that, can be no possible objec- 
tion to the assignment of ‘John’s baptism’ 
generally, as the date of the commence- 
nent of the apostolic testimony (against De 
Wette). We may notice, that from this 
point the testimony of the Evangelists 
themselves in their Gospels properly be- 
gins, Matt. iii. 1, Mark i. 1, Luke iii. 1, 
John i. 6. μάρτ. τῆς avacr. | This 
one event was the passage-point between 
the Lord’s life of humiliation and His life 
of glory,—the completion of His work 
below and beginning of His work above. 
And to ‘give witness with power’ of the 
Resurrection (ch. iv. 33), would be to 
discourse of it as being all this; in order 
to which, the whole ministry of Jesus 
must be within the cycle of the Apostle’s 
experience. It is remarkable that 
Peter here lays down experience of mat- 
ters of fact, not eminence in any sub- 
jective grace or quality, as the condi- 
tion of Apostleship. Still, the testimony 
was not to be mere ordinary allegation of 
matters of fact: any who had seen the 
Lord since His resurrection were equal to 
this;—but belonged to @ distinct office 
(see John xiv. 26: also ch. v. 31, note), ve- 
quiring the especial selection and grace of 
God. 23.] ἔστησαν, viz. the whole 
company, to whom the words had been 
spoken; not the eleven Apostles. 

‘lwonp .... 7 The names Ἰωσήφ. and 


ABCD 
EXabe 
dfghk 

Imop 

13 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 11 


δύο, Ἰωσὴφ τὸν καλούμενον Βαρσαββᾶν, ὃς “ἐπεκλήθη 4 = ch. iv. 86. 


Ἰοῦστος, καὶ Μαθθίαν. 


κύριε " καρδιογνῶστα πάντων, 


tA a ‘4 , Or rn 
τούτων τῶν δύο ἕνα 38 λαβεῖν τὸν τόπον τῆς * διακονίας 
, \ » a - 
ταύτης καὶ " ἀποστολῆς, ἀφ᾽ ἧς 


ili, 2. = 2 Macc. ix. 23. see Luke i. . 80. 
8 only. Deut, xxii. 7. 


Aug). 
vulg syrr Eus[-edd, Bas,] Chr: 
D tol wth. (13 def.) 

24. [εἰπαν, so ABCDX® p.] 


ex τ. τ. δ. Syr arm. 
25. τοπον bef τον D. 


Aug). 


"Iwo7s, different forms of the same, are 
confused in the Mss., both here and in ch. 
iv. 36. But Barsabbas (or Barsabas) and 
Barnabas are not to be confounded: they 
are different names (Barsabbas = son of 
Sabba or Saba: on Barnabas, see ch. iv. 
36, note) ; and Barnabas is evidently intro- 
duced in iv. 36 as a person who had not 
been mentioned before. Of Barsahas, 
nothing further is known. Euseb., iii. 39, 
states, on the authority of Papias, that he 
drank a cup of poison without being hurt. 
[There is a Judas Barsabbas mentioned in 
ch. xv. 22, whom some take to be his 
brother. | In all probability both the 
selected persons (see Kus. i. 12) belonged 
to the number of the Seventy, as it would 
be natural that the candidates for apostle- 
ship should be chosen from among those 
who had been already distinguished by 
Christ Himself among the brethren. 
Justus is a Roman cognomen, assumed ac- 
cording to ἃ custom then prevalent. The 
name Justus seems to have been common : 
Schéttgen, Hor. Hebr., on this place, gives 
two instances of Jews bearing it. 
Ma0@iav | Nothing historical is known of 
him. ‘Traditionally, according to Nice- 
phorus (H. E. ii. 40, Winer), he suffered 
martyrdom in Adtliiopia; according to 
others, in Colchis (Menolog. Gree. iii. 198, 
Winer): another account (Perionii Vite 
Apost. p. 178 sqq., Winer) makes him 
preach in Judea and be stoned by the 
Jews. Clem. Alex., Strom. ii. 9 [45], p 
452 P., vii. 13 [82], p. 882 P., mentions the 
παραδόσεις of Matthias, which perhaps 
were the same as an apocryphal gospel 
once current under his name, mentioned 
by Eus., H. E. iii. 25. See Winer, Realw. 
24.) It is a question, to Whom this 
prayer was directed. I think all proba- 
bility is in favour of the Apostle (for Peter 
certainly was the spokesman) having ad- 


v = here (Matt. xv. 2, 3. 


for wand, wwonv B(Ble) 5 lect-1 syr sah. 


om ov J) o. 
txt ABCDER® rel [vulg] syr copt Eus Bas, Chr, Dion-areop ΤᾺ] Procop : 
for eva, ava, aking αναλαβειν, D}(txt D4). 

rec (for τοπον) κληρον, with C3EN rel syrr [arm Eus,(appy) 
Bus, Chr,]: om eth (τὴν διακονιαν tavtTns T. ἀποστ.) : 


rec (for ap’) εξ, with E rel Chr; de vulg K-lat: txt ABCDR p copt Bas,, @ 


5al. Dan. 


24 καὶ προςευξάμενοι εἶπαν GW x ab. <0. 


only +. 


* ἀνάδειξον ὃν ἐξελέξω Ex Herm: Past. 


4.3 (see 
Wan Test. 
Sinait., fol. 

, ΟῚ ΄, 1485). 
ἡ παρέβη ᾿Ιούδας πο- s Luke x.1 
only. Hab. 
1 Cor. ix. 2. Gal. it, 
Exod. xxxii. 8. (Sir. xxiii. 18 ) 


u Rom. i. 5. 
2 John 9) only. 


t ver. 17. 


rec βαρσαβαν, with C rel 


txt ABEN b fg p am fuld coptt Eus-mss,.—BapvaBay 


rec ex τ. τ. δυο eva bef ov εξελ. : 
eva ov εξελ. 


txt ABC!D vulg coptt Procop, 


dressed his glorified Lord. And with this 
the language of the prayer agrees. No 
stress can, it is true, be laid on κύριε : see 
ch. iv. 29, where unquestionably: tie Father 
is so addressed: but the ἐξελέξω, compared 
with οὐκ ἐγὼ ὑμᾶς τοὺς δώδεκα ἐξελεξά- 
μὴν, John vi. 70, seems to me almost deci- 
sive. See also ver. 2; Luke vi. 13; John 

xiii. 18, xv. 16, 19. ‘The instance cited 
on the other side by Meyer, ἐξελέξατο 
ὃ θεὸς διὰ τοῦ στόματός μου ἀκοῦσαι τὰ 
ἔθνη κιτ.λ., is not to the point, as ποῦ 
relating to the matter here in hand; 
nor are the passages cited by De Wette, 
2 Cor. i. 1; Eph. i. 1; 2 Tim. i. 1, where 
Paul refers his apostleship to God, since 
obviously all such appointment must be 
referred ultimately to God:—but the 
question for us is,—In these words, did 
the disciples pray as they would have 
prayed before the Ascension, or had they 
Christ in their view ὁ The expression kap- 
διογνῶστα (used by Peter himself of God, 
ch. xv. 8) forms no objection: see John 
xxi. 17, also in the mouth of Peter himself. 
We are sure, from the mposkuyjoaytes 
αὐτόν of Luke xxiv. 52, that even at this 
time, before the descent of the Spirit, the 
highest kind of worship was paid to the 
ascended Redeemer. Still, I do not re- 
gard it as by any means certain that they 
addressed Christ, nor can the passage be 
alleged as convincing in controversy with 
the Socinian. ἀνάδειξ. x.7.A.] Not, 
as in K. V., ‘shew whether of these two 
Thou hast chosen, but appoint (see reff.) 
one of these two (him) whom Thou hast 
chosen. The difference is of some im- 
port: they did not pray for a sign merely, 
to shew whether of the two was chosen, 
but that the Lord would, by means of 
their lot, Himself appoint the one of His 
choice. 25.] τόπον is from internal 
evidence, as well as manuscript authority, 


w= Matt. 
xxvi. 52. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ. 


I, 26. 


“ ᾿Ὶ Ν - , Ν ¢ \ " , 
ρευθῆναι εἰς τὸν " τόπον τὸν ἴδιον. 30 καὶ * ἔδωκαν 5 κλή- 


, a e A Ρ a \ 
Job xviii. 21. Qoug αὐτοῖς, Kal *émecev ὁ Y κλῆρος * ἐπὶ Μαθθίαν, καὶ 


Prov. xxvii. 
& 


\ lal ef , / 
xc here only. ὃ συγκατεψηφίσθη μετὰ τῶν ἕνδεκα ἀποστόλων. 


see Luk? xv. 


2. = βαλλ., 
Matt. xxvil. 
35 |i. y = Matt. xxvii. 35 |) only. 


b = Luke ix. 51 (vill. 23) only t. 


D-lat Aug). 


συψηφ. D'(but corrd): Karey. δὲ!. 


Cuap. II. 1. for καὶ ev τω, καὶ eyeveTo εν Tas ἡμέραις εκειναις Tov D. 


the preferable reading. It has been altered 
to κλῆρον to suit ver. 17. διακονίας, 
implying the active duties; ἀποστολῆς, 
the official dignity of the office :—no figure 
of ἐν διὰ δυοῖν. τὸν τόπον τὸν 
ἴδιον] With the reading τόπον before, I 
think these words may be interpreted two 
ways: 1. that Judas deserted this our 
τόπος, our Office and ministry, to go to his 
own τόπος, that part which he had chosen 
tor himself, viz. the office and character of 
a traitor and enemy of God; 2. regarding 
the former word τόπος as being selected to 
correspond to the more proper and dreadful 
use of the word here, that Judas deserted 
his τόπος, his appointed place, here among 
us, that he might go to his own appointed 
τόπος elsewhere, viz. among the dead in 
the place of torment. Of these two in- 
terpretations, I very much prefer the 
second, on all accounts; as being more 
according to the likely usage of the word, 
and as more befitting the solemnity of such 
a prayer. At the same time, no absolute 
sentence is pronounced on the traitor, but 
that dark surmise expressed by the eu- 
phemism τὸν τόπον 7. ἴδ... which none can 
help feeling with regard to him. To refer 
the words op. eis τ. τόπ. τ. 15., to the suc- 
cessor of Judas (Knatchbull, Hammond, 
al.), ‘ut oceupet locum ipsi a Deo destina- 
tum, (1) is contrary to the form of the 
sentence, which would require καὶ πορευ- 
θῆναι; (2) is inconsistent with the words 
mop. k.T.A., Which are unexampled in this 
sense; (3) would divest a sentence, evi- 
dently solemn and pregnant, of all point 
and meaning, and reduce it to a mere tau- 
tology. It appears to have been very early 
understood as above ; for Clement ot Rome 
says of Peter (1 Cor. v.), οὕτω μαρτυρήσας 
ἐπορεύθη eis τὸν ὀφειλόμενον τόπον τῆς 
δόξης, an expression evidently borrowed 
from our text. Lightf., Hor. Hebr. in 
loc., quotes from the Rabbinical work 
Baal turim on Num. xxiv. 25,—‘ Balaam 
ivit in locum suum, i.e. in Gehennam.’ 

26. ἔδωκ. κλήρους αὐτοῖς) They 
cast lots for them, αὐτοῖς being ἃ dativus 


Neh. x. 34. see ver. 17. 
(-pwots, 1 Chron. xxxvi. 21.) 


11. 1 Kai ἐν τῷ "συνπληροῦσθαι τὴν ἡμέραν τῆς 


z Jonahi. 7. 


ἰδιον Tor. C: tom. τ. δικαιον A. 
26. rec (for avtors) avtwy (see note), with D!K rel syr [arm] Chr, Aug-mss 
Aug-ed,: txt ABCD®X p 18 vulg coptt ath Chr,. 


: om Syr 
om ὃ D}(ins D*) m. 


for evSexa, ιβ΄ wii D, so also Eus,. 


Tas 


commodi. ‘The ordinary reading, whether 
αὐτῶν is referred to the Apostles or to the 
candidates, would require τοὺς κλήρους. 
Αὐτῶν has been an alteration, to avoid the 
rendering ‘they gave lots to them.’ These 
lots were probably tablets, with the names 
of the persons written on them, and shaken 
in a vessel, or in the lap of a robe (Prov. 
xvi. 33); he whose lot first leaped out 
being the person designated. ovy- 
kat. | The lot being regarded as the divine 
choice, the suffrages of the assembly were 
unauimously given (not in form, but by 
cheerful acquiescence) to the candidate 
thus chosen, and he was ‘ voted in’ among 
the eleven Apostles, i.e. as a twelfth. 
That Luke does not absolutely say so, 
and never afterwards speaks of the twe/ve 
Apostles, is surely no safe ground on which 
to doubt this. Stier seems disposed 
to question (in his Reden der Apostel, i. 
18 ff., which however was a work of his 
youth) whether this step of electing a 
twelfth Apostle was altogether suitable to 
the then waiting position of the Church, 
and whether Paul was not in reality the 
twelfth, chosen by the Lord Himself. But 
I do not see that any of his seven queries 
touch the matter. We have the prece- 
dent, of all others most applicable, of the 
twelve tribes, to shew that the number, 
though ever nominally kept, was really 


‘exceeded. And this incident would not 


occupy ἃ prominent place in a book where 
Paul himself has so conspicuous a part, 
unless it were by himself considered as 
being what it professed to be, the filling 
up of the vacant Apostleship. 
Cuap. II. 1—4.] THE OuTPOURING OF 
tHE HoLy SPIRIT ON THE DISCIPLES. 
1. ἐν τῷ συνπληροῦσθαι. ... 7 
While the day of P. was being fulfilled : 
‘during the progress of that particular 
day: this is necessitated by the pres. tense. 
In sense, it amounts to ‘ when the day of P. 
was fully come,’ as E. V.: but not in grain- 
mar. Professor Hitzig, in a letter to Ide- 
ler, “‘Ostern und Pfingsten, u.s.w.,” main- 
tains that the meaning 15, ‘ds thedayof P. 


a here only +. - 


Mp: ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ: 15 


9 \ 
“~ KQL c ch. xx. 16. 

1 Cor. xvi. 8 
d (ch. xx. 18, τ. τσ.) John iv. 86, xx. 4. xxi. 2. 


A 9 7 e a \ 
ὁ πεντηκοστῆς ἦσαν πάντες “ ὁμοῦ " ἐπὶ TO αὐτό. 


onlyt+. ΤΟΙ ii. 1. 2 Macc. xii. 32. 
64. Jobiii. 18 Symm. 


Ezra ti, 
e ch. i. 15 reff. 

nucpas vulg D-lat E-lat Syr eth arm [Ath-int, ] Aug, Vig. rec aravres, with m rel 
Thl-sif: om EX! Chr,: txt ABCI8% ed p [Ath,].—ovtwy avtwy παντων I) Syr eth. 
—add ot αποστολοι α d k m Ht Thi-fin. rec (for ομου) ομοθυμαδον, with C3 ἘΠ᾿ -gr] rel 
f Ath-4-mss] Chr, Thl-sif: om D (syrr ?) copt sah(infer se for ou. ε. ro av.): txt ABCIR 


p Ath,, pariter vulg, simul K-lat [Aug,, eadem animatione simul Aug, Promiss, }. 


drew on,—‘was approaching its fulfil- 
ment :’ but this view is refuted by Neander, 
« Pflanzung u. Leitung, u.s.w.,” p. 10, note. 
Hitzig supports his view by ver. 5, taking 
κατοικοῦντες to imply constant residence, 
rot merely sojourning on account of the 
feast, which latter he says would have been 
specified if it were so. Neander replies, 1. 
that ἐν τ. συνπλ. τ. 7. τ. 7. must necessa- 
rily mean that the day itselfhad arrived ; 
compare πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου οὐ τῶν καιρῶν, 
Gal. iv. 4and Eph.i.10. In Luke ix. 51, 
it is not said of the day, but of the days of 
His being received up, including the whole 
period introductory to that event: and, by 
the very same interpretation, the day of P. 
must in this case have arrived, (and was 
being accomplished, i. 6. in process of pass- 
ing.) And again, if only the approach of 
that day were indicated, why should the day 
itself have been mentioned, seeing that it 
would then be no way concerned in the nar- 
rative ? On the propriety of the day itself 
as belonging to the narrative, see below. 
2. It is true that in ver. 5, if we had that 
verse only before us, we should interpret 
katou. of dwelling, permanently (no real 
difference being traceable between κατοι- 
κεῖν with an accus., and κατοικεῖν év); but 
if we compare it with ver. 9, we shall see, 
that the same persons would thus be κατ- 
οἰκοῦντες in Jerusalem and several other 
localities,—which necessarily restricts the 
meaning, in ver. 5, toa temporary sojourn. 
And, granting that there may have been 
some residents in Jerusalem among these 
foreign Jews, the ἐπιδημοῦντες Ῥωμαῖοι 
certainly point to persons who were for 
some especial reason at Jerusalem at the 
time, as also the proselytes. And in ver. 14 
Peter distinguishes the ἄνδρες ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, ---- 
the residents, from οἱ κατοικοῦντες Ἵερουσ. 
&mavres,—the sojourners. τ. Hp. τῆς 
aw.| The fiftieth day (inclusive) after the 
sixteenth of Nisan, the second day of the 
Passover (Levit. xxiii. 16),—called in 
Exodus xxiii. 16, ‘ the feast of harvest, — 
in Deut. xvi. 10, ‘the feast of weeks ;" --- 
one of the three great feasts, when all the 
males were required to appear at Jeru- 
salem, Deut. xvi. 16. No supplying of 
ἡμέρας, or ἑορτῆς, is required after rer- 
thxooTHs: the word had passed into a 
proper name, see ref, Tobit, where it is in 


appos. with ἑορτῇ, and ref. 2 Mace. At 
this time, it was simply regarded as the 
feast of harvest : among the later Jews, it 
was considered as the anniversary of the 
giving of the law from Sinai. This infer- 
ence was apparently grounded on a com- 
parison of Exod. xii. 2 and xix. 1, Jo- 
sephus and Philo know nothing of it, and 
it is at the best very uncertain. Chry- 
sostom’s reason for the event happening 
when it did is probably the true one: ἔδει 
γὰρ ἑορτῆς οὔσης πάλιν ταῦτα γενέσθαι" 
ἵνα οἱ παρόντες τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ χριστοῦ, 
οὗτοι καὶ ταῦτα ἴδωσιν (in Catena). 
See a number of other reasons given by 
Wordsw., more suo. The question, on 
what day of the week this day of Pente- 
cost was, is beset with the difficulties at- 
tending the question of our Lord’s last 
passover ; see notes on Matt. xxvi. 17, and 
Johu xviii. 28. It appears probable how- 
ever that it was on the Sabbath,—i. e. if we 
reckon from Saturday, the 16th of Nisan. 
Wieseler (Chron. des Apostol. Zeitalters, 
p- 20) supposes that the Western Church 
altered the celebration of it to the first day 
of the week in conformity with her observ- 
ance of Easter on that day. If we take the 
second day of the Passover as Sunday, the 
17th of Nisan, which some have inferred 
from John xviii. 28, the day of Pentecost 
will fallon the first day of the week. The 
custom of tle Karaites was, to keep Pen- 
tecost always ou the first day of the week, 
reckoning not from the day after the great 
Passover-Sabbath, but from that following 
the Sabbath in Passover week—understand- 
ing ΠΣ ΤΠ in Levit. xxiii. 15 of the ordinary 
Sabbath ;—but this cannot be brought to 
bear on our enquiry, as it probably arose 
later. πάντες) Not the Apostles only, 
nor the hundred and twenty mentioned 
ch. 1. 15; but all the believers in Christ, 
then congregated at the time of the feast 
in Jerusalem. The former is manifest from 
ver. 14, when Peter and the eleven stand 
forward and allude to the rest as οὗτοι: 
and the latter follows on the former being 
granted. Both are confirmed by the uni- 
versality of the promise cited by Peter, vv. 
17 ff. See Chrys. below, on ver. 4. 

ὁμοῦ together: the rec. ὁμοθυμαδόν im- 
plies more, viz. that their purpose, as well 
as their locality, was the same, ἐπὶ τὸ 


14 


ἃ ch. xvi. 36. 
xxviii. 6 
oaly. Josh. 
x. 

e = Luke (iv. 
37) xxi. 25. 
Heb. xii. 19 
only. Ps. 
el. 3. 

f = here only. 
Isa, xxviil. 
15, 18. 

here (ch. xvii. 25) only. 
1 = John xii. 3. Hag. ii. 8. see Isa. vi. 4. 

χχχὶ. (xlviii.) 43. 1 Matt. xvii. 3. 

δ ἃ]. Gen x. 23. n = Luke xxii. #4. 

4. Gen. viii. 3 (4). 


" βιαίας Kal 


& ΄ Ὁ \ 
ἦσαν ὃ καθήμενοι, ὃ Kat 


8 πνοῆς 


2. aft καὶ ins εἰδου (7. 6. ιδου) D [so Cyr, ]. 


D 93-52. 
Cypr. 
3. for γλωσσαι wset, γλωσσει N!. 


TPASEIS ATOSTOAON. 


Job xxxvii. 10. see Thucyd. iv. 100, 

k — Matt. iv. 18. 
Luke i. 11. ch. vii. 2, 26 al. 
Rev. i. 13. 
p = Luke... 15. ch. iv 


IT. 


5 ’ ad » 3 - » A e > “ f , 
eyeveTo “advm εκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ “ ἦχος ὥςπερ ἶἧ φερομένης 
Ὕ»». , “ Χ > 

ἱ ἐπλήρωσεν ὅλον τὸν οἶκον οὗ 

Μ b) a , 
lw@dénoav avtois ™ Suamepefomevar 
a Ὦ e \ oe ο ὃ θ / o2 , 7 “ > a 

γλῶσσαι " ὡςεὶ πυρὸς, ° ἐκαθισέν τε ὃ ἐφ᾽ Eva ἕκαστον αὐτῶν, 
* καὶ Ῥ ἐπλήσθησαν ἅπαντες πνεύματος ἁγίου. καὶ ἤρξαντο 


h here only. = Exod. xiv. 31. Isa. lix, 19. 
Luke xxi. 35. Rev. xiv. 6. xvii. 15. Jer. 
Exod, iii, 2, 16. m = Luke xii. 


ὁ constr., Mark xi. 2,7. Rev. xx. 


«δ, 31. ix. 17. xiii. 9. see Eph. vy. 18. 


for ex, απὸ [de] E. βιαι. bef πνο. 


for ολον, παντα 1) -οὐ], omnem E-lat ας : totam vulg D-lat: totum 
καθεζόμενοι CD: txt ABEN rel [Dion, Ath, Cyr, ] Cyr-jer. Thdrt,. 
for exad. Te, και εκαθ. B(Mai Btly Tischdf) & 
p D-corr(and lat) [syrr(?) arm Dion] Ath, Cyr-jer, Did, Chr Cyr[-p 


ἢ: και εκαθ. τε 


D}{-gr}: εκαθ. (alone) B(Bch): εκαθ. δὲ C! E-lat Did, Aug, : txt AC*D? E[-gr] rel 
{vulg] syrr[?] copt Eus, Ath, Thdrt, Thl.—exa@ioay (corrn to suit γλωσσαι) D-gr δὲ! 


syrr coptt Ath, Did, Cyr,[-p]}. 


αὐτό] Where ? evidently not in the temple, 
or any part of it. The improbability of 
such an assemblage, separate and yet so 
great, in any of the rooms attached to the 
temple,—the words ὅλον τὸν οἶκον in ver. 2 
(where see note),—the συνῆλθεν τὸ πλῆθος, 
ver. 6,—the absence of any mention of the 
temple, —all these are against such a sup- 
position. Obviously no @ priori considera- 
tion such as Olshausen alleges (in loc.), 
that “thus the solemn inauguration of 
the Church of Christ becomes more impos- 
ing by happening in the holy place of the 
Old Covenant,” can apply to the enquiry. 
Nor can the statement that they were διὰ 
παντὸς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, Luke xxiv. 53, apply 
here (see above on ch. i. 13); for even if 
it be assumed that the hour of prayer was 
come (which it hardly could have been, 
seeing that some time must have elapsed 
hetween the event and Peter’s speech), 
the disciples would not have been assem- 
bled separately, but would, as Peter and 
John, in ch. iii. 1, have gone up, mingled 
with the people. See more below. 

2. ἦχ. ast. dep. πνοῆς βιαίας could not 
be better rendered than in E. V., a sound 
as ofa rushing mighty wind. ‘Ihe dis- 
tinction between πνοῆς and πνεύματος, on 
which De Wette insists, can hardly be ex- 
pressed in our language. It is possible that 
Luke may have used πνοῆς to avoid the con- 
currence of πνεύματος βιαίου and πνεύμα- 
tos ἁγίου. It doubtless has its especial pro- 
priety ;—it is the breathing or blowing 
which we hear: it was the sound as ofa 
violent blowing, borne onward, which ac- 
companied the descent of the Holy Spirit. 
To treat this as a natural phenomenon,— 
even supposing that phenomenon miracu- 
lously produced, as the earthquake at the 
erucifixion,—is contrary to the text, which 
does not describe it as ἦχος φερομένης mr. 


βι., but ἦχος ὥςπερ >. rv. Bi. It wis the 
chosen vehicle by which the Holy Spirit was 
manifested to their sense of hearing, as by 
the tongues of fire to their sense of seeing. 
“φέρεσθαι ad violentum quo venti 
moventur impetum notandum adhiberi 
solet. El. Hist. An. vii. 24, ἐπειδὰν τὸ 
πνεῦμα βίαιον ἐκφέρηται : Diog. Laért. 
x. 25. 104, διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος πολλοῦ 
φερομένου. Kypke. οἶκον) Cer- 
tainly Luke would not have used this 
word of a chamber in the Temple, or 
of the Temple itself, without further ex- 
planation. Our Lord, it is true, ealls the 
Temple ὃ οἶκος ὑμῶν, Matt. xxiii. 38,— 
and Josephus informs us that Solomon’s 
Temple was furnished τριάκοντα βραχέσιν 
οἴκοις, and again ἐπῳκοδόμηντο δὲ τούτοις 
ἄνωθεν ἕτεροι οἶκοι : but to suppose either 
usage here, seems to me very far-fetched 
and unnatural. 3. ὥφθ. αὐτοῖς 1---ποῦ, 
‘there were seen on them,’ as Luther; but 
as E. V., there appeared unto them. 
διαμεριζόμεναι} not, ‘distributed,’ as με- 
ρισμοῖς in Heb. ii. 4: from the construe- 
tion, d:au. must refer to something charac- 
teristic, not of the manner of apportion- 
ment, but of the appearance itself. ὡςεὶ 
πυρός see reff. They were not πυρός, as 
not possessing the burning power of fire, 
but only a@set πυρός. in appearance like 
that element. ἐκάθισεν) viz. τὸ φαι- 
νόμενον : not τὸ πνεῦμα, nor ἣ γλῶσσα, 
but the appearance described in the pre- 
ceding clause. I understand ἐκάθ. as 
usually interpreted, lighted on their 
heads, This also was no effect of natural 
cause, either ordinarily or extraordinarily 
employed: see on ver, 2. — 4.) On 
ἅπαντες, Chrys. says, οὐκ ἂν εἶπε πάντες, 
καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ, εἰ μὴ καὶ of 
ἄλλοι μετέσχον. ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν 
ἑτέραις γλώσσαις There can be no ques- 


ABCD 
Exabe 
dfghk 
lmop 
13 


SS 


_ ἃ 


EEO CTCL Ch hee ———————————— eC ee 


— 


94, ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ 


lal e ’ / 
λαλεῖν TetEepats ᾿ γλωσσαις 
Xxx..9: 
5 = ch. xi. 29 reff. 
Ps. xv. 10). ch. x. 40. xiv. 3. 


ς θὲ = Qn 
καθὼς TO πνεῦμα 


r = Matt. xvi. 17. ch. x. 46. xix. 6. 
t = Matt. xiii. 11. 


AITOSTOAON. 15 


t ἐδίδου « =1 Cor. xiv. 
21. Exod. 
1 Cor. xii. 10, ἄς. xiv. 2, ἕο. Gen. x. 5. 


Luke i. 74. John ν. 26. ver. 27 and ch. xiii. 35 (from 


4. παντες AB'DER p : txt (see prolegomena, ch. v. § 3, ad fin.) [B-corr’-?] C rel [ Did, 


Ath, Cyr-jer, Chr, Cyr, ] Cosm. 


tion in any unprejudiced mind, that the 
fact which this narrative sets before us 
is, that the disciples began to speak in 
VARIOUS LANGUAGES, viz. the languages 
of the nations below enumerated, and 
perhaps others. All attempts to evade 
this are connected with some forcing of 
the text, or some far-fetched and inde- 
fensible exegesis. This then being laid 
down, several important questions arise, 
and we are surrounded by various difficul- 
ties. (1) Was this speaking in various lan- 
guages a gift bestowed on the disciples for 
their use afterwards, or was ita mere sign, 
their utterance being only as they were 
mouth-pieces of the Holy Spirit? Zhe 
latter seems certainly to have been the 
case. It appears on our narrative, καθὼς 
τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς, 
as the Spirit gave them utterance. But, 
it may be objected, in that case they would 
not themselves understand what they said. 
I answer, that we infer this very fact from 
1 Cor. xiv.; that the speaking with tongues 
was often found, where none could inter- 
pret what was said. And besides, it 
would appear from Peter’s speech, that 
such, or something approaching to it, was 
the case in this instance. He makes no 
allusion to the things said by those who 
spoke with tongues; the hearers alone 
speak of their declaring τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ 
θεοῦ. So that it would seem that here, as 
on other occasions (1 Cor. xiv. 22), tongues 
were for a sign, not to those that believe, 
but to those that believe not. If the first 
supposition be made, that the gift of speak- 
ing in various languages was bestowed on 
the disciples for their after use in preach- 
ing the Gospel, we are, I think, running 
counter to the whole course of Scripture 
and early patristic evidence on the subject. 
There is xo trace whatever of such a 
power being possessed or exercised by the 
Apostles, or by those who followed them. 
(Compare ch, xiv. 11, 14; Euseb. iii. 39; 

ren. iii. 1, p. 174.) The passage cited 
ie ont by Wordsw. from Iren. iii. 
17, p. 208, to shew that Jreneus under- 
ἐδ the gift to be that of permanent 
preaching in many languages, entirely fails 
of its point :—“‘ Quem et descendisse Lucas 
ait post ascensum Domini super discipulos 
in Pentecoste, habentem potestatem om- 
nium gentium ad introitum vite (which 
Wordsw. renders “in order that all na- 
tions might be enzbled to enter into life,” 


ηρξατο D}{-gr|(txt D-corr!),. 


aft to mv. ins To 


suitably to his purpose, but not to the 
original) et ad assertionem novi Testamen- 
ti: unde et omnibus linguis conspirantes 
hymnum dicebant Deo, Spiritu ad unita- 
tem redigente distantes tribus, et primitias 
omnium gentium offerente Patri.” Here 
it will be observed is not a word about 
future preaching; but simply this event 
itself is treated of, as a symbolic one, a 
first fruit of the future Gentile harvest. 
The other passage, id. v. 6, p. 299, shews 
nothing but that the gift of tongues was 
not extinct in Irenzeus’s time: there is in 
it not a word of preaching in various 
languages. I believe, therefore, the event 
related in our text to have been a sudden 
and powerful inspiration of the Holy 
Spirit, by which the disciples uttered, not 
of their own minds, but as mouth-pieces of 
the Spirit, the praises of God in various 
languages, hitherto, and possibly at the 
time itself, unknown to them. (2) Howis 
this ἑτέραις γλώσσαις λαλεῖν related to the 
γλώσσῃ λαλεῖν afterwards spoken of by 
St. Paul? I answer, that they are one 
and the same thing. γλώσσῃ dad. is to 
speak in @ language, as above explained ; 
γλώσσαις (ἑτέραις, or Katvats, Mark xvi. 17) 
Aad., to speak in languages, under the 
sume circumstances. See this further 
proved in notes on 1 Cor. xiv. Meantime 
I may remark, that the two are inseparably 
connected by the following links,—ch. x. 
46, xi. 15,—xix. 6,—in which last we have 

the same juxtaposition of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν 
and προφητεύειν, as afterwards in 1 Cor. 

xiv. 1—5 ff. (3) Who were those that 
partook of this gift? answer, the whole 
assembly of believers, from Peter’s appli- 
cation of the prophecy, vy. 16 ff. It was 
precisely the case supposed in 1 Cor. xiv. 
23, ἐὰν οὖν συνέλθῃ ἣ ἐκκλησία ὅλη ἐπὶ 
τὸ αὐτὸ καὶ πάντες λαλῶσιν γλώσσαις», 
εἰξέλθωσιν δὲ ἰδιῶται ἢ ἄπιστοι, οὐκ ἐροῦ- 
σιν ὅτι μαίνεσθε; These ἰδιῶται and 
ἄπιστοι were represented by the ἕτεροι of 
our ver. 13, who pronounced them to be 
drunken. (4) I would not conceal the 
difficulty which our minds find in conceiy- 
ing a person supernaturally endowed with 
the power of speaking, ordinarily and con- 
sciously, a language which he has never 
learned. I believe that difficulty to be in- 
superable. Such an endowment would not 
only be contrary to the analogy of God’s 
dealings, but, as far as I can -see into the 
matter, self-contradictory, and therefore- 


16 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON, If, 


5 v au δὲ » «ς \ 

ὅν ἧσαν ὃὲ ἐν ᾿Ἱερουσαλὴμ KaTol- ABCD 

v constr., ch. i. ee ee 
dfghk 


> , ᾽ aA 
ἃ νογ. 14. ον. ἢ ἀστγρφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς. 
xxvi. 25 only. 
I Chron. xxv.1. Ps. lviii. 7. Ezek. xiii. 9,19. Mic. v.12. 
1,13. Luke i, 10,20. Jer. xxxiii. (xxvi.) 20. 


Zech. x. 2 only. 


αγιον E vulg eth. rec αὐτοῖς bef amodbeyy. (corrn for the sake of perspicuous 
order ; but these trajections and insertions between a governing and a governed word 
are characteristic of Luke, and esp in Acts), with C3E rel [tol] syr Cyr-jer, [Chr, Cyr, 
Thdrt,]: txt ABC!DX p vulg (sah ?) arm Ath, Cyr, Did, [ Bas, ] Ambr Vig. (36 def.) 


5. for ev, εἰς AN'. 


impossible. But there is no such contra- 
diction, and to my mind πὸ such difficulty, 
in conceiving a man to be moved to utter- 
ance of sounds dictated by the Holy Spirit. 
And the fact is clearly laid down by Paul, 
that the gift of speaking in tongues, and 
that of interpreting, were wholly distinct. 
So that the above difficuity finds no place 
here, nor even in the case of ἃ person 
both speaking and interpreting : see 1 Cor. 
xiv. 13. On the question whether the 
speaking was necessarily always in a 
foreign tongue, we have no data to guide 
us: it would seem that it was; but the 
conditions would not absolutely exclude 
rhapsodical and unintelligible utterance. 
Only there is this objection to it: clearly, 
languages were spoken on this occasion, — 
and we have no reason to believe that 
there were two distinct kinds of the gift. 
(5) It would be quite beyond the limits of a 
note to give any adequate history of the ex- 
egesis of the passage. A very short sumn- 
mary must suffice. (a) The idea of a gift 
of speaking in various languages having 
been conferred for the dissemination 
of the Gospel, appears not to have ori- 
ginated until the gift of tongues itself had 
some time disappeared from the Church. 
Chrysostom adopts it, and the great ma- 
jority of the Fathers and expositors. (8) 
Gregory Nyss. (see Suicer. Thes., γλῶσσα), 
Cyprian, and in modern times Erasmus 
and Schneckenburger, suppose that the 
miracle consisted in the multitude hearing 
in various languages that which the be- 
lievers spoke in their native tongue: μίαν 
μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνήν, πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσ- 
θαι. This view Greg. Naz. mentions, but 
not as his own, and refutes it (Orat. xli. 15, 
p. 743), saying, ἐκείνως μὲν yap τῶν ἀκου- 
ὄντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἢ τῶν λεγόντων Td 
θαῦμα. ‘This view, besides, would make a 
distinction between this instance of the 
gift and those subsequently related, which 
we have seen does not exist. (γ) The 
course of the modern German expositors 
has been, (1) to explain the facts related, 
by some assumption inconsistent with the 
text, as e.g. Olshausen, by a magnetic 
‘rapport ’ between the speakers and hear- 
ers,—Wwhereas the speaking took place 
jirst, independently of the hearers ;— 
Eichhorn, Wieseler, and others, by sup- 


ev cep. bef ησαν, omg δε, D. 


katoi. bef ev cep. C Syr 


posing γλώσσῃ λαλεῖν to mean speaking 
with the tongue only, i.e. inarticulately in 
ejaculations of praise, which will not suit 
γλώσσαις Aad. ;—Bleek, by interpreting 
γλῶσσα = glossema, and supposing that 
they spoke in unusual, enthusiastic, or 
poetical phraseology,—which will not suit 
γλώσσῃ AadA.;—Meyer (and De Wette 
nearly the same), by supposing that they 
spoke in an entirely new spiritual lan- 
guage (of which the γλῶσσαι were merely 
the individual varieties), as was the case 
during the Irvingite delusion in this coun- 
try,—contrary to the plain assertion of 
vv. 6—8, that they spoke, and the hearers 
heard, in the dialects or tongues of the 
various peoples specified ;— Paulus, Schul- 
thess, Kuinoel, &c. by supposing that the 
asseinbly of believers was composed of Jews 
of various nations, who spoke as moved by 
the Spirit, but in their own mother tongues, 
—which is clearly inconsistent with ver. 
4 and the other passages, ch. x. and xix., 
and 1 Cor. xiv., above cited :—(2) to take 
the whole of this narrative in its literal 
sense, bnt cast doubts on its historical 
accuracy, and on Luke’s proper under- 
standing of what really did take place. 
This is more or less done by several of the 
above mentioned, as a means of escape 
from the inconsistency of their hypotheses 
with Luke’s narrative. But, to set aside, 
argumenti gratia, higher considerations, 
—is it at all probable that Luke, who 
thust have conversed with many eye and 
ear-witnesses of this day’s events, would 
have been misinformed about them in so 
vital a point as the very nature of the 
gift by which the descent of the Spirit was 
accompanied? There is every mark, as. 
I hope I have shewn abundantly in the pro- 
legomena, of the Acts having been written 
in the company and with the co-operation 
of δέ. Paul: can we suppose that he, who 
treats so largely of this very gift elsewhere, 
would have allowed such an inaceuracy to 
remain uncorrected, if it had existed? On 
the contrary, I believe this narrative to 
furnish the key to the right understanding 
of 1 Cor. xiv. and other such passages, as [ 
there hope more fully to prove. καθ- 
ὡς «.T.A.] according as (1. 6. ‘in such 
measure and manner in each case as’) the 
Spirit granted to them to speak (be- 


BEI; Gece 
ABCDE 
INabec 
dighk 


_lmop 








13 


5—T. 


TIPABZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


17 


lal ’ A Yi “- 
κοῦντες ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ἄνδρες δ“ εὐλαβεῖς * ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους 5 Luke ἢ. 55. 
Cc 


“ y ς΄ Ἁ \ > / 
τῶν 7 UTTO TOV ουρᾶνον. 


13. xxiii. 34 al. 

xi. 15. 2 Chron. v. 13. 
ς ch. ix. 22. xix. 32. xxi. 27,3lonly. Gen. xi. 9. 

xx. 3}. Eph. iv. 16. Col. iv. 6, 


copt Aug, : ἰουδαιοι bef karo. K. 
ανδρ. 10. 

6. for ort, και D[-gr]: gui D!-lat. 
syrr sah Aug, Bede,: nxovoay 40. 96. 


/ \ An a 
6 Zvevouevns δὲ τῆς * φωνῆς Tav- 
της συνῆλθεν τὸ "πλῆθος καὶ “ συνεχύθη: ὅτι ἤκούον 
, aA δὸς ἢ, πεν ae a 
ἃ εἷς 4 ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ " διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν. 7  ἐξ- 


y ch. iv. 12. ΟΟ]. 1. 23, Deut. xxv. 19. 
a = ch. i. 6 reff. 

Jonah iv. 1. 

1 Kings xiii. 20 Ald. 


ανδρ. bef τουδ. ΟΣ : om ιουδ. δὲ. 


1. Vill. 2. 
xxii. 12 only. 
Lev. xv. 31. 
Micah vii. 2 
AB2 Ald. 


51. 
1. ch. xvii. 
z Luke ix. 35. ch. xix. 34. Rey. 
Ὁ abs., ch. vi. 5. xv. 12,30. xix. 9. xxiil. 7. 
1 Mace. iv. 27. d Luke iv. 40. ch. 
ech. i. 19 reff. f = ch. viii. 13 reff. 


ευλ. bef 


ἤκουσεν BN syr: ἡκουεν C p, audiebat vulg 


om εἷς EN 6 36. for τη ιδ. διαλ. λαλ. 


auT., Ἀαλουντας Tals γλωσσαις αὐτῶν D Syr: ταῖς yAwoours αὐτων Aad. syr-mg Augy : 
lingua sua vulg D-lat E-lat, linguam suam Bede. 


stowed on them utterance). There is no 
emphasis, as Wordsw., on αὐτοῖς, but 
rather the contrary: placed thus behind 
the verb, it becomes insignificant in com- 
parison with the fact announced, and with 
the subject of the sentence. The word 
ἀποφθέγγεσθαι has been supposed here to 
imply that they uttered short ejaculatory 
sentences of praise: so Chrys., ἀποφθέγ- 
ματα γὰρ ἦν τὰ παρ αὐτῶν λεγόμενα: 
(Ec., Bloomf., and Wordsw. But in 
neither of the two other places in St. Luke 
(see reff.) will it bear this meaning, nor 
in any of the six where it occurs in the 
LXX: though in two of those (Mic. and 
Zech.) it has the peculiar sense of speak- 
ing oracularly, and in Ezek. xiii. 19 it 
represents 333, mentior. Our word to 
utter, to speak out, seems exactly to 
render it. It is never desirable to press 
a specific sense, where the more general 
one seems to have become the accepted 
meaning of a word. And this is especially 
so here, where, had any peculiar sense 
been intended, the verb would surely have 
held a more prominent position. Their 
utterance was none of their own, but the 
simple gift and inspiration of the Holy 
Spirit : see above. 5—13.] EFFECT 
ON THE MULTITUDE. 5.| De Wette 
maintains that these κατοικοῦντες cannot 
have been persons sojoerning for the sake 
of the feast, but residents : but see above 
on ver.1. Isee no objection, with Meyer, 
to including both residents and sojourners 
in the term, which only specifies their then 
residence. evAaBets | Not in reference 
to their having come up to the feast, nor 
to their dwelling from religious motives 
at Jerusalem (τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν 
σημεῖον, ἀπὸ τοσούτων ἐθνῶν πατρίδας 
apévtas καὶ οἰκίαν καὶ συγγενεῖς, ἐκει 
οἰκεῖν, Chrys.), but stated as imparting 
a character and interest to what follows. 
They were not merely vain and curious 
listeners, but men of piety and weight. 

ἀπὸ παντὸς €Bv..... 1 Not perhaps used so 

Vox, 11. 


much hyperbolically, as with reference to 
the significance of the whole event. As 
they were samples each of their different 
people, so collectively they represented all 
the nations of the world, who should hear 
afterwards in their own tongues the won- 
derful works of God. 6.1] Whatever 
τῆς φωνῆς ταύτης may mean, one thing is 
clear,—that it cannot mean, ‘ this rumour” 
(‘when this was noised abroad, K.V.: so 
also Erasm., Calv., Beza, Grotius, &c.), 
which would be unexampled (the two pas- 
sages cited for this sense from the LXX 
are no examples; Gen. xlv. 16 ; Jer. xxvii. 
(1.) 46). We have then to choose between 
two things te which φωνή might refer: 
—(1) the ἦχος of ver. 2, to which it 
seems bound by the past part. γενομένης 
(compare ver. 2, ἐγένετο . . . ixos), which 
would hardly be used of a speaking which 
was still going on when the multitude as- 
sembled : compare also John iii. 8 ;—and 
(2) the speaking with tongues of ver. 4. 
To this reference, besides the objection just 
stated, there is also another, that the voices 
of a number of men, especially when diverse 
as in this case, would not be indicated by 
φωνή, but by gwvat: compare Luke’s own 
usage, even when the voices cried out the 
same thing, Luke xxiii. 23, οἱ δὲ ἐπέκειντο 
φωναῖς μεγάλαις αἰτούμενοι αὐτὸν σταυρω- 
θῆναι, καὶ κατίσχυον αἷ φωναὶ αὐτῶν. And 
when he uses the sing., he explains it, as 
in ch, xix. 34, φωνὴ ἐγένετο μία ἐκ πάντων. 
So that we may safely decide for the 
former reference. The noise of the rush- 
ing mighty wind was heard over all the 
neighbourhood, probably over all Jerusa- 
lem. τὸ πλῆθος | including the scoffers 
of ver. 13, as well as the pious strangers: 
but these latter only are here regarded in 
the συνεχύθη and in the jx. εἷς ἕκαστος. 
On these latter words see above on ver. 
4. Each one heard λαλούντων avTav,— 
i. e. either various disciples speaking 
various tongues, each in some one only : or 
the same persons speaking now one now 


18 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON. Ih 
ἐς με. ἔἕσταντο δὲ καὶ ἐθαύμαζον λέγοντες Οὐχὶ 8 ἰδοὺ ἅπαντες 
xxi. . Ε ΠΣ & Ἢ 5s 
Luke xiii-16. οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ λαλοῦντες Γαλιλαῖοι; ὃ Kai πῶς ἡμεῖς 
25. “Fade? ἐν. ἀκούομεν ἕκαστος τῇ ἢ ἰδίᾳ διαλέκτῳ " ἡμῶν ἐν ἣ ἐγεννήθη- 

14 A compl. a ν᾽ 
neeech.i19 μεν, 9 Πάρθοι καὶ Μῆδοι καὶ ᾿Ελαμῖται, καὶ οἱ 'ἱ κατ- 


i constr., ch. i. 
19 reff. 


Qn \ rE » / \ 
οἰκοῦντες τὴν Μεσοποταμίαν, ᾿Ιουδαίαν te καὶ Καππα- 


7. rec aft εξιστ. δὲ ins παντες (from ver 12), with ACKIN! rel 36 vulg syrr coptt 
[arm]; ἀπαντες 3 27-9. 69: om BDae fhlmo Ht ath Chr, Aug, rec aft 
λέγοντες ins προς αλληλους (explanatory gloss; and hence became a var read also in 
some inferior mss in ver 12: not, as Mey., genuine here, and thence insd in ver 12), 
with [C?]DEI rel syrr [arm Aug,]: om ABC!N p vulg coptt 2th [Chr, ]. rec οὐκ, 
with AC[I] rel [Chr,]: οὐχ DEN p: txt B (the 1 became absorbed by the follg 1, thence 


οὐχ (as in LXX-A Judg iv. 14; xv. 2), and was corrd into ouk). 


rel: txt A B(see table) CDIX 36. 
qui log. Gal. sunt vulg. 

8. [exacros bef akovouer E. ] 
(Lachm) fuld) Aug,(once τ. ἰδίαν δ.) Jer. 
AC? or 3 El [fl k] p 1. 13 syr-mg Thl-fin. 

9. om και ελαμιται R?. 
ins D5) vulg (not am! fuld [tol]) [Aug, ]. 


another tongue. The former is more pro- 
bable, although the latter seems to agree 
with some expressions in 1 Cor. xiv., e.g. 
ver. 18 (in the rec. and perhaps even in 
the present text). συνεχύϑη] Observe 
ref. Genesis. 7. | They were not, lite- 
rally, ald Galileans; but certainly the 
greater part were so, and all the Apostles 
and leading persons, who would probably 
be the prominent speakers. 8—11.] 
This question is broken, in construction, by 
the enumeration of vv. 9, 10, and then ver. 
11 takes up the construction again from 
ver. 8. As regards the catalogue itself, 
—of course it cannot have been thus de- 
livered as part of a speech by any hearer 
on the occasion, but is inserted into a 
speech expressing the general sense of 
what was said, and put, according to the 
usage of all narrative, into the mouths of 
all. The words τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλ. Hp. ἐν ἡ 
ἐγεννήθημεν are very decisive as to the 
nature of the miracle. The hearers could 
not have thus spoken, had they been spiri- 
tually uplifted into the comprehension 
of some ecstatic language spoken by the 
‘disciples. They were not spiritually acted 
on at all, but spoke the matter of fact: 
they were surprised at each recognizing, so 
far from his country, and in the mouths of 
Galileans, his own native tongue. 9.] 
Πάρθοι] The catalogue proceeds from the 
N.E. to the W.and 8. See Mede, Book i. 
Dise. xx., who notices that it follows the 
order of the three great dispersions of the 
Jews, the Chaldean, Assyrian, and Egyp- 
tian. So also Wordsw. ‘ Habet (Parthia) 
ab ortu Arios, a meridie Carmaniam et 
Arianos, ab occasu Protitas Medos, a 
septentrione Hyrcanos,—undique desertis 


om 3rd καὶ D!-gr(ins D?). 


τὴν διαλεκτον D!-gr(txt D?) vulg(not am but 


nu. bef διαλ. E. εγενηθημεν 


om τε D!(and lat: 


cincta,’ Plin. vi. 29. See also Strabo, xi. 
9,and Winer, Realw. Μῆδοι] Media, W. 
of Parthia and Hyrcania, 8. of the Cas- 
pian sea, Εἰ. of Armenia, N. of Persia. 

*EXapttar] in pure Greek λυμαῖοι, in- 
habitants of Elam or Elymais, a Semitic 
people (Gen. x. 22). Elam is mentioned 
in connexion with Babylon, Gen. xiv. 1; 
with Media, Isa. xxi. 2; Jer. xxv. (xxxii. in 
LXX) 25; with, or as part of, Assyria, 
Ezek. xxxii. 24; Isa. xxii. 6 ; as a province of 
Persia, Ezra iv. 9; as the province in which 
Susan was situated, Dan. viii. 2 (but then 
Susiana must be taken in the wide sense, 
ἜἘλυμαῖοι mposexets ἦσαν Σουσίοις, Strabo, 
xl. 13; xvi. 1). According to Josephus, 
Antt. i. 6. 4, the Elamzans were the pro- 
genitors of the Persians. We find scattered 
hordes under this name far to the north, 
and even on the Orontes near the Caspian 
(Strabo, xi. 13; xv. 3; xvi. 1). Pliny’s 
description, the most applicable to the 
times of our text, is, ‘Infra Euleum 
(Susianen ab Elymaide disterminat amnis 
Euleus, paulo supra) Elymais est, in 
ora juncta Persidi, a flumine Oronti ad 
Characem ccxl m. pass. Oppida ejus Seleu- 
cia et Sosirate, apposita monti Casyro,’ 
vi. 27. Μεσοποταμίαν) the well- 
known district between the Euphrates 
and Tigris, so called merely as distin- 
guishing its geographical position (Strabo, 
xvi. 1): it never formed astate. The name 
does not appear to be older than the Mace- 
donian conquests. ‘The word is used by the 
LXX, Vulg., and E. V. in Gen. xxiv. 10 to 
express 0°72 Dox, Aram of the two rivers. 


- Similarly the Peschito renders it here, and 


ch. vai. 2. See Winer, Realw. Ἴου- 
ϑαίαν7 I can see no difficulty in Judxa 


ABCDE 
Inabe 
ἃ fghk 
lmop 
13 


rec παντες, with E - 
οἱ λαλ. bef εἰσιν ΟἹ lect-12: εἰσιν bef ουτοι p: 


S—12. 


doxiav, Ἰ]όντον καὶ 


Παμφυλίαν, Αἴγυπτον καὶ τὰ μέρη τῆς Λιβύης τῆς 
κατὰ Κυρήνην, καὶ οἱ * ἐπιδημοῦντες “Ῥωμαῖοι, ᾿Ιουδαῖοί 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ AIOSTOAQON. 


\ / 
τὴν ᾿Ασίαν, 


19 


‘ 

TE ΚΟ kch. xvii. 21 
only +. 

1 Matt. xxiii. 
15. ch. vi. 5. 
xiii. 43 only. 
Exod. xii. 48, 

9 al. 


10 Φρυγίαν 


te καὶ ἱπροςήλυτοι, 11 ἸΚρῆτες καὶ ἤΑραβες, ἀκούομεν τὸ Luke i. 49 


only. Ps, 


΄ ᾽ nr A e / , σε Σ 
λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ ™ μεγαλεῖα α τὰ, here 


τοῦ θεοῦ; 15 ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ " διηπόρουντο 
ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες Τί ἂν ο θέλοι τοῦτο εἶναι ; 


10. om τε D vulg [coptt arm]. 
11. ἀραβοι D!, arabi D-lat(txt D*). 


12. rec διηπορουν, with CDEI rel 36 { Bas, Chr,]: txt ABN. 
ins καὶ bef Aey. D. 


γεγονοτι D syr-mg Aug). 


only. Dan. 
uu. 3 Symm. 
act. Luke ix. 
7. ch. vy. 24. 
x. 17 only. 
LPs 

o -- ch. xvii. 20 only. Herod. i. 78 al. 


aft avy. ins te D-gr. 


aft αλλον ins em τω 
for αν θελοι, θελει (corrn to suit 


the direct form of speech after Xeyovres) ABCD I(appy) p 86 Chr,: θελοι ἐξ [ Bas, ]: 


txt Εἰ rel Thl.—7: tovro θελει A 36(sic) 113. 


being here mentioned. The catalogue does 
not proceed by languages, but by territorial 
division; and Judea lies immediately S. of 
its path from Mesopotamia to Cappadocia. 
It is not Ἰουδαῖοι by birth and domicile, 
but of κατοικοῦντες τὴν “lIovdalay who 
are spoken of: the ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς settled 
in Judea. And even if born Jews were 
meant, doubtless they also would find a 
place among those who heard in their mo- 
ther-tongue the wonderful works of God. 

Καππαδοκίαν] At this time (since 
v.c.770) a Roman province (see Tacit. Ann. 
ii. 42), embracing Cappadocia proper and 
Armenia minor. Πόντον) The former 
kingdom of Mithridates, lying along the 
S. coast of the Euxine (whence its name) 
from the river Halys to Colchis and Ar- 
menia, and separated by mountains from 
Cappadocia on the ὃ. It was at this time 
divided into petty principalities under Ro- 
man protection, but subsequently (Suet. 
Nero 18) became a province under Nero. 

τὴν ᾿Ασίαν] i.e. here Asia pro- 
pria, or rather the W. division of it, as 
described by Pliny, v. 27, as bounded on 
the E. by Phrygia and Lycaonia, on the 
W. by the Agean, on the S. by the 
Egyptian sea, on the N. by Paphlagonia. 
Winer, Realw., cites from Solinus, 43: 
‘Sequitur Asia, sed non eam Asiam loquor 
que in tertio orbis divortio terminos omnes 
habet, . . . verum eam que a Telmesso 
Lycie incipit. Eam igitur Asiam ab 
Oriente Lycia includit et Phrygia, ab 
occid. ὥρα littora, a meridie mare 
/Egyptium, Paphlagonia a septentrione. 
Ephesus in ea urbs clarissima est.’ See 
ch. xvi. 6, where the same appears to be 
intended. 10. Φρυγίαν) 7 μεγάλη 
Φρυγία of Strabo, xii. 8: Jos. Antt. xvi. 
2.2. It was at this time part of the Roman 
province of Asia. Παμφυλίαν] A 
small district, extending along the coast 


from Olbia (Strabo, xiv. 4), or Phaselis 
(Plin. v. 27), to Ptolemais (Strabo, 1. c.). 
It was a separate tributary district (χωρὶς 
ὕπλων φορολογεῖται, Jos. B. J. ii. 16. 4): 
we find it classed with Galatia and ruled by 
the same person, Tac. Hist. ii. 9. 

Atyvrrov| Having enumerated the prin- 
cipal districts of Asia Minor, the catalogue 
passes (see above on the arrangement, ver. 
9) to Egypt, a well-known habitation of 
Jews. Two-fifths of the population of 
Alexandria consisted of them, see Philo, 
in Flace. 8, vol. ii. p. 525, and they had an 
Ethnarch of their own, Jos. Antt. xiv. 7. 
2s Sib τὰ μ. τ. Λιβύης τ. kK. 
Κυρήνην) By this expression is probably 
meant Pentapolis, where Josephus (Antt. 
xiv. 7. 2), quoting from Strabo, testifies 
to the existence of very many Jews,— 
amounting in Cyrene to a fourth part 
of the whole population. The Cyrenian 
Jews were so numerous in Jerusalem, 
that they had a special synagogue (see 
ch. vi. 9). Several were Christian con- 
verts: see ch. xi. 20; xili. 1. οἱ ἐπι- 
δημοῦντες Ῥωμαῖοι) ‘The Roman Jews 
dwelling (or then being) in Jerusalem,’ see 
ref. The comma after Ῥωμαῖοι is better 
retained (against Wordsw.). | “Iovd.. 
τ. κι προςήλ. This refers more naturally 
to the whole of the past catalogue, than 
merely to the Roman Jews. The τε καί 
shews that it does not take up a new - 
designation, but expresses the classes of 
divisions of those which have gone before. 
See a similar construction in John ii. 15, 
where τά τε πρόβατα x. τοὺς βόας is 
epexegetic of πάντας preceding. 

11. Κρῆτες «. “Apafes} These words 
would seem as if they should precede the 
last. μεγαλεῖα] mio, ref. Ps., see also 
ref, Luke. 13. ἕτεροι] Probably native 
Jews, who did not understand the foreign 
languages. Meyer supposes,—persons pre- 


σ 2 


” 


—_ 


20 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATOSTOAON. 


II. 


13 ἕτεροι δὲ P διαχλευάζοντες ἔλεγον ὅτι “ γλεύκους * με- P κους 


: aad τὸ μεστωμένοι εἰσίν. " 5 σταθεὶς δὲ ὁ Πέτρος σὺν τοῖς ἕνδεκα τώμενοι 
sxxii. 19 only, A A ἜΝ Ὁ 

r here δεῖν τοῦ ε ἐπῆρεν τὴν " φωνὴν αὐτοῦ καὶ "ἀπεφθέγξατο αὐτοῖς ABCDE 

sch.xi 13zetf “ApOpes ᾿Ιουδαῖοι καὶ οἱ ᾿ κατοικοῦντες ᾿ἱερουσαλὴμ ἅπαν- catgh 
τ, Tes, τοῦτο ὑμῖν “γνωστὸν ἔστω, καὶ “ ἐνωτίσασθε τὰ τὰ 


Judg. ix. 7. 
u ver. 4 reff. 
v constr., ch. 

i. 19 reff. 
w ch. xiii. 38 


ῥήματά μου. 


reff. 
shere only. Gen. iv. 23. Ps 


Bs Pog! be 8 y 
z Matt. xxiv. 49. John ii. 10. 1 Cor. xi. 21. 1 Thess. v. 7. 


15 οὐ yap ws ὑμεῖς ἡ ὑπολαμβάνετε οὗτοι 
2 μεθύουσιν: ἔστιν γὰρ ὥρα τρίτη τῆς ἡμέρας" 10 ἀλλὰ 


= Luke vii. 43 (x. 30. ch. i.9. 83 John 8) only. Jer. xliv. (xxxvii.) 9. 
Rey. xvii. 2, 6 only. 


1 Kings xxv. 36, trans., Deut. xxxii. 42. 


13. rec χλευαζ, with ED) rel: txt ABCD®I2N ac ἢ k p18. 36. 40.---διεχλευαζον 


Aeyovtes D'(and lat). 


14. ins tore bef ora. δε D}-gr [simly Syr]. 
for evdexa, Sexa D'(and lat!: txt D®), and add αποστο- 

aft ernp. ins mpwros D'(and lat): aft τ. pw. αὐτου ins 
aft amep@. ins Aeywy C [arm] Aug. 


ABDIR® p 40 [Bas, Chr, ]. 
λοις D lect-12 Syr Aug,. 


προτερον K. 


aft yA. ins ovto: D: also, variously placed, vulg coptt. 


rec om 6, with CEP 13. 36 rel: ins 


for απεφθ. avt., εἰπεν D [syrr]. 


mavtes ABC(D)[I']& p: txt (see proleg) EI?P rel 36 vulg [ Bas, Chr, |.—7avtes 


bef οι κατ. cep. D [Aug, ]. 
D!: -σαθε DA(sic). 


nuew Di (txt D4). 


om και bef ενωτ. D. ενωτισατε 


15. ovons wpas της nu. γ΄ D}-gr(txt D-corr!) vulg E-lat [Iren-int,] Aug, Gaud,. 


viously hostile to Jesus and his disciples, 
and thus judging as in Luke vii. 34 they 
judged of Himself. γλεύκους 1», see 
ref. Job. Sweet wine, not necessarily 
new wine (nor is the “spiritual sense of the 
passage ” any reason why a meaning should 
be given to the word which it need not 
bear. That sense in fact remains without 
the meaning in question): perhaps made 
of a remarkably sweet small grape, which 
is understood by the Jewish expositors to 
be meant by px or mW, Gen. xlix. 11; 
Isa. v. 2; Jer. ii. 21,—and still found in 
Syria and Arabia (Winer, Realw.). Suidas 
interprets it, τὸ ἀποστάλαγμα τῆς σταφυ- 
λῆς πρὶν πατηθῇ. 

14. 80.] THE SPEECH OF PETER. “Luke 
gives us here the first sample of the preach- 
ing of the Gospel by the Apostles, with 
which the foundation of Christian preach- 
ing, as well as of the Church itself, appears 
to be closely connected. We discover 
already, in this first sermon, all the pecu- 
liarities of apostolic preaching. It contains 
no reflections nor deductions concerning 
the doctrine of Christ,—no proposition of 
new and unknown doctrines, but simply 
and entirely consists of the proclamation 
of historical facts. The Apostles appear 
here as the witnesses of that which they 
had seen: the Resurrection of Jesus form- 
ing the central point of their testimony. 
It is true, that in the after-development 
of the Church it was impossible to confine 
preaching to this historical announcement 
only: it gradually became invested with 
the additional office of building up be- 
lievers in knowledge. But nevertheless, 
the simple testimony to the great works of 
God, as Peter here delivers it, should never 


be wanting in preaching to those whose 
hearts are not yet penetrated by the Word 
of Truth.”? Olshausen, in loc. The dis- 
course divides itself into two parts: 1. (vv. 
14—21) ‘ This which you hear is not the 
effect of drunkenness, but is the promised 
outpouring of the Spirit on all flesh, —2. 
(vv. 22—36) ‘which Spirit has been shed 
forth by Jesus, whom you crucified, but 
whom God hath exalted to be Lord and 
Christ.’ 14. σὺν τοῖς ἕνδεκα | Peter and 
the eleven come forward from the great 
body of believers. And he distinguishes 


(by the οὗτοι in ver. 15) not himself 


from the eleven, but himself and the 
eleven from the rest. De Wette concludes 
from this, that the Apostles had not them- 
selves spoken with tongues, as being an in- 
ferior gift (1 Cor. xiv. 18 ff.); perhaps too 
rashly, for this view hardly accords with 
ἅπαντες, which is the subject of the whole 
of ver. 4. ἄνδρες *lovd.] the Jews, 
properly so called: native dwellers in Jerus. 
ot κατ. Ἵερ. ἅπ΄., the sojourners 

(ver. 5) from other parts. ἐνωτίσασθε is 
a word unknown to good Greek, and belong- 
ing apparently to the Alexandrine dialect. 
Stier quotes ‘inaurire’ from Lactantius 
(R. der Ap. p. 32, not.). 15.] οὗτοι, 
seeabove. ὥρα τρίτη] the first hour of 
prayer: before which no pious Jew might 
eat or drink: ‘* Non licet homini gustare 
quidquam, antequam oraverit orationem 
suam.” Berachoth.f. 28.2; Lightf., Wetst. 
But perhaps we need not look further 
than the ordinary intent of such a defence— 
the improbability of intoxication at that 
hour of the morning. See Eccl. x. 16; Isa. 
v.11; 1 Thess. v. 7. 16.| This pro- 
phecy is from the LXX, with very slight 


oo Hi. 8}. 

ABCDE 

Prabe 

dfghk 

lmop 
13 


13—20. TIPAREIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, 21 


rae, x a 
τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ " εἰρημένον διὰ τοῦ προφήτου 17 >” Karas ach. xii. 40 


> A > / ς / , ¢ la) \ 
ἐν ταῖς “ ἐσχάταις “ ἡμέραις, λέγει ὁ θεός, “ ἐκχεῶ STO ΤΟΣ τε: 
rn ΄ , A c 2 Tim. iii. 1. 
τοῦ πνεύματός μου ἐπὶ ‘racav ἱ σάρκα, καὶ προφητεύ- James... 
ς CAN GOA = Sa. ii. 2 al. 
σουσιν οἱ viol ὑμῶν καὶ ai θυγατέρες ὑμῶν, καὶ οἱ ὃ νεα- ὅτ ἃ 
/ Cait CoN al aera ” \ e ΄ ΓΝ Tit. iii. 6. 
νίσκοι ὑμῶν " ὁράσεις ὄψονται, καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι ὑμῶν Zech. xii-10. 
i 8. 9 ΄ 6 = Mark vi. 43. 
ἱ ἐνυπνίοις 1 ἐνυπνιασθήσονται. We Kai Kye ἐπὶ τοὺς Luke xx.10 


, \ \ ΄ Ξ Matt. xxiv. 22. 
δούλους μου καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς δούλας μου ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις “Yorn sie 


John xvii. 2. 


Ξκείναις ἐκ Εεω a 71 ὃ Ἴ [9] TI ͵ Ἴ ἧς ὶ TT 7 - 1 Co wae 
€ r.1. 29 al. 


19 \ 16 , m , 3 ~ > A n yy \ 

covow. 19 καὶ ᾿ δώσω ™ τέρατα ἐν TH οὐρανῷ " ἄνω καὶ 
Lal AEN a aA an 

σημεῖα ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ° κάτω, αἷμα Kal πῦρ Kal ἀτμίδα 


καπνοῦ. 


al. 

g ch. v. 10 reff. 
h = Rev. (iv. 3 
bis.) ix. 17 

only. Zech. 


90 © ef 4 / > A \ e x.2 

ὁ HALOS 4 μεταστραφήσεται εἰς σκότος καὶ ἢ, Here only. 
r s » Ὁ 3 \ s 3 λθεῖ ει), { / \ 1 Kings 
σελήνη εἰς αἷμα, ὃ πριν δ ἢ ἐλθεῖν “ἡμέραν “κυρίου τὴν 


xxviii. 6, 15. 
only. Jud. vii. 13. 


j Jude 5 
k ch. xvii. 27 [Luke xix. 42] only. (1 Cor. iv. 8.) Joell. c. AN33°> compl. 
1= Matt. xxiv. 24. 
o Matt. xxvii. 51 || Mk. Mark xiv. 66. John viii. 23. Deut. iv. 39. 


(\| Mk. v. τ.) 3 Kings xiii. 3, 5. m ch. vii. 36 reff. n John xi. 41. Deut. iv. 39. 
qGal.i.7. Jamesiv.9only. Deut. xxiii. 5. 


p James iv. l4only. Ley. xvi. 13. 

1 r Matt. xxiv. 29 || Mk. Rev. vi. 12 al. Isa. xiii. 10. 
s Matt. i. 18. Mark xiv. 30. ch. vii. 2. Isa. vii. 15. 
5. 2Cor.i. 14, 2 Thess. ii. 2) only. Isa. ii. 12. 


t1 Thess. v.2. 2 Pet. 711. 10 (1 Cor. i. 8. v. 

16, 17. rec aft mpod. ins twndA* καὶ, with ABCEIP® rel 36 vulg E-lat syr [Cyr-jer, 
Bas, Chr,] and, but placing sw7A bef προφ., eth Gaud (corrns: 1st, the name of the 
prophet supplied ; and 2ndly, the και inserted to suit the LXX): ιωηλ, omg καὶ, Syr 
copt [and after προφ, sah}: om D Iren-int(iii. 12, p. 193) Rebapt, Hil, Aug). for 
εν τ. εσχ. ἡμ.; μετα TavTa (corrn to LXX) B sah eth-pl Cyr-jer,: μετὰ ταῦτα ev τ. ε. 
nu. C 103 arm. for o cos, κυριος DE vulg Iren-int Rebapt Hil. Tacas σαρκας 
D!-gr(txt D-corr!). for vuwy (1st and 2nd), αὐτων ἢ Rebapt Hil [1st Dion, | (corrn 
to suit maces σαρκας ?): om 2nd vu. C [ Dion, ]. om 8rd vu. 1) Rebapt. om 
Ath vu. (C!{appy ]) DE [Rebapt}j. om αἱ (bef θυγ.) (ΟἹ ὃ) Ὁ. ορασει 19}. ree 
ενυπνια (80 LXX-Bx}-32), with EP rel 36 vulg D-lat Chr, Sevyn,: om D!-gr: txt (so 


Lxx-Ax’b) ABC D?[-gr] δὶ fk p 13. 
18. for ye, eyw D}(and lat: txt D4). 


transpose τοὺς SovAous and τας δουλαϑ N. 


om εν τ. nu. ex. and (as LXX) kat προφητευσ. 1) Rebapt,. 
19. om (as LXX-ABx!) avw A m 871 Syr sah (of these Syr omits katw: so also. LX). 


om aa to καπνου D. 


20. μεταστρεφεται Dl-gr(txt D2(and lat): -τραφισται 1)}0). 


ACDE® p 13: ins BP rel 36 Chr,. 


variations. Where the eopies differ, it 
agrees with the Alexandrine. The varia- 
tions, &c., are noticed below.. τοῦτό 
ἐστιν, ‘this is,’ i.e. ‘this is the fact, at 
which those words pointed.’ See a some- 
what similar expression, Luke xxiv. 44. 

17.) ἐν ταῖς ἐσχ. Hp. is an exposition of the 
μετὰ ταῦτα of the LXX and Hebrew, re- 
ferring it to the days of the Messiah, as 
Isa. 11. 2; Micah iv. 1, al. See also 2 Tim. 
Higl;, Heb... ic Ἐς λέγει ὁ θεός does 
not occur in the verse of Joel, but at the 
beginning of the whole passage, ver. 12,and 
is supplied by Peter here. ἐκχεῶ] 
LXX-AN3>D: καὶ ἐκχ., BRI. It is a 
later form of the future; see Winer, edn. 
6, § 15. ἀπὸ Tov πν.] In the Heb. 
simply “ My Spirit,’—Trnr. The 
two clauses, x. of νεαν. and κ᾿. oi mpecB., 
are transposed in the LXX. 18. καί 
ye] LXX-AN34-D: καί, BR}. Aft. 
δούλας om μου ΒΝ). The Hebrew does 
not express it either time, but has, as 


om ἢ (as EXX) 
rec ins τὴν bef nuepay (conform to LXX-AB 


in E. V., ‘the servants and handmaids.’ 
kal προφητεύσουσιν is notin LXX 
nor Heb. 19.] καὶ δώσω: τέρατα ἐν 
οὐρανῷ Ed-vat.: txt ABN. ἄνω, σημεῖα, 
and κάτω are not in LXX nor Heb. 
αἷμα κ. mip... .] Not, ‘bloodshed and 
wasting by fire,’ as commonly interpreted : 
—not devastations, but prodigies, are 
foretold :—bloody and fiery appearances: 
—pillars of smoke, Heb. 20.] See 
Matt. xxiv. 29. Hp. κυρ. Not the 
first coming of Christ,—which interpre- 
tation would run counter to the whole 
tenor of the Apostle’s application of the 
prophecy :—but clearly, His second com- 
ing ; regarded in prophetic language as 
following close upon the outpouring of the 
Spirit, because it is the neat great event in 
the divine arrangements. The Apos- 
tles probably expected this coming very 
soon (see note on Rom. xiii. 11); but this 
did not at all affect the accuracy of their 
expressions respecting it. Their days wit- 


» ~ \ lal a 
u=Jobn vii, ἢ μεγάλην καὶ " ἐπιφανῆ. 41} καὶ "ἔσται, πᾶς ὃς ἐὰν 
ae τς a , < + P *y Ν 99 » 
jude ver 6. X ἐχικαλέσηται TO ὄνομα κυρίου ἡ σωθήσεται. 33 ἄνδρες 
Mal. iv. 5. ? ω > \ f 7 ΕῚ a 
vhereonly. Ἰσραηλίται, ἀκούσατε τοὺς λόγους τούτους. Ἰησοῦν 
Joel 1. αι Ἢ Τ - » Ζ 2 \ a ~ a? 4 
δῶ τς. tov Nafwpatov, ἄνδρα *amo τοῦ θεοῦ * ἀποδεδευγμένον 
7. ch. iii. 23. nm \ 
jolie Pets ὑμᾶς ° δυνάμεσιν Kal τέρασιν καὶ σημείοις ἃ οἷς 
see Luke i. ; , > 4 πὰς Η ΣΙΩΝ ͵ εὐ δώ \ 9 \ 
an, ἐποίησεν Ov αὐτοῦ ὁ θεὸς “ ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν, καθὼς αὐτοὶ 
δος 18 Rn, τι Ida Borst Bach, Sill. 9. y = Matt. x. 22 al. fr. z = Matt. xi. 19. ch. x. 
33. 2 Cor. vii. 13. Rev. ix. 18. Isa. xlv. 26. ach. xxv.7. 1Cor.iv.9. 2 Thess. ii.4 only. Esth. ii. 


1 Macc. x. 34. Xen. Hell. iv. 4. 8. 
d attr., ch. i. 1 reff. 


b = Luke ix. 13. ch. xxiv. 17 al. 


9 AB(not δὲ Ed-vat). : 
e Luke ii. 46. ch. i. 15 al. Ps, cxxxiv. 9. 


e = ch. viii. 13 reff. 


and gramml corrn), with ACEPN? rel 36: om (so ZXx-x) BDN?. 
DR’ [ins N-corr! oF 3], 
21. om ver N!(ins in very small letters &-corr!). 
R-corr! rel Chr,: txt BE 36. ins του bef κυρ. D!. 
22. ισδραηλιται (so ch. iii. 12 al) δὲ, orp. BILE]. ναζοραιον (so ch. iii. 6 al) DIN}. 
αποδεδ. bef απο τ. θ. (corrn to avoid ambiguity of avdp. απο τ. 0.) BC D-corr & 
m pvulg [sah eth] arm Ath, Chr, [Thdot-anc, Thdrt] Iren-int, Fulg,: txt AD'EP rel 
36 D-lat [syr copt Ath, Cosm, Tert, ].—dedoximacuevoy D'(appy: txt D?: probatum 
D-lat): designatum E-lat: approbatum vulg Iren-int Ambr Fulg.—qui a Deo videri 
factus est apud vos Syr. for υμ., nuas D'(and lat: txt D?) ὁ k 100-27 lect-5 [ Eus, | 
(of these 100-27 have μων below). for os, οσα D}(txt D?). om o (bef @eos) C. 
o 6. bef δι’ avrov E ἃ 1 vulg (not am demid [fuld tol}) [ Ath, Thdrt, ]. rec 
aft καθως ins Kat (καθως καὶ being a very common expr), with C3P 13 rel | vulg-ed] syr 
Chr [Thdot-anc, Cosm,]: om ABC!DERX τὴ p 36. 40 Syr [coptt arm] wth [Eus, | Ath, 
Iren-int,. for avTo., vuers παντες Es υμεις 117 vulg arm. 


om και eid. 


rec os αν (LXX), with ACDP 


especially James i. 18. ἀποδεδειγμέ- 
νον] ‘demonstratum,’ more than ‘ap- 


nessed the Pentecostal effusion, which was 
the beginning of the signs of the end : then 


follows the period, KNOWN TO THE FATHER 
ONLY, of waiting—the Church for her 
Lord,—the Lord Himself till all things 
shall have been put under His feet,—and 
then the signs shall be renewed, and the 
day of the Lord shall come. Meantime, 
and in the midst of these signs, the cove- 
nant of the spiritual dispensation is, ver. 
21—‘ Whosoever shall call on the name of 
the Lord, shall be saved.’ The gates of 
God’s mercy are thrown open in Christ to 
all people :—no barrier is placed,—no union 
with any external association or succession 
required: the promise is to individuals, 
As individuals: was ὃς ἐάν : which indi- 
vidual universality, though here by the 
nature of the circumstances spoken within 
the limits of the outward Israel, is after- 
wards as expressly asserted of Jew and 
Gentile, Rom. i. 17, where see note. 

22.) ἄνδρ. Ἰσρ. binds all the hearers in 
one term, and that one reminds them of 
their covenant relation with God: com- 
pare πᾶς οἶκος Ἰσραήλ, ver. 36. TOV 
Nafwpaiov} Not emphatically used by 
way of contrast to what follows, as Beza, 
Wetst., &c.; but only as the ordinary ap- 
pellation of Jesus by the Jews, see John 
xviii. 5, 7; ch. xxii. 8; xxvi. 9. ἀπό, 
not for ὑπό, here or any where else (see 
Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 47, b): but signifying the 
source whence, not merely the agency by 
which, the deed has place. See reff., and 


proved’ (K.V.):—shewn to be that which 
He claimed to be. ἀποδεδ. must be taken 
with ἀπὸ τ. θεοῦ : not, as some have 
divided the words, ἄνδρ. ἀπὸ τ. θεοῦ, 
ἀποδ. «.7.A.: Gal. i. 1 is no justification of 
this, for there ἀπό refers to ἀπόστολοΞ.---- 
and certainly Peter would never have 
barely thus named our Lord ‘a man from 
God.’ The whole connexion of the passage 
would besides be broken by this rendering: 
that connexion being, that the Man Jesus 
of Nazareth was by God demonstrated, dy 
God wrought in among you, by God’s 
counsel delivered to death, by God raised 
up (which raising pp is argued on till ver. 
32, then taken up again), by God (ver. 36), 
finally, made Lord and Christ. ‘This was 
the process of argument then with the Jews, 
—proceeding on the identity of a man 
whom they had seen and known,—and 
then mounting up from His works and His 
death and His resurrection, to His glorifi- 
cation,—all THE PURPOSE AND DOING OF 
Gop. But if His divine origin, or even His 
divine mission, be stated at the outset, we 
break this climacterical sequence, and lose 
the power of the argument. The ἀποδε- 
δειγμένον (εἶναι) ἀπὸ θεοῦ of Dr. Bloom- 
field is of course worse still. ols (ἃ) 
ἐποίησεν Sv avr. 6 8.] not, as De Wette, 
a low view of the miracles wrought by 
Jesus, nor inconsistent with John ii. 11 ; 
but in strict accordance with the progress 


ABCDE 
ΡΝ δὺς 
dfghk 
lmop 
13 


ΠΡΑΞΈΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


23 


/ A 
οἴδατε 38 τοῦτον ty f ὡρισμένῃ ὅ βουλῇ καὶ » προγνώσει Τοῖς avi 
la lal 3 » \ ͵ , Tren. de. 
τοῦ θεοῦ iéxdorov * διὰ χειρὸς | ἀνόμων ™ προςπήξαντες & = Luke vil 


30. ch. iv. 28, 
ay Sul 


’ /- ° ἃ e XN aA 
n ἀνείλατε, 24 ὃν ὁ θεὸς 5 ἀνέστησεν Ῥὰ λύσας τὰς T ὠδῖνας Ἐδν τὶ 17. 


hl Pet. 13.2 


nr 7 / [υ an 
τοῦ θανάτου, " καθότι οὐκ ἣν δυνατὸν " κρατεῖσθαι αὐτὸν onlyt.dudith 
1X. 


ς > bf le) 
VTT QAUTOU. 


Herod. vi. 85. k = ch. xi. 30 reff. 

m here only +. n= ch. v. 33 reff. 
others, John vi. 39, 40, 44, 54 only. 
δεσμούς, Al. H. An. xii. 5. 


iii. 2. 1. Ὁ = Eph. τ. 82. Heb. vii. 14. 
only. Psa. xv. 8. 

x.2. Rom. xi, 10. Isa. xlix. 16. 

i. 13. 1 Kings xxiii. 19. 


9 \ \ 

25 Δαυεὶδ yap λέγει “eis αὐτὸν ἡ ἸΪροορώμην 
Ν , WwW > , / x \ / v4 y 5 lal 

τὸν κύριον © ἐνώπιόν μου * διὰ παντός, ὅτι Y ἐκ δεξιῶν μου 


w = Lukei. 19. ch. iv. 10 al. 
y Matt. xx. 21,23. Lukei.1l. ver. 34. ch. vii. 55, 56. 


fae ie] 
only. see ch. 
xxvi. 5. 
i here only t. 
Bel & Dr. 22 
Theod. = 


1=1 Cor. ix. 21 3ce only. Wisd. xvii. 2. (Luke xxii. 37.) 

o = trans., of Christ, ver. 32. ch. xiii. 32, 34, xvii. 3l only. of 
p = Mark vii. 35. 
᾿ r = here (Matt. xxiv. 8 || Mk. 1 Thess. v. 3) only. Ps. xvii. 5. 
s = Lukei.7. xix. 9. (ver. 45.) ch. (iv. 35.) xvii. 31 only. L. 


q Job xxxix.2. τῶν wd. λῦσαι 


᾿ Ξε here only. Josh. xviii.l. Xen. Mem. 
1 Pet. i. 11 only. v = here (ch. xxi. 29) 
Gen. xxiv. 51. x Matt. xviii. 10. ch. 
Heb. 


28. rec aft x5. ins λαβοντες (corrn to fill up the constr), with DEPN? rel 36 syr 


[Eus, Cyr, Thdot-anc,] Chr, [Cyr-p,] Cosm, : om ABC}N? 
rec χειρων (corrn), with C3EP rel 36 vulg [Syr arm- 


arm Ath, Iren-int, Victorin,. 


p 40 vulg Syr coptt eth 


zoh | coptt Chr, [Cosm,] Iren-int,: txt ABCIDN p 18 [syr eth Eus,} Ath, Cyr[-p,]. 
(ave:Aare, so ABCDEPR ἀρ [138] 36 [Eus,] Ath,.) 


24. aft Avoas ins δι αὐτου E. 


for θανατου, adov (corrn from vv. 27, 31: see also 


Ps. xvii. 5) Ὁ vulg E-lat Syr copt Polye, Epiph, Ps-Ath, Iren-int, [Thdrt-int, ]. 


25. ins μεν bef yap E 36. 
κυριον ins μου DN: om evwmoy Syr. 


of our Lord through humiliation to glory, 
and with His own words in that very 
Gospel (v. 19), which is devoted to the 
great subject, the manifestation, by the 
Father, of the ‘glory of the Son. This 
side of the subject is here especially dwelt 
on in argument with these Jews, to exhibit 
(see above) the whole course of Jesus of 
Nazareth, as the ordinance and doing of 
THE GoD oF ISRAEL. 23.] βουλή 
and πρόγνωσις are not the same: the 
former designates the counsel of God—His 
Eternal Plan, by which He has arranged 
(cf. ὡρισμένῃ) all things; the latter, the 
omniscience, by which every part of this 
plan is foreseen and unforgotten by Him. 
ἔκδοτον] by whom, is not said, but 
was supplied by the hearers. τῇ ὥρισμ. ἄς. 
are not to be joined to ἔκδοτον as agents 
—the dative is that of accordance and 
appointment, not of agency :—see Winer, 
edn. 6, § 31.6, b, and ch. xv. 1; 2 Pet. 
i, 21. ὃ. χειρὸς ἀνόμων] viz. of the 
Roman soldiers, see reff. προςπή- 
ξαντες) The harshness and unworthiness 
of the deed are strongly set forth by a 
word expressing the mechanical act merely, 
having nailed up, as in contrast with the 
former clause, from Ἰησοῦν to ὑμῶν. 
Peter lays the charge on the multitude, 
because they abetted their rulers,—see 
ch. iii. 17, where this is fully expressed : 
not for the far-fetched reason given by 
Olshausen, that ‘all mankind were in fact 
guilty of the death of Jesus:’ in which 
case, as Meyer well observes (and the 
note in Olsh.’s last edn. ii. p. 666, does 
not answer this), Peter must have said 


(προορωμην, so AB}CDERN (not 36).) 


aft 


‘we, not ‘you.’ 24.] There is some 
difficulty in explaining the expression 
ὠδῖνας in the connexion in which it is 
here found. The difficulty lies, not in 
the connexion of λύειν with wdivas, 
which is amply justified, see reff., but in 
the interpretation of ὠδῖνας here. For 
ὠδῖνας Sav. must mean the pains of death, 
i.e. the pains which precede and end in 
death ; a meaning here inapplicable. (The 
explanation of Chrys., Theophyl., Cc., 6 
θάνατος ὥδινε κατέχων αὐτόν, κ. τὰ δεινὰ 
ἔπασχε, will not be generally maintained 
at the present day. Stier does maintain 
it, Reden der Apostel, vol. i. p. 49 ff, but 
to me not convincingly: and, characteris- 
tically, Wordsw. also.) The fact may be, 
that Peter used the Hebrew word "5317, ref. 
Psa. ‘nets, or bands,’ i. 6. the nets in which 
death held the Lord captive; and that, in 
rendering the words into’Greek, the LXX 
rendering of the word in that place and 
Ps. exiv. 3, viz. ὠδῖνες, has been adopted. 
(But see Prolegg. to Vol. I. ch. ii. § 11. pp. 
28,29.) It has been attempted in vain by 
Olshausen and others to shew that ὠδῖνες 
sometimes in Hellenistic Greek signifies 
bands. No one instance cited by Schleus- 
ner (Lex. V. T.) of that meaning is to 
the point. See Simonis Lex., 93m. 

οὐκ ἦν Suv. depends for its proof on the 
yap which follows. 25.| els αὐτόν, 
not ‘of Him, but in allusion to Him. 
The 16th Psalm was not by the Rabbis 
applied to the Messiah: but Peter here 
proves to them that, if it is to be true in its 
highest and proper meaning of any one, 
it must be of Him. We are met at every 


24. 


5. —lcn, =i, 
13. 2 Thess. 
ii.2. see Heb. 
xii. 26, 27. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON. 


Tf: 


ἐστὶν ἵνα μὴ “ σαλευθῶ 506 διὰ τοῦτο * ηὐφράνθη μου 
΄ ,ὔ \ b ᾿ / ς le) ΄ c Μ δὲ \ 
ἡ καρδία Kat» ἡγαλλιάσατο ἡ γλωσσά μου, “ ETL OE καὶ ἢ 


- 


> 4. δ. ΄ / » / 
achvniier, σάρξ μου ἃ κατασκηνώσει © ἐπ᾽ " ἐλπίδι, 51 ὅτι οὐκ ἴ ἐγκατα- 


b ch. xvi. 34. 
Matt. τ. 12. 
Luke x. rot ᾿ ᾿ 2 
. ἡ. 8 ἃ]. e 3 
LPet.i-6el. 1 ὅσιόν σου ™ ἰδεῖν ® διαφθοράν. 
ς here only. 
see ch. xxi. 


28. 


ἃ Matt. xiii. 32 


Deters τὴν ψυχήν μου Peis ᾿ἅδην οὐδὲ * δώσεις τὸν 


28 ο ἐγνώρισάς μοι Ρ ὁδοὺς 


ζωῆς, ᾿ πληρώσεις με εὐφροσύνης " μετὰ τοῦ προςώπου 
29 ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί, ' ἐξὸν εἰπεῖν ἃ μετὰ ἃ παῤῥησίας 


Ziv... \ CL) \ ~ ν ΄ ΄ “ ν᾿ ae 
e Rom. iy. 18 προς υμας περὶ του πατριάρχου Δαυείδ, OTL Και ΕεΤτε- 


Ι! only, Ps. σου. 
reff. ic 
f 2 Cor. iv, 9 reff. = Rev. vi. 9. xx.4 only. Wisd. iii. 1. 


Ξ > 

viii. 40 reff. i Matt. xi. 23. Rev. i. 18 al. 
vii. 26. Ps. Ixxxv. 2. 

n ver. 31. ch. xiii. 34, ἄς. only. 


q = ch. xiii. 52 reff. 


Job xxxiii. 28. 


Hos. xiii. 14. 
m = Luke ii. 26. ch. xiii. 35 (from 1. c.) &e. 
ΟἹ Cor. xii. 3 reff. 
rch. xiv. 17 only. Esth. ix. 18, 19. 


Jos. Antt. vi. 14. 2. h constr., ch. 

k = ver. 4 reff. 1 == Heb. 
Heb. xi. 5. see Ps. Ixxxviii. 48. 
p = Matt. xxi. 32. Prov. v. 6. 


s constr., here only. 1. c. t Matt. 


xii. 4. 2Cor. xii.4 only. Esth. iv. 2. w. aor., ch. xxi. 37 reff. ie u ch. iv. 29, 31. xxviii. 31 only. Lev. 
xxvi. 13, see John vii. 13. Eph. vi, 19. _ _vch. vii. 8,9. Heb. vii. 4 only. 1 Chron. xxvii. 22. w Matt. ii. 
19 al. gospp. only, exc. ch, vii. 15. Heb. xi.22. 1 Chron. xix. 28. 


26. (ηυφρανθη, so ABCDEPX m p 40 Clem,.) 
LXX), with ACDEPN? rel 36: txt BX! Clem. 


rec ἡ καρδ. bef μου (corrn from 
ep [C]DR. 


27. rec adov {so LXX-4), with EP rel Orig,: txt (so Lxx-Bx) ABCDN b c f(k ?) op 


40 Clem, Thi [ Epiph, }. 
28. γνωρισας D'-gr(txt D?). 
LxX (Field is wrong). 


turn by the shallow objections of the 
Rationalists, who seem incapable of com- 
prehending the principle on which the 
sayings of David respecting himself are 
referred to Christ. To say, with De 
Wette, that Peter’s proof lies not in any 
historical but only in an zdeal meaning of 
the Psalm, is entirely beside the subject. 
To interpret the sayings of David (or 
indeed those of any one else) ‘ historically,’ 
i.e. solely as referring to the occasion 
which gave rise to them, and having no 
wider reference, would be to establish a 
canon of interpretation wholly counter to 
the common sense of mankind. Every 
one, placed in any given position, when 
speaking of himself as in that position, 
speaks what will refer to others similarly 
situated, and most pointedly to any one 
who shall in any especial and pre-eminent 
way stand in that position. Applying 
even this common rule to David’s sayings, 
the applicability of them to Christ will be 
legitimized :—but how much more, when 
we take into account the whole circum- 
stances of David’s theocratic position, as 
the prophetic representative and type of 
Christ ! Whether the Messiah was present 
or not to the mind of the Psalmist, is of 
very little import: in some cases He plainly 
was: in others, as here, David’s words, 
spoken of himself and his circumstances, 
could only be in their highest and literal 
sense true of the great Son of David who 
was tocome. David often spoke concerning 
himself ; but THE SPIRIT WHO SPOKE IN 
Davin, εἰς τὸν χριστόν. The citation is 
verbatim from the LXX (except in the 
order of pov 7 καρ. : see var. readd.): the 


εὐφροσυνὴν Al(appy) [mj 96(sic Scholz), so A in 


Vatican, Sinaitic, and Alexandrine copies 
agree throughout, except in ἅδην BR (τον 
ad. NX!) and ἅδου (A), and εὐφροσύνης (BR) 
and -νὴην (A), between which our mss. 
also vary. ἵνα ph σαλευθῶ] Heb. 
‘I shall not be moved, 26. ἡ γλῶσσά 
μου] Heb. 23, ‘my glory: so in Ps. 
ceviii. 1, where our prayer-book version 
renders “1 will give praise with the best 
member that I have.” Cf. also Ps. lvii. 8. 

27. διαφθοράν] Heb. nme, <‘cor- 
ruption, from mim, corrupit,—or ‘the 
pit, from mw, subsidere. De Wette main- 
tains the last to be the only right render- 
ing: but the Lexicons give both, as above, 
and Meyer and Stier defend the other. 

28.] ἐγνώρισας «.7.A.: Heb. ‘ Thow 
wilt make known, πληρώσεις K.T.A.: 
Heb. ‘ Fulness of joys (is) with thy pre- 
sence,’ These two last clauses refer to 
the Resurrection and the Ascension respec- 
tively. 29. ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί] g. d., “1 
am your brother, an Israelite, and there- 
fore would not speak with disrespect of 
David.’ He prepares the way for the apo- 
logetic sentence which follows. ἐξόν] 
supply, not ἔστω, but ἐστίν, I may, Xe. 

The title ‘Patriarch’ is only here 
applied to David, as the progenitor of the 
kingly race:—Abraham and the sons of 
Jacob are so called in the N. T. reff. In 
the LXX, the word is used of chief men, 
and heads of families, with the exception 
of 2 Chron. xxiii. 20, where it represents 
“captains of hundreds.” ὅτι} not, 
because; but that,—contains the subject 
of εἰπεῖν, and is that for which the apology 
is made. We learn from 1 Kings ii. 
10, and Neh. iii. 16, that David was buried 


ABCDE 
PNabe 
dfghk 
lmop 
13 


26—33. IIPAZEIS AIITOSTOAON. 25 


͵ Ν Χ 3 4 \ ‘ y fel » A δ 7 ’ e A 
λεύτησεν καὶ * ἐτέφη, καὶ TOY μνῆμα αὐτοῦ ἐστιν 7 ἐν ἡμῖν τι Cor. xv.4 
” Peg Oe IF ΄ 7 > ape sear 
ἄχρι τῆς ἡμέρας ταύτης. 39 προφήτης οὖν " ὑπάρχων καὶ ¥ obvi τὸ τοῖ 
ἊΣ \ “ bv be .Y Sean 18 \ > ἃ a a 25,27. Col. 
εἰδὼς ὅτι > ὅρκῳ ὃ“ ὦμοσεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεὸς ἐκ ἃ καρποῦ τῆς 


iii. 3. Num. 
5) ΄ 4... κα / A xxiii. 21. 

ὁ ὀσφύος αὐτοῦ 'ἱ καθίσαι ἐπὶ τὸν θρόνον αὐτοῦ, 51 ὅ προ- "τ Luke vii. 
a \ a ΟΥ̓ BN a hh? , a na of 55 al. t pea 
ἰδὼν ἐλάλησεν περὶ τῆς " ἀναστάσεως TOU χριστοῦ, OTL Ps. iiv.i9. 
, τὴ 7 : ’ Aas Sir. xx. 16. 

οὔτε ' ἐγκατελείφθη * εἰς * ddou οὔτε ἡ σὰρξ αὐτοῦ ' εἶδεν > see James v. 
- 7en. 

i διαφθοράν. ue 


32 A AY ᾽ A ] ᾽ / Φ / 
τοῦτον τὸν Inoovv !uvéotnoev o θεός, e chaste ἘΜ τδ 


a 7, ς A > \ m , 99 A 5 A 5 a only. Isa. 
οὗ πάντες ἡμεῖς ἐσμὲν τ μάρτυρες. * τῇ δεξιᾷ οὖν τοῦ xix. 18 
τ SA. CXxxi. 


11. = Lukei. 42. Gen. xxx. 2. e == Heb. vii. 5,10 only. Gen. xxxy. 11. f trans., Matt. 
xix. 28. 1 Cor. vi.4. Eph. 1.20 only. 1 Kings xxx. 21. g Gal. iii. 8 only. = Ps, exxxix. 3. Wisd. 
xix. 1. see Gen. xxxvii. 18. h ch. 1. 22 reff. i ver. 27, k here only. Isa. 
xiv. 19 al. = ver, 24 reff. m ch. i. 8 reff. 


£9. To μνημιον D. for ev, map D vulg E-lat. 

30. εἰδων D'[-gr](txt D4), for οσφυος, καρδιας D1(txt 7:8: precordia D-lat). 
rec aft oo. αὐτου ins To κατα σαρκα αναστησειν Tov χριστον (explanatory gloss, taken 
into the text from margin), with (D1E)P rel syr Kus, (Chr,) Thdrt Thl—but om το D!, 
om To κ. cap. Εἰ. 4. 27-9: αναστησαι D1E 13: aft τον xp. ins και D-gr E 69. 96. 105: 
om ABCD®N p Hr vulg Syr coptt «th arm [Eus,] Cyr, Iren-int, Victorin, [ Fulg, ]. 
rec Tov θρονου, with EP? rel Chr[Cyr,], @povov (only) P!: txt ABCDX® p Orig Eus, 
(2xx-B"(B! def) x34 have -vov, LXX-Ax! -vov: Meyer thinks -νον a grammi alteration to 
suit better the transitive καθισαι: but qu 7). 

31. προειδως D® 1. 60-9. 100-4-27-63: προειδων (= προιδ.) ACE c 6 13.—om προιδ. 


«A. π. τ. D)(and lat). 


rec for ovre and ovre, ov and ovde (corrn from ver 27), with 


E-gr(ove) Prel syrr coptt Thdor-mops [Thdrt,]: οὐκ and ovre 13: ovre and ovde B: 


txt ACDN p 36 vulg E-lat Eus, Chr, Cyr, Iren-int Victorin Fulg Bede-gr. 


ree 


κατελειφθη, with P rel: txt ABCDEN df ἢ 18. 86 Eus, Thaum, Chr, [Cyr,] Thdrt 


Thdor-mops. 


- rec adds ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτου (from ver 27), with C3EP rel syr(aft a6.) [arm 


Thaum(bef eyxar.)] Chr,(bef eyxar.) Thdrt(aft a8.) Fulg, Philast,: om ABC!DN p 


vulg Syr coptt eth Did-int Iren-int Victorin. 


adnv BN b (k ?) o p 36 Eus, Thaum,. 


32. aft τουτον ins ovy D}(and lat) E Ambr, Victorin,.—om τὸν D!-gr(txt D8). 
ἐσμεν bef ques N: μαρτ. bef ἐσμεν D vulg [Did-int]: om ἐσμεν P!: txt ABCEP* rel. 


at Jerusalem, in the city of David, i.e. 
the stronghold of Zion, 2 Sam. v. 7 

Josephus, Antt. vii. 15. 3, gives an account 
of the high priest Hyrcanus, when be- 
sieged by Antiochus Eusebes,—and after- 
wards King Herod, opening the tomb and 
taking treasure from it. See also xiii. 8. 
4 vxwin iets: Bo Sp 2.5. “Dio Cassius 
(lxix. 14) mentions, among the prodigies 
which preceded Hadrian’s war, that the 
tomb of Solomon (the same with that of 
David, see Jos. Antt. xvi. 7. 1) fell down. 
Jerome mentions (Epist. xlvi. (xvii.) ad 
Marcellam, vol. i. p. 209) that the tomb 
of David was visited in his time (the end 
of the fourth century). 30. |] προφή- 
τῆς, in the stricter sense, a foreteller of 
Suture events by the inspiration of the 
Holy Spirit. εἰδώς See 2 Sam. vil. 
12. The words are not cited from the 
LXX, but rendered from the Hebrew. 
On the principle of interpretation of this 
prophecy, see above on ver. 25. 31.] 
The word προϊδών distinctly asserts the 
prophetic consciousness of David in the 
composition of this Psalm. But of what 
sort that prophetic consciousness was, 
may be gathered from this same Apostle, 


1 Pet. i. 1O—12: that it was not a distinct 
knowledge of the events which they forc- 
told, but only a conscious refcrence in 
their minds to the great promises of the 
covenant, in the expression of which they 
were guided by the Holy Spirit of prophecy 
to say things pregnant with meaning not 
patent to themselves but to us. 32. | 
From ver. 25 has been employed in sub- 
stantiating the Resurrection as the act of 
God announced by prophecy in old time: 
now the historical fact of its accomplish- 
ment is affirmed, and the vouchers for it 
produced. ov | either masc., see ch. 
i. 8; xiii. 31,—or neut. The former seems 
most probable as including the latter. 
‘We are His witnesses,’ would imply, ‘ We 
testify to this His work,’ which work im- 
plied the Resurrection. πάντες, first 
and most properly the Twelve: but, se- 
condarily, the whole body of believers, all 
of whom, at this time, had probably seen 
the Lord since His Resurrection; see 1 Cor. 
xv. 6. 33.] Peter now comes to the 
Ascension—the exaltation of Jesus to be, 
in the fullest sense, Lord and Christ. 

τῇ δεξιᾷ] by the right hand, not ‘zo 
the right hand.’ The great end of this 


26 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON. 11: 
‘ft al n ΄ \ / ο > / lal , lal 
1 Matt, xxii θεοῦ "ὑψωθεὶς THY τε “ ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ABCDE 
12. ch. v. 31. PRabe 
ΦᾺ \ an \ / a ΓΒ Lal 
xii. 7. ἁγίου Ρ λαβὼν P παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς 4 ἐξέχεεν τοῦτο ὃ ὑμεῖς dfghk 
1 Pet. ν. 6 al. 34 > \ eur , ri? lmop 
Sir. xv. 5. [καὶ] βλέπετε καὶ ἀκούετε. οὐ γὰρ Δαυεὶδ τ ἀνέβη " εἰς 13 
¢= ch.i.4 reff. 
> John v. 34 r 
rr ss. ποὺς οὐρανούς, λέγει δὲ αὐτὸς Hizey κύριος τῷ κυρίῳ 
δ αι, μου Κάθου " ἐκ δεξιῶν μου 35 ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς , 
James i, 7. ts ; ΡΞ Ρ 36 FA » ° 
Rev.i27. gov ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου. ἃ ἀσφαλῶς οὖν 
ΔΗ δ r S 3 A , ΄ Ν 
Tae?’ ψινωσκέτω πᾶς “οἶκος IopanX ὅτι καὶ κύριον αὐτὸν :--οτὲ 
John iii. 13. 
Humatas 6 (from Deut. xxx. 12). Rev. xi. 12. s ver. 25 reff. Psa. cix. 1. t Matt. v. 35. Luke 
xx. 43. ch. vii. 49. Heb. i. 13. x. 18. James ii. 3 only. Isa. Ixvi. 1. Ps. xeviii. 5. u = here (Mark 


xiv. 44. ch. xvi. 23) only. 
8, 10 (from Jer. xxxvili. [xxxi.] 31). 


33. for τὴν τε, και τὴν D. 


Wisd. xviii. 6. see Gen. xxxiv. 


v= Matt. x. 6. ch. vii. 42. Heb. viii. 


rec τ. ay. mveup., With DP rel Thdrt, Cosm, Iren-int,: 
txt ABCEN ὁ p 13 Chr, [Cyr-p,], spiritus sancti vss(appy). 


for TovTo o umeis, υμειν 


o D}(and lat: txt D®): aft τουτο ins to δωρον E [demid tol syrr] Iren-int { Did-in 


Ambr. 
ACEPX rel [vss Did-int, ] Thdrt, 


rec ins νυν bef vuers, with CEP rel syr Cosm, [aft, Iren-int,] : 
DX 1 p vulg Syr coptt [eth] arm Did[-int, 1. 
: ins BD 13 [arm-zoh ]. 


om iene 


rec om Ist καὶ (as wnnecessary), with 


34. for λέγει de, εἰρηκεν yap D {simly Syr]; deatt autem vulg(not am fuld το). 


for εἰπεν, λέγει D am lat-mss-in-Bede. 


xxii. 44 ||) [A] B!-?(sic, see table) [ΟΕ ΡΝ 8, 


35. om av D!(ins D? 
36. ins o bef ox. CD 6. 


speech is to shew forth (see above) the 
Gop oF JsraEt as the doer of all these 
things. However well the sense ‘to’ 
might seem to agree with the ἐκ δεξιῶν 
of ver. 34, we must not set aside a very 
suitable sense, nor violate syntax (for 
the construction is entirely unexampled in 
Hellenistic as well as prose classical Greek) 
in order to suit an apparent adaptation. 
The reference is carried on by the word 
δεξιά, though it be not in exactly the same 
position in the two cases. And the ἀνέβη 
εἰς τοὺς ovp. of ver. 34 prepares the way 
for the ἐκ δεξιῶν following without any 
harshness. On the poetic dative after 
verbs of approach, see Musgr., Pheenisse, 
310 (803, Matth.), and Hermann, Antig. 
234. See also ch. v. 31, and Winer (who 
defends the construction), edn. 6, ὃ 91. 5. 
Wordsw. denies that the δεξιὰ θεοῦ is ever 
specified in the N. Τ᾿. as the instrument by 
which He works. But he has omitted to 
state that this and the similarly ambi- 
guous place, ch. v. 31, are the only real 
instances of the expression being used, all 
the rest being local, ἐκ δεξιῶν or ἐν δεξιᾷ : 
so that his @ictum goes for nothing. And 
in the LXX the use of God’s right hand 
as the instrument is very frequent: cf. 
Exod. xv. 6, 12; Ps. xvii. 6; lix. 5 
(where the dat. is used ieee and about 
20 other places; Isa. xlviii. 13; Ixiii. 12, 
ἄς. After this, the objection, when ap- 
plied to a speech so full of O. T. spirit and 
diction as this, would, even if valid as 
regards the N. T., be irrelevant. 

ἐπαγγελίαν) Christ is said to have re- 
ceived from the Father the promise above 


ins o bef κυριος (as LXX; see also Matt 


elz om Ist και, with Syr coptt [th(Treg) Bas, |] Eustath- 


cited from Joel, which is spoken of His 
days. This,and not of course the declara- 
tions made by Himself to the same effect, 
is here referred to, though doubtless 
those were in Peter’s mind. The very 
word, ἐξέχεεν, refers to ἐκχεῷ above, ver. 

3 τοῦτο, ‘this influence,’ this 
merely; leaving to his hearers the in- 
ference, that this, which they saw and 
heard, must be none other than the 
effusion of the Spirit. βλέπετε 
need not imply, as Dr. Burton thinks, 
that “there was some visible appear- 
ance, which the people saw as well as 
the apostles :’’—very much of the effect 
of the descent of the Spirit would be 
visible,—the enthusiasm and gestures of 
the speakers, for instance; not, however, 
the tongues of flame,—for then none could 
have spoken as in ver. 13. 84. This 
exaltation of Christ is also proved from 
prophecy—and from the same passage with 
which Jesus Himself had silenced His ene- 
mies. See notes, Matt. xxii. 41 fh. ° δέ 
is not ‘for, which would destroy the whole 
force of the sentence: the Apostle says, For 
David himself is not ascended into the 
heavens,—as he would be if the former 
prophecy applied to him: Buv he himself 
says, removing all doubt on the subject, 
&e. The rendering δέ, for, makes it 
appear as if the ἀνέβη εἰς τ. οὐρ. werea 
mistaken inference from Psalm cx. 1, 
whereas that passage is adduced to preclude 
its being made from the other. 36. ] 
THE CONCLUSION FROM ALL THAT HAS 
BEEN SAID. mas οἶκος “lop. = was 
ὃ oik. Ἴσρ., οἶκος being a familiar noun 


i 

34—38. 
καὶ χριστὸν ὁ θεὸς 
ὑμεῖς ἐσταυρώσατε. 

387 ᾿Ακούσαντες δὲ 


\ A 
te πρὸς τὸν Ilerpov καὶ τοὺς λοιποὺς ἀποστόλους Ti 1. 


Me 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATOSTOAON. 27 
Ὑ ἐποίησεν, τοῦτον τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ὃν w= Matt. iv. 
Gal. Gen. 


xly. 
* κατενύγησαν τὴν καρδίαν, εἶπόν x here oni. 


yen. XXXIV. 

Ps cviil. 
16. (-νυξις, 
Rom. xi. 8.) 


ποιήσωμεν, ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί; 388 Tlérpos δὲ πρὸς αὐτοὺς 5 Nate ape 


/ “ 
Y Μετωνοήσατε, καὶ 5 βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν * ἐπὶ τῷ 


ap-Thdrt, 
Ath, Chr, ] Iren-int, [ Tert, |. 


[Nyss, Cees, : καὶ sepia ov o Geos bef avtov c m 4. 100: αυὑτον bef κυριον coptt (a 
om avtov D!(and lat): txt ABCD? 36 vulg arm Eustath, 
erat. bef o θεος (corrn) BX p vulg[-ed] syrr copt «th 
: om ὁ @. lect-12: txt ACDEP rel am fuld [demid 
fustath, Bas, Chr, | Epiph, Tren- -int,. (18 def.) 


positions for perspicuity) : 
Ath, Bas, Chr, Iren-int,. 
Bas, ] Ath, Leont, Tert, Amb, 


ch. iii. 19. 
Vill. 22 al. 

Jer. viii. 6. 

z constr.. here only. 


: ins ABCDEPN rel vulg syr [arm-zoh] zth-pl['Tischdf] Epiph, Nyss, [ Bas, 
rec Kat χριστὸν bef avroy, with EP rel ese Epiph, 


ἰ trans- 


om τὸν D}(ins D2). 


87. for δε, ow E-gr Aug,.—rore maytes οἱ συνελθοντες κ. axovoavtes D syr-mg. 


κατηνυγησαν E p 
ΑΒΟΝ p [Bas, Epiph, | Chr). (18 def.) 


δειξατε nuw DE tol syr-mg Aug,[om,]. 


rec τή Kapdia (see Ps cviii. 16), with DEP rel vulg: txt 
for εἰπὸν Te, και ect. E: 
ΤῊΝ 1 18. 78. 103 Aug,.—ka τινες εξ avtwy evray D![-gr |. 

[ Aug, ]. rec ποιήσομεν, with D rel Cyr-jer, : 
Chr. (13 def.)—ins ουν bef ποι. (see Lu iii. 10) D Iren-int Aug,. 


em. δὲ ἢ: εἰπόντες 
om λοιπους D 104 
txt ABCEPS ἃ ἢ Καὶ ῥὶ Bas Epiph, 
at end, add υπο- 


38. rec ins εφη bef προς avrous, with EP rel [syr coptt Thdrt,]; φησιν bef καὶ Barr. 


ΑΟΝ p vulg Cyr 


yr-jer,: 


φησιν bef μεταν. D: for erp. δε, εἰπε δε πετρος a h 38. 67. 113 


lect-12 Syr eth arm (ail these varr shew that originally the verb was not expressed) : 


om B 65. 127-63 demid. (13 def.) 
txt AEPN rel Bas, Chry. 


used anarthrously: see Eph. ii. 21, note, 
and Winer, edn. 6, § 19, who however 
does not give οἶκος in his list: the whole 
house of Israel—for all hitherto said has 
gone upon proofs and sayings belonging 
to Israel, and to all Israel. ὁ θεὸς 
ἐποίησεν, as before, is the ground-tone 
of the discourse. κύριον, from ver. 
34. χριστόν, in the full and glorious 
sense in which that term was propheti- 
cally known. The same is expressed ch. v. 
81 by ἀρχηγὸν k. σωτῆρα ὕψωσεν. 

The final clause sets in the strongest and 
plainest light the fact to which the dis- 
course testifies—ending with ὃν ὑμεῖς 
ἐσταυρώσατε, ---ἢ 8 remembrance most 
likely to carry compunction to their 
hearts. ‘In clausula orationis iterum illis 
exprobrat quod Eum crucifixerint, ut majori 
conscientiz dolore tacti ad remedium aspi- 


rent.’ Calvin in loc. ‘ Aculeus in fine.’ 
Bengel. 37—41.] EFrEcT OF THE 
DISCOURSE. 87. κατενύγ.] κατανύσσω 


is exactly ‘compungo.’ The compunction 
arose from the thought that they had 
rejected and crucified Him who was now 
so powerful, and under whose feet they, as 
enemies, would be crushed. ‘ Concionis 
fructum Lucas refert, ut sciamus non 
modo in linguarum varietate exsertam 
fuisse Spiritus Sancti virtutem, sed in 
eorum etiam cordibus qui audiebant.’ 

Calvin. ποιήσωμεν, the deliberative 


for em, ev BCD [Cyr-jer,] Epiph, [Cyr, Thdrt, ] : 


subjunctive,—cf. Winer, edn. 6, § 41, a. 
4, 6.—What must we do? 38. | 
μετανοήσατε, not, as in Matt. iii. 2; iv. 17, 
μετανοεῖτε. The aorist denotes speed, a 
definite, sudden act: the present, a habit, 
more gradual, as that first moral and legal 
change would necessarily be. The word 
imports change of mind; here, change 
from thinking Jesus an impostor, and 
scorning Him as one crucified, to being 
baptized in His name, and looking to Him 
for remission of sins, and the gift of the 
Spirit. The miserable: absurdity of 
rendering metav., or ‘pcenitentiam agite,’ 
by ‘do penance,’ or understanding it as 
referring to a course of external rites, is 
well exposed by this passage—in which 
the internal change of heart and purpose 
is insisted on, to be testified by admission 
into the number of Christ’s tollowers. 
See Calvin’s note. βαπτισθήτω) Here, 
on the day of Pentecost, we have the first 
mention and administration of CHRISTIAN 
BAPTISM. Before, there had been the 
baptism of repentance for the remission 
of sins, by John, Luke iii. 3; but now we 
have the important addition ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόμ. 
Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ,--οὐ the Name—i. 6. on 
the confession of that which the Name 
implies, and into the benefits and blessings 
which the Name implies. The Apostles 
and first believers were not thus baptized, 
because, ch. i. 5, they had received the 


28 


a Matt. xxvi. 
28. Luke iii. 
3 || Mk. 

b = ch. viii. 20. 
Χ. 45. χὶ..17. 
John iv. 10. 

ech. i. 4 reff. 

d here only. d 
2 Kings vii. 

ς Ὁ“ 
ἡμῶν. 
reff. 

f — ch. xiii. 2 
reff. 

g=Lukexi. ] 
53. ch. xiii. 
91 αχὶν, 17. 
xxv. l4. 
xxvii. 20. 
xxviii. 23. Luke only, exc. Heb. vii. 23. Num. ix. 19. 

21. Rom.v.9. Ezek. xxxvi. 29. 
ii. 18 (Luke iii. 5) only. 


σκολιᾶς ταύτης. 


Deut. xxxii. δ. 


30+. 2 Mace. iii. 9 al. (-δεκτός, 1 Tim. ii. 3. v. 4 only.) 


xvili. 2. 1 Macc. ii. 48. 


TIPABEI> ATOSTOAON. 


k = Matt. xxiv. 34 al. 


IT. 


TAS | “a ae 5 a 5" a. A \ rd 
ὀνόματι ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ ὃ εἰς ὃ ἄφεσιν ὃ ἁμαρτιῶν, καὶ λήμ- 
ψεσθε τὴν » δωρεὰν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος. 


39 ὑμῖν yap 


ἐστιν ἡ " ἐπαγγελία Kal τοῖς τέκνοις ὑμῶν, καὶ πᾶσιν τοῖς 
εἰς “ μακράν, ὅσους ἂν ' προςκαλέσηται κύριος ὁ. θεὸς 
40 “Erépois τε λόγοις ὃ πλείοσιν " διεμαρτύρατο καὶ 
παρεκάλει αὐτοὺς λέγων 1 Σώθητε ἀπὸ τῆς ἢ" γενεᾶς τῆς 
41 Οἱ μὲν οὖν ™ ἀποδεξάμενοι τὸν λόγον 
αὐτοῦ ἐβαπτίσθησαν, καὶ " προςετέθησαν [ἐν] τῇ ἡμέρᾳ 


h ch. viii. 25 reff. i = Matt. i. 
ῬῈ; πιο ἢν l= Philsii. 15. 1 Pet. 
m Luke viii. 40. ch. xviii. 27. xxi. 17, xxiv. 3. xxviii. 
n ver. 47. ch. v. 14. xi. 24. Num. 


ins Tov κυριου bef ino. xp. DE [am] syrr sah arm Cyr-jer, Bas, (Epiph,) Thdrt, Cypr, 


Hil Lucif, Ambr Aug Vig. (Syr copt Iren-int om χριστου.) 


τῶν auapT. υμων A 


B(sic ; see table) δὲ p vulg coptt eth Αὔριο; Tay au. qnuwy C: txt DEP 13 rel syrr 
[arm] Cyr-jer, Bas, Chr, [Cyr,] Iren-int, Cypr, Lucif Ambr Augajie. 


39. ἡμῖν and ἡμων D Aug, txt, |. 


[coptt']. 
40. for τε, δε D-gr kk: ome. 


(διεμαρτυρατο, so ABCDEN a h p Chr,.) 


_ for ogous, ovs (mistake in copying ?) AC 104 


rec 


om avrous, with EP rel Chr, 36-comm: ins ABCDN p 36-txt vulg [Syr coptt eth arm] 


Lucif,,and, bef rapexare:,syr-w-ast. 


taut. bef rns σκολιας D lect-1 vulg Lucif [ Aug, ]. 


41. for αποδεξ., πιστευσαντες D (syr-mg Aug ins καὶ πιστευσαντες bef εβαπτισθησαν). 
rec ins aouevws bef αποδεξ. (explanatory gloss on αποδεξ. from margin: or from 


ch xxi. 17), with EP rel syrr Chr, Aug, : 


om ABCDN p vulg coptt eth Clem, Aug). 


rec om ev, with EP rel (coptt?) Chr,: ins (possibly as a corrn to avoid the 
apparent connexion of Ty nu. εκ. With mposereOnoav) ABCDN® p vulg. 


BAPTISM BY THE Hoty Guost, the thing 
signified, which superseded that by water, 
the outward and visible sign. The 
result of the baptism to which he here 
exhorts them, preceded by repentance and 
accompanied by faith in the forgiveness of 
sins in Christ, would be, the receiving the 
gift of the Holy Spirit. 39.]| τοῖς 
τέκνοις ὑμ.., Viz. as included in the prophecy 
cited ver. 17, your little ones: not, as in 
ch. xiii. 32, ‘your descendants, which 
would be understood by any Jew to be 
necessarily implied. {Thus we have a pro- 
vidential recognition of Infant Baptism 
at the very founding of the Christian 
Church. ] πᾶσιν τοῖς εἰς μακράν, the 
Gentiles; see Eph. ii. 15. There is no 
difficulty whatever in this interpretation. 
The Apostles always expected the conver- 
sion of the Gentiles, as did every pious 
Jew who believed in the Scriptures. It 
was their conversion as Gentiles, which 
was yet to be revealed to Peter. It is 
surprising to see such Commentators as 
Dr. Burton and Meyer finding a difficulty 
where all is so plain. The very expression, 
ὅσους ἂν προςκαλέσηται ὃ θεὸς ἧμ., Shews 
in what sense Peter understood τοῖς εἰς 
Hakp.; not all, but as many as the Lord 
our God προςκαλ., shall summon to ap- 
proach to Him,—bring near,—which, in 
his present understanding of the words, 
must import—by becoming one of the 


chosen people, and conforming to their 
legal observances. 40.] The words 
cited appear to be the concluding and in- 
clusive summary of Peter’s many exhorta- 
tions, not only their general sense: just as 
if ver. 36 had been given as the representa- 
tive of his whole speech above. σώθητε 
is improperly rendered in E. V. ‘ save your- 
selves: it is not (see Stier, R. A. i. 62) 
oa (ere ἑαυτούς, as in Luke xxiii. 35, 37, 
39: be saved, Zaffet eud) retten, is the 
true sense. σκολιᾶς ---566 reff. Peter 
alludes to ref. Deut. 41.) This first 
baptism of regeneration is important on 
many aecounts in the history of the Chris- 
tian Church. It presents us with two 
remarkable features : (1) It was conferred, 
on the profession of repentance, and faith 
in Jesus as the Christ. 'There was no in- 
struction in doctrine as yet. The infancy 
of the Church in this respect corresponded 
to the infancy of the individual mind ; the 
simplicity of faith came first,—the ripeness 
of knowledge followed. Neander well ob- 
serves (Leit. u. Pflanz. p. 34) that among 
such a multitude, admitted by a confession 
which allowed of so wide an interpretation, 
were probably many persons who brought 
into the church the seeds of that Judaizing 
form of Christianity which afterwards 
proved so hostile to the true faith; while 
others, more deeply touched by the Holy 
Spirit, followed humbly the unfolding of 


ABCDE 
PNabe 
fghkl 
Τὴ o-p $3 


39—43. 


, 
ἐκείνῃ 5 ψυχαὶ ὡςεὶ τριςχίλιαι. 


a tal A lal ᾽ , \ al / Le 
ροῦντες τῇ " διδαχῇ τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ τῇ ® κοινωνίᾳ, TH 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATOSTIGCAON. 


20 


12} ἦσαν δὲ 4 προςκαρτέ- ο = ch. vii. 14. 


xxvii. 37. 
1 Pet. iii. 20. 
Gen. xlvi. 15 


7 ~ » \ an a 1. 
‘khaoel τοῦ ἄρτου καὶ ταῖς Tposevyais. 48 ἃ ἐγίνετο O€ p constr., ver. 
5 reff. 


q ch. i. 14 reff. 
1.9. Ley. vi. 2. 


exewn bef τη nuepa D [am fuld demid]. 
42. for noav de, και noav 1) Syr. 
αποστ. add ev ιερουσαλημ D. 


r Matt. vii. 28. ch. v. 28. xiii. 12. Rom. vi.17al. Ps. lix. tit. only. 
t Luke xxiv. 35 only t. ί 


ins ev bef τη 8:5. A 98 vulg D-lat. 
rec ins καὶ bef τη κλασει, with D?E PR? 18 rel [syr 


s = Gal. 
u = but w. ἐπί, ch. v. 5 reff. 

ws δὲ [1]. 

aft 


arm Chr,]: om ABC D![and lat] &! p[Syr coptt τ]. 
48. rec ἐγένετο (corrn as more usual), with EP rel Chr,: txt A[B?]& vulg syrr, 


that teaching by which He perfected the 
apostolic age in the doctrine of Christ. 
(2) Almost without doubt, this first baptism 
must have been administered, as that of 
the first Gentile converts was (see ch. x. 47, 
and note), by effusion or sprinkling, not 
by wmmersion. The immersion of 3000 
persons, in a city so sparingly furnished 
with water as Jerusalem, is equally incon- 
ceivable with a procession beyond the walls 
to the Kedron, or to Siloam, for that pur- 
ose. 

42. 47.) DESCRIPTION OF THE LIFE 
AND HABITS OF THE FIRST BELIEVERS. 
This description anticipates ; embracing a 
period extending beyond the next chapter. 
This is plain from ver. 43: for the miracle 
related in the next chapter was evidently 
the first which attracted any public atten- 
tion: vv. 44,45, again, are taken up anew 
at the end of chap. iv., where we have a 
very similar description, evidently apply- 
ing to the same period. 42.| τῇ δι- 
δαχῇ τῶν ἀποστ., compare Matt. xxviii. 20. 

τῇ κοινωνίᾳ] community : the living 
together as one family, and having things 
in common. It is no objection to this 
meaning, that the fact is repeated below, 
in ver. 45: for so is the κλάσις τοῦ ἄρτου 
in ver. 46, and the zposk. ταῖς mposevx. 

The Vulg. interpretation of τῇ κοινω- 
via (καὶ) τῇ κλάσει τ. ἄρτ. by “ communi- 
catione fractionis panis,’ per Hendiadyn, 
is curious enough. If suggested by 1 Cor. 
x. 16, it should have been ‘ communica- 
tione et fractione panis.’ The adoption of 
the right reading renders this interpreta- 
tion untenable. The supplying τῶν ἀποστ. 
after κοινωνίᾳ, as in Εἰ. V., is better than 
the last, but still I conceive bears no mean- 
ing defensible in construction. Very dif- 
ferent is the κοινωνία τ. ay. πνεύματος of 
2 Cor. xiii. 18, because there the Holy 
Ghost is imparted, is that of which all 
partake, are κοινωνοί: whereas the ko. τῶν 
ἀποστ. must signify fellowship with the 
Apostles, or fellowship with that Society of 
which the Apostles were the chief; neither 
of which meanings I conceive row. will 
bear. The special sense in which 
κοινωνία occurs, Rom. xv. 26, could not 


‘struction, it is omitted. 


be here meant, or the word would have 
been qualified in some way, τῇ κοιν. (τῇ) 
eis τοὺς πτωχούς, or the like. τῇ 
κλάσει τ. ἄρτου] This has been very 
variously explained. Chrysostom (in Act. 
Homil. vii. p. 57) says, τὸν ἄρτον μοι δοκεῖ 
λέγων, καὶ τὴν νηστείαν ἐνταῦθα σημαίνειν, 
καὶ τὸν σκληρὸν βίον' τροφῆς γάρ, οὐ τρυφῆς 
μετελάμβανον. And similarly (ΠΟυϊη θη 8, 
and of the moderns Bengel: ‘fractione 
panis, id est, victu frugali, communi inter 
ipsos.? But on ver. 46 he recognizes a 
covert allusion to the Eucharist. 

The interpretation of 7 KA. τ. apt. [here } 
as the celebration of the Lord’s Supper 
has been, both in ancient and modern 
times, the prevalent one. Chrysostom 
himself, in his 27th Hom. on 1 Cor., p. 
422, interprets it, or at all events τῇ 
κοινωνίᾳ and it together, of the Holy Com- 
munion. And the Romanist interpreters 
have gone so faras to ground an argument 
on the passage for the administration iz 
one kind only. But,—referring for a 
fuller discussion of the whole matter to 
the notes on 1 Cor. x. xi.,—barely to ren- 
der ἡ κλάσις Tov ἄρτου the breaking of 
bread in the Eucharist, as now understood, 
would be to violate historical truth. The 
Holy Communion was at first, and for some 
time, till abuses put an end to the practice, 
inseparably connected with the ἀγάπαι, or 
love-feasts, of the Christians, and unknown 
as a separate ordinance. To these ἀγάπαι, 
accompanied as they were at this time by 
the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, the 
KAdo.s Tov ἄρτου refers,—from the custom 
of the master of the feast breaking bread 
in asking a blessing; see ch. xxvii.35, where 
the Eucharist is out of the question. 

No stress must be laid, for any doctrinal 
purpose, upon the article before ἄρτου : the 
construction here requires it, and below, 
ver. 46, where not required by the con- 
I need hardly 
add that the sense inferred by Kypke and 
Heinrichs from Isa. lviii. 7, διάθρυπτε πει- 
νῶντι τὸν ἄρτον cov,—that of giving bread 
to the poor, is in the highest degree im- 
probable here, and inconsistent with the 
Christian use of 7 κλάσις τοῦ ἄρτου elses 


930 


TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


Il. 44-- 41. 


΄ = “ / IA \ an Ν 
ν τ ον ει 4. πάσῃ " Ψυχῆ φόβος, πολλά τε Κ᾿ τέρατα καὶ σημεῖα * διὰ 


Rom. ii. 9. 
xiii. 1. 
Gen. xvii. 14. 
w ch. vii. 36 
reff. 
x = ch. iv. 16, 
30 al. 
y ch. i. 15 reff. 
ἘΞ ret. i. 
12, 16. 
a= ch. iv. 32 


Tit. i. 4. Jude 3 only (ch. x. ldreff.)$. Wisd. vii. 3. 


lal ‘ / 
τῶν ἀποστόλων ἐγίνετο. 
Ss y a..\ \ ALAS Ἀν ev a / 45 \ \ 
ἦσαν ἢ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ καὶ 3 εἶχον ἅπαντα ἃ κοινά, 45 καὶ τὰ 
per ΕΟ Rees ἜΘ ey ee 
κτήματα Kal Tas “ ὑπάρξεις ᾿ἐπίπρασκον Kai © διεμέριζον 

> ἈΝ lal 1 / 7 8 / g => 46 h θ᾽ ς / 
αὐτὰ πᾶσιν ἴ καθότι av τις ® χρείαν ὃ εἶχεν, καθ᾽ ἡμέραν 


2 Chron. xxxv. 7 al. 


44 πάντες δὲ οἱ πιστεύοντες 


bch. ν.1. Matt. xix. 221} Mk. only. Prov. xxxi. 
d ch. iv. 34 reff. e Luke xxii. 


(xxix.) 16. c Heb. x. 34 only. : 
17. John xix. 24, from Ps. xxi. 18. = ch. iv. 35 only. Exod. i.12,17. Thucyd. iv. 118 fin. see ver. 24 reff. 

g abs., Mark ii. 25. ch. iv. 35. 1 Cor. xii. 24. 1 John iii. 17. h Matt. xxvi. 55. ch. iii. 2. xvi. 5. Heb. 
vil. 27 al) Num. iy. 16. 


eyeivero BICD. 
ins ov μικρα EK 25. 


for τε, δε BN p copt: yap sah: om D!-gr(ins D3) m. 
aft Sia ins των χείρων Εἰ 40 syr eth. 


aft onu. 
εγιν. bef δια τ. ἀποστ. 


AC Syr copt eth.—eyevero ce: eywovto Ε] 25. 64.—aft ἀποστ. add εν tepovoadnu 
ACER vulg[ (bef eyiv.) am] Syr copt: of these ACN vulg [am] copt further add goBos 
Te Nv meyas em παντας (see ch v. 5 al): om ΒΡ rel [sah eth arm]. 


44. ins ca bef παντες δε ACN p. 
H* [eth arm] Orig, Thl-fin. 


45. κ΄ ogo. κτηματα εἰχον ἡ ὑπαρξεις D [Syr].—om τα p. 
for καθοτι, τοις D!-gr(txt D®): καθως 138. 


καθ ἡμεραν bef πασι D. 


for δε, τε D. 
om σαν and καὶ Β 57 Orig, Salv,. 


πιστευσαντες (corrn) BX f 
παντα D. 


εμεριζον A. ins 


46. for καθ nuepay, παντες D'[and lat]: καθ ny. παντες τε DE. 


where. ταῖς mposevx. | The appointed 
times of prayer: see ver. 46. But it 
need not altogether exclude prayer among 
themselves as well, provided we do not 
assume any set times or forms of Christian 
worship, which certainly did not exist as 
yet. See notes on Rom. xiv. 5; Gal. iv. 
10. 43.] πάσῃ ψυχῇ, designating 
generally the multitude,—those who were 
not joined to the infant church. This is 
evident by the πάντες δὲ of πιστεύοντες 
when the church is again the subject, ver. 
44. φόβος, dread, reverential astonish- 
ment, at the effect produced by the out- 
pouring of the Spirit. On the [anticipa- 
tory character of the] latter part of the 
verse see general remarks at the beginning 
of this section. 44.) If it surprise us 
that so large a number should be continu- 
ally assembled together (for such is cer- 
tainly the sense, not ‘fraterno amore 
conjunctos,’ as Calvin)—we must remember 
that a large portion of the three thousand 
were persons who had come up to Jeru- 
salem for the feast, and would by this time 
have returned to their homes. εἶχον 
ἅπαντα κοινά] they had all things (in) 
common, i. 6. 20 individual property, but 
one common stock : see ch. iv. 32. That 
this was literally the case with the infant 
church at Jerusalem, is too plainly asserted 
in these passages to admit of a doubt. 
Some have supposed the expressions to 
indicate merely a partial community of 
goods : ‘non omnia vendiderunt, sed par- 
tem bonorum, que sine magno inconmodo 
carere poterant,’ Wetstein; contrary to 
the express assertion of ch. iv. 32. In 
order, however, rightly to understand this 
community, we may remark: (1) J¢ zs 
only found in the Church at Jerusalem. 


No trace of its existence is discoverable 
any where else: on the contrary, St. Paul 
speaks [constantly] of the rich and the 
poor, see 1 Tim. vi. 17; 1 Cor. xvi. 2 
| Gal. ii. 10; 2 Cor. viii. 13—15; ix. 6, 
7]: also St. James, ii. 1—5; iv. 13. 
And from the practice having at first 
prevailed at Jerusalem, we may [partly] 
perhaps explain the great and constant 
poverty of that church, Rom. xv. 25, 26; 
1 Cor. xvi. 1—3: 2 Cor. viii. ix.: also ch. 
xi. 30; xxiv. 17. The non-establish- 
ment of this community elsewhere may 
have arisen from the inconveniences which 
were found to attend it in Jerusalem: see 
ch. vi. 1. (2) This community of goods 
was not, even in Jerusalem, enforced by 
rule, as is evident from ch. v. 4 [xii. 12], 
but, originating in free-will, became per- 
haps an understood custom, still however 
in the power of any individual not to 
comply with. (8) It was not (as Grotius 
and Heinrichs thought) borrowed from 
the Essenes (see Jos. B. J. ii. 8. 3), with 
whom the Apostles, who certainly must 
have sanctioned this community, do not 
appear historically to have had any con- 
nexion. But (4) it is much more probabl 
that it arose from a continuation, and 
application to the now increased number 
of disciples, of the community in which 
our Lord and His Apostles had lived 
(see John xii. 6; xiii. 29) before. (The 
substance of this note is derived from 
Meyer, in loc.) The practice probably 
did not long continue even at Jerusalem : 
see Rom. xv. 26, note. 45. | κτήματα, 
[probably] landed property, ch. v. 1— 
see reff.: ὑπάρξεις, any other possession ; 
moveables, as distinguished from land. 

αὐτά, their price; see a similar construc- 


[Gii.45 


ono] 

ABCDE 

GPRab 

ΠΥ δ Ὁ Ὁ 

lmop 
13 


ἘΠῚ 1. 


σε ' προςκαρτεροῦντες ὁμοθυμαδὸν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, 


Te } 


ΓΑ \ > / ω Ν 
λιάσει καὶ Ῥ ἀφελότητι καρδίας, “1 « αἰνοῦντες τὸν θεὸν καὶ 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


3 3 2 m ’ 
κατ οἰκον ἄρτον, ™ μετελάμβανον 


91 


“Ὁ , 

K κλῶντές τ chit (reff.); 
k Matt. xiv. 19, 
chi xx.7,/11. 

XXVil. 35. 

1 Cor. x. 16. 
xi. 24. 

Jer. xvi. 7. 


" σροφῆς ἐν ° ἀγαλ- 


ἔχοντες ᾿ χάριν “πρὸς ὅλον τὸν λαόν. ὁ δὲ κύριος * προς- 1}. ν- 2). 
Θ ΟΣ Ξ ν bette 6 ΡΩΝ x nee ree eos 72. 
ετίθει Tous ἃ σωζομένους " καθ᾽ ἡμέραν “ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό. REE 
, \ are | , ΓΝ 5 ae ᾷ Philem. 2. 
X JIL. 1 [érpos δὲ καὶ ᾿Ιωάννης * ἀνέβαινον εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν see ch. vii. 3. 
xx. 20 
m constr., ch. (xxiv. 25.) xxvii. 33, 34. 2 Tim. 11. 6. Heb. vi. 7. xii. 10 only +. Wisd. xviii. 9. n ch, ix. 
19 reff. o Luke i i, 14,44. Heb. i. 9(from Ps. xliv.7). Jude 24 only. LXX, Psalms only. 
p here.only +. q ch. iii. 8, 9. Luke ii. 13. Luke only, exc. Rom. χν. 11. Rev. xix. 5. Ps. cl. 1. 
r = Luke ii. 52. ch. vii. 10. Prov. iii. 4. 8. = Rom. ν. 1 reff, t ver. 41. u 1 Cor. 
xv. 2 reff. v ver, 46. w = ch. i. 15 reff. x Luke xviii. 10. John vii. 
14. Isa. ii. 3. 
mposexaptepouy D. ev Tw tepw bef ομοθ. C [Syr]: om ομοθ D 8. 108. και κατ 


οἰκους αν (om av D-corr) emt τὸ avto κλωντεξ τε αρτον D. 


47. for λαον, κοσμον 10. 


rec aft καθ ἡμεραν ins Tn εκκλησια (explanatory gloss : 


see note), with EP 13 rel syrr [ Bas-sel, | Chr,, aft ew: to αὐτο D (Dk 19. 40 syrr prefix 
ev): om ABC/ GN vulg coptt eth arm Cyr, [ Lucif, ]. 


Cuap. III. 1. rec δὲ bef rerpos, with EP rel 36 syr Chr, :—em τὸ αὐτὸ is omd at 


end of ch. ii. and insd aft ἄνεβαινον in Syr: 
txt ABC(D)[G]X m? p vulg coptt xth arm 


lil, ev Se ταις Nuepats TavTais WeTpos και: 


tion Matt. xxvi. 9; and Winer, edn. 6, 
§ 22. 3. 4. καθότι ἂν... .] The ἄν with 
imperf. indic. in this connexion implies 
‘accidisse aliquid non certo quodam tem- 
pore, sed quotiescunque occasio ita ferret,’ 
Herm. ad Viger., p. 818. See ch. iv. 35; 
Mark vi. 56; xi. 24; Soph. Philoct. 290 ff. ; 
Aristoph. Lys. 510 ff. 46.] Kad 

hp. . . . ἐν τῷ tep@—see Luke xxiv. 53. 
The words need not mean, though they 
may mean, that they were assembled in 
Solomon’s porch, as in ch. v. 12—but most 
probably, that they regularly kept the 
hours of prayer, ch. iii. 1. κατ᾽ οἶκον] 
domi, “ privatim’ (Beng.), as contrasted 
with ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ. So also Wolf, Scal., 
Heinr., Olsh., Meyer, De Wette :—not, 
domatim, ‘from house to house,’ as Erasm., 
Salmasius, Kuinoel, al.:—the words may 
bear that meaning (see Luke viii. 1), but 
we have no trace of such a practice, of 
holding the ἀγάπαι successively at dif- 
ferent houses. The κλάσις τ. ἄρτου 
took place at their house of meeting, 
wherever that was: cf. ch. xii. 12; and 
see ver. 42 note. pet. τροφ.]} they 
partake of food :—see reff. ;—viz. in these 
agape or breakings of bread. ἀφελό- 
τῆτι] In good Greek, ἀφέλεια : the adj. 
ἀφελής (see Palm and Rost) originally im- 
plying “free from stones or rocks” (4, 
φελλεύς, stony or rocky land), and thus 
simple, even, pure. 47.]| αἰνοῦντες 
τ. 8. does not seem only to refer to giving 
thanks at their partaking of food, but to 
their general manner of conversation, in- 
cluding the recurrence of special ejacula- 
tions and songs of praise by the influence 
of the Spirit. τοὺς σωζομένους] 


D ends ch. ii. with ἐκκλήσια, but begins ch. 


those who were in the way of salvation: 
compare σώθητε, ver. 40: those who were 
being saved. Nothing is implied by this 
word, to answer one way or the other the 
question, whether all these were jinally 
saved. It is only asserted, that they were 
in the way of salvation when they were 
added to the Christian assembly. Doubt- 
less, some of them might have been of the 
class alluded to Heb. x. 26—29: at least 
there is nothing in this word to preclude 
it. Correct criticism, as well as ex- 
ternal evidence, requires that the words 
ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ or τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ should be 
rejected, as having been an explanatory 
gloss, (‘est heec Chrysostomi, ut videtur, 
glossa, per Syrum et alios propagata ;’ 
Bengel,) and ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό brought back to 
its place and the meaning which it bears 
in this passage (see ver. 44), viz. together, 
in the sense of making up one sum, one 
body assembled in one place. Mey er attri- 
butes the separation of ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό from 
Πέτρος to an ecclesiastical portion having 
begun ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ταύταις II. x. lw. 
as D. De Wette asks, why should those 
words have been inserted at the beginning 
of a portion ? Perhaps in accordance with 
a not uncommon practice of opening an 
ecclesiastical lection with such a phrase. 
Or possibly, I might suggest, as a mis- 
taken interpretation of ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό, 
which was not understood. Then when 
ἐπ. τ. av. became joined to Πέτρος, ΤΊ; 
ἐκκλ. would naturally be supplied after 
mposeTiOet. 

Cuap. III. 1—10.] HEALING OF A LAME 
MAN BY PETER AT THE GATE OF THE TEM- 
PLE. 1.] ἀνέβαινον, were going up. 


99 ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 
A \ e “ a“ \ » , 
y=Markxy. YEqrl τὴν ὥραν τῆς προςευχῆς τὴν ἐνατην. 
1. Luke x. 
35. ch. iv. 5. 
Esth. v. 8 F 
(notA[appy]) 
Ald. compl. 
z ch. xiv. 8 reff. 
a = ch, ii. 30 
Hl, ak: 85 \ les ps Ἴ > Ey te Pe 
(Rom. xi. 18 Tapa TOV ELSTTOPEVOMEVWV Εἰ 9 lepov 
hin dre, ἸΠέτρον καὶ “lod έλλοντα 
ς cn. ll. ren. 
d ver. 10. Matt. ἢ oe ἐς v ΤῸ ἐξ fe 5 
Tom wis i ἠρώτα ἴ ἐλεημοσύνην λαβεῖν. 
only. ὃ King 
δὲ ἜΣ 6 constr., 1 Cor. x. 13 reff. 
2. ἄς. Tobit xii. 9. g Mark i. 21 al. h ch. xxi. 18, 26. 
(29, 35). 1 Kings xvi. 6. 2 Macc. iii. 14 only. 


Cyr, [Lucif, ]. 


i constr., see ch. xvi. 39 reff. 


aft ἱερὸν ins To δειλεινον ad vesperum D. 
evaTn τη Tposevxn D!: τὴν evatrny Tns mposevxns D%(and lat) arm. 


Tit 


9 , 
~ KGL. τὶς 


» \ \ Ζ 5 , \ ᾽ Ὁ“ a ec “ b > 
ἀνὴρ χωλὸς ὅ εκ κοιλίας μητρὸς αὐτοῦ ὃ ὑπάρχων ὃ ἐβα- 
) / a > ‘Q c θ᾽ ς \ \ Av “ 

στάζετο, ὃν ἐτίθουν “ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν πρὸς τὴν θύραν τοῦ 

ς la , ς Qn - / 
ἱεροῦ τὴν λεγομένην * ὡραίαν, " τοῦ αἰτεῖν ἴ ἐλεημοσύνην 


ὃ ὃς ἰδὼν 


h ’ / > \ e ἈΝ 
εἰςξιέναι εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν 
4 ἀτενίσας δὲ [létpos * εἰς 


f = Luke σχὶ. 41. xii. 43. ch. ix. 36 al. Luke only, exc. Matt. vi. 


Heb. ix. 6 only. Exod. xxviii. 23, 31 
k ch. i. 10 reff. 


for της mpos. T. εν.» 
rec evvaTny, 


with p rel: vearny B(Bch): txt A B(Mai Tischdf) CDE[G]PX a b? gh1m. 


2. ins ἐδου bef τις D'[ and lat} Syr. 
¥-lat. 


ειναι D'-gr{txt D3), 


om ὑπαρχων D [copt(appy) | Lucif: constitutus 
the ro in εβασταζετο is superadded, but by B!(not as Tischdf). 
πυλὴν (see ver 10: cf Eng Version) Kb o Bas-sel,. 

3. for os ἰδων, ovTos aTevioas τοις οφθαλμοις avTov και ἰδων D[reg]. 
aft np. ins avrouvs D [Syr ethj coptt. 


for @up., 
παρ avtTwy e:stop. αυὐτων D'[ -gr |. 
for estevat, 
om AaBew DP rel 


H' [reg 501} Lucif,: μέ darent Syr sah eth: ins ABCE[G]X Ὁ o p 13 copt [arm Chr, ]. 


aft AaB. ins παρ᾽ avtwv E [(copt) }. 
4. εμβλεψας δε o π. D. 


τὴν ἐνάτην] See ch. x. 3, 30. τὴν 
ὥραν τῆς wp. generic ;---τὴν év., specific. 
There were three hours of prayer; those 
of the morning and evening sacrifice, i. e. 
the third and ninth hours, and noon. See 
Lightfoot and Wetst.in loc. 2.1 éBaor., 
was being carried. They took him at 
the hours of prayer, and carried him back 
between times. τὴν θύραν... τ. A. 
ὡραίαν] The arrangement of the gates of 
the Temple is, from the notices which we 
now possess, very uncertain. Three en- 
trances have been fixed on for the θύρα 
ὡραία : (1) The gate mentioned Jos. B. J. 
v. 5.3: τῶν δὲ πυλῶν αἱ μὲν ἐννέα χρυσῷ 
καὶ ἀργύρῳ κεκαλυμμέναι πανταχόθεν ἦσαν, 
ὁμοίως τε παραστάδες καὶ τὰ ὑπέρθυρα. μία 
δὲ ἡ ἔξωθεν τοῦ νεὼ Κορινθίου χαλκοῦ, 
πολὺ τῇ τιμῇ τὰς καταργύρους καὶ τὰς 
περιχρύσους ὑπεράγουσα. This gate was 
also called Nicanor’s gate (see the Rab- 
binical citations in Wetstein),—and lay 
on the eastern side of the Temple, towards 
the valley of Kedron. Jos. mentions it 
again, as 7 ἀνατολικὴ πύλη τοῦ ἐνδοτέρου, 
χαλκῆ οὖσα, and gives a remarkable ac- 
count of its size and weight: adding, 
that when, before the siege, it was dis- 
covered supernaturally opened in the 
night, τοῦτο τοῖς ἰδιώταις κάλλιστον ἐδόκει 
τέρας" ἀνοῖξαι γὰρ τὸν θεὸν αὐτοῖς τὴν 
τῶν ἀγαθῶν πύλην. But some find a 
difficulty in this. The lame man, they 
say, would not be likely to have been 
admitted so far into the Temple (but 
see Wetst. as above, where it appears 
that lepers used to stand at Nicanor’s 
gate): and besides, he would have taken 


Lets αὐτὸν bef πετρος G arm:] for εἰ5, προς &. 


up his station naturally at an outer gate, 
where he might ask alms of a// who entered. 
These conditions suit better (2) the gate 
Susan; as does also the circumstance men- 
tioned ver. 11, that the people ran toge- 
ther to Solomon’s porch ; for this gate was 
on the east side of the court of the Gentiles, 


ABCDE 

ΡΝ αν 

cfghk 

lmop 
13 


and close to Solomon’s porch. Only the . 


name ὡραία cannot be derived from the 
town Susan (from which the gate was 
named, having a picture of the town over 
it), that word signifying ‘a lily ;’ the town 
being named, it is true, διὰ τὴν ὡραιότητα 
τοῦ τόπου (Athen. xii. 1, p. 573): but the 
derivation being too far-fetched to be at all 
probable. Another suitable circumstance 
was, that by this gate the market was held 
for sheep and cattle and other offerings, 
and therefore a greater crowd would be at- 
tracted. (3) Others again (Lightf. favours 
this) attempt to derive ὡραία from 137, 
‘tempus,’ nd refer the epithet to two gates 
opening towards the city on the western 
side. But it is very unlikely that Luke 
should have used wp. in so unusual a mean- 
ing :—not to say (see Lightf. Deser. Templi) 
that the meaning of myn itself is very 
doubtful. So that the matter must remain 
in uncertainty. 8.1 ἠρώτα. . . .- - 
AaBetv,—so Soph. Aj. 886, αἰτήσομαι δέ 
σ᾽ οὐ μακρὸν γέρας λαβεῖν, and Aristoph. 
Plut. 240, αἰτῶν λαβεῖν τιμικρὸν ἀργυρίδιον. 

ἐλεημ., as in ref. Matt. The 
Jewish forms of asking alms are given in 
Vajicra Rabb. f. 20. 3. 4 (cited by Meyer), 
—‘Merere in me:’ ‘In me benefac tibi,’ 
and the like. 4, βλέψον eis ἡμᾶς] 
Calyin’s note is important: ‘Non ita lo- 


'και εστ. Ὦ. 


2—8. 


? A \ ἥν 9 ’ , a 
αὐτὸν σὺν τῷ ᾿Ιωάννῃ εἶπεν | Βλέψον 1 εἰς ἡμᾶς. 
m ’ “ 5 -“ n ὃ ΡΣ \ ’ > lal ΠῚ Xr “-“ 

ἐπεῖχεν αὐτοῖς " προςδοκῶν τὶ παρ᾽ αὐτῶν ° λαβεῖν. 


6 εἶπεν δὲ Πέτρος ᾿Αργύριον καὶ 
μοι ὃ δὲ ἔχω, τοῦτό σοι δίδωμι. 
χριστοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου [ἔγειραι 
4 πιάσας αὐτὸν τῆς δεξιᾶς χειρὸς 


a \ ΄ a 
χρῆμα δὲ " ἐστερεώθησαν ai ‘Paces αὐτοῦ καὶ τὰ " σφυρά, 
8 \ Vv 3 , » \ / \ 7 A \ 
καὶ " ἐξαλλόμενος ἔστη Kal περιεπάτει, καὶ εἰςῆλθεν σὺν 
> lal ’ Ἁ lal 6 
αὐτοῖς εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν περιπατῶν καὶ ἥ ἁλλόμενος καὶ 
2 Pet. i. 8. 


r Luke i. 64 al9. ch. v.10 414. Luke only, exc. Matt. xxi. 19, 20. Num. vi. 9 al. 
1 Kings i. 1. 


o = ch. ii. 33 reff. ch, iv. 37. xxviii. 7. 


xxxli. 6. xxiv. ὃ. met., ch. xvi. 5 only. 


u here only +. v here only. Joel xi. 5. 


συν wwavyny K. evrev Dl}, 
5. for επειχεν, ατενεισας D-gr. 


AaB. bef τι E [coptt |.—avrov C. . 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAON. 


5 ὁ δὲ 1 Matt. xxii. 
161 Mk. 
Luke ix. 62. 
John xiii. 22. 
σρυσίον ovy ὑπάρχει m—1 Tim.’ 

τὴ -- m. iv. 

XP MF iX ἘΣ 16. Luke 

Εν To OVOLAaTL ησου 


\ ΄ ny \ 
καὶ] περιπάτει. 7 καὶ 


” 5. τὺ 
ἤγειρεν AUTOV? * παρῶᾶ- Bw.ev, A). 
Sir. xxxi. 
(xxxiv.) 2. 
n constr., ch. 
xxviii. 6 only. 
2 Mace. xii. 
44. absol., 
Matt. xxiv. 
50 al. 
q = here only. (ch. xii. 4 reff.) 
8 = ver. 16 only. Ps. 
there only. Exod. xxvi. 19, ἄς. 
w John iv. 14. ch. xiv. 10 only, Isa. xxxy. 6. 


Sir. xx. 16. 


for βλεψον, ατενεισον (sic) D. 
AaB. bef παρ avr. DE vulg [(Syr) coptt] Lucit.— 


6. πετρ. δε ecm. AC(G] vulg coptt: txt B D(o πετρ.) EPX syrr eth [arm Bas, | Chr, 


ΤῊ] [ Cypr, | Lucif;. ουκ CN. 


rec ins eyerpar kar (addu from such passages as 


Luke v. 23, vi. 8 al 3), with C rel 36; eyepe καὶ AE([G|P mp: avacra Epiph: om 


ΒΝ sah. 
have left it as doubtful.) 
7. πιασασας (sic) P. 


Bas-sel, Sevrn, Lucif]. 
also have σφυδρα [φυδρα C1]. 


8. aft περιεπ. ins χαιρων KE; χαιρομενος D. 


(The authorities being divided, eyepe and -pa: being no real variation, I 


rec om 2nd avtoy, with DEP rel Chr,: ins ΑΒΟ[ ἃ XN p 
36 vulg syrr coptt eth arm Eus Bas, Bus-sel, Cypr, Lucif,. 
rec αὐτου bef at βασεις, with [ΠΕΡ rel: txt ABC[G|N p 
kat στα σφυδρα (sic: but δ erased) δὰ, [A] B!(Tischdf) 


Kal παραχρ. εσταθη 
[vulg 


περιπ. bef ε. το tep. k 13. om last 


καὶ (see note) A sah Lucif: ins BCEPX rel Iren-int.—om περιπ. x. αλλ. κ- D wth. 


quitur Petrus quin de consilio Dei certus 
sit: et certe his verbis singulare aliquod et 
insolitum beneficium sperare jubet. Queri 
tamen potest, an facultatem habuerint 
edendi miracula quoties liberet. Respon- 
deo, sic ministros fuisse divine virtutis, ut 
nihil suo arbitrio vel proprio motu tenta- 
rint, sed Dominus per ipsos egerit quum ita 
expedire noverat. Hine factum est ut 
unum sanarint,non autem promiscue omnes. 
Ergo, quemadmodum in aliis rebus ducem 
et directorem habebant Dei Spiritum, ita 
etiam in hac parte. Ideo priusquam clau- 
dum surgere jubeat Petrus, conjecit in eum 
et defixit oculos. Talis intuitus non carebat 
peculiari Spiritus motu. Hine fit ut tam 
secure de miraculo pronuntiet. Porro, ex- 
citare hoc verbo claudum voluit ad recipien- 
dam Dei gratiam: ille tamen nihil quam 
eleemosynam exspectat.’ 5. ἐπεῖχεν] 
not τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς (as Bos and Kuinoel), 
which is implied:—but (see reff.) τὸν 
νοῦν, fixed his attention on them. 

6.] ‘Non dubium est, quin etiam iis qui 
non erant de communitate fidelium, datz 
fuerint eleemosyne: sed Petrus tum vel 
nil habebat secum, in via ad templum, 
vel non tantum dare poterat quantum ad 
sublevandum pauperem opus esset. Vide 
abstinentiam Apostoli in tanta administra- 
tione, cf. ii. 45, coll. iv. 35.’ Bengel. But 

Vou. IT. 


perhaps it is more simple to conclude that 
Peter spoke here of his own station and 
means in hfe—‘lamno rich man, nor have 
I silver or gold to give thee.’ ἐν TO 
ὀνόμ.7 There is no ellipsis (as Heinr. and 
Kuinoel) of λέγω σοι, which weakens the 
force of the sentence: the name of Jesus is 
that in which, by the power of which, the 
“rise up and walk” is to be accomplished. 

7. muaoas.... ἤγειρεν] οὕτω καὶ 
6 χριστὸς ἐποίησε: πολλάκις λόγῳ ἐθε- 
ράπευσε, πολλάκις ἔργῳ, πολλάκις καὶ 
τὴν χεῖρα προήγαγεν, ὅπου ἦσαν ἄσθε- 
νέστεροι κατὰ τὴν πίστιν" ἵνα μὴ δόξῃ amd 
ταυτομάτου γενέσθαι. Chrys. in Act. Hom. 
viii. p. 63. See Mark ix. 27. βάσεις 
are the soles of the ἔρεῦ,-- σφυρά, the 
ankles. Luke, the physician, had made 
himself acquainted with the peculiar kind 
of weakness, and described it accordingly. 

8.] ἐξαλλ. describes his first joyous 
liberation from his weakness: as soon as 
he felt himself strengthened, he leapt up, 
for joy. No suppositions need be maile, 
such as πειράζων ἴσως ἑαυτόν (Chrys.): or 
that it was from ignorance how to walk 
(Bloomf.). His joy is quite sufficient to 
explain the gesture, and it is better to 
leave the narrative in its simplicity. If 
καί before αἰνῶν is omitted (see digest), 
the present participle has its ratiocinative 

Dp 


54 


re a Ἃ δ = 

x ch. ii. 47 reff. “~“ Q@LVY@Y TOV θεόν. 

y constr.,1 Cor. 
xiv. 37 reff. 

z = 2 Cor. viii. 
19 reff. see 
Matt. xix. 8, 

a vv. 2, 3. 

b ch. v. 9. 
Matt. xxiv. 
23 \!. John. 2. 

c ver. 2. 


d = Luke iv. 


11.185. 

e Luke iv. 36. 
v. 9 only 
Cant. iil. 8 
(-βεῖν, Mark 
Bee 

f -= Mark v. 42. 


μῶντος ™ ἔκθαμβοι. 


xvi. 8. Luke 
v. 26 (ch. x. , 
10 reff.) only. Deut. xxviii. 28. g Rom. vi. 21 reff. 
35. 1Cor.x. 11. 1 Pet. iv. 12. 2 Pet. ii. 22 only. 
k = Mark vi. 33 only. Judith vi. 16. met., 1 Pet. iv. 4 only. 


only. Ezek. xlii. 3. 


n = ch. v. 8 reff. o Luke iv. 22. xx. 26 al. 


TIPAZEIS ATIOSTOAOQN. 


Gen. xlii. 4. 


Th. 


3 lal et Ν ‘ 
9 καὶ εἶδεν πᾶς ὁ λαὸς αὐτὸν περιπα- 
wn \ x Ε] a Ν θ ΄, ξ 10 y , / δὲ » Ν 
τοῦντα καὶ * αἰνοῦντα τὸν θεὸν ἐπεγίνωσκον δὲ αὐτὸν 
o e > ς 1 Ν A a , ΄ θ ΄ b ’ \ An 
ὅτι οὗτος ἣν O* πρὸς τὴν " ἐλεημοσύνην καθήμενος ” ἐπὶ TH 
c ΄ / , nw ς al Ν ἃ 5 7 θ e θ / ‘ 
@paia πύλῃ τοῦ ἱεροῦ: Kal “ ἐπλήσθησαν ἄμβους καὶ 
a c 
f > / 7” .3 \ ae h > lal 
ἐκστάσεως ὅ ἐπὶ τῷ " συμβεβηκότι αὐτῷ. 
Ἁ » » Ἀ ’ὔ \ a | ’ k ὃ cal 
τος δὲ αὐτοῦ τὸν Ilétpov καὶ ᾿Ιωάννην, * συνέδραμεν πᾶς 
ς A \ ‘ " A 
ὁ λαὸς πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἢ ἐπὶ TH 
¢ e a 
15 ἰδὼν δὲ ὁ Lletpos " ἀπεκρίνατο 
Ν Ν Ν ” ὃ at Wi fo θ / oA 
πρὸς τὸν λαὸν “Avopes Ισραηλῖται, τὶ αυμάζετε ° ἐπὶ 
j ἢ ἡμῖν TL ἡ ἀτενίζετε ὡς ἰδίᾳ δυνάμει ἢ 4 εὐσεβεί 
τούτῳ, ἢ ἡμῖν τί Ρ ἀτενίζετε ὡς ἰδίᾳ μει ἢ 4 εὐσεβείᾳ 


1 i κρατοῦν- 


] “ io , 
στοᾷ τῇ καλουμένῃ Σολο- 


h Mark x. 32. Luke xxiv. 14. ch. xx. 19. xxt, 
i -- Jud. xvi. 26 B. see Matt. ix. 25 al, 


Ps. xlix. 18. 1 John v. 2. x. 23. ch. v. 13 


m here only +. objectively, Dan. vii. 7 Theod. (-Beto@at, Mark ix. 5.) plur., ch. v. 16, 
Isa. lii. 15. 
4, xiv. 9. xxiii. 1 only. Job vii. 8 Ffatevoe (3) Aj (Esdr. vi. 28} only. with eis, ch. 1. 10 reff. 


p w. dat., Luke iv. 20. xxii. 56. ch. x, 
“Πα here onlys 


exc. past. epp. (1 Tim. ii. 2 al.) & 2 Pet. (i. 3al.) Isa. xi. 2. Wisd. x. 12, 


9. rec avrov bef πας o A., with EP rel Chr, Lucif,: txt ABCDR® p vulg. 


θεον, κυριον C. 


for 


10. rec (for δε) te, with Ὁ E-gr P rel syr farm Chr,] Lucif,: [om Syr sah :] txt 


ABCR p vulg E-lat copt Bas-sel,. 


om αὐτὸν &!(written above the line by X-corr?). 


for ovtos, autos (corrn as more usual) ACR g p 36 vulg [Syr] Bas-sel, Lucif, : 


txt BDEP rel [syr coptt] Chr ΤῊ]. 
correcting τη wpata but not πυλην). 


καθεΐομενος 10. 
for cuuB., γεγενημενω D. 


τὴν wpatav πυλὴν N1(N3 


11. for ver, εκπορευομενου δε Tov πετρου Kat twavov συνεξεπορευετο Κρατων αὐτουϑ5᾽ οι 


δε θαμβηθεντες εστησαν ev τὴ στ. ἡ (τη [)3) κ. σ. εκθ. 10. 


for δε, re A Syr. 


rec for avtou, Tov ιαθεντος χωλου (beginning of an ecclesiastical lection), with P rel 


Thl: txt ABCDERN c p 36 [vulg] syrr coptt (zeth) arm. 
rec προς αὐτοὺς bef mas oAaos, with EP rel copt: 


ins tov bef wav. ABN τὰ p (Ἤν... 
txt ABCN p vulg syrr sah eth arm. 


12. αποκριθεις δε o πετρ. εἰπεν TP. avtous D. 
for Ist 4, εἰ (ttacism) &. 


ABCDN k 0 p 13. 


force, alleging the cause of the walking 
and leaping: and would best be rendered 
in English, in his praising of God. 
11—26.] THE DISCOURSE OF PETER 
THEREUPON. 11. κρατοῦντος | holding, 
physically : not spoken of mental adhesion, 
but of actual holding by the hand or arm, 
that he might not be separated from them 
in the crowd, but might testify to all, who 
his benefactorswere. στοᾷ τῇ κ. Dodou. | 
See John x. 23, note. 12. ἀπεκρί- 
vato | viz. to their expressions of astonish- 
ment implied in ἔκθαμβοι. See Matt. xi. 
25. ἀπεκρίνατο never signifies ‘made an 
address, as Bloomf.; but always ‘an- 
swered :’ cf. ch. v. 8, note. This second 
discourse of Peter may be thus divided : 
This is no work of ours, but of God, for 
the glorifying of Jesus, vv. 12, 18 :—whom 
ye denied and killed, but God hath raised 
up, vv. 13—15 :—through whose name this 
man is made whole, ver. 16:—ye did it in 
ignorance, but God thereby fulfilled His 
counsel, vv. 17, 18. Exhortation to re- 
pent, that ye may be forgiven, and saved 
by this Jesus Christ at His coming, vv. 


om tov (bef πετρ.) c.— 


rec om ο, with EP rel [Chr,]: ins 
ws nuwy Ty ιδια Suv. ἡ ευσ. 


19—21: whose times have been the subject 
of prophecy from the first, ver.21. Cita- 
tions to prove this, vv. 22—24: its imme- 
diate application to the hearers, as Jews, 
vv. 25, 26. There the discourse seems to 
he broken off, as ch. iv. 1 relates. 

ἐπὶ τούτῳ] not, αὐ this (event): but at 
this man, compare αὐτόν below, which 
would not be used at the first mention of 
one then present. Their error was not 
the wonder itself,—though eventhat would 
shew ignorance and weakness of faith, for 
it was truly no wonderful thing that had 
happened, viewed by a believer in Jesus,— 
but their wondering αὐ the Apostles, as 
if they had done 1t by their own power. 
‘Ergo,’ says Calvin, ‘hoe est perperam 
obstupescere, quum in hominibus mentes 
nostre subsistunt.’ δυνάμει, power, 
—such as magical craft, or any other 
supposed means of working miracles: εὖ- 
σεβείᾳ meritorious efficacy with God, so 
as to have obtained this from Him on 
our own account. The distinction is im- 
portant :—‘ holiness,’ of the Εἰ, V., is not 
expressive of εὐσεβ., which bears in it the 


ABCDE 
Prabe 
dfghk 
Imop 
13 


9--͵Ἰῦ, ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAON. 90 

r ’ 5 lal -“ > , 19 id \ “7 \ εἶ “ 

πεποιηκόσιν “ τοῦ περιπατεῖν αὐτόν ; 15 ὁ θεὸς ᾿Α βραὰμ + - Mark i117. 
fll. ot al, 

Ν ’ ΄ . lal , “ i 
καὶ ᾿Ισαὰκ καὶ ᾿Ιακώβ, ὁ θεὸς τῶν ' πατέρων * ἡμῶν, " ort e120 
’ \ A A ᾽ a ἃ a \ vii. 1 al. 
ἐδόξασεν τὸν ἁπαῖδα αὐτοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦν, ὃν ὑμεῖς " μὲν Josh. a Ἢ 
Ww / \ x > ΄ > ‘ \ , 16 Be Wine : 

παρεδώκατε, καὶ “ ἠρνήσασθε [αὐτὸν] ἡ κατὰ πρόςωπον can. eras 
΄ / 3 / ᾽ ΄ ΄ ΄σ \ τ 
Πιλάτου, Τ᾿ κρίναντος ἐκείνου ὃ ἀπολύειν. 13 ὑμεῖς δὲ τῇ. ν. 90 τεῦ. 
u = ver. 26 


\ ty , 
Tov ἅγιον καὶ “δίκαιον “ ἠρνήσασθε, καὶ δ ᾽ἡτήσασθε τε. 


¥ μέν solita- 


ε ἄνδρα ‘dovéa ἔ χαρισθῆναι ὑμῖν, 15 τὸν δὲ " ἀρχηγὸν τίσι Rem 


ii. 12 reff. 

a a > , ΤΑ ΘΕ" ς θ \ i” b) j - e = eae 
τῆς ζωῆς amextewate ὃν ὁ Geos ᾿ἰἤγειρεν Ex ' νεκρῶν, οὗ xxvii. 18 
i Mk. Jer 


Xxxiii. (xxvi.) 24. 

reff. a ch. xxvi. 32 reff. 
ἃ constr., Luke xxiii. 23. ch. xiii. 28. 3 Kings xix. 4. 
g = 1 Cor. ii. 12 reff. 


x = ch. vii. 35 reff. ¥ = 2 Cor. x. 1 reff. z constr., ch. xv. 19 
ἢ Ὁ = Johr vi. 69. 1 John ii. 20. ς abs., ch. vii. 52 reff. 
e Luke xxiv. 19. Judg. vi. 8. f ch. vii. 52 

reff, heh. v.31. Heb. ii. 10. xii. 2 only. 1 Macc. ix. 61. x. 47. 
i 1 Cor. xy. 12 reff. 


TovtTo πεποιηκοτων τουτο (του D-corr) περιπ. avt. D [simly Sevrn, ]. τουτον Εἰ vulg 
Iren-int Cassiod. 

13. ins θεος bef toaax and bef tax. AD vulg copt eth [arm] Iren-int, ins o θεος CR 
Chr, (corrns to suit Lxx Exod iii. 6, and Matt xxii. 32 ||): om BEP rel syrr sah 
[Sevrn, ] Thdot-ancyr,. for των, Tw &. for maida, πατερα δὶ (corrected by N° 
(12th cent)). aft imo. ins xp. D eth-pl. ques D[-gr]. rec om μεν (erased 
because no correspondg δε, follows), with Ὁ m [13]: ins ABCEPR rel 36 vulg [syr Did, | 
Chr Iren-int Jer. aft maped. add εἰς κρισιν D syr-mg Iren-int; εἰς xpitnpiov 1". 

απηρνησασθαι D. om αὑτον (as needless) ABCX p 36 vulg copt arm [th 
Thdot-ancyr} Did, Iren-int Jer,: ins DEP rel syr sah Chr. πειλατου TOU κρειναντος 
εκεινου ἀπολυειν αὐτὸν θελοντος 1); cum judicasset ille dismittere eum voluit D-lat (a 
curious instance of combination of readings); Tov, θελοντος, and voluit are marked 


for erasure. κρινοντος C 13. 


απολλυειν &. 


14. δικαιον εβαρυνατε και ἤτησατε D: so tor ἡρνησ., aggravastis Iren-int. ins 


uaddov bef ἡτησασθε E, att ἡτησ. syr-mng. 


idea of operative, cultive piety, rather than 
of inherent character. 13. ὁ 0. ᾿᾽Αβρ. 
k.7.A.] ‘Appellatio frequens in Actis, pre 
ceteris libris N. T., et illi periodo tempo- 
rum conveniens.’ Bengel. ὅρα πῶς αὐτὸν 
(τὸν Gedy) ciswhet συνεχῶς εἰς τοὺς Tpo- 
γόνους' ἵνα μὴ δόξῃ καινόν τι εἰςάγειν 
δόγμα" καὶ ἐκεῖ (ch. ii.) τοῦ πατριάρχου 
Δαβὶδ ἐμνημόνευσε, καὶ ἐνταῦθα τῶν περὶ 
τοῦ ᾿Αβραὰμ. .. (Chrys.). ἐδόξασεν] 
not, as E. V., ‘hath glorified,’ implying, by 
thus honouring His Name: it is the his- 
toric aor., glorified, viz. by His exaltation 
through death—see John xii. 23; xvii. 10. 

παῖδα] not ‘Son, but Servant: 
servant, however, in that distinct and 
Messianic sense which the same expression 
bears in Isa. xl.—lxvi. in the LXX. vids 
is the word always used to designate Jesus 
as the Son of God. The above meaning 


‘Is adopted by all the best modern Com- 


mentators, Pisc., Bengel, Olsh., Meyer, 
De W., Stier, some of whom refer to a 
paper of Nitzsch’s in the Stud. u. Krit. 
for 1828, Heft 2, p. 331 ff. Olsh. says, 
‘After N.’s remarks on the subject, no 
one hereafter can suppose this expression 
equivalent to υἱὸς τ. 0.” “In the next 
age,” says Wordsw., “the term παῖς θεοῦ 
was applied to Christ as a Son. See Poly- 
carp, Mart. § 14, p. 1040 (Migne) ; ands. 
Hippolyt. Philosoph. x. 33 (in Migne’s 


ins (nv και bef χαρισθηναι vu. E Aug). 


Origen, tom. vi. p. 540), and contra 
Noétum, § 5, 7, 11, pp. 809 ff. (Migne), 
and the note of Fabricius, ii. p. 10.” 

κατὰ πρόςωπον IT. as E. V., ‘in the presence 
of P.,’ or better perhaps, to the face of 
Pilate. The expression is no Hebraism. 
Polybius often uses it. κατὰ πρόξωπον 
λεγομένων τῶν λόγων, XXV. 5. 2: K. Tp. 
ἀπαντᾷν τοῖς πολεμίοις, xvil. 3. 3, &c. See 
Schweigh., Lexicon Polybianum. 
κρίναντος ἐκ. ἀπολ., see Luke xxiii. 205 
John xix. 4, 12. 14. ἅγιον κ. δίκαιον] 
not only in the higher and divine sense 
present to Peter’s mind, but also by Pilate’s 
own verdict, and the testimony of the Jews’ 
consciences. The sentence is full of anti- 
theses ; ἅγιον x. dix. contrasts with the 
moral impurity of ἄνδρα povéa,—apxny.- 
τ. ζωῆς, with the destruction of life im- 
plied in govéa,—while ἀπεκτείνατε again 
stands in remarkable opposition to apx. T. 
c This last title given to our Lord 
implies (as Vulg.) ‘Auctorem vite:’ see 
reff.; so ἀρχηγὸν κ- καθηγεμόνα τῆς ὅλης 
ἐπιβολῆς “Aparov, Polyb. ii. 40. 2: ὅπερ 
(scil. want of occupation in mercenary sol- 
diers) σχεδόν, ws εἰπεῖν, ἀρχηγὸν k. μόνον 
αἴτιον γίνεται στάσεως, i. 66. 10 al. It 
is possible, that the words ἄρχ. τ. ¢. may 
contain an allusion to the great miracle 
which was the immediate cause of the en- 
mity of their rulers to Jesus. But of course 


D 2 


26 TIPAZEIS, ABOSTOAON. ΤΙ; 
© A j , ΄ >] 16 \ k 3 \ ~ 1 , “-“ 
jehiSreff. MMELS ~ {LAPTUPES εσμεν. Kab €7b TH  WhoTél’ TOV 
k = Luke v. 5. ͵ Arie n ἃ κα , 
Phil. sti.9 sl. ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ τοῦτον ὃν θεωρεῖτε καὶ οἴδατε m ἐστερέ- 
Ξ \ , » \ e ΄ 
ret ὡσὲν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ; καὶ ἡ πίστις ἡ "Ov αὐτοῦ 5 ἔδω- 
m ver. 7 reff. »- \ c ΄ 
niPeti2l. κεν αὐτῷ τὴν PONOKANPLaY ταύτην 4 ἀπέναντι πάντων 
o = here only. Σ t 3 Ἶ ; et 2 4 a 
5 a γέ la ᾿ ¢ 
χρόνος υμων. 17 καὶ νῦν, ἀδελφοί, οἷδα ὅτι "Kata 3 ἄγνοιαν 
μάθησιν ? 
΄ 7 ΄ e la nr ¢ ‘\ a 
δίδωσι, | ἐπράξατε, ὥςπερ καὶ οἱ ἄρχοντες ὑμῶν; 18 ὁ δὲ θεὸς ἃ 


Eurip. Suppl. 
419. 


p here only. 
Isa.i.6Ed -vat. 


F (not ABN) only. 
r — Matt. xix. 3. 
15. veers D' (txt D*). 
16. om em BN! p [arm]: 
ov D}-gr(ins D3), 
17. ins avdpes bef αδελφοι DE. 
[ins] ὑμεῖς μεν D. 
Ambrst, [Aug, 


1 Thess. v. 23. 
Phil. ii. 3. iv. 11. 


(-pos, 
om. x. 2. 


James i. 4.) 
sch. xvii. 30 reff. 


ev 119 [tn] vulg D-lat E-lat coptt eth Iren-int. 
att oSare ins or: D!-gr. 

[for oda | επισταμεθα [ D arm-mss. 

att expag. add πονηρον D!, το πονηρον D3 34 syr-mg Iren- -int, 


x ΄ ΄ -"“ nw 
ἱπροκατήγγειλεν διὰ ἃ στόματος πάντων τῶν προφητῶν 


q -- Matt. xxvii. 24. 
t ch. vii. 52 only +. 


Rom. iii. 18 (reff.). 
u ch. i. 16 reff. 


om 


aft] ors 


18. for a, o D-gr [Syr]: que bodl demid hal Vig, 


Peter had a higher view in the title than 
merely this. 16.] ἐπὶ τ. πίστει. 
The EK. V. is right; through, or better, 
on account of faith in His name. The 
meaning, for the sake of (i.e. of awakening, 
in you, and in the lame man himself) faith 
in his name (Rosenm., Heinrichs, Olsh., 
Stier), though grammatically justified, 
seems against the connexion with the udp- 
τυρές ἐσμεν just before. It is evident to 
my mind that the πίστις τοῦ ov. adr. is the 
faith of these μάρτυρες. His name (the 
efficient cause), by means of, or on account 
of (our) faith in His name (the medium 
operandi), &e. ἐστερ. and ἔδωκ 
again are historic aorists,—confirmed and 
gave; better than ‘hath confirmed’ and 
‘hath given.’ K. ἢ πίστις H δι᾿ αὐτοῦ 
—and that faith which is wrought by 
Him—not ‘faith in Him;’ which is an 
inadmissible rendering. Peter’s own words 
(ref. 1 Pet.) are remarkably parallel with, 
and the best interpreters of, this expres- 
sion: ὑμᾶς τοὺς δι᾽ αὐτοῦ πιστοὺς εἰς θεόν, 
τὸν ἐγείραντα αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν καὶ δόξαν 
αὐτῷ δόντα, ὥςτε τὴν πίστιν ὑμῶν καὶ ἐλ- 
πίδα εἶναι εἰς θεόν. Some of the Commen- 
tators are anxious to bring in the faith of 
the lame man himself in this verse. Cer- 
tainly it is according to analogy to sup- 
pose that he had such faith, from and after 
the words of Peter:—but, as certainly, 
there is no allusion to it in this verse, and 
the thread of Peter’s discourse would be 
broken by any such. 
in His name on the part of us His wit- 
nesses, of which he is here speaking, as the 
medinm whereby His name (= the Power 
of the great dignity to which He has been 
exalted, the apynyla τῇς ζωῆς) had in this 
case worked. 17.] νῦν introducing a 
new consideration : see 2 Thess. ii. 6. Here 


it softens the severer charge of ver. 14: 


It is the firm belief’ 


sometimes it intensifies, as ch. xxii. 16; 
1 John ii. 28: especially with ἰδού, ch. 
xiii. 11; xx. 22. No meaning such as 
‘now that the real Messiahship of Him 
whom ye have slain is come to light’ 
(Meyer) is admissible. ἀδελφοί, still 
softening his tone, and reminding them of 
their oneness of blood and covenant with 
the speaker. κατὰ ἄγνοιαν) There 
need be no difficulty in the application of 
the ἄγνοια to even the rulers of the Jews. 
It admits of all degrees—from the un- 
learned, who were implicitly led by others, 
and hated Him because others did,—up to 
the most learned of the scribes, who knew 
and rightly interpreted the Messianic pro- 
phecies, but from moral blindness, or per- 
verted expectations, did not recognize 
them in our Lord. Even Caiaphas him- 
self, of whom apparently this could least 
be said, may be brought under it in some 
measure : even he could hardly have de- 
livered over Jesus to Pilate with the full 
consciousness that He was the Messiah, and 
that he himself was accomplishing pro- 
phecy by so doing. Some degree of ἄγνοια 
there must have been in them all. 

The interpretation (Wolf) ‘ ye did, as your 
rulers (did), is of course inadmissible, 
being contrary to the usage of the words : 
πράσσειν &sTep καί can never mean to 
imitate, but érpatare must refer to a defi- 
nite act (understood), and ὥςπερ καί must 
take up another subject of ἐπράξατε. 

18.] πάντων, see Luke xxiv. 27 and note. 
There is no hyperbole (Kuinoel) nor 
adaptation (Meyer) to Jewish exegetical 
views. ‘Oumnes prophete in universum 
non prophetarunt nisi de diebus Messi’ 

(Sanhedr. 99. 1), was not merely a Jewish 
view, but the real truth. The prophets 
are here regarded as one body, actuated 
by one Spirit ; and the sum of God’s pure 


ABC DE 

PNRabe 

dfghk 

lmop 
13 


Ἄν 


Ἢν 


16—20. 


Vv θ al \ Ν 5 “aw , ΄ ef 
TTACVELY TOV χρίστον αὐτου ἐπλήρωσεν ουτως. 
\ A ae 
Zeis TO 4 EarerhOjvac ~ sh: i,16 


νοήσατε οὖν καὶ Y ἐπιστρέψατε 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΔΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. oy 


19 x Qe vabs.,ch.i. 3 
per reff. 


Cn \ ¢ ͵ bw b a ” c ΜΔ Matt. i. 22 al. 
ὑμῶν Tas ἁμαρτίας, Ὁ ὅπως ὃ ἂν ἔλθωσιν “ καιροὶ “ ἀνα- fr. 2Chron. 
XXXVI. 22. 


7 \ , A ¢ \ πη τον ΡῸ 
ψύξεως “ ἀπὸ προςώπου τοῦ κυρίου, *9 καὶ ἀποστείλῃ > shi 88 τοῖς 


27 (from Isa. vi. 10). Mark iv. 13. Luke xxii. 32. 
ii, 14. Rey. iii. 7. vii. 17, xxi.4 only. Ps. 1.9. ΐ 
xv. 17 (from Amos ix. 12 A). Kom. iii. 4 (from Ps. 1. 4 [6]) only. 


44. Heb. ix. 10. Ps. lxviii. 13. 


y Matt. xiii, 15 


& ch. xxviii. 
zch. vii. 19. Rom. i. 11, 20 al. a Col. 
Isa. xliti. 25. 2 Macc. xii. 42. b Luke ii. 35. ch. 


c and constr., Luke x1x. 


d here only. Exod. viii. 15 only. (-ψυχεῖν, 2 Tim. i. 16.) 


. . . 
ὁ = here only. see 2 Thess. 1.9. Rev. xx. 11. Ps. xcvi. d. 


rec αὐτου bef παθειν (alteration to suit αὐτου προφ. ver 21), with P rel: txt BCDEN p 
vulg syrr arm Chr, Iren-int,.--aft mpop. ins αὐτου, retaining αὐτου of txt, A(prob) ¢ 66? 
zth-pl Vig,.—om παθ. τ. xp. (homaotel αὐτου to αὐτου ὃ) A. 


19. for εἰς, προς BR. 
ἐπελθωσιν D-gr Tert). 


pose, shewn by their testimony, is, that 
His Curist should suffer. Notice 
the inf. aor. παθεῖν, as in ch. 1. 3, of a 
definite single act. 19.) οὖν, que 
cum ita sint. εἰς TO ἐξαλ.} The faith 
implied in ἐπιστρέψατε has for its aim, is 
necessarily (by God’s covenant, see John 
iii. 15, 18) accompanied by, the wiping out 
of sin. ὅπως ἂν ἔλθ. x.7.A.] This 
passage has been variously rendered and 
explained. ΤῸ deal first with the render- 
ing :-- ὅπως ἄν cannot mean ‘wien, as in 
E. V.—ézws never occurs in that sense in 
the N. Τ᾿, nor indeed with an indice. at all; 
—and if it did, the addition of ἄν, and the 
use of a subjunctive, would preclude it here. 
It can have but one sense,—in order that. 
This being so, what are καιροὶ ἀναψύξεως ? 
From the omission of the article, some 
have insisted (e. g. Stier, R. ἃ. Apost. i. 89) 
on rendering it ‘ times, seasons, of ava. 
But this.cannot be maintained. καιρός 
and καιροί are occasionally anarthrous when 
they manifestly must have the article in 
English. Cf. especially Luke xxi. 24, καιροὶ 
ἐθνῶν, where none would think of render- 
ing, ‘seasons of (the) Gentiles.’ See for 
καιρός Matt. viii. 29; Mark xi. 13; 1 Pet. 
i. 5. And, since philologically we have to 
choose between ‘seasons’ and ‘the seasons,’ 
ἔλθωσιν must I think determine in favour 
of the latter. For by that word we must 
understand a definite arrival, one and the 
same for all, not a mere occurrence, as the 
other sense of καιροί would render neces- 
sary. This is also implied by the aorist, 
used, in a conditional sentence, of a single 
fact, whereas a recurrence or enduring of a 
state is expressed by the present. In order 
that the times of ἀνάψυξις may come. 
What is avay.? Clearly, from the above 
rendering, some refreshment, future, and 
which their conversion was to bring about. 
But: hardly, from what has been said, re- 
freshment ix their own hearts, arising 


from their conversion: besides the above’ 


tas ap. bef vuwy D [vulg(and demid) spec Iren-int Tert, }. 
aft avawvé. add vu E tol lat-mss-in-Bede, and 
aft «A@. Bede-gr Syr syr-w-ast copt Iren-int (Tert). 


om tov E k m 86. 


objections, the following words, ἀπὸ mpos- 
mov τοῦ κυρίου, are not likely to have 
been used in that case. No other meaning, 
it seems to me, will suit the words, but 
that of the times of refreshment, the great 
season of joy and rest, which it was under- 
stood the coming of the Messiah in His 
glory was to bring with it. That this 
should be connected by the Apostle with 
the conversion of the Jewish people, was 
not only according to the plain inference 
from prophecy, but doubtless was one of 
those things concerning the kingdom of 
God which he had been taught by his risen 
Master. The same connexion holds even 
now. If it be objected to this, that thus we 
have the conversion of the Jews regarded as 
bringing about the great times of refresh- 
ment, and those times consequently as de- 
layed by their non-conversion (« neque enim 
est Mutate vos in melius, ut Deus mittat 
Christum: non esse potest: hoc non pen- 
det a nostra μετανοίᾳ. Morus in Stier 
R. A. i. 91), I answer, that, however true 
this may be in fact, the other is fully borne 
out by the manner of speaking in Scrip- 
ture: the same objection might lie against 
the efficacy of prayer. See Gen. xix. 22; 
xxxil. 26; Mark vi. 5; 2 Thess. ii. 3; 2 Pet. 
id, 22, ἀπὸ προςώπ. τ. κυρ. From 
the presence of God (the Father), who 
has reserved these καιροί in His own power. 
When they arrive, it is by His decree, 
which goes forth from His presence. Cf. 
ἐξῆλθεν δόγμα παρὰ Καίσ. Avy., Luke 
1 eh 20.] ἀποστείλῃ (see above), 
literally,—not figuratively, by the Spirit : 
—even if the word send be no where else 
applied to the second comuig of the Lord, 
there is no reason why it should not be 
here : the whole ground and standing-point - 
of these two orations of Peter are peculiar, 
and the very mention of the ‘ times of re- 
treshment’ proceeding forth from the pre- 
sence of the Father would naturally lead 
to the position here assigned to the Son, as — 


Ὺ πὶ . = 
38 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AMOSTOAON. Itt 
4 f / e “ ἈΝ » - 91 A g r 
fch. xxii.14. TOV TT POKEWELPLO LEVOV UMLV χρίστον Ἰησοῦν, ba ον δεῖ 
xxvi. 16 only. - ‘ 4 , 7 : ’ Ἔν , 
Exod. iv. 13. h i j 
Josh. Ἢ 12. ουρᾶνον μεν δέξασθαι axes χρονωὼν ὠττοκαταστασξως 
2} ey A / 4. » ΄ € \ , fal ς , 
vid only, πάντων, " ὧν ᾿ ἐλάλησεν ὁ θεὸς ™ διὰ στόματος τῶν " ἁγίων 
= ch. iv. 12 
᾿ reff. ᾿ h = Luke ix. 53. xvi. 4,9. i and constr., ch. xvii. 30. Matt. ii. 7. Luke i. 57. 
ὁ here only +. see note. k attr., ch. i. 1 reff. ] = Luke xxiv. 25. ch. xxviii. 25. 2 Pet. i. 
21. Ps. ἔχις: 11. m ch. i. 16 reff. n Luke i. 70. 2 Pet. iii. 2. 


20. rec προκεκηουγμενον (either a mistake, or a gloss agreeable to the sense of vv. 18, 
21), with Orig [Cosm,], qui predicatus est vulg, prius annunciatum copt-wilk : txt 
ABCDEPNX rel 36 syr-mg-gr Chr,: preparatum Sren-int,: destinatum and predesig- 
vatum Tert: predestinatum D-lat E-lat syrr sah [arin]: προκεχρισμενον eth. rec 
ina. bef xp. (corrn to more usual appelln, the connexion of xp. not being perceived, see 
note), with AC m p rel vss Chr, Cosm, Iren-int,: txt B D-gr EPR ἃ ὁ g h 1 syr sah. 

21. χρονον D}(txt D-corr!) {m]. rec for των ay., παντων ay., With Cosm : παντων 
των ay. EP 13 rel [syr] Chr, (corrz to suit ver 24, and των omd in rec by mistake, owing 
to -twy preceding): txt ABCDN (c?) o p H' [vss] Orig, Chr, Iren-int, Tert,.—aft ay. 


one sent by the Father. See below, on ver. 
26. Besides which, the aor. will not allow of 
the figurative interpretation, confining, as 
it does, the ‘ sending ’ to one definite event. 

προκεχειρισμένον | before appointed, 
as apparently in the first ref.: or perhaps 
mpo- merely gives the idea of forth, before 
the rest, as in the two others, and perhaps 
even in the first also. ὑμῖν, to you,—as 
your Messiah. According to the right read- 
ing, χριστ. Ἰησοῦν, χριστόν may be con- 
nected with τὸν προκεχ. tu., Him who 
was predestined your Messiah, namely, 
Jesus. 21. dv Set ovp. p. δέξασθαι 
These words admit of a double rendering : 
(1) ‘ Whom the heaven must receive. (2) 
‘Who must possess (capessere) the heaven.’ 
Of these the former is in my view decidedly 
preferable, both as best suiting the sense, 
and as being the natural rendering, whereas 
the other is forced. Only two or three in- 
stances of δέχομαι used in this sense are 
produced, and in these it gets the meaning 
by signifying ‘ to take to one’s self,’ as pro- 
perty or inheritance: which would surely 
never be said of οὐρανόν, thus barely ex- 
pressed. Besides, the emphatic position 
of οὐρανόν, with μέν attached to it, is 
almost decisive against this rendering. I 
apprehend that this particle in a sentence of 
the present form is always found appended 
to the subject, never to the object; and 
that, if odp. had been the object, the form 
of the sentence would necessarily have been 
ὃν μὲν δεῖ κιτ.λ. The reason given by 
Bengel for rejecting the right rendering, 
‘Celo capi, 1. 6. cohiberi, coneludi, vio- 
lenta est interpretatio, quasi ccelum Christo 
majus sit; et inimica celsitudini Christi 
super omnes ceelos,’ is best answered by 
himself ‘Non tamen nullo. sensu dici po- 
tuit, celum suscipit Christum: admittit 
scil. ut thronus Regem legitimum ;’ only I 
would rather understand it locally, and re- 
cognize a parallel expression with that in 
cb. i., also local, νεφέλη ὑπέλαβεν αὐτόν. 


And so far from seeing in it any derogation 
from the Majesty of Christ, it seems to me 
admirably to set it forth: it behoves the 
heaven (which is his, obeying his will) to 
receive Him till the time appointed. The 
omission of the article cannot be adduced 
either way here: for οὐρανός ‘the heaven,’ 
is frequently anarthrous, as ἥλιος and other 
similar nouns : see (besides very numerous 
instances of ovp. after a preposition, which 
are hardly to the point) 2 Pet. iii. 12, and 
τὰν πρὸς ἕσπερον κέλευθον οὐρανοῦ, Eur. 
Orest. 1003. Ζεύς ἐστιν αἰθήρ, Ζεὺς δὲ 
γῆ, Ζεὺς δ᾽ οὐρανός, Asch. Frag. i. 96. 
The tragedians never prefix the article to 
οὐρανός, γῆ (meaning ‘the earth’), αἰθήρ, 
or ἥλιος, except when qualified by an 
adjective, as ὦ τὸν αἰπὺν οὐρ. διφρηλατῶν, 
Soph. Aj. 832, and even then very seldom. 
Middleton has but very slightly noticed 
this, ch. iii. 1, § 5, note. ἄχρι] Not 
during, as the advocates of the present 
spiritual sense of the passage wish to 
render it, but until; see below. 

χρόνων ἀποκαταστ. πάντων «.T.A.] The 
key both to the construction and mean- 
ing here, is our Lord’s saying, Matt. 
xvii. 11, Ἡλίας μὲν ἔρχεται καὶ ἄπο- 
καταστήσει πάντα. From this we see 
that ἀποκατ. πάντων stands alone, as the 
ἀποκατ. of all things: and that ὧν does 
not belong to πάντων. Next, what is atro- 
κατάστασις We must be guided by the 
usage of the kindred verb ἀποκαθίστημι 
(or-dvw). Certainly, to restore is its usual 
iinport, and most strikingly so, accom- 
panied however with the notion of a glo- 
rious and complete restoration, in ch. i. 6. 
To render our word fulfilment, and apply 
it to πάντων ὧν ἐλάλ. k.7.A., is against all 
precedent. And, in the sense of re- 
storation, I cannot see how it can be 
applied to the work of the Spirit, as pro- 
ceeding, during this the interim-state, in 
the hearts of men. This would be con- 
trary to all Scripture analogy. I under- 


ABCDE 
ΡΝ δὺς 
‘dfghk 
lmop 
13 


21—24. TIPABEIS AMOSTOAON., 90 


>’ 3 .A b] fa a Ως τς Ἢ or J 
ο ἀπ᾽ αἰῶνος αὐτοῦ ἃ προφητῶν. 22 Μωυσῆς μὲν εἶπεν ὅτι & -- buke i. 70. 
/ ΄ al p > / ΄ c ‘ ¢ a , “ Ps. pa 52 
προφήτην ὑμῖν ὃ ἀναστήσει κύριος ο θεὸς ὑμῶν ἐκ τῶν, — Matt. xxi. 
2 Ga ¢e a e 3.21} ᾽ a 5) ΄ \ ͵ 24. ch. vii. 
ἀδελφῶν ὑμῶν 4 ὡς ἐμέ: αὐτοῦ ἀκούσεσθε 'KaTa πάντα %, ‘rom 


Dect. xviil. 


φ xn / . e “~ f> " , a 5 
ὅσα ἂν λαλήσῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 73 "ἔσται δέ, 'πᾶσα "ψυχὴ, Print. vii 
ι , IN eats / an , 5) ’ v2 , 29 al. 
ἥτις ἐὰν μὴ ἀκούσῃ τοῦ προφήτου ἐκείνου " ἐξολοθρευθή- x= ch, asi 
22. Col. ii. 


20), 22. 
iv. 15 
5 =and constr., 
ch. ii. 17, 21. 
t Matt. vii. 
vhere only. Deut. vii. 10 al. Jos. Antt. #iii. 11. 1. 
x Luke i. 3. viii. 1. ch. xi. 4. xvii. 23 only t. L. 


σεται ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ. Heb. 


ζ ᾿Ὶ 7: , \ e ΄“- A 
24.” καὶ πάντες “ δὲ οἱ προφῆται ἀπὸ 
τ- \ \ a a e ΄ 

Σαμουὴλ, καὶ τῶν " καθεξῆς ὅσοι ἐλάλησαν καὶ ¥ κατήγ- 


Col. iii. 17. u — ch. ii. 43 reff. 
John vi. 51. viii. 16, 17 al. 


24. x. 32. 
w Matt. x. 18. 
y ch. xiii. 5 reff. 


ins των B?-marg(sic: see table) EX? ὁ k 13, rec αὐτου προφ. bef am awvos, with 
P rel 36: om az. awv. D 19 arm Cosm, Iren-int Tert,: 13 has it thus, ay. αὐτου τῶν 
am at. προφ. : alii aliter (prob the expr was fond difficult, as Mey suggests, because 
strictly aw aiwvos there were no prophets. Hence it was ejected to the marg and 
found its place variously when reinserted) : txt (a very usual collocation in the Acts) 
ABCER (k) p. ins των bef προφ. D!.—om αὐτου k. 

22. rec aft μεν ins yap (to connect the prophecy of Moses, as an example, with ver 
21), with P rel Syr Chr,: om ABCDER Db! ὁ p 36 vulg syr coptt eth [arm] Chr, 
Iren-int,. rec ins πρὸς τους πατερας bef εἰπεν, with P rel ΤῊ] : aft εἰπεν DE sah 
eth arm Chr, Iren-int: om ΑΒΟΝ p vulg Syr copt.—(Dd ef sah eth Iren-int add 
ἡμῶν aft the above insn; E 24. 43 add ὑμων.) * ἡμῶν CEPR! at beef hl ὁ 18 
syr sah eth Just, [Orig,]: om B 60 Syr copt Chr, [Chron, Cosm,]: ὑμων ADR? p rel 


vulg [Orig,] Chr, Iren/ -int, ]. 
euov D)}-sr(txt D?). 


tor 2ud vuwy, nuwy D-gr a 5. 14. 57. 95 lect-12. 


23. rec av, with BDE rel [Orig, Eus, Chr]: txt ACPR bedefglmop 


(εξολεθρ., so ABCD.) 
24. om δε D. 
Chr [Cosm, 1 Iren-int. 


for ooo, οἱ C2D*8 vulg: 
ἐλαλησεν D1: ἐπροφητευσαν (3 arm -ed j. 


ο D!: txt AB C\(appy) C3E rel D-lat 


rec 


προκατηγγειλαν (gloss), with ΟΣ rel Cosm: txt AB Cappy) DEPR ec def gklmp 


36 vulg syrr coptt ztharm Chr Thi Iren-int. 


stand it then of the glorious restoration of 
all things, the παλιγγενεσία | Matt. xix. 
28], which as Peter here says, is the theme 
of all the prophets from the beginning. 
No objection can be raised to this 
from the meaning of χρόνοι : see ch. vil. 17, 
and Peter’s own language, 1 Pet. 1. 20, ἐπ᾽ 
ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων. If the distinction be 
true between χρόνοι and καιροί, as denoting 
a longer and a shorter period respectively, 
which I much doubt,—it does not affect 
this passage: for, either way, the χρόνοι 
amoxat. will imply the time or period of 
the ἄποκατ., not the moment only when it 
begius or is completed, as καιρός (not 
καιροί) ἀποκατ. might. De Wette is hardly 
right in saying that the unexpressed δέ to 
answer to μέν is contained in the sense of 
ἀποκατάστασις : it is rather contained in 
the previous clause, kal ἀποστείλῃ, K.T.A. 
In order to fill up the ellipsis, this clause 
would have to be repeated after προφη- 
τῶν-- τότε δὲ αὐτὸν ἀποστελεῖ. ὧ 
ive. οὕς, agreeing with χρόνους, or perhaps 
περὶ ὧν, i.e. χρόνων. It does not refer to 
πάντων, ---566 above. On the testimony 
of the prophets, see ver. 18, note. 
22.] This citation is a free but faithful 
paraphrase of the text in Deut. See LXX. 


Ov, - 


That the words, as spoken by Moses, 
seem to point to the whole line of pro: 
phets sent by God, is not any objection to 
their being applied to Christ, but rather 
necessitates, and entirely harmonizes with, 
that application. See the parable Matt. 
xxi. 33-——41. And none of the whole pro- 
phetic body entirely answered to the ὡς ἐμέ, 
but Christ. The Jews therefore rightly 
understood it (though not always con- 
sistent in this, compare John i. 21 with vi. 
14) of the Messiah. 23. ἐξολεθρ.] 
LXX ἐγὼ ἐκδικήσω ἐξ αὐτοῦ. This word, 
only known to later Greek, is often found 
in the LXX. See besides reff., Gen. xvii. 
14; Deut. ix. 3; Ps. xvii. 40 ; xxii. 27. In 
most places where it occurs, the readings 
vary between -ολοθρ- and -ολεθρ- ; see var. 
readd. 24.] See ver. 18, note. 

The construction of the Vulg., defended by 
Casaubon and adopted by Valeknaer and _ 
Kuinoel, τῶν καθεξῆς ὅσοι ἐλάλ,, ‘et omnes 
prophetz a Samuel, et deinceps qui locuti 
sunt,’ is not so good as the ordinary one in 
E.V. Cf. ἀρξάμενος ἀπὸ Μωυσέως καὶ ἀπὸ 
πάντων τῶν mpod., Luke xxiv. 27. Still 
less admissible is the rendering given in 
Dr. Burton’s note, as perhaps the literal 
one, ‘And to the same effect spoke) all 


40 TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. III. 2a, 26: 


OF ΄ A e -. > a 
>= Matt. viii, γείλαν TAS ἡμέρας ταύτας. 5 ὑμεῖς ἐστε οἱ 2 υἱοὶ τῶν ABCDE 
12. Luke 
xx. 34, 36. 


a PRabec 
ab ce 2 bd ΄ ς \ be \ 
2 Thess. ii. 3. vag ole? Kal τῆς διαθήκης “ ἧς δ διέθετο ὁ θεὸς προς dfghk 
Ezek. xxx. 5. \ , f 


ν᾿ Ja , ees 5 ἣ \ n lmop 
reves τοὺς ᾿ πατέρας ὑμῶν, λέγων πρὸς ᾿Αβραὰμ Kat ἐν τῷ 13 


5 / / h b] / lal 6ε Ν n 
— Lukei. 72. 5 I 
a= Lukei72. σπέρματι TOU ἐνευλογηθήσονται πᾶσαι αἱ 'πατριαι τῆς 


Ps. xxiv. 14. 


“" 26 ς “ “ k 5 , e \ Ν ] τὸ ΕῚ “ 

bite wis 15: ὑμῖν πρῶτον * ἀναστῆσας o θεὸς Tov! παῖδα αὐτοῦ 
&x.16,from 5 , “4. ἢ ἴ ,.ἢ rn Seen 9 ae ay , 

Jer. xxviii, ἀπέστειλεν aUTOV ™ εὐλογοῦντα υμᾶς " ἐν τῷ ° ἀποστρέφειν 

peek 18. c attr., ch. 1. 1 reff. d as above (b). Luke xxii. 29 bis. Heb. ix. 16, 17 only. 


e = Heb. x. 16. Exod. xxiv. 8. Jer. xi. 10. f ch. vii. 51,52. xxviii. 25. Matt. xxiii. 32. John vi. 49,58. Heb. iii. 


9 (from Ps. xciv. 9) only. Num. xxxii. 8, 14. g Rom. ix. 7 reff. Gen. xxii. 18. h Gal. i iii, 8 only, 
from Gen. xii. 3 Ed-vat. (evAoy., A. B def.). i Take ii. 4. Eph. iii. 15 only. Num. i. 18. k= ser; 
22 reff. 1 = ver. 13. ch. iv. 27,30. Matt. xii. 18 only. Isa. xlix. 6. m = Gal. iii. 9. Eph. i. 
3al. Gen. xii. 3 A compl. n = ch. iv. 30 reff. o — Luke xxiii. 14, 2 Tim. iv. 4. Job xxxiii. 17. 


25. rec om οἱ (as unnecessary, or perhaps in the way, as according to the common 
notion an art with the predicate distributes zt), with DP rel Chr, [Cosm,]: ins 
ABCER b? ¢ ὁ kp [coptt]. for ns, nv D'(txt D2), o 6. bef διεθ. BD coptt 
om int,. rec nuwy (corrn, as ot πατ. nuwy is the more usual ; see ver 13, ch vii. 

2, 15), with CDPN? rel vulg syrr copt sah-ms eth [arm-ed Chr Cosin ] lren-int: txt 
ABUNS k m! p sah-woide arm[-mss] Chr, ΤῊ] Iren-int-ms. rec om ev, with E-lat 
[Cosm]: ins ABCD E[-gr] PN rel. etrevaoyn9. C: ευλογηθ. Β 6 8. 15. 27. 100-27- 
63 Chr Thi, Ec: txt (except the initial ε) is written over an erasure by A! [but θη 
above the line}. 

26. rec o θεος bef avacr. (rearrangement for perspicuity), with ADEP rel vulg syr 
coptt [wth arm, Treg] Chr, Iren-int,: txt BCX Syr eth farm(Tischdf) Chr, ]. rec 
aft 7. maid. aut. ins inoouy (marginal gloss. 


of variations, are spurious), with AP re] Cosm, : 


arm Chr ΤῺ], Iren-int,. 
ΕΠ σ)δύντας D-gr. 


the prophets from 8. downwards, as many 
as spoke and predicted these days.’ Zo 
what effect ? And would not the sentence 
thus amount to little more than saying, 
« As many prophets as predicted these days, 
predicted these days?’ Peter’s aim is to 
shew the unanimity of all the prophets in 
speaking of these times. Samuel is 
named, more as being the first great pro- 
phet after Moses, than as bearing any part 
in this testimony. ‘The prophetic period of 
which David was the chief prophet, began 
in Samuel (Stier). τὰς Tp. TAVT. | 
These days, now present, not the times 
of restoration, as De Wette and others 
understand : which would require ἐκείνας. 
‘ These days’ are, in fact, connected with 
the times of restoration, as belonging to 
the same dispensation and leading on to 
them; and thus the Apostle identifies the 
then time with this preparation for (67ws 
ἂν ἔλθ.) and expectation of (ἄχρι) those 
glories: but to make τὰς qu. ταύτ. identical 
with the καιροὶ avay. and the χρόν. ἄποκατ., 
is to make him contradict himself. 
25.| He applies this to them, as being 
inheritors of the promises. They were 
descendants, according to the flesh, and 
fellow-partakers, according to the spirit. 
For a full comment on this promise 
made to Abraham, see Gal. iii. 16. 
This is cited freely from the LXX, which 
for of πατριαί has τὰ ἔθνη. 26. | 
πρῶτον, first; implying the offer to the 


εξαπεστειλεν D Chron. 


All such additions, if at all the subject 
om BCDERN p [να] Syr coptt ath 
om avrov D Chr, 'Thl, Iren-int. 


Gentiles (but as yet, in Peter’s mind, only 
by embracing Judaism) afterwards: see 
ch. xiii. 46; Rom. i. 16. It is strange 
how Olshausen can suppose that the Spirit 
in Peter overleapt the bounds of his subse- 
quent prejudice with regard to the admis- 


sion of the Gentiles:—he never had any 


such prejudice, but only against their 
admission uncircumcised, and as Gentiles. 
It is still stranger how a scholar like 
Dr. Burton can propose the ungramma- 
tical and unmeaning rendering, “ πρῶτον is 
perhaps used with reference to Christ’s first 
coming, as opposed to his second.” This 
would require τὸ mp@Tov,—and would cer- 
tainly imply in the mind of the speaker an 
absolute exclusion of all but Jews till the 
second coming. ἀναστήσας, not ‘from 
the dead :’ but as in ver. 22. παῖδα, 
His Servant: see note, ver. 13. 
ἀπέστειλεν, indefinite, of the sending in 
the flesh; sent, not ‘hath sent;’ it does 
not apply to the present time, but to God’s 
procedure in raising up His Servant Jesus, 
and His mission and ministry: and is dis- 
tinct from the ἀποστείλῃ of ver. 20. This 
is also shewn by the pres. part. εὐλογοῦντα, 
ingeniously, but not quite accurately ren- 
dered in E. V. ‘to bless you” He came 
blessing you (his coming was an act of 
blessing— it consisted in the εὐλογεῖν : an 
anarthrous present participle in such a 
connexion carries necessarily a slightly ra- 
tiocinative sense), in (as the conditional 








.. εἰς 

την C. 

ABDE 

Prabe 

afghk 

lmnop 
13 


TIPAZEIS AMOSTOAON. 


IV. ]—4. 4. ] 
« > A “ Ρ a“ ΄ -“ EV 1 Δ , ὃ \ x 
εκαστον ATO τῶν ἔ πονηρίων υμων. Ξ ANOVYTWV OE p Matt, xxii. 
= \ Ἣ \ ᾿ > * ec e lols . \ oc. ar Vil. 
αὐτῶν πρὸς τὸν λαὸν “ ἐπέστησαν αὑτοῖς οἱ ἱερεῖς καὶ 35: Luke ai. 
ς aye n ¢ nm ᾽ 4 29.1 Cor. v. 
6S στρατηγὸς τοῦ " ἱεροῦ Kal οἱ Σαδδουκαῖοι, 3 ' διαπονού- & Eph. vi. 
4 \ = ᾿ς \ ¥ 12 only. 
μενοι διὰ τὸ διδάσκειν αὐτοὺς τὸν λαὸν Kal " καταγγέλλειν IH 116. ον 
ἊΝ cal ‘ 3 , \ an € \ ᾿ ea = 
ἡ ἐν τῷ Ἰησοῦ τὴν * ἀνάστασιν τὴν * ἐκ “ νεκρῶν" ὃ καὶ * ἐπ- Pn si 18 
ἤ x ’ a \ x \ He) Ἴ y 7, Pe al. Luke 
ἔβαλον * αὐτοῖς τὰς " χεῖρας καὶ EVEVTO ELS” Τηρησιν “Εἰς only,exc. | 
ess. V. ὅ. 
\ 9 x / / \ \ a ᾽ oT: 9 
τὴν * αὔριον, ἣν yap " ἑσπέρα ἤδη. * πολλοὶ δὲ τῶν ἀκου- FP, 
΄ Ν , Ses Sie? ΄ » \ κ᾿ vi. 5. 
σαντων TOV AOYoV ἐπιστευσαν, καὶ ἐγενήθη ἀριθμὸς τῶν τ ch. v.24 
᾿ ὌΚΟ ΧΧΙΙ. Ve 
only. s = as above (r), Luke xxii. 4. ch. v. 26 (xvi. 20, ἅς.) only . L. (Neh. ii. 16.) t ch. xvi. 
only. Eccl. x. 9. 2 Mace. ii. 28 Ed-vat. F(not AB) only. , Uu=ch. xill. 5 reff. v = 1 Cor. 
xv. 22 reff. w Luke xx. 35. 1 Pet. i.3 only. without εκ, 1 Cor. xv. 12 reff. x constr., 
Mark xiv. 46. Isa. xix. 16. see ch. xxi. 27. y = ch. v. 18 (1 Cor. vii. 19) only +. L.P. 1 Macc. 


v.18. Thucyd. vii. 86. Jos. iii. 5. a Luke xxiv. 29. ch. xxviii. 


z Matt. vi. 34 only. 
23 only. Gen. i. 5, ἄς. 


exactos D}(txt D?), waus quisque vulg D-lat Iren-int: om Syr. for απο, ex D. 

for ὑμων, avtwy ΟἹ 13. 662 vulg D-lat copt Iven-int: αὐτου 5. 27-9. 69. 100-4-27-63 : 
om B Chr, Thl-ms (corrections and omission to suit ἕκαστον which did not seem to 
tally with υμων) : txt A[C3]DE[P JX rel syrr eth [arm] Cosm). 


Cuap. IV. 1. aft λαὸν ins τα ρήματα tavra D ὁ Syr syr-mg Thil-sif, [ταὐτὰ τα pu. | 
E Lucif,. οἱ cep. bef αὑτοῖς 18: om aut. D vulg Lucif. ot ἀρχιερεῖς (alteration 
to more usual word: cf. Lu xx. 1) BC eth [arm }. om Kk. 0 στρ. τ. sepov D: ins 
aft oad6. Syr. 

2. ins καὶ bef διαπ. C!(appy) [eth-pl]: καταπ. D’?: καιαπ. D': om diam. eth{-rom ]. 

αναγγειλλειῖν Tov incovy ev TH avactace: D. for τὴν εκ,των DPacdfgh 
1m o? Ht E-lat sah eth [arm] Chr, Thl, Lucif}. 

3. eme:Badovtes D-gr: om καὶ (bef εθεντοὴ) D-corr-gr. aft «@evro ins avrous (to 
complete sense) ACE k 36 vss Chr, Thl-fin; αὐτοῖς m: om BDPN p rel ΤῊ], Lucif,. 

(The page in C ends εθεντο avrous εἰς τὴν, either adding τὴν bef rnpnoww, or omg 
εἰς τηρησιν.) ἐπαυριον D 40 [γαυριον &?]. 

4. om Tov λογον A. και αριθμ. τε εγεν. avdp. D'[om τε D?}]. rec ins o bef 
αριθμος (from supposed necessity of art), with AEP p rel 36 Chr, : om BDR. 


element of the blessing) turning every 
one from your iniquities: thus conferring 
on you the best of blessings. evAoy., in 
allusion to évevAoy., ver. 25. ἐν τῷ in 
this sense, see Luke viii. 5. The applica- 
tion to the present time is made by in- 
ference :—‘ as that was His object then, 
so now :—but (see below) the discourse is 
unfinished. The intransitive sense of 
ἀποστρέφειν,“ which blessing 1s to be 
gained by (in) every one of you turning 
Srom your iniquities,—given in the Vulg., 
“αὖ convertat se unusquisque,’ and main- 
tained by Theophyl., @c., Beza, Kuinoel, 
Meyer, &c., on the strength of ver. 19, is 
inadmissible,—as ἀποστρέφω is not found 
thus used in the N.T., and we have the 
precedent of ref. Luke and Rom. xi. 26 for 
the transitive sense. The argument from 
ver. 19 tells just as well for it: ‘Repent 
and be converted, for this was the 
object of Jesus being raised up, to confer 
on you this very blessing, the turning away 
each of you from your iniquities.’ This 
discourse does not come to a final conclusion 
as in ch. ii. 36, because it was interrupted 
by the apprehension of the Apostles. 
Cuar. IV. 1—4.] APPREHENSION AND 


IMPRISONMENT OF THE TWO APOSTLES. 

1.] éwéor., see reff. ot ἱερεῖς, 
the officiating priests, as soon as they were’ 
released from their duties. The otpar- 
nyos τ. ἱεροῦ wus the captain of the Le- 
vitical guard of the temple, mentioned by 
Jos. B. J. vi. 5. 3, δραμόντες δὲ of τοῦ ἱεροῦ 
φύλακες ἤγγειλαν τῷ στρατηγῷ. We 
hear in Jos. Antt. xx. 6. 2, of 6 στρατηγὸς 
“Avavos: and in B. J. ii. 12. 6, he is said 
to be son of the high priest Ananias. In 
2 Macc. iii. 4, we hear of the προστάτης Tov 
ἱεροῦ, who appears to have been the same 
officer. See Winer, Realw., art. Temple, 
end. Σαδδουκ.] See note on Matt. iii. 7. 
Perhaps they on this occasion had moved 
the guard and the priests to notice the 
matter: for διαπον. seems only to refer to 
them. Cf.alsoch. v.17. 2.) ἐν τ. Ἰησ., 
—not, as E. V., ‘through Jesus,’ but in 
the person (or example) of Jesus, alleging 
Him as an example of that which the Sad- 
ducees denied: preaching by implication, 
inasmuch as one resurrection would imply 
that of all, the resurrection of the dead. 
The ἐν in reff. carries this somewhat fur- 
ther, but the usage is philologically the 
same. ‘The resurrection through Jesus’ — 


43 ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ATMOSTOAQON. IV. 
beonstr.sch. ἀνδρῶν [ὡς χιλιάδες πέντε. δῦ ἐγένετο δὲ “ὁ ἐπὶ τὴν 
ix. 3, 32, 37. τὰ = 4 ἃ % 
uw, Loni ἃ αὔριον © συναχθῆναι αὐτῶν τοὺς ἱἄρχοντας καὶ τοὺς 
Lake iif 21. πρεσβυτέρους καὶ τοὺς γραμματεῖς ἐν ‘lepovaadnp, ὃ καὶ 

vi. 1,6, 12 al. - . ᾿ ἢ aa aes ᾿ P 
c= chit "“Apyas ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς καὶ Καϊάφας καὶ ᾿Ιωώννης καὶ 
thine sa Αλέξανδρος ὅδ καὶ ὅσοι ἦσαν ἐκ ὃ" γένους } ἀρχιερατικοῦ, 

, compl , Raa , > \ δ a ͵ , , 

e Mati. sa 7 καὶ " στήσαντες αὐτοὺς * ἐν [to] μέσῳ | ἐπυνθάνοντο ᾿Εν 
ot τ᾿ Ὁ ποίᾳ "δυνάμει ἡ ° ἐν ποίῳ 5 ὀνόματι ἐποιήσατε τοῦτο ὑμεῖς ; 
tach. wii, 27 reff g Col. ii. 1. Herod. i. 57. vii. 185. h = ch. vii. 13. xiii. 26. Rev. xxii. 

16. Jer. xlviii. (xli.) 1. ihere only+. Jos, Antt. xv. 3. 1. k Matt. xvili. 2 || Mk. (John viii. 3. 
l constr . ch. x. 29. xxiii. 19. m — Luke vi. 32, 34. ch. xxii. 34. Rom. iii. 27 al. 2 Kings xv. 2. n=ch. 

iii. 12 al. o = Luke x. 17. ver. 10. ch. xvi. 18 al. 
rec wset, with EP rel Chr: ws B(sic, see table) 1) : om AX p vulg copt eth Hil,. 

5. aft avpiov ins nuepay 19}. συνηχθησαν οἱ apx. Kk. ot πρεσβ. k. yp. and 
avvas &e D [simly copt]. om avtwy D 3. 95! Syr copt eth. rec om 2nd and 
3rd τοὺς (supposed unnecessary), with EP rel: ins ABN b ὁ 9}. rec (for ev) εἰς 
(corrn to suit συναχθῆναι, cf Matt vi. 26, xiii. 30; and esp xxvi. 3), with PN rel: 
txt ABDE Ὁ ἢ k 0 p 36 Chr,.—om εν tep. Syr. 

6. rec avvav Tov apxiepea κ. καιαφαν K. ιωαννὴν K. adetavdpov, with EP rel 36 [Chr, ]: 
txt AB D(see last verse) δὲ p [vulg coptt].—om o (bef apx.) B(sic; see table).—for 
iwwavyns, wvabas D. 

7. om tw DEP rel Chr, : ins ABN p 36. touto bef εποιησατε (so corrected a 
prima inanu from εἐποιειτε) δὲ. 
does not appear on the present occasion to was that of new converts on this occasion, 
have formed part of their preaching. or of the whole Church: but most pro- 
3.) ἑσπέρα, perhaps, from their adjourn- _ bably the latter. 
ing the case till the next day, the second 5—12.] Tue APosTLES EXAMINED 
evening, beginning with the twelfth hour: BEFORE THE SANHEDRIM. PETER’S 
see Matt. xiv. 15, and note. 4.) éyev- SPEECH. ὅ.] αὐτῶν, of the Jews ; 
ἤθη -- ΤῊ 5 form is unknown in good a construction frequently used where 
Greek : but common in Hellenistic,—see there can be little chance of mistaking 
Col. iv. 11; 1 Thess. ii. 14; Winer, ὃ 15. to whom or what the pronoun refers, 
10 appears to have been originally a Doric see John viii. 44, note; Rom. ii. 26; 
form: and is commonly, though this can- Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 22. 3. 3 b. In this 
not always be pressed (1 Thess. i. 5,6; ii. place, however, it has been mistaken : 
5, and notes there), used where a passive for Meyer refers αὐτῶν to the believers 
sense is admissible, and an agent under- just mentioned, inasmuch as they were 
stood: cf. e.g. Matt. vi. 10; viii. 13; Jews: absurdly enough. ἄρχ. 
xxi. 42. Here the agent would be κ. πρεσβ. x. γρ.1 The Sanhedrim: see 
God: see ch. ii. 47. τῶν ἀνδρῶν] Matt. ii. 4; xxvi. 59; ch. v. 21. 

It does not appear whether we are to ἐν Ἱερουσαλήμ] Why is this specified ὃ 
take this strictly as masculine, or more The difficulty of accounting for it has led 
loosely as if it were ἀνθρώπων: Meyer in some mss. to ἐν being altered to εἰς, 
thinks the former: Olshausen, that as yet so as to imply that certain of them who 
only men attached themselves to the church dwelt out of town (Lightf. ἄς.) were sum- 
(but see ch. i. 14): De Wette objects to moned to Jerusalem. I believe it merely 
the stricter view, that Luke does not so implies that the meeting was not held in 
reckon, ch. ii. 41 (see however Luke ix.14, the temple, but in the city. 6.] On 
and cf. || Mt.): but leaves it undecided. Annas and Caiaphas, both called high 
The laxer use of ἀνδρῶν occurs Luke xi. priests, Luke iii. 2,—see note there. Of 


31, and James i. 20. In ch. v. 14, men 
and women both are mentioned as being 
added to the Lord. Wordsw. sees in 
the 5000 ἄνδρες a fulfilment of the pro- 
phecy contained in the miracle of feeding 
the 5000. But how will the circumstances 
tally, seeing that these were but new con- 
verts, babes in grace, not yet fed to the 
full as were those others? And again, it 
is not guite certain whether this number 


Jolin and Alexander nothing is known. 
Lightfoot supposes John to be identical 
with the Jochanan ben Zacchai of the Tal- 
mud, who however (De W.) was not of the 
high-priestly, but only of the priestly race: 
—and Pearson, Wolf, Krebs, and Mangey 
suppose Alexander to have been the brother 
of Philo Judzus, mentioned by Jos. Antt. 
xviii. 8.1. But this is very improbable ; 
for he was Alabarch of the Jews at Alexan- 


ABDE 
PRabec 
dfghk 
lmop 
13 





“««-«αρχον- 
τες p. 

ABDE 

Pradbc 

dfgh 

klma 
13 


o—13. 


TIPAZEIS ATMOSTOAON. 


43 


, , / A “- 
ὃ τότε Ilétpos Ῥ πλησθεὶς πνεύματος ἁγίου εἶπεν πρὸς νον". ἀτοῇ. 


αὐτοὺς 9”Apyovtes τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ ᾿' πρεσβύτεροι [τοῦ " 1σ- 


ri Matis xt, 
23. Luke vii. 
3. ch. xxv. 15. 


anr], 9 εἰ ἡμεῖς σήμερον * ἀνακρινόμεθα ἃ ἐπὶ ¥ εὐεργεσίᾳ 5 here only. 
parr], ἤμερ ρινόμ ργεσίᾳ "ὶς 


5) ͵ ’ = 

ἡ ἀνθρώπου ἀσθενοῦς, * ἐν τίνι οὗτος Υ σέσωσται, 10 * γνω- 
\ lal Lal “A A ‘ δ 1 

στὸν ἔστω πᾶσιν ὑμῖν καὶ παντὶ τῷ λαῷ ᾿Ισραὴλ ὅτι ὃ ἐν 15 (vis) 

τ ο : 


xod. xxiv. 1. 

t Luke xxiii. 14. 

ch. xii. 19 al3. 
Cor. ii. 14, 
417. 
nly. L.P. 


- τὰ / ’ A » lal wn =”. 
τῷ “ὀνόματι ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου, ὃν ὑμεῖς 1... 65 χα. 


2 ΄ a e θ \ b 2” 
εσταυρώσατε, OV O εος 


rs) e Ἂν \ = \ \ , 
ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανὸν τὸ δεδομένον 
Ρ δεῖ “σωθῆναι ἡμᾶς. 


Ps. ii. 8). Mark xiv. 47 al. 1 Kings xvi. 21, 22. 

13 al. (chiefly John) in gospp. Tit. il. 8 only. 

only. 4 Kings xxii.6. Herod. ii. 121. 
i Matt. xxi. 42 || & 1 Pet. ii. 7 (from 1. 6.) only. 

26). Rom. xi. 11. 

ii. 9 al. 

21. xiv. 22. 


n-- ch. ii. 40 al. 
Dan. ii. 28. 


ἤγειρεν ἐκ 
= 6 7 d ’ , ς cal e e / 
οὗτος “ παρέστηκεν “ ἐνώπιον ὑμῶν © ὑγιὴς. 
΄ a lal U id 
ὁ λίθος ὁ “ ἐξουθενηθεὶς Uh ὑμῶν τῶν £oiKodopwV, ὁ 
hie ee χὰ, ik Ἢ 
γενόμενος εἰς ἱ κεφαλὴν ᾿ γωνίας. 
5 >) Ν ] e l / K 7 Ν m 40 a n “ 
ἄλλῳ οὐδενὶ “ἡ σωτηρία" “ouTE yap ὀνομὰ ἐστιν " ἐτερον 


15 θεωροῦντες δὲ τὴν τοῦ Ἱ]έτρου 


Isa, xxxviil. 21. 
Xen. Symp. iv. 4. 


Rey. vii. 10. xii. 10. xix. 1. Obad. 17 AN3>, Ald. compl. (om 7 BN}). 
och. ii. 5 reff, 2 
q = ch. xvi. 30, 31 al. fr. 


u =: Rom. vi. 
21 reff. 


b 


A x 2 ΄ 
νεκρῶν, fers ee v1 Tim. vi. 2 
ll οὗτός ἐστιν only. Ps. 


Ixxvii. 11. 
wconstr., Rom. 
ὩΣ 6 <p b2 


12 \ > ” b) 
“και OUK εστίν EV 


@ zich. xili. 38 
@ τοῦ 

© aver. 7. 

b 1 Cor. xv. 12 


ἐν ἀνθρώποις, * ἐν 


d = ch. ii, 25 reff. 
Rom, xiv. 3 reff. g here 

h constr., ch. v. 36 reff. Psa. exvii. 22. 

. labsol., John ivy. 22 (ch. xiii. 
m = Phil. 
p = Luke xxiv. 7. ch. iii. 


k ch. xxvi. 26 reff. 


Job ii. 2. 


8. om Tov icp. (as unnecessary aft του Aaov Ὁ) ABN vulg coptt eth Cyr, Fulg: ins 


DEP rel 36 syrr Chr, Iren-int, Cypr,. 
(not am fuld demid) | Syr eth Ουρι. 


9. aft avakpivoy. ins ap υμων DE syrr eth-pl Iren-int, Cypr,. 


σεσωται &. 
10. for παντι, παν δὲ}. 


ins σήμερον bef υγιης E: att vy. Bede-gr. 


syr-mg Cypr,. 
11. μων D-gr. 


at end ins ἀκουσατε E 15-8. 36-7 vulg[-ed 


ex Dm. 


ins tov κυριου bef ina. xp. E vulg-ed(not am fuld demid). 


add kat ev aAAw ovdenr Εἰ 


rec οἰκοδομουντων (corrn to suit LXX and Matt xxi. 42), with 


EP rel Chr [Thdrt, Cypr,]: txt ABD ὁ 36 Orig, Did,. 


12. om ἡ oat. 1). 


"κοὐδὲ (philological correction? so Meyer) ABN abhk 
o 13. 36 [syr] coptt Did, Thdrt Bas,: ov D [Syr]: ovre EP rel Chr,. 


etepov bef 


eotw' AE ach m 18 demid fuld [tol Chr, |: eo. ev. ov. D-gr [syr ath] Bas, Iren-int, 


[Orig-int]: er. ov. es. δὲ [vulg-ed]: txt B[P] rel. 
o δεδομενον D!, quod datum est D-lat, q. d. sit Iren-int: txt D%. 


m ὁ ΗΙ Thi. 
om ev D 117-63 vulg Iren-int Cypr. 


dria, Jos. ibid. 7. ἐν ποίᾳ δυνάμει--- 
not = ev π. ἐξουσίᾳ, ‘in what authority,’ 
—but in what (manner of) power; of 
what kind was the enabling cause, the ele- 
ment in which, as its condition, the deed 
was wrought ?—év ποίῳ ὀνόματι -- ποῦ ‘in 
what name, —i. 6. ‘by whose authority, 
but by (“ 2x,’ see above) what (manner of) 
name, spoken as a word of power: see ch. 
111.6, 16; Jos. Antt. viii. 2. 5. TOUTO, 
not the teaching (Olshaus., &c.),—nor 
both the miracle and the teaching (Heinr.), 
but the miracle: and that only. 8. | 
πλησθ. mv. Gy., i.e. specially, for the 
occasion. 9.1 εἰ, if, with an implica- 
tion of the fact being so: see ch. xi. 17. 

ἐν τίνι, not ‘ by (in) whom,’—this is 
not yet brought forward: but wherein, in 
what, as the conditional element. No per- 
son had been mentioned in the question, 
ver. 7,—nor does Peter afterwards say ev 


om ὑπὸ Tov ovpavov Phe gl 
vuas B [Ambrst, ]. 


Ἰησοῦ xp., but ἐν τῷ dvdu. “I. xp. On 
the other hand, ἐν τούτῳ, ver. 10, may 
very well be masculine, as referring to 
Ἰησοῦς xp. Himself, included in the pre- 
vious words τῷ ὃν. 71. xp.:—it may also 
be neuter, ‘in this Name:’ but the mase. 
is preferable, on account of οὗτος following 
sosooninver.11. | 10.] 6v.... dv: 
the copula is omitted to make the contrast 
more striking. παρέστηκεν, Stands, 
asin KE. V. He was there present. 

11.] See Matt. xxi. 42, note. 12.] In| 
Jos. Antt. iii. 1. 5, Moses, praying to God 
for Israel, says, ἐν αὐτῷ γὰρ εἶναι τὴν 
σωτηρίαν αὐτοῦ, καὶ οὐκ ἐν ἄλλῳ. σωτη- 
ρία is used here in the higher sense of sal- 
vation, not with reference to the healing 
of the lame man. See reff. Thé article 
implies, ‘the salvation for which we all 
look? our salvation: ἐστὶν ἢ σωτ. is para- 
phrased in the next clause by δεῖ σωθῆναι 


4} 


MPAZEIS. ATIOSTOAON. 


IV. 


᾿ "»ν. , \ a 4 ‘\ s ’ .“ ” θ 
r—ch.ii29. ἡ παρρήησιαν καὶ ἰωώάαννου, καὶ καταλαβόμενοι ὅτι ἂν ρω- 


xxvill. 31. 
1 Tim. iii. 13. 
Wisd. v. 1. 

s = ch. x. 34. 
XXvV. 25. 

Eph. iii. 18. 
see Johni. ὃ. 

there only t. 

Ὁ 1 Cor. xiv. 
16, 23, 24. 

2 Cor. xi. 6 
only. Prov. 
vi. 8 (only ?). 

υ constr., 1 Cor. 
xiv. 37 reff. 

w = Luke vii. 
42. xii. 4 (ch. 
xxv. 26). 
Heb. vi. 14. 
Prov. iii. 27. 

x Luke xxi. 15 
only. Esth. 
viii. 8. 

y Matt. xxvi. 
59. ch. v. 27, 
34. xxiii. 1 
41. Jere χυ. 1. 

xx.32. Gen. xx. 9. 

d constr., ch. i. 19 reff. 

xxix. 26 only. 
only. Gen. xxvii. 42. (constr., ch. v. 28 reff.] 


γοντες 


νεῖσθαι" 


ech. xx. 9. xxiv. 4. 


13. om και tdiwr. D. 


> ᾽ = 
οὐδὲν * εἶχον * ἀντειπεῖν. 


z = here (ch. xvii. 18 reff.) only ζ. see Josh. xi. 5 Ald. compl. 
= here only. (ch. i. 19 reff.) 

2 Tum. ii. 16. iil. 9 only. 

g = John xxi. 23. ch. xx. 29. 


t » ΄ , ’ \ u ὃ an > / Vv 4 / 
ποι ᾿ ἀγράμματοί εἰσιν καὶ ἃ ἰδιῶται, ἐθαύμαζον, " ἐπεγίνω- 
‘ e \ “3 a 9F / / 
σκόν TE αὐτοὺς OTL σὺν τῷ Ἰησοῦ ἦσαν: 1 τόν τε ἄνθρω- 
ral ¢ nw \ 4 
πον βλέποντες σὺν αὐτοῖς ἑστῶτα τὸν τεθεραπευμένον, 


- \ \ “ 
15 κελεύσαντες δὲ αὐτοὺς ἔξω τοῦ 


Υ συνεδρίου ἀπελθεῖν, * συνέβαλλον πρὸς ἀλλήλους λέ- 
16 Τί ὃ ποιήσωμεν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις τούτοις ; ὅτι 
μὲν γὰρ ὃ γνωστὸν σημεῖον γέγονεν “ δι’ αὐτῶν, πᾶσιν τοῖς 
ἃ κατοικοῦσιν ἱἹΙἹερουσαλὴμ φανερόν, καὶ οὐ δυνάμεθα ἀρ- 
17 ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα μὴ "ἐπὶ πλεῖον ἴ διανεμηθῇ ὅ εἰς 
τὸν λαόν, [" ἀπειλῇ] ᾿ ἀπειλησώμεθα αὐτοῖς μηκέτι λαλεῖν 


ἃ constr., Matt. 

c = ver. 30. ch. ii. 43 al. 
fhere only}. Deut. 

11 Pet. ii. 23 


Jer. ii. 12. 
h ch. ix. 1 reff, 


for τε, δε D 36 E-lat copt. 


14. rec Se, with P rel 36 copt [arm] Thl-sif: om D!: txt ABD3ERX ce [13] vulg syrr 


sah eth Chr, Thl-fin Lucif. 
D-gr. 

15. κελευσαντος N}(txt &-corr!(?)). 
απαχθηναι D-gr. 


avtwv D!-gr(txt 5). 


on δὲ D-gr ὁ [Syr] eth. 
rec συνεβαλον (corrn to more usual tense), with Ὁ e 36 syr sah 


ELXOV ποίῆσαι ἢ AVTELTELV 


for απελθειν, 


eth [arm] Thl-fin: txt ABEPR rel vulg Syr copt Chr, Thl-sif Lucif. 
16. rec ποιήσομεν, with D-gr P rel E-lat vulg [ Bas-sel, |] Chr Thl-fin Lucif, : txt AB 


E-gr δὰ k m 13. 36 D-lat 'Thl-sift 


yeyovevat D!-gr. 


φανεροτερον εστιν D-gr. 


rec ἀρνήσασθαι (the more common N. T. word), with EP rel Chr: txt ABD 


c Bas-sel,. 
17. om αλλ D-gr. 
pnuata tavta KE syr-mg Lucif). 


for un, δε A2. 


πλεον τι Dz aft Aaov ins τα 


om απειλη (prob mistake in copying ; perhaps 
omd as unnecessary) ABDN vss Bas-sel, Lucif, : 


ins EP rel 36 syr Chr, Thl. 


emAnooueba ουν avtas D!-gr(am. D3: -σωμεθα. adding ergo, D-lat).—(-coueda Pb de 


k? o [Thl-fin ].) 


ἡμᾶς. οὔτε yap /.. . ‘} lit. for 
neither is there another name under 
heaven (which is) given (by God) among 
men (not ‘to men,’ Vulg., Beza, Kuinoel), 
whereby we must be saved: i.e.,as E. V. 
Dr. Burton’s rendering, ‘ For neither is the 
name which is given among men, whereby 
we are to be saved, any other than this,’ is 
ungrammatical. 

13—18.] CONSULTATION AND SENTENCE 
OF THE SANHEDRIM. 13. | καταλαβό- 
μενοι, having had previous knowledge; 
not as EK. V., which would be the partie. 
pres.; see the past, ch. xxv. 25. ἰδιῶ- 
ται, --ἰ 6 word of contrast to those pro- 
fessionally acquainted with any matter : 
here therefore, laics, men of no knowledge 
on such a subject as this. ἔπεγίνωσκον, 
—they recognized them; (so Ou. ώ, 215, 
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν πατρὸς πειρήσομαι ἡμετέροιο, 
αἴ κ᾽ éw ἐπιγνοίη κ-. φράσσεται ὀφθαλ- 
μοῖσιν: Plato, Euthyd. 301 Ε, ἄρα poi 
ποτε αὕτη (ἡ σοφία) παραγενήσεται ὥςτε 
μοι οἰκεία γενέσθαι; ᾿Ἐπιγνοίης ἂν αὐτήν. 
ὦ Σώκρατες, ἔφη, οἰκείαν γενομένην :) their 
astonishment setiing them to think, and re- 


for μηκετι, un A 142 | Bas-sel, |. 


minding them that they had seen these men 
with Jesus :—not for a pluperfect, here or 
any where else: nor is ἦσαν ;---ὔμαῦ they 
(once) were with Jesus. 14.) This, ac- 
cording to De W., is the only place in Luke 
where te couples two sentences. He there- 
fore objects to the reading; and also as 
destroying the contrast; but clearly the 
former is no sound critical reason, nor is it 
correct: see ch.i.15 al. fr.:—and I cannot 
see that any contrast is intended: the two 
circumstances which the Sanhedrim found 
it difficult to gainsay were, the boldness of 
these illiterate men, conferred by their 
companionship with Jesus, ard the pre- 
sence of the healed man standing with 
them. 17. διανεμηθῇ  Ὁ6 scattered 
or spread: lit., be distributed: so Plato, 
Minos, 317 D, τίς ἐπιστήμων διανεῖμαι ἐπὶ 
γῇ τὰ σπέρματα; and afterwards, τίς δὲ 
τὴν τροφὴν ἐπὶ τὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων σώματα 
διανεῖμαι ἄριστος; [ἀπειλῇ] ἀπειλ.] 
for idiom, see reff. The construction 
of ἀπειλέω with an infin., stated by Dr. 
Bloomf. to be ‘so rare that even the best 


lexx. scarcely adduce an example,’ is its” 


ABDE 
PRabe 
dfgh 
klmo 
13 


14—23. 


k 


γεσθαι μηδὲ διδάσκειν * 


μᾶλλον ἢ τοῦ θεοῦ, ὃ" κρίνατε" 309 οὐ δυνάμεθα γὰρ ἡμεῖς ἃ 
εἴδαμεν καὶ ἠκούσαμεν μὴ λαλεῖν. 


σάμενοι 


» ’ὔ \ \ , ¢ 
Χκολάσωνται αὐτούς, διὰ τὸν λαόν, ὅτι πάντες ἐδόξαζον 


Ν Ν > \ A , 
τὸν θεὸν ἡ ἐπὶ τῷ γεγονότι. 
Υ͂ e ” 
τεσσεράκοντα ὁ ἄνθρωπος 


ral lal PLZ ῶι Ve 

τοῦτο τῆς ἢ ἰάσεως. / 55 " ἀπολυθέντες δὲ ἦλθον πρὸς τοὺς “τ. 
τ \ ΄ .“ ra 

ὁ ἰδίους Kal ἀπήγγειλαν ὅσα πρὸς αὐτοὺς οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς Kal 


r = Matt. xvii.dal. Isa. xlii. 24. 

u = ch. xxvi. 32 reff. 

x2 Pet. ii. (4v.r.) 9only +. Wisd. xi. 16. 
11.42 al. Exod. vii. 7. 


32 only. Prov. iii. 8. ἑ = ch. xxiv. 


for avOpwrwy, avOparw Pah 113. 


MPASEIS AIOSTOAON. 


> \ Aes , = 4 l ὃ x ] > θ , 
ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι τούτῳ | μηδενὶ | ἀνθρώπων. 
> \ m ΄ ἈΝ D Ao 
σαντες αὐτοὺς τὶ παρήγγείλαν τὸ " καθόλου μὴ 
\ a 9 ΄ “ lal 
ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ ᾿Τησοῦ. 
, δήν 9 ΄ > s 3 \ 
Πέτρος καὶ ᾿Ιωάννης ἀποκριθέντες εἶπον πρὸς 
PK él Us 3 4 5 , “ θ lal ς “ 
t δίκαιόν ἐστιν “ ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ ὑμῶν 


/ \ 
ἃ ἀπέλυσαν αὐτούς, μηδὲν " 
4 ’ “" Ν i , 
55. ἐτῶν yap ἢν πλειόνων 


bs y A , \ n . 
δ ἐφ ὃν γεγόνει TO σημεῖον ὅν, Se" 


— Luke v. 19. (and constr.) xix. 48. 


a constr., see M: ark Xv. 39. 
9.2 
au re 


45 


18 και καλέ- k Luke i ix. 48, 


3 _ xxi. 8 | 
St a 
19 ὁ δὲ nate 


xxiv. 23. 
James iii. 8. 
Exod, xvi. 
29 A Ald. 
compl. Num. 
xvi. 15. 

m Fe i.4 

t ren, 
TT POSQTTELAN- n here only. 


exes Ezek. xili. 3, 
EUPLOKOVTES 


5 
αὐτοὺς 
Γ ἀκούειν 


21 e \ 

21 οἱ δὲ 

w A lal 
TO TOS 02 Pet. ii. 16, 
18 only. Job 
xiii. 7 al. 

p = Matt. 
xxvii. 49. 
Luke xiv. 28 


q = Luke xvi. 


1 Tim 
11..3. V4: 
1 John iii. 22. 
3 Ainge iil. 
Sc uke vit. 43... Cor: xiv 19. ΣῈ 5. lye : δὰ only +. 
w Luke i. 62. ix. 40. 
y Rom. vi. 21 reff. z constr., Mark v.42. Luke 


Luke i. 65. b ver. 30 and Luke xi. 


18. for kat Kad. avt., συνκατατιθεμενων δε avtTwy TH yrwun φωνησαντες avtovs D 


syr-mg(exce φων. avt.) Lucif; D goes on παρηγγειλαντο κατα To μὴ Φθ. 


ree att 


mapnyy- ins αὐτοῖς (a common filling up), with P rel vss ΤῊ] Lucif: om AB D-gr EX k 


36 vulg syr arm Chr,. 
19. αποκρειθεις δε π. κ. 
εἰπον, with P rel. ΤῊ] 
TouTO υμ. δικκαιον φαινεται K. 
20. δυνομεθα Β. 
Bl-corr: txt AB'DX Chr-wlf,. 


«. Ὁ Syr eth. 


om to HK 18. 
Tov Aaov παντεξς yap Ii. 


κολασωσιν ΒΒ]: 


22. ins nv bef o ανθ., retaining nv above, D-gr. 


eyeveto k: txt BD. 
23. exeivot δε απολ. E. 


ordinary construction: see Palm and 
Rost sub voce, and ef. 1]. α΄. 161; ν΄. 143; 
ο΄. 179, al. freq.: Od. A’. 313; Xen. Mem. 
ii. 5. 4; Hell. v. 4. 7; Eur. Med. 287. 
The use of the middle in the active sense 
is confined to later Greek. 18.] ἐπί, 
soas to make that Name the subject (basis) 
of their discoursing. 

19—22.] ‘THE APOSTLES’ ANSWER AND 
DISMISSAL. 21.| προςαπειλ., having 
threatened them in addition; — with 
threats superadded to the inhibition cf ver. 
18. μηδέν, nO means: not μηδὲν 
αἴτιον, see John xiv. 30. The difficulty 
with the Sanhedrim was, to find any means 
of punishing them which should not stir 
up the people; διὰ τὸν λαόν belongs to 
this clause, not to ἀπέλυσαν air. 

92.) πλ. τεσσ. for TA. ἢ τεσσ., as some- 
times in classical Greek ; so οὐκ ἔλασσον 
πέντε καὶ εἴκοσι, Thucyd. vi. 95. See 
Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 37,5. The constr. ἐφ᾽ 


om To [Β1 ΙΝ]. 


-covtat P Ser’s mss [Chr Thl]. 


ins o bef way. A. rec mp. aut. bet 


: txt ABDEN ck 18 vulg syrr coptt [ath] arm Chr,.—e:ray B. 


rec εἰδομεν, with B2(see table) EP rel (-w- P a f): οἰδαμεν 
om wy D}(ins D>). 
21. for undev, μη D k vulg Syr coptt [ποῖ]. 


aft evpiock. ins αἰτίαν D Syr copt. 
φοβουμενοι 


rec εγεγονει, with AEPX rel : 


om touvto D-gr Iren- mint, Lucif,. 
[ανηγγεῖλαν ΝΟ mi ja h Thi-sif. ] 


transp apx. 


ὃν γεγόνει (see as in reff.) is accounted for 
by the sense involved in it being the 
access, so to speak, of the event ¢o the 
person mentioned. In the note on Rev. 
iv. 2,1 have noticed that καθῆσθαι ἐπί is 
commonly used when the fact is announced 
for the first time, with an accus.: but 
afterwards when the same fact is again 
referred to, with a gen. or dat. τὸ 
σημ. τῆς iag.—the genitive of apposition ; 
50 τὸν ἀῤῥαβῶνα τοῦ πνεύματος, 2 2 Cor. v. 
5: σημεῖον περιτομῆς, Rom. iv. 11, &e. 
The circumstance of his being more than 
forty years old both gave notoriety to his 
person as having’ long resorted there, and 
made the miracle more notable, his malady 
being more coutirmed. 

αι} 51; 1 PRAYER OF THE CHURCH 
THEREUPON. 29. τοὺς ἰδίους, the 
other Apostles, and possibly some others 
assembled with them. There is nothing in 
ver. 31 to mark that only the Apostles were 


48 ΠΡΑΞΈΕΙΣ AITOSTOAQN. We 
: ‘ 9 , - 94, e δὲ > 7 d ΄ θ \ 
dch.i.wret οἱ πρεσβύτεροι εἶπαν. “1 οἱ δὲ ἀκούσαντες ἅ ὁμοθυμαδὸν ABDE 
e=— mke xvii. 9 \ Ae \ 4 \ > , 1. PRabe 
18. 1Kings ραν φωνὴν πρὸς τὸν θεὸν καὶ εἶπαν ‘ Δέσποτα, σὺ df gh 
f = Luke ii. ΄ \ ς 7, ‘ \ a mo 
2. Revi. [0 θεὸς) 80 ποιήσας τὸν ὃ οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν ὃ γῆν καὶ τὴν ~ 43 
10. 2 Pet ΄ \ / lal 4 a \ nw 
fi.2. Judes ἕ θάλασσαν καὶ πάντα Ta ἐν αὐτοῖς, 2° ὁ τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν 
mt? διὰ πνεύματος ἁγίου ἃ στόματος Δαυεὶδ ἱπαιδός σου 
iii. 1. en κ΄ ΟΞ 7, ” \ \ m2 ΄ 
8 τ". χῖν. 15. εἰστὼν δ΄Ϊνα τί ἱ ἐφρύαξαν ἔθνη καὶ λαοὶ ™ ἐμελέτησαν 
δ ΄ [9] , e a ol fol ¢ li 
(Genint, " Keva; 58 ° παρέστησαν οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς Kal οἱ Ρ dpyov- 
Isa. xlii. 5. ΄ \ \ a 
heh 1. 16 τεῦ, TES PI συνήχθησαν ¥ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ὃ κατὰ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ ὃ κατὰ 
i = Luke i. 69. 5 ἢ 
ἘΞ ΤΩ - aA a fs) / \ ee Per , 
αἰ δον Ὁ τοῦ " χριστοῦ ' αὐτοῦ. 510 συνήχθησαν yap " én’ ἀληθείας 


reff. Psa. li. 5 A / ͵ ΣΝ \ ef w AQ 7 ’ A ἃ 
᾿ Ἢ: ΤΑΝ Εν ΤΊ πόλει ταῦτ ΕἼ ι TOV αγίον παῖδά σου Ιησοῦν, ον 
iere only. 1c. 
2 Mace. vii. 34 only. m Mark xiii. 11. 1Tim.iy. 15 only. Prov. viii. 7. 
κενός, Xen. Anab. ii. 2. 21. o ver. 10 reff. 


rch. i. 15 reff. s = Matt. xxvii. Lal. 

Fxli. 20. V = Matt. xxvii. 27. 
and πρεσβ. E. (ειπαν, so BD.) 

24. att ἀκουσαντες ins kat emvyvovtes τὴν Tov Beov ενεργειαν D. τὴν pwr. 
avtwy E coptt eth: τὴν φων. 6. (ειπαν, so ABDPR.) om o θεος ABN 
am demid fuld copt Ath, Did, [ Hil,]: ins DEP rel 36 eth [arm] Thl-fin Lucif,.—«upre o 
eos, ong συ, 13. 40. 96: σὺ εἰ o Geos 32. 42. 69 lect-1 syrr sah Thl-sif Iren-int,. 
(The variations may be explained by the difficulty found in the position of o θεος, 
some treating it as voc, others as nom, and glossing accordy.) 

25. rec o δια στόματος Δαβιδ του παιδος σου (see below), with (P) rel 40 (om του Pa 
edghkm 40) Chr, Thl-tin Hil: os δια πνευματος αγιου δια Tov στομ. AaAnoas Saved 
παιδὸς gov 1) alii aliter, see Scholz: txt ABEN 13. 36. (Z¢ seems to me that every tes- 
timony tends to confirm the more difficult and complicated readg of the text. Meyer 
dismisses it as a congeries of various glosses. But glosses on what? Had the ree 
been the original, no reason can be assigned why it should have been glossed on at all,— 
nor, if it had been, why the glosses should have been inserted into the text in so unusual 
an order of constr. Sve note.) for εἰπων, λαλησας D. 

27. rec om ev τῇ πόλει ταυτὴ (as unnecessary, see note), with P rel Thl: ins 
ABDEN bec deg ko 18 vss Chr, Cyr, Iven-int, 'Tert, Lucif, Hil,.—aft woAe: ins 
σου A. σου bef maida D 137 Hil,. 


present on this occasion. 24 ὁμοθ. 
ἦραν pwv., not, as Meyer supposes, literally 


n = 1 Cor. xv. 10 reff. φόβος 
p ver. 5. q = Matt. xxii. 34. Neh. vi 2. 
t Rev. xi. 15. xii. 10 uch. x. 34 reff. Deut. 

w = ch. ili. 26 reff. 


the accumulation of parallel clauses, of the 
rest of the prayer; ef. ver. 27. ἵνα τί 


all speaking together in a known formula 
of prayer, but led by some one, and all 
assenting; not τὰς φωνάς, but φωνήν: 
see note on ch. ii. 6. σὺ [ὁ Beds] 6 
ποι.: Thou art God (or, if 6 θεός be 
omitted, He) who hast made:—not Thou 
O God who hast made :—in this latter 
case, the first sentence would go on to the 
end of ver. 26, and there abruptly end, 
without any prayer being expressed: 
whereas now it is an acknowledgment that 
it was the same God, who was now doing 
these things, that had beforetime pro- 
phesied them of Christ. 25.] The 
text of this verse (see var. readd.) is in a 
very confused state. I have kept to that 
of the oldest Mss., adopted also by Lach- 
maun. ‘Though harsh in construction, 
their words are not senseless, as De Wette 
styles them,—orouatos Δαυεὶδ... . being in 
apposition with πνεύματος ἁγίου. The rec. 
has been an emendation and simplification 
of the text, which bears, in this its original 
form, the solemn and stately character, in 


k.T.A. | cited verbatim from the LXX. 

The Messianic import of this Psalm has 
been acknowledged even by those who 
usually deny all such reference, e.g. De 
Wette. Meyer endeavours to refer it to 
some circumstances then present, but is 
not bold enough to enter into any vindica- 
tion of his view. φρνυάσσω is only 
found in the middle in good Greek (see 
Kypke, Observ. ii. p. 30 f. Meyer). φρύ- 
ayud ἐστι τὸ ἀλόγιστον κίνημα, Athanas. 
in Catena. 27.| The γάρ implies an 
acknowledgment of the truth of God in the 
fulfilment of the prophecy: Thou art the 
God who hast, &c., for these events have 
happened accordingly. ΑἜἐν τῇ πόλει 
ταύτῃ. which has been excluded from the 
text on account of its apparent redundance, 
answers to ἐπὶ Σιὼν ὄρος τὸ ἅγιον αὐτοῦ, 
Ps. ii. 6. See also Matt. xxiii. 37; Luke 
xiii. 33. The parts of this verse corre- 
spond accurately to those of the prophecy 
just quoted. παῖδα, servant, as be 
fore, ch. iii. 26. Jesus, the Servant of 


24—3]. 


x » 
EXPLOAS, 


καὶ " Λαοῖς ᾿Ισραήλ, 38 ποιῆσαι ὅσα ἡ ὅ χείρ σου καὶ ἡ 


4 βηγυλή σου ὃ προώρισεν γενέσθαι. 


\ Ν > \ a ‘ \ a 
ὁ ἔπιδε ἐπὶ τὰς © ἀπειλὰς αὐτῶν, καὶ ἴ δὸς τοῖς δούλοις σου 


8 \ g xe / h 
μετὰ ὃ παβῤρησίας 


K χεῖρά σου * 


a \ 
τῷ τὴν 
καὶ πι τέρατα γίνεσθαι "dia τοῦ 


Ρ παιδός σου Ἰησοῦ. 3! Καὶ 4 δεηθέντων αὐτῶν ἴ ἐσαλεύθη ὁ 

249 \ 
δ τόπος ἐν ᾧ ‘noav ' συνηγμένοι, καὶ 
Η / ΐ , A fal 
ἱ ἐλάλουν τὸν ᾿ἱ λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ 


a / \ 
τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, καὶ 


Xo 5ςε / 
8 μετὰ ὃ παρρησίας. 
e ch. ix. 1 reff. 


ich. xi. 19 reff. 
Matt. viii. 3. ch. xxvi. 1. 


f ch. ii. 4 reff. 


1 ver. 22 reff. 


TIPAZ EIS ATOSTOAON. 


/ 7 A \ 7 + 9 
πάσης ἱ λαλεῖν τὸν ἱ λόγον cov 30] ἐν 
ἐκτείνειν [σε] εἰς ἰἴασιν, καὶ σημεῖα 


j =ch.iii. 26. Rom. χν. 13. 4 Kings v. 18. 


AT 


Ἡρώδης τε καὶ Llovrios ἸΠλάτος σὺν ἔθνεσιν x Luke ιν. τ», 


from Isa. 'x1, 
Lan xe oe: 
2. Cor. i. 21. 


Heb. i. 9 
(from Ps. xliv. 
7) only 
ἘΡΕΙ͂. 

y plur., Rom. 
xv. 1] reff. 

z see ch. xi. 
tet bs. 


29 καὶ ° τὰ © νῦν, KU 
» Κύριε, 


21 


Ixxvii. 42. 

a ch. ii. 23 reff, 

b 1 Cor. ii.7 
reff. 

ce ch. v. 38, 
xvii. 30. xx. 
32. xxvii. 22 
Acts only 
Gen. xi. 6 
Ald. Mat- 
thie, ὃ 282. 
Luke 1. 25 

Ps. 


’ , A 
° ovoMaTOS τοῦ ἁγίου 
u > , θ Ὁ 
ἐπλησθησαν ἅπαντες 


only. 
exi. 8. 
= ch. xx. 19 reff. 
Exod. vii. 5. see 
1 Cor. i. 10 only. 


g ch. ii. 29 reff. 
k of God, afteny only. 


m ch. vii. 36 reff. ch. x. 43. 


o -ch. iii. 16. viii. 12 al. p ver. 27. q absol., here only. 3 Terns viii. 33 B. Sir. xxviii. 2. 
r Matt. xi. 7. ch. xvi. 26. Ps. xvii. 7. 5 — ch. vii, 49, from Isa. Ixvi. 1. t = Matt. xxii. 
41. Neh. vi. 2. u ch, ii. 4 reff. 
Aaos E 3. 33 Thi-sif Hil, Aug,. 
28. om 2nd σου A!B am! E-lat! [arm] Hil, Lucif, Aug. 
29. edide D [eperde AE]. for omethas, αγιας Di-gr (txt D-corr!). tac. bef 


mapp. D-gr E vulg copt Hil, Lucif, : 


30. for χειρα σου ἘΣ ΣΕ, oe, xX. o€ εἰσ. A; 


om mac. ¢ 26. 36.57. 137 lect-1 Syr sth [Cyr-p,]. 


ext. σε B: om σε DE RiX(see 


Tischdf’s note) 6 f 15 Chr, :,txt PX! rel 36 ΤῊ] (both pronouns here and gov in ver 


27 agree better with the character of the diction of the prayer). 
syr-mg has a note that “some copies have not the word 


(txt D’) 133 Thi-sif. 
name. 

31. παντες δὲ! 
Chr,: txt ABD[X&] am [Tren-gr]. 
Iren,{-gr and]-int (Augs). 


Jehovah, is the antitype and completion of 
David, and of all other servants of the 
Lord: what is said of them only partially 
and hyperbolically, is said literally and 
entirely of Him. 28.| There is an 
ellipsis in the thought between ποιῆσαι 
and ὅσα: ποιῆσαι, (ὡς μὲν ἐδόκει, τὴν 
ἰδίαν βουλήν, ὄντως δὲ) boa... As De 
Wette well remarks, συνήχθησαν ποιῆσαι 
is used subjectively, ‘they were collected, 
to do,’ and then the speaker changes his 
ground to an objective one in ésa—(as 
they believed—but really) as many things 
as Thy hand, &e. ποιῆσαι must not be 
rendered, with Kuinoel, ‘ita ut facerent.’ 
It does not express the result, but the zn- 
tention, of their assembling. Still worse is 
it to take ποιῆσαι with ἔχρισας, ‘Whom 
Thou hast anointed,....to do,’ &e., as 
some have proposed: the parenthesis, as 
well as the whole train of thought, for- 
bidding it. ἡ χείρ σ. kK. ἢ βουλή] not 
ἃ ἕν διὰ δυοῖν (Kuinoel): χείρ indicates 
the Power, βουλή the Wisdom of God. 
The Wisdom decreed, the Hand performed: 
but the same word προώρισεν is used of 
both by what grammarians call zeugma— 
as in γάλα ὑμᾶς ἐπότισα, ov βρῶμα, 1 Cor. 
iii. 2. See Winer, edn. 6, § 66. 2, 6. 

30. | ἐν τῷ, see ref. ch. iii. and note there. 


γενεσθαι D' 


rec mv. αγιου, omg του (see ch ii. 4), with EP 13. 36 re vulg 
aft mapp. ins παντι Tw θελοντι πιστευειν DE 


In Thy stretching forth (while Thou 
stretchest forth) Thine hand for (eis, of 
the purpose) healing, and that signs and 
wonders may come to pass by mears of 
the Nam2 of Thy Holy Servant Jesus. 
31.] As the first outpouring of the Spirit, 
so this special one in answer to prayer, 
was testified by an outward and visible 
sign: but not by the same sign,—for that 
first baptism by the Holy Ghost, the great 
fulfilment of the promise, was not to be 
repeated. The rationalist Commentators 
have done good service by pointing out 
parallel cases, in profane’ writers, of sup- 
posed tokens of the divine presence. Virg. 
Ain. iii. 89. Ovid, Met. xv. 672. Schétt- 
gen, Hor. Hebr. in loc., produces similar 
notices from the Rabbinical writings. 

It was on every ground probuble that the 
token of the especial presence of God 
would be some phawuomenon which would 
be recognized by those present as such. 
Besides which, the idea was not derived 
from profane sources, but from the Scrip- 
tures :,see Ps., xxix. 8; Isa. i. 29,285 
xiii. 18; Ezek. xxxviii. 19 (especially) ; 
Joel iti. 16; Hagg. ii. 6, 7. ἐπλήσ- 
θησαν, with a fresh and renewed out- 
pouring. τοῦ ay. Tv. is personal: 


they were all filled with the Holy Spirit: 


48 TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. IV. 32—37. 
v here only. 32. Τοῦ δὲ πλήθους τῶν πιστευσάντων ἣν κ" καρδία 
2 Chron. : 
2. Ww vw x 

«ὮΙ μὲν καὶ “ ψυχὴ ** μία, καὶ " οὐδὲ εἷς τὶ τῶν ᾿ ὑπάρο δα 

: ’ 
ws αὐτῷ ἔλεγεν ᾽ ἴδιον εἶναι, ἀλλ᾽ ἦν αὐτοῖς ἅπαντα ὃ κοινά. 
ergy 33 Ἢ υ ὃ ΄ ἔχ ἂ δῶ νὰ ΄ 2X. , 
14. Jonni. 99 καὶ ὃ δυνάμει μεγάλῃ © ἀπεδίδουν TO “ μαρτύριον οἱ ἀπο- 

oT πὶ > 7 ~ ’ > lol od 

pecr™ grokos τῆς “ἀναστάσεως τοῦ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ, !yapis τε 
2 Kings xiii. 


30. μεγάλη ἦν ὅ ἐπὶ πάντας αὐτούς. 73+ οὐδὲ yap ἢ ἐνδεής τις 


y neut. plu. 


ec " » - cA \ 5 , ; ’ v 
Eke vi 3. sh i, al ἐν αὐτοῖς" ὅσοι yap ‘KTnTopes ' χωρίων ἢ οἰ- 
xii. 15 onl ~ » Ἀ k \ ~ l 
G sk ν. πωλουντες ξερον T ων π᾿ a- 
Gen. xxx Lav ὑπῆρχον. s ἐῴφερον tas * τιμᾶς τ LIrp 
def.) Ald. Job xx. 29 BN Ald. compl. only. see ch. iii. 6 reff. z = John x. 3, 4, 12. a = ch. ii. 44 reff. 


b = ch. i. 8 reff. δ Ξ- here only. d = 1 Cor. i. 6 reff. see 1 Cor. ii. 1. = μαρτυρία, John i. 7 and 
passim ε ch. i. 22 reff. f = Luke 1. 40 al. see note, and ch. ii. 47. g = Luke 
x.6. (Rom. iii. 22. 1 Pet. iv. if. h here only. Deut. xv. 4, 7. i here only τ. 

jch.i.18 reff. k =ch.v. 2,3. vii. 16. Matt. xxvii.6,9 al. Isa. lv. 1. 1 Matt. xiii. 46. xviii. 
25. xxvi. 9 {j. ch. ii. 45. v. 4. Rom. oy 14 only. Exod. xxii. 3. 


32. rec ins ἡ bef καρδια, with D3EP rel [coptt] Orig, Chr, Bas, [Cyr-p,] Leont, Thi : 
om ABD'R [arm] Orig, (Ath Thdrt) Euthal Bas, [ Cyr, Ἔ rec ins ἢ bef ψυχη, with EP 
rel 36 Orig, Chr, Bas, [Cyr-p,]: on ABDN Teoptt arm] Orig, Euthal Bas, | C vert. 
aft μια ins καὶ οὐκ ny διακρισις ev autos ovdeura D(E) Cypry Zeno, Ambr,. —tfor d:ak., 
xwp.cuos, and for ovd., τις E. om [2nd] και Εἰ. ovdas Del. om τι D{-gr}. 

avtov D: avtwy P b? f gk |! m 40: om H 18. 36. 133. [ελεγον B!.] 
αλλα D. + παντα BD: txt AE PIN 18 rel 36. 

33. rec uey. bef δυν., with EP rel ΤῊ]: txt ABDNach vulg Chr, Iren-int, Ors, 
Aug,. οἱ αποστ. bef το μαρτ. AEa gh k o Thi-sif Ors, Aug,. ins (aft abe 
χριστου (ΑὙΘΕ(Ν) Syr copt zth-rom arm “Chr, : _ bef, copts] om BP [rel] syr.—i xv bef 
του kv AN 36 [aft κυρ. ins nuwy 36 vulg(not am fuld demid) copt].—for κῦ εὖ, εὖ xv 
e Syr.—(Very usual varr where the name ino. or xp. occurs : the canon being in such 
cases, that the simplest well-supported form of expression was the genuine text.)—r. 


κι t. bef τ. avacr. B. 


34. for urnpxev, nv (corrn to avoid tautology) A(B)X® Fr-coisl a ‘h Cyr,: 
οσοι yap KTNT- noav xwp. ἢ οἰκων ὑπηρχον (combination) D': 
D has πωλουντεξ. αἱ φεροντες (αιφερον (ep. 195) 


rel.— nv bef tis B. 
om ὑπηρχ. D-corr (and lat) RX}. 


tas D? and lat, prefy καὶ) τιμας των mimpacko . 


the meaning being the same with πν. ay., 
the influence of the Holy Spirit,—but the 
form of expression varied. See ch. i. 8; 
ii. 33, 38; ix. 31; x. 45. 

32—37.| THE STATE OF THE CHURCH 
AT THIS TIME. This passage forms the 
conclusion of this division of the history 
and the transition to ch. v. 32. τῶν 
πιστευσάντων) Much the same meaning 
as τῶν πιστευόντων, but with reference to 
their having become converts, and specially 
to those mentioned in ver. 4,—though the 
description is general. ‘ Ubi regunm habet 
fides, animos ita conciliat ut omnes idem 
velint et nolint. Hine eniin discordix, 
quod non regimur eodem Christi Spiritu.’ 
Calvin. On the community of goods, sce 
note at ch. ii.45. We have the view there 
taken strikingly confirmed here by the ex- 
pressions used. No one called (reckoned) 
any thing of his goods (w hich were still 
τὰ ὑπάρχοντα αὐτῷ, not alienated) (to be) 
his own. (ἔλεγεν, dicebat : hoc ipso pre- 
snpponitur proprietatem possessionis non 
plane fuisse deletam. Bengel.)* 33. | 
The Apostles were the specially appointed 
witnesses of the Resurrection, ch.i. 22: and 
this their testimony they gave with power, 


txt DEF 


. των (-σκομενων D? and lat). 


i. e. with a special gift of the Holy Spirit 
to enforce and illustrate, to persuade and 
dispute on, those facts of which their own 
experience (see ver. 20) informed them. 
That the Spirit did not inspire them with 
unbroken uniformity in matters of fact, 
our present Gospels, the remnants to us of 
this very testimony, sufficiently witness. 
Nor was this necessary: each man reported 
what he had heard and seen ;—and it was 
in the manner of delivering this report 
that the great power of the Spirit was 
shewn. See, on the whole subject, Pro- 
legg. Vol. I. i. § iii. 5 ff. χάρις, better 
grace, i.e. from God, than favour, i.e. 
from the people, which would hardly i 
so absolutely designated. 34.] ya 
gives a proof of God’s grace Pi Ps in 
them, in that they imparted their goods 
to the poor: see especially 2 Cor. viii. 7. 
πιπρασκομένων, the things which 
were being sold :—the process of selling, 
as regarded the whole church, yet going 
on, though completed in individual cases ; 
in the places cited by Wetst. from Demosth. 
and Appian the pres. retains its proper 
foree, as here. In Appian, B. Civ. v. p. 
1088, the expression is, τιμὰς τῶν ἔτι 


ABDE 


Prabe 
dfgh 


klmo 
13 


V. 1—3. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ AMOZTOAON. 


49 


, 35 \ > Θ m Ν \ , ΄»“ἅμ ᾿ 
σκομεένων καὶ ἐτιθουν παρᾶ TOUS πόδας τῶν ἀπο- m Matt. xv. 30. 
ς 


στόλων, " διεδίδετο δὲ ἑκάστῳ “ καθότι ἄν τις "“ χρείαν 
36 Ἰωσὴφ δὲ ὁ P ἐπικληθεὶς Βαρνάβας 4 ἀπὸ τῶν 


? 
εὐχεν. 


23 Va. ΟΜ Ὁ, 
58. 4 Kings 
iv. 37 Ald. 
n Luke xi. 22. 
Xviii. 22. 
John vi. 11 


ἀποστόλων, ὃ ἐστιν ἴ μεθερμηνευόμενον " υἱὸς ‘TapaKkAr- οπὶν. Josh. 
- ᾽ μ PH” ad 9 rap Nm sie. 


ns Δ oh a K ΄ ete siti 7 on yy «Ὁ / > 
σεως, ἐλευεΐτης, Kumpios Tw “γένει, “1  νπάρχοντος aUTw 


κ΄ och. ii. 45 
(reff.). 
« Pch. i. 23 reff. 


w 2 ax λή "7 F ἌΓ Ὁ an ὶ ἔθ m tabhert > 
AYPOV “πωλήσας NVEYKEV TO χρημᾶ Kat €UNKEV Tapa 4 ch. il. 22 reff. 


\ if »" ᾿ 
τοὺς πόδας τῶν ἀποστόλων. 


V. 1Τ᾿Ανὴρ δέ τις ᾿Ανανίας 
ΕῚ , ‘ > 4 A * > a x 5 / 
ὀνόματι σὺν Lawdeion τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ * ἐπώλησεν 


r Matt. i. 23. 
Mark νυ. 41. 
xv. 22, 34. 
John i. (39 
τ. r.) 42. ch. 
xiii. 8 only +. 


io! 9) \ 2 / > \ aA a οι ὁ 
2 κτῆμα, * καὶ δ ἐνοσφίσατο ἀπὸ τῆς ὃ τιμῆς, " συνειδυίης , S%,Prol. fin. 


\ lal , Ν / 
καὶ τῆς γυναικός, Kal ἐνέγκας 
/ . A ,ὔ 
πόδας τῶν ἀποστόλων ἔθηκεν. 


hich. ΧΗ 19, Ἐν" 2) Macc, xv. 1: 
w here only, exc. gospp. Mt. Mk. L. 


Josh. vii. 1. 


a Titus ii. 10 only. 
Job xxvii. 6. ᾿ 


iv. 4 (reff.) only. 


35. (διεδιδετο, so AB! DER.) 
om av P m 73. 


d / \ e X \ 
Mepos τι παρᾶ TOUS 


= Matt. xiii. 24, 44 al. 
y sing., here only. plur. Mark x. 23, 24 || L. ch. vill. 18, 20. xxiv. 26 only. 2 Chron.i. 11, 12. 
2 Mace. iv. 32 only. 

d = John xix. 23 al. 


ins ev bef exaorw Ὁ. 


1 Thess. v. 5 
3 \ e f RE 

3 εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Ἰ]έτρος 2, 2 Kings 

v = ch. iii. 6 reff. 

x 1 Gor: x. 25 ref 

z ch. 11.45 reff. 
ce = I Gor, 

e ch. iv. 35, 37. 


u = ch. xviii. 2 reff. 
Gen. xxiii. 9. 


b = ch. iv. 34 reff. 
Gen. xlvii. 24. 


καθο (for καθοτι) and 


36. rec wons (see note, ch i. 23), with P 13 rel syr sah Chr, Thl: txt ABDEN 36. 


40 vulg copt Syr eth arm Chr, Epiph,. 
adghIlm 40 Ht Thi. 
37. for aypov, xwptov D?(-1ov D1), 


epunvevouevoy B: om c?. 
for mapa, προς EX 36 Thi-sif. 


ree vro, with D rel 36 Chr: txt ABEPX 
Kump. bef λενειτης D. 


Cap. V. 1. ev avtw δε τω καιρω avnp (beginning of ecclesiastical portion) E. 


ovou. bef αναν. AD be τὰ vulg: txt BEPN [rel arm] Chr. 


σαπφειρα (corra) BDa 


b? ¢ hloChr,: cappupa Ὠϊ(-ιρα D-corr): σαμπφιρι 13: σαμφιρη R3(raugipyn XN): txt 


A Εἰ(-φφιρη) Ρ Καὶ m. 


2. om καὶ X!(eadem manu suppletum videtur). 
συνειδυιας (corrn), with DP rel: txt ABEN. 


rel ΤῊ] : om AB D-gr δὲ 13 arm Chr). 


for απο, ex D. rec 
rec aft γυν. ins αὐτου, with EP 
εθετο D. 


3. aft εἰπεν δὲ ins προς avtov E; aft πετρος c; simly vulg-ms(Matthii) syr-w-ast 


πιπρασκομένων. 35.] παρὰ τοὺς 
πόϑας.--ποὐ a Hebraism for the whole 
person—but literal. So Cicero pro Flacco, 
6. 28, ‘ Ante pedes Pretoris in foro ex- 
pensum estauri pondo centum.’ (Rosenm.) 
Wetstein gives several other examples. The 
Apostles, like the Preetor, probably sat upon 
a raised seat, on the step of which, at their 
feet, the money was laid, in token of reve- 
rence. 86.] Barnabas, m2) 13, is 
υἱὸς mpopntelas—and the interpretation 
has been generally made good by taking 
παράκλησις as included in προφητεία, and 
as in the sense of exhortation: see ch. xi. 
23. Λευεΐτης The Levites might pos- 
sess land at all times within the precincts 
of the Levitical cities: such was the case, 
6, g., in Jer. xxxii. 7. At the division of 
the kingdoms, the priests and Levites all 
resorted to Rehoboam in Judah (and Ben- 
jamin), 2 Chron. xi. 13; from that time 
probably, but certainly after the captivity, 
when the Mosaic division of the land was 
no longer accurately observed, the posses- 
sion of land by Levites seems to have been 
allowed. The whole subject is involved in 
some uncertainty: cf. Levit, xxv. 32 ff.; 
Num. xxxv.1—8; Deut. xii. 12; xviii, 8.3]. 


Vox. If. 


Κύπριος For the state of Cyprus 
at this time, see notes on ch. xi. 19; xiii. 
4... ἡ. 87. χρῆμα] Very unusual in 
this sense. See Herod. iii. 38, ἐπὶ πόσῳ 
ἂν χρήματι βουλοίατο τοὺς πατέρας ἄπο- 
θνήσκοντας ἀποσιτέεσθαι, and other exam- 
ples in Wetstein. 

Cuap. V. 1—11.] THE HISTORY OF 
ANANIAS AND SaPPHIRA. This incident, 
though naturally connected with the end of 
the last chapter, forms an important inde- 
pendent narrative. 1.1 *Avavias, 22, 
Neh. iii. 23, or ΤΣ, Dan. i. 6, in LXX: 
also 1 Chron. iii. 21, al.= The cloud of God, 
or The mercy of God. Σαπφείρῃ, per- 
haps from the Greek σάπφειρος, sapphire, 
or from the Syriac xvpw, beautiful (Grot.). 

The crime of these two is well described 
by Meyer: ‘ By the sale of their field, and 
the bringing in of the money they in fact 
professed to give the whole price as a gift 
of brotherly love to the common stock : but 
their ain was to get for themselves the 
credit of holy love and zeal by one portion 
of the price, whereas they had selfishly 
kept back the other portion for themselves. 
They wished to serve fwo masters, but to 
appear to serve only One, — 8.1 The 

E 


“0 


TIPAZEIS ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


V. 


, \ Ul 3 , ς a 
tionnrvi.s. Ανανία, διὰ τί ᾿ἐπλήρωσεν ὁ Σατανᾶς τὴν καρδίαν σου 


see Eccles. 


ix. 3 8 ψεύσασθαί σε τὸ πνεῦμα TO ἅγιον Kal * νοσφίσασθαί [σε] 


g Matt. v. 11 αἱ. 
constr., here 


only. Deut. 
xxxiii. 29. 

h = ch. i. 18 
reff. 


i = here only. 
1 Macc. xv. 7. 
k ch. iv. 34 reff. 


\ A A 
Lehi. 7. ἀλλὰ τῷ θεώ. 
m= ver. 9. Ἢ « Ἐς Apt 
aun TouTous πεσὼν P ἐξέψυξεν. 
2 Kings xix. en ΄ \ ᾽ 7, 
23. seeJohn Ε͵7Γὺ TAVTAS TOUS ακΚουοντας. 
Xiv. 223. 


n Luke ix. 44. xxi. 14. Hag. ii. 19. see ch. i. 7. 
Ixxvil. 36. p ver. 10. ch. xii. 23 only. 
11. Lukei. 65. Gen. xxxv. 5. see ch. ii. 43. 
v.1,2al. οἱ ν., Tit. ii.6. Jer. xiv. 3. 


[Syr coptt eth] Thi. 
προς avaviay I) vulg-mss( Lachmann). 


D-gr. 


Ὁ constr., here only. 
Judg. iv. 21 A Ald. compl. 
r= ch. Vili. 26, 27 reff. 


rec om 0, with DP rel: ins ABEN Ὁ m 18 Chr,. 
for ἐπληρ., ἐπηρωσεν NR). 
rec om 2nd σε, with ABEN c k 1 0 36: ins DP rel 38. 42. 95-6. 113-77 sah 


ἀπὸ τῆς " τιμῆς τοῦ " χωρίου; * οὐχὶ μένον σοὶ ἔμενεν, Kal 
k θὲ 1 “ ced 11] ἐξ / ς a ani a 4 n ἔθ 3 a 
πραθὲν ' ἐν τῇ σῇ | ἐξουσίᾳ ὑπῆρχεν ; ™ τί ὅτι " ἔθου ἐν τῇ 
/ \ a a Η > 0 ᾽ ’ > , 
καρδίᾳ σου τὸ πρᾶγμα τοῦτο; οὐκ 5 ἐψεύσω ἀνθρώποις, 
5 > ΄ δὲ δ a / \ ΄ 
ἀκούων δὲ ὁ ᾿Ανανίας τοὺς λόγους 


\ j a 
καὶ «ἐγένετο φόβος μέγας 
6 r » / \ e 8 , 
ἀναστάντες δὲ οἱ 5 νεώ- 
Josh. xxiv. 27. 2 Kings xxii. 45. Ps. 


Ezek. xxi. 7 only. q = Ver. 
8 -- John xxi. 18. 1 Tim. 


for avavia, 
TO ay. TY. 


Leont,. (I have inserted it doubtfully, as more in character, and very likely to have 


been omitted us unnecessary.) 


4. euevoy (but corrd) &!: μεσὸν D!-gr(txt D2). 

om on D[-gr}j. 

movnpov Tovto D sah: facere dolose rem istam D-lat. 
5. ακουσας δε D-gr: καὶ evdews ακουων EK. 


syllable of mpadev) P. 


ins ABEPNabdfghkmo Chr, ΤῊ]. 


om ἐν (confounded with last 

for το mp. TovTo, ποιησαι (ins το D?) 
evevoov D'(txt D?). 

rec om ὁ, with D rel 36 Orig Bas, : 

ins tapaxpnua bef ππεσων 1). rec 


aft akovoyras ins Tavta (see ver 11), with EP rel syr | (eeth-rom) arm Bas, | Chr, ΤῊ] : 
om ABDN? vulg Syr coptt zth-pl Orig, Lucif. 


6. aft avaor. δε ins παραχρημα KH. 


διὰ τί implies the power of resistance to 
Satan— Why hast thou allowed Satan to 
fill, &c. ? 4.] While it remained, 
did it not remain thine own? i. e. was it 
not in thine absolute power ἢ and when 
sold, was it not (i.e. the price of it) in 
thine own power, to do with it what 
seemed good to thee ? τί ὅτι, 1. 6. 
τί ἐστιν ὅτι : see reff. ἔθου ἐν τ. 
καρδ., = syoy ow, Dan. i. 8; Mal. ii. 2. 
Satan suggested the lie, which Ananias 
ought to have repelled: instead of that, he 
put it in his heart,—placed it there where 
the springs of action are, and it passed out 
into an act. οὐκ ἐψ. ἀνθ., ἀλλὰ τ. 8. | 
This οὐκ, ἀλλά, is not always an absolute 
and exclusive negation and assertion, see 
Mark ix. 37; John xii. 44. But here it 
seems to be so, and to imply, ‘ Thine at- 
tempt to deceive was not to deceive us, 
men; but to deceive the Holy Ghost,— 
God, abiding in His church, and in us its 
appointed superintendents.’ This verse is 
of weighty doctrinal import, as proving the 
Deity of the Holy Spirit ; unless it be held, 
that the Holy Spirit whom (ver. 3) Ananias 
attempted to deceive, and God to whom 
he lied, are different. ‘ Hac est sententia : 
Ananias mentitus est Deo et ejus Spiritui, 
non hoiminibus et Petro. Aude si potes, 
Sociniane, ita dicere: mentitus est non 
Spiritui Sancto et Petro, sed Deo.’ Bengel. 

5.] The deaths of Ananias and Sap- 
phira were beyond question supernaturally 


inflicted by Peter, speaking in the power of 
the Holy Spirit. This is the only honest 
interpretation of the incident. Many, how- 
ever, and among them even Neander, at- 
tempt to account for them on natural 
grounds,—from their horror at detection, 
and at the solemn words of Peter. But, in 
addition to all other objections against this 
(see on ἐξοίσουσιν, ver. 9), —it would make 
man and wife of the same temperament, 
which would be very unlikely. Wesurely 
need not require any justification for this 
judicial sentence of the Apostle, filling as 
he did at this time the highest place in the 
church, and acting under the immediate 
prompting of the Holy Spirit. If such, 
however, be sought, we may remember that 
this was the first attempt made by Satan 
to obtain, by hypocrisy, a footing among 
Christ’s flock : and that however, for wise 
reasons, this may since then have been 
permitted, it was absolutely necessary in 
the infancy of thechurch, that such attempt 
should be at once, and with severity, de- 
feated. Bengel remarks : ‘ Quod gravitati 
poene in corpore accessit, in anima potuit 
decedere.’ κ. éyév. φόβ. x.7.A.] The 
ἀκούοντες can hardly be (Meyer) those 
present, who (De W.) not only heard, but 
saw : the remark is proleptical, and = that 
in ver. 11, 6.] Were ot νεώτεροι a 
class in the congregation accustomed to 
perform such ‘services,—or merely the 
younger men, from whom they would na- 


“Ὁ. 


4—10. IIPAZ EIS, ATIOSTOAQON. 51 


τερον ‘ouvertethay αὐτὸν καὶ " ἐξενέγκαντες ἡ ἔθαψναν. there only. 
“ιν ἡ e ον x ; “ur. Troad. 
Véyévero δε, ἣ ὡς ὡρῶν τριῶν "διάστημα, Kal ἡ γυνὴ δ ΔἸ Cor 


> A \ 5 a \ », δ 8 5) / \ ‘ Sir. iv. 31.) 
αὐτοῦ μὴ εἰδυΐω TO γεγονὸς εἰφῆλθεν. 8.0 ἀπεκρίθη δὲ πρὸς wav. tb 

SALE / NMS a teeta 7 εἰ b F ΓΕΑ ar 
αὐτὴν Ilérpos Kuré μοι 25εἰ *tocovtov τὸ ὃ χωρίον Ὑἱ] 58. Luke 

> , ε \ > \ ΄ ς nits Heb. 
Camedoabe ; ἡ δὲ εἶπεν Ναὶ " τοσούτου. 9 ὁ δὲ Πέτρος ti: ἢ ony. 

Ν > Ν d T / “ e Nal f id A 8 a Ν 
πρὸς αὐτὴν { ὅτι “ συνεφωνήθη ὑμῖν 8 πειράσαι τὸ 
lal £ x e A Ἢ 

" πνεῦμα " κυρίου; ἰδοὺ οἱ πόδες τῶν Y θαψάντων τὸν wy" ver. 36 at 


see Luke vii. 
12. 
v1 Cor. xv. 4 
” ΠΦΕΨῸΣ A 60 \ j 5) 7 , 10k 2% , x here only ζ. 
ἄνδρα σου ἱ ἐπὶ τῇ θύρᾳ, Kai 1 ἐξοίσουσίν σε. ἔπεσεν δὲ ofspace, Gen, 
ΧΧΧΙΙ. al. 
y =ch. iii. 12. Matt. xi. 25 al. Deut. xxvi. 5. z = Matt. xxvi. 63. Mark xv. 44. a gen. of 
price, Matt. x. 29. xxvi.9. Rev. vi. 6. 4 Kings vii. 1. b ver. 3. c= ch. vii. 9. Heb. 
xii. 16 only. Gen. xxv. 33. d ver. 4 reff. e Matt. xviii. 19. xx. 2,13. Luke 
y. 36. ch. xv. 1ὅ only. 4 Kings xii. 8. impers., here only. fdat., Matt. v.21? James 
iii. 18. Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 31. 10. g 1 Cor. x. 9 reff. (= €KT. ib.) h 2 Cor. iii. 17. see 
Luke iv. 18, from Isa. Ixi. 1. i = ch. iii. 10, 11 reff. j ver. 6 reff. k Mark 
ν. 22. John xi.32. Rev. i. 17 only. 
7. ews NR}. διαστεμα D. 
8. for amexp., εἰπεν I) vulg[ (not am &c) coptt wth Lucif, ].—pos nv o πετρος εφη E. 
rec (for προς avtnv) avtn, with P rel vulg Chr, Thl: om ὃ}: txt ABDN dem 
36. 40 (syr-w-ast) Orig Lucif. rec ins o bef πετρος, with DEP rel Orig, Chr: om 
ABN d 36. for εἰπε μοι ει, επερωτήσω oe etapa D-gr. το χωριον bef 1st τοσουτου 
D-gr sah. for 2nd δε, 5n D}(txt D-corr!). ἡ 
9. rec aft merp. ins εἰπε, with AP rel 36 | vss]: εἰπεν δὲ πετρ. E: txt BDN vulg. 
om προς D!-gr(ins D3). aft τι ins ovy &}(83 disapproving). συνεφωνησεν 
D ins Tov bef κυρ. Ὁ. εἰστανται emi τη θ. EK. ταις θυραις Α. 


ἼΟ. και ex. D Syr [1 Lucif,. 


turally be expected ? Meyer and Olshausen 
(also Mosh. and Kuin.) maintain the former ; 
Neander and De W. the latter. We can 
hardly assume, as yet, any such official dis- 
tinctions in the congregation as would mark 
off of νεώτεροι from of πρεσβύτεροι, which 
latter are first officially mentioned ch. xi. 
30. Besides which, we have no such eccle- 
siastical class as of νεώτεροι. And the use 
of οἱ νεανίσκοι in ver. 10, as applying to 
these same persons, seems to decide that 
they were mere/y the younger members of 
the church, acting perhaps in accordance 
with Jewish custom,—perhaps also on 
some hint given by Peter. συνέστει- 
Aav] So περιστέλλω, Ezek. χχῖχ. δ; Tobit 
xii. 13; Sir. xxxviii. 16, wrapped the body 
up,—probably in their own mantles, taken 
off in preparing to carry him out. The 
context will not permit any more careful 
enfolding of the body to be understood. 

The speedy burial of the dead, practised 
among the later Jews, was unknown in 
earlier times, see Gen. xxiii. It was 
grounded on Num. xix. 11 ff. The prac- 
tice was to bury before sunset of the same 
day. The immediate burial in this case 
adds to the probability that the young 
men obeyed an intimation from the Apos- 
tle. 7. The construction is, ἐγένετο 
dé, . . . καί, It happened, that: and ὡς 
ὦ. τ. διάστ. is parenthetical, not the nom. 
to ἐγένετο. See a precisely similar con- 
struction, Luke ix. 28: and Winer, edn. 
6, § 62. 2. 8.] amexp., perhaps to her 
‘salutation: or, it may be, to her manner, 


challenging a reply. The word must at 
any rate be taken as implying some pre- 
vious communication, to which an answer 
was to be given. τοσούτ., naming 
the sum: or perhaps pointing to the money 
lying at his feet. The sense tantilli 
(Born.) is implied of course, but not.ex- 
pressed by τοσούτου. No stress on an- 
έδοσθε as referring to the smallness of price: 
it is the ordinary word for selling, see reff. 

9.1 To try the omniscience of thie 
Spirit then visibly dwelling in the Apostles: 
and the church, was, in the highest sense, to 
tempt the Spirit of God. It was a saying 
in their hearts ‘There is no Holy Spirit :’ 
and certainly approached very closely to a 
sin against the Holy Ghost. Peter charac- 
terizes the sin more solemnly this second 
time, because by the wife’s answer it was 
now proved to be no individual lie of a 
bad and covetous man, but a preconcerted 
scheme to deceive God. ot πόδες) Not 
that Peter heard (Olsh.) the tread of the 
young men outside (they were probably 
barefooted), but it is an expression common 
in the poetical or lively description of the 
Hebrews, and indeed of all nations (see Isa. 
lii.7; Nah.i.15; Rom.x. 15; Eurip. Hippol. 
656 ; Soph. Cd. Col. 890, al. freq.), making 
the member whereby the person acts, the 
actor. I take the words to mean, that the 
time was just at hand for their return : 
see James v. 9. The space of three hours 
was not too long: they would have to carry 
the corpse to the burying-ground, at a con- 
siderable distance from-the city (Lightf.), 


E 2 


w 


p 
ΜῈ 


Ich. iii. 7 reff. 

m ver. 5 reff. 

n Matt. xix. 20, 
22. Mark 
xiv. 51 (bis). 
xvi. 5. Luke 
vii. 14. ch. ii. 
17. 1 John ii. 
13, 14 only. 
Gen. xiv. 24. 

ο = Matt. iii. 
16. Gal. i. 18. 


' παραχρῆμα 


7 -“ 
τοὺς ἀκούοντας ταῦτα. 


re 
s ch. i. 14 reff. 
t ch. iii. 11 reff. 


TIPASEIS ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ. 


k ‘ \ 
πρὸς τοὺς 


\ a 
ενέγκαντες Y ἔθαψαν 5 πρὸς τὸν ἄνδρα αὐτῆς. 


Υ͂. 


K πόδας αὐτοῦ καὶ ™ ἐξέψυχεν' 


> , δὲ e n / Φ » ‘ \ * j 3 
εἰςξελθόντες δὲ οἱ " νεανίσκοι εὗρον αὐτὴν νεκρὰν καὶ | ἐξ- 


11 καὶ Ρ ὀγέ- 


veto φόβος μέγας ἐφ᾽ ὅλην τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ ἐπὶ πάντας 


ς a “ lal , / a 
24 Ava δὲ τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων ἐγίνετο σημεῖα 
te καὶ ᾿ τέρατα πολλὰ ἐν TO λαῷ 
rch. vii. 36 ρ ‘ oo 


\ > s e θ δὸ 
καὶ OAV ~ ομοσυμαοον 


ἅπαντες ἐν τῇ 'στοᾷ Σολομῶνος: 13 τῶν δὲ " λοιπῶν 


Eph. ii. 3. » \ ed y A > ΡΥ ᾽ » νυν} ΄ «Ἢ 
5 1 hess. . οὐδεὶς ἐτόλμα " κολλᾶσθαι αὐτοῖς, ἀλλ ἐμεγάλυνεν au 
13. v. 6. ‘ € i Ν - \ oy ; ! 
ve ΔΊΣ, 6. τοὺς ὁ λαός: 11 μᾶλλον δὲ " προςετίθεντο 5 πιστεύοντες 
δ: be 2 1) a Tr 10 ) ὃ 3 € Ὶ αικῶν" 15 τ Τ' > κατὰ 
Po ee δῤμδι. ἐς ἀχφα, ὑφούδὲ beatles a, aie τὰ 
with x.ds τὰς ὁ πλατείας ἃ ἐκφέρειν τοὺς ἀσθενεῖς καὶ ἃ τιθέναι " ἐπὶ 
reff. f ἢ . ΄, “ τ , , Ἦν Ὁ Ά 
x= Luke v.15. Γκλιναρίων καὶ ὃ κραβάττων, ἵνα ἐρχομένου Ἰ]έτρου " κἂν 
onn ΧΙΧ 
ch. ix. 22 al. y = ch. ii. 41 reff. z absol., ch. iv. 32 al. fr. a plur., here only. Ps. exlvi. 4. 
b = Luke x. 32 al. c Luke xiv. 21. Rev. xxi. 21 ἃ]. Ezek. xxvili. 23. d ver. 6 reff. 


e = Rev. χ. 2. Luke viii. 16. 
νυ. 8, ἄς. ch. ix. 33 only +. 


rec (for mpos) mapa (see ch iv. 35, 37, v. 2), with EP rel [Chr, 1 Lucif, 


f here only +. see Luke v. 19, 24. 
h = Mark v. 28. vi. 56. 


g Mark ii. 4, ἄς. vi. 55. John 
2 Cor. xi. 16. 


: ert 26. 37: ὑπο 


2: txt ABD Orig,, mp. τ. 7. ἀποστόλου syr.—for mp. τ. π., εἰωπιον 15-8. 36. 


evpavy A: ηυραν E: txt BDPR rel [Chr]. 
11. om em A sah. 
12. for δε, τε B Syr eth. 
lect-12 Cyr-jer, ΤῊ]: 
with P rel 36 Chr ΤῊΪ : 


13. και ovders των λοιπων D eth. 
14. ins οἱ bef mor. A 13. 


συνστειλαντες εξηνεγκαν καὶ D-gr. 


ακουοντες D, κατοικουντας Ῥ, 

Steph eyevero, with h 4. 13-4-5. 

txt ABDE[P]® re] 86 Chr Lucif;. 

om πολλα k 133 lect-12: 
for amaytes, παντες ABE 1: txt DPN rel Chr: 

τω tepw D 42 sah eth; εν τω vow συνήγμενοι E. 

rec σολομωντος, with Ako [(13)] 36 Chr Thi: 


78. 127.80 

rec ev Tw Aaw bef πολλα, 

txt ABDEX m0 13 vulg Syr Lucif. 

add συνηγμενοι Syr copt; ev 
aft ev tn στ. ins τὴ D 42. 

σαλομωντος NX: txt BDEP rel. 

ουθεις Β. 


15. for κατα, και εἰς ABD®X k 13. 86. 40 ; και εν ταις πλατιες E: om eth: txt D'P, 


none of the vss have και. 
7.0. ins ἐενπροσθεν avtwy E. 


and when there, to dig a grave, and bury it. 
ἐξοίσουσιν This word, spoken before 
her death, decisively proves that death to 
have been not a result merely of her detec- 
tion, but a judicial infliction. 10.] εἰςελ- 
θόντες, when they came in: not implying 
that they immediately entered, but leaving 
room for some interval of time: see above. 
12—16.] PRoGRESS OF THE FalItH ; 
MIRACULOUS POWER AND DIGNITY OF 
THE APOSTLES. 12.] δέ is merely 
transitional, and does not imply any con- 
trast to the φόβος just mentioned, q. ἃ. 
- ‘notwithstanding this fear, the Apostles 
went on working, &c.’ See ch. ii. 48. 
ἅπαντες, the Apostles only, not all the 
Christians. It does not follow, from πάντες 
referring to ali the believers in ch. ii. 1 (see 
note there), that ἅπαντες necessarily refers 
to the same here also. The Apostles are 
the subject of the paragraph: and it is to 
set forth their unanimity and dignity that 
the description is given. They are repre- 


om tas D!, 
rec κλινων (corra to more usual word), with E[P] rel 
Chr Thdrt: txt ABD® rel Cyr-jer.—pref των A. 


att ασθεν. ins avtwy D. aft 


(xpaBaTTwy, 50 AB! DR.) 


sented as distinct from all others, believers 
and unbelievers (both which I take to be 
included under the term of λοιποί) : and 
the Jewish people itself magnified them. 
The further connexion see on ver. 14. 

or. Σολ.] See ch. iii. 11; John x. 23, 
note. 13.] τῶν λοιπῶν, all else, 
whether believers or not: none dared to 
join himself to (see reff.), as being one cf, 
or equal to, them: but (so far was this 
from being the case that) the very people 
(multitude) magnified them. 14. 
And (not parenthetical, but continuing the 
description of the dignity of the Apostles) 
the result of tliis was that believers were 
the more added to the Lord (not mor. 
τῷ κυρίῳ, but mposer. τῷ κυρ.. as decided 
by ch. xi. 24), multitudes of men and 
women. 15.] ὥςτε now takes up 
afresh the main subject of vv. 12 and 19, 
the glorification of the apostolic office, in- 
somuch, that..... It is connected not 
only with ἐμεγάλυνεν adr. ὃ A., but also 


ABDE 
PNrabe 
dfgh 
klmo 
13 


a 


J1—17. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AIOSTOAON. 99 


. i εἶ κ δ / \ > wn + 16 l 7 δὲ Ἀ Ἀ ‘ 
ἢ OKLA ~ETTLOKLAGYH TLVL AUTWY. | συνήρχετο Εε Και TO i Matt. iv. ἴδ. 


Mark iv. 32. 


πλῆθος τῶν ™ πέριξ πόλεων Ἱερουσαλήμ, φέροντες ἀσθενεῖς Lubes. 79. 


Col. ii. 17. 
Heb. viii. 5. 


Yn? , CNL ahs es ΄ op Z θ ΄ g a” 
Kut οχλουμεένους ὑπο ~ πνευματῶν ακαύαρτων, OLTLVES χῚ only. 


2 / .“ 
ἐθεραπεύοντο ἅπαντες. 


Judg. ix. 36. 
k and constr., 
Mark ix. 7 


lt ey / A | ¢ \ \ ’ὔ ΄ \ nw 7 | ‘4 
17%’ Avaotas δὲ ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς καὶ πάντες οἱ σὺν αὐτῷ, 5 puke. 


35 only. Ps. 


ἡ οὖσα " αἵρεσις TOV Σαδδουκαίων, “ ἐπλήσθησαν ἃ ζήλου | x. 4. 


“m here only τ. Jos. Β. J. ii. 19. 1. 
rch. vui. 26, 27 reff. 


uch, xiii. 45 (reff.). 


aft ox. ins αὐτου E 33 vulg [arm] Thdrt, Thl-fin. 


Tii-fin. auTw &', 


1 ch. i. 6 reff. 


n here (Luke vi. 18 rec.) only +. Tobit vi. 7 (not &). o Matt. 
x. lal. fr.in gospp. Rev. xvi. 13. xviii. 2. Zech. xiii. 2. 


pch. x 14 reff. q = ch. x. 41 reff. 


sch. xy. 5. xxiv. 5, 14. xxvi. 5, xxviii. 22. 1 Cor. xi. 19. Gal. 
v.20. 2 Pet. ii. lonly$. Jos. Antt. xili. 5. 9. see Lev. xxii. 18. 


t = ch. ii. 10 reff. 


επισκιασει B[m] 13. 58. 133 


att aurwy add απηλλασσοντο yap ato maons ασθενιας ws 


exxev εκαστος avtwy D; και ρυσθωσιν amo maons ασθενιας ns erxov K; et liberarentur 
ab infirmitatibus suis vulg(not tuld) Lucif.—liberabantur am Lucif; ab infirmitale 


[ Lucif, and] (omg s.) am demid. 
16. 5:0 συνηρ. E. 


om xai(ins D?) to Ὁ}. 


for περιξ, περι D1 (txt D9(?)). 


rec ins ets bef tepove., with DEP rel 36 demid [arm] Chr: circa syr coptt [eth |: 
om ABN k vulg Lucif.—*‘from the other cities round about Jer” Syr (Etheridge). 


for ὑπο, απο D. 
παντες D. 


17. tor avaot. δε, ka: ταυτα βλεπων αναστ. E: om Syr. 


with ver. 12. κατὰ Tas 7A. |] down the 
streets, i.e. in the line of the streets,— 
sce Winer, edn. 6, § 49, d. κλιν. 
x. κραβ.] Kuinoel’s distinction, that the 
latter is a poor and humble bed, the former 
a couch of richer character, appears to be 
upféunded. (So also Bengel.) 

Πέτρου) As the greatest, in pre-eminence 
and spiritual energizing, of the Apostles. 
Now especially was fulfilled to him the 
promise of Matt. xvi. 18 (see note there) : 
and even the shadow of the Rock (Isa. 
xxxil. 2, Heb., and E.V., spoken primarily 
of His divine Master) was sought for. 
We need find no stumbling-block in the 
fact of Peter’s shadow having been be- 
lieved to be the medium (or, as is surely 
implied, having been the medium) of work- 
ing miracles. Cannot the ‘ Creator Spirit’ 
work with any instruments, or with none, 
as pleases Him ? And whatis ahand ora 
voice, more than a shadow, except that the 
analogy of the ordinary instrument is a 
greater help to faith-in-the recipient ἢ 
Where faith, as apparently here, did not 
need this help, the less likely medium was 
adopted. See, on the whole, ch. xix. 
12, and note: and remark that only in the 
case of our Lord (Luke viii. 46 ||) and His 
two great Apostles in the N. T.,—and of 
Elisha in the O. T., havé we instances of 
this healing virtue in the mere contact 
with or accessories of the person. But 
what a fertile harvest of superstition and 
imposture has been made to spring out of 
these scanty examples! 16.| Keep, in 
both verbs, συνήρχετο and ἐθεραπεύοντο, 
the imperfect sense; ‘the multitude, &c., 





for o:tives, καὶ D-gr 38. 113 sah Lucif,. ειωντο 


ᾧγους ΒΙ. 


was coming together, bearing, &c.,—for 
all such (quippe qui) were being healed :’ 
viz. when the next incident, ἀναστὰς δὲ 
k.T.A., happened [which forms a contrast 
to this waxing prosperity of the Church }. 
17—42.| IMPRISONMENT, MIRACULOUS 
LIBERATION, EXAMINATION BEFORE THE 
SANHEDRIM, AND SCOURGING OF THE 
APOSTLES. 17.) ἀναστάς is not re- 
dundant, but implies being excited by the 
popularity of the Apostles, and on that ac- 
count commencing a course of action hos- 
tile to them: see reff. (‘ Non sibi quiescen- 
dum ratus est.’ Beng. διηγέρθη κινηθεὶς 
ἐπὶ τοῖς γενομένοις, Chrys.) To suppose 
that the H. P. ‘rose up’ after @ council 
held (Meyer) is far-fetched, and against the 
ἐπλήσθησαν ζήλου, which points to the 
kindling zeal of men first stirred up to 
action. 6 ἀρχ.] Annas,—ch. iv. 6, 
and note on Luke iii. 2. ἡ ot σὺν αὐτῷ] 
those who were with him (see ch. iv. 
18 ; xix. 38; xxii. 9). Not the members 
of the Sanhedrim: but the friends and 
kindred (ch. iv.6) of the H. P.: see ver. 
21: Kuinoel’s ‘qui a partibus ejus sta- 
hant’ is too definite (De W.): it was so, 
but this meaning is not in the words. 
ἡ οὖσα] attr., but implying more than οὗ 
ὄντες ἐξ αἱρέσεως τ. &.:—the movement 
extended through the whole sect. On 


‘aip. tr. %., see Matt. iii. 7, note. The 


passage of Josephus, Antiq. xx. 9. 1, is 
worth transcribing: πέμπει δὲ Καῖσαρ 
(Nero) ᾿Αλβῖνον εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν ἔπαρχον, 
Φήστου τὴν τελευτὴν πυθόμενος. ὁ δὲ 
βασιλεὺς ἀφείλετο μὲν Thy ώσηπον τὴν 
ἀρχιερωσύνην, τῷ δὲ ᾿Ανάνου παιδί, καὶ 


54 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ AMOSTOAQN. 


V. 


18 \ τ 7 / ἢ Vv “ Vv 3 \ \ ’ Ul \ 
v choxxi. 27 καὶ " ἐπέβαλον τὰς " χεῖρας " ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀποστόλους καὶ ABDE 
ch. ξ ὴ , Prabc 
weh.iv.3ref% ἔθεντο αὐτοὺς ἐν ἣ τηρήσει Xdnuocla. 19 ἄγγελος δὲ atch 
amen pe , ig g 
v / x Ν 37 4 ΄, a -“ mo 
ft κυρίου ἡδιὰ νυκτὸς ἤνοιξεν τὰς θύρας τῆς φυλακῆς, ᾿"κ3 
y 2 (xvi. 9.) . ‘ 3 Ἢ - 20 Π : > ‘ 
x10, €€ayayov Te αὐτοὺς εἶπεν “Ὁ Πορεύεσθε καὶ σταθέντες 
Mean, λαλεῖτε ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ τῷ λαῷ πάντα τὰ ῥήματα τῆς * ζωῆς 
z = Matt. xiv. > s en ς ᾿ 
10. Acts, ch. ταύτης. 2l ἀκούσαντες δὲ εἰςτῆλθον ἢ ὑπὸ τὸν “ ὄρθρον 
viii. 
Ν \ / ‘ e 
ἜΣ xiv εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν καὶ ἐδίδασκον. “᾿ παραγενόμενος δὲ ὁ ἀρχ- 


iii. 

a= ie only 
(see note). 

b = here only. 
Jonah iv. 10, 
so ὑπὸ τὴν 
ἑωθινήν, 
Polyb. i. 53. 4, 
ὑπὸ τὴν ὡραίαν (prima estate), iti. 16. 

xii. 51. John iii. 23. Acts, ch. ix. 
6 only. Josh. xxiii. 2. mid., ch. x. 
also νυ. Ut. Ἴσρ.) 

i here bis. Matt. xi. 


24 al. 


18. 
Chr, : 
δημ.). 

19. rote δια ν. bef ay 
Chr, : om ABD}. 
for τε, δε B 73.—xaur εξ. E. 

21. for ακουσ. δε, ἐξελθοντες δε E Syr. 
yevouevoy Bl(sic, see table). 


ἐπεβαλλον A [6]. 


τὰς. 


ce Luke xxiv. 1 (John viii. 21 only. 
26. ταὶ 10 & passim. Gen. xiv. 1 
f ch. iv. 15 reff. 

h constr., w. pass., here only (3). see ch. xiii. 42 note. 
2. ch. xvi. 26 only. Gen. xxxix. 22 bis. xl. 3, 5 only. 


aft συν avtw ins εἐγερθεντες To πρωι D. 


Ν \ a / \ 
ἱερεὺς καὶ οἱ σὺν αὐτῷ * συνεκάλεσαν TO ᾿ συνέδριον καὶ 
» \ lal tn , 
πᾶσαν τὴν ξγερουσίαν τῶν υἱῶν ᾿Ισραήλ, καὶ ὃ" ἀπ- 
, \ 9 / A 
έἐστειλαν εἰς TO Ps ok ἀχθῆναι αὐτούς. 


22 οἱ δὲ 


Joel ii. 2. d Luke 
e act., Mark xv. 16. Luke xv. 
g here only. Exod. iii. 16 al. fr. (there 


act., ch. xxvi. 17 reff. 


rec aft χειρας ins avtwy, with EP rel (syr) coptt [ Bas, ] 
om ABD® 36. 40 vulg Syr arm ΤῺ] Lucif,. 


aft Gnu. ins καὶ ἐεπορευθη ets ἘΣ ὡς εἰς τα ιδια D. 


rec ins τῆς bef νυκτος, with ΕΡΝ 5 rel 36 [Bas, ] 
avoitas AX 36 vulg sah: 


es Tnpnoew E-gr Lucif(omg 


ανεωξαν D!-gr, avewtev D® Chr,. 


add ex της φυλακης E. Tapas 


συνκαλεσαμενον 1), retaining the καὶ bef απεστειλαν. 


αὐτῷ ᾿Ανάνῳ λεγομένῳ, τὴν διαδοχὴν τῆς 
ἀρχῆς ἔδωκε. τοῦτον δέ φασι τὸν πρεσ- 
βύτατον Ἄνανον εὐτυχέστατον γενέσθαι" 
πέντε γὰρ ἔσχε παῖδας, καὶ τούτους πάν- 
τας συνέβη ἀρχιερατεῦσαι τῷ θεῷ, αὐτὸς 
καὶ πρότερον τῆς τιμῆς ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ἂπο- 
Aavoas, ὕπερ οὐδενὶ συνέβη τῶν παρ᾽ ἡμῖν 
ἀρχιερέων. ὁ δὲ νεώτερος "Ανανθδὶ 5... 5% 
θρασὺς ἦν τὸν τρόπον, καὶ τολμητὴς δια- 
φερόντως" αἵρεσιν δὲ μετήει τῶν Σαδδου- 
καίων, οἵπερ εἰσὶ περὶ τὰς κρίσεις ὠμοὶ 
παρὰ πάντας τοὺς ᾿Ιουδαίους, καθὼς ἤδη 
δεδηλώκαμεν. This shews that the family 
of Annas, if not he himself, were connected 
with the sect of the Sadducees. They (see 
ch. iv. 1, note) were the chief enemies of 
the Apostles, for teaching the resurrection. 

18. τηρ.] see ch. iv. 3. 20.| τῆς 
ζωῆς ταύτης, an unusual expression, seems 
to refer to the peculiar nature of the en- 
mity shewn towards them by the Saddu- 
cees, for preaching the ἀνάστασις Cwis— 
‘of this LIFE, which they callin question.’ 
Or perhaps τ. ¢. 7. may import the religion 
of Jesus having its issue in /ife. A similar 
expression, 6 λόγος τῆς σωτηρίας ταύτης, 
occurs ch. xiii. 26. See also Rom. vii. 24. 
But beware of assuming in either of these 
passages the use of the figure called by 
the grammarians hypallage, so that τὰ 6. 
τῆς ¢. ταύτης = τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα τῆς 
ζωῆς : for thus the sense is enervated, 
and the peculiar reference in each case 


lost. The indiscriminate application of 
these supposed figures of speech has been, 
and continues to be, one of the worst foes 
of sound exegesis. The deliverance, 
here granted to all the Apostles, was again 
vouchsafed to Peter in ch. xii., and is 
there related more in detail. It is therea 
minute touch of truth, that he should mis- 
take for a dream (ver. 9) what he saw: 
having lain so long in prison, and his mind 


naturally dwelling on this his former mira- - 


culous liberation. 21.) ὑπὸ τ ὄρθρ., 
at daybreak: see reff. παραγενό- 
μενος | to the ordinary session chamber in 
the Temple, on the south side of it (Winer, 
Rezxlw.): and therefore, if the Apostles were 
teaching in Solomon’s porch (ver. 12), not 
in their immediate vicinity. Perhaps the 
παραγενόμενος. . . -συνεκάλεσαν. ... 5 
implying that the summons was not issued 
till after the arrival of the H. P. and his 
Sriends, may point to a meeting of the 
Sanhedrim hurriedly and _ insufficiently 
called, for the purpose of ‘ packing’ it 
against the Apostles. Ifso, they did not 
succeed, see ver. 40 : perhaps on account of 
the arrival of some who had been listeners 
to the Apostles’ preaching. πᾶσαν 
τ. γερουσίαν] Probably the πρεσβύτεροι, 
including perhaps some who were ποῦ 
members of the Sanhedrim; the well- 
known foes of Jesus and his doctrine. 
The expression π᾿ T. γερουσ, τῶν vi. 


18—26. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ AMOSTOAQON. 59 


ἃ παραγενόμενοι ὑπηρέται οὐχ εὗρον αὐτοὺς ἐν TH 7 du- i=ch-xv.16 


A ὃ ἃ, 1. 9 ΄ ‘ / , δ 
λακῇ: 38 Ἰἀναστρέψαντες δὲ ἀπήγγειλαν λέγοντες ὅτι 
\ Η ΄ δ s ΄ 
τὸ ἱδεσμωτήριον εὕρομεν * κεκλεισμένον ἐν πάσῃ | ἀσφα- 
λείᾳ καὶ τοὺς φύλακας ἑστῶτας ἢ ἐπὶ τῶν θυρῶν, ἀνοί- 


δὲ n 54 DE “ 
ἕαντες δὲ " ἔσω οὐδένα εὕρομεν. 


λόγους τούτους ὅ τε “στρατηγὸς τοῦ “ἱεροῦ καὶ 
ἀρχιερεῖς, Ρ διηπόρουν περὶ αὐτῶν τί 
23 ἃ παραγενόμενος δέ τις ἀπήγγειλεν 
ἄνδρες ods ἔθεσθε ἐν τῇ * φυλακῇ εἰσὶν 


Ν iZ 
Kal διδάσκοντες TOV λαόν. 


26 τότε TaTreN@v ὁ °atpat- 


only. Gen. 
Vili. 9. 

see John ii. 
1D ΖΕ. 1. 


xxv. 10. ch, 
xxi. 30. Rey, 
94. /f δὲ ” \ xxi. 25. 
“ὧν Εε κουσαν τοὺς Ezek. xliv. 


ie 
ol 1 = 1 Thess. v. 


3 (Luke 1. 
ἊΝ , a 4) only. Lev. 
QV YEVULTO TOUTO.  xxvi.5. (as, 
Mark xiv. 


> an “ a \ . 

αὐυτοις OTL LOOU OL .) : 

m = Matt. xxi. 
19. Gen. 
xviii. 1. (πρό, 
James vy. 9. 
ch. xii. 6.) 

n = John xx, 


> an © a ¢ na 
EV τῷ ἱερῷ ETTWTES 


A \ -“ , \ 
ηγὸς σὺν τοῖς ὑπηρέταις ἤγαγεν αὐτοὺς οὐ * μετὰ * Bias, 36. Gen. 


“ \ \ , 
ἐφοβοῦντο yap τὸν λαόν, 


i. 14. xiv. 25. 
(viii. 5.1 x. 31, 32, 33. xi. 8. ch. xiv. 19. 


Ὁ \ 
Γ ἵνα] μὴ 
q = Matt. ii. 22. ch. ix. 17. xxiii. 32. Gen. xix. 2. 


s = John xviii. 28 xix. 31. see Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 56. 2, Rema 
2 Cor. xi. 25. 


Xxxix. ll. 
o ch. iv. 1 reff. 


ὃ λιθασθῶσιν. oor its 


reff. 
rch. xxiv. 7 (xxi. 35. xxvii. 41) only. Exod. 
rk. t John 
Heb. xi. 37 only. 2 Kings xvi. 6, 13 only. 


22. rec urnp. bef παραγ., with DEP rel 36 sah: txt ABN a h vulg Syr copt eth 


Lucif,. 
nupov BE. for ev τὴ pva., ecw D. 
23. for δε, και D1(Se καὶ D-corr'). 


add καὶ ανυξαντες την pvdaknv 1) vulg syr-w-ast. 


απηγγειλον &. 


ουκ Ὁ. 


om or: E-gr vulg Syr. 


rec aft τὸ ins uev (to answer to δὲ follg), with E-gr P rel 36 vulg coptt Chr, 


[Lucif,]: om ABDX Hr E-lat syrr eth. 


ενκεκλεισμενον D!, 


ἡυραμεν (twice) E [ evpaper (1st) 13 }. 


rec ins eéw bef ear. (gloss to particularize, and to 
answer to ecw follg), with Chr-txt: om ABDEPX® rel vss Chr-comm, Lucif. 


rec 


for em, πρὸ (more usual), with E[-gr] P rel vulg-ed syr copt [arm] Clr: προς c: txt 
ABD®& m 36, ad am fuld demid D-lat E-lat Syr sah. 
24. rec ins ἱερεὺς καὶ o bef otparnyos, with P rel 501: οἱ ἱερεῖς καὶ 0, omg the 


preceding o τε, E: 


αρχιερευς και o 67. 98. 104 Chr: for o τε tO apxrepeis, o TE 


oTpaTnyos K.o0 Lepevs του tepov 96; οἱ apxiepers K. οἱ στρατηγοι τ. Le. Syr wth: txt 


ABDR® e 86 vulg coptt arm Lucif. 


εἰναι τ. KE. 


εθαυμαζὸν μεν τε και διηπ. π. avT. τι αν θελοι 
aft αὐτῶν ins το δὲ᾽ (δ 8 disapproving). 


γενηται D}(txt D4). 


25. rec aft αὑτοῖς ins λεγων, with 36 [ (eth) arm-mss] (Lucif,): om ABDEPN rel 


vulg syrr coptt eth arm{-ed] Chr). 
και XN}, 
26. [aft orpar. ins ev Tw tepw E. | 


ins D3 or ὃ). φοβουμενοι yap D-gr. 
13: ins AP rel 36 Chr. 


Ἰσραήλ, common in the LXX, is perhaps 
translated from the form of words in which 
they were summoned. γερουσία, being 
the ordinary word for the πρεσβύτεροι, 
would be the Hellenistic formal expression. 

23. ἐν waco. ἀσφ.] Not, as Vulg., 
‘cum omni diligentia’ (so Luth.), nor as 
E. V. ‘with all safety’ (?); but in all 
security—‘in a state of perfect safety.’ 

24.) If the ἱερεύς of the rec. be 
genuine, it must designate the High 
Priest ; not that the word itself can bear 
the meaning (compare 1 Mace. xv. 1 and 
2), but that the context points out the 
priest thus designated to be the H. P. 
(Meyer.) On 6 στρατ. τ. iep., see 
note, ch. iv. 1. He appears to have been 
summoned to meet the Sanhedrim, per- 


om οἱ δξ!. 


_at first sight. 


om eoTwTes(ins X-corr') 


for nyay., nyev BD'® : deducebant D-lat : amaya- 
yovres 13: ηγαγον [D}]1: txt AEP rel 36 vulg Chr, Lucif. 


om ov D!(and lat : 
om iva (to connect μη with epoB.) BDEN 


haps as the offence had taken place within 
his jurisdiction. But he was probably 
one of the ἀρχιερεῖς (see Winer, Realw., 
Tempel, end). These latter were the 
titular High Priests, partly those who 
had served the office, partly the presidents 
of the twenty-four courses, partly the kin- 
dred of the H. P. (see Matt. ii. 4.) 

αὐτῶν] ‘ The Apostles, the αὐτούς of ver. 
22: not ‘these words, as would appear 
τί ἂν γέν. τοῦτο] To 
what this would come; ‘ whereunto this 
would grow,’ E. V.:—not ‘ quomodo fac- 
tum sit,’ as Kuin.,—nor ‘quid hoc esset 
rei’ (ri ὃν ety, as ch. x. 17), as Grot. and 
others. 26.| [ἵνα] μὴ ALO depends 
upon οὐ μετὰ Bias, not upon ἐφοβ. It, 
however, iva be omitted, then this latter is 


56 TIPABEIS ATIOSTOAON. γι 
97 . , Q\ b \ u ¥ ? ιν ὃ U \ 
uch. iv. 7 reff. “1 GAYAYOVTES O€ AUTOUS εστησαν EV τῳ ᾿ συνεοριῷ. Kab 
Υ ae iv. 1d ; , > \ Ri 4,9 \ 28 rE wx J] λί 
eff. ςς, ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτοὺς O APXLEPEUS Εγων αραγγελίᾳ 
πα τε, iv: Χ I ax \ ὃ ὃ , y 2) an ee 
Bald Tim 1. παρηγγείλαμεν υμιν μὴ ἑοασκειν επι τῷ ονοματύ 


5, 18 only {. 7, \ « Α A 
acinstr..ch. τούτῳ, Kal ἰδοὺ “ πεπληρώκατε THY ᾿Ιερουσαλὴμ τῆς 

Soa "νὴ A a \ 7 a 9.69" el aes 

ἃ διδαχῆς ὑμῶν, καὶ βούλεσθε ὃ ἐπαγαγεῖν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς τὸ Ἡ καὶ 
ἢ “ - μὰ, ΄, ζ ᾽ \ \ ͵ ουλέε- 
Gen xaxi-30° αἷμα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τούτου. 29 ᾿Αποκριθεὶς δὲ Πέτρος σθαι... 
al. 's ABDE 
Tg eee \ , 3 3 val a - cal BY 

yen.iv. rel καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι εἶπαν ἃ ΤΠειθαρχεῖν δεῖ θεῷ μᾶλλον ἢ HPRad 


z John xii. 3. 


ch. ii. 2 al. 2 a 30 s e@ \ a f , Porc lia g edfgh 
Hee. ii. 8 : ἀνθρώποις. ρον; εος τῶν TTATEP@V μων ηγειρεν kimo 
a = ch. il. 42 
> - ἃ e “ 4 21, 4 ΕῚ a , 13 
wt, Ἰησοῦν, ὃν ὑμεῖς ® διεχειρίσασθε ἰδ κρεμάσαντες érri" ξύλου. 
8 only. Gen. av = by, Mag? 2 ye APP 
vi. 17. ὁ = Matt. xxiii. 35. xxvii. 25. 2 Kingsi. 16. ἃ ver. 32. ch. xxvii. 21. Titus iii. 
lonly+. Sir. xxx. 28 (xxxiii. 37). Esdr. viii. 94 (90) only. e ch. iii. 13. xxii. 14. 1 Chron. xii. 17 al. 
f = John iv. 20. vi. 31. ch. iii. 13. vii. 11, &c. xiii. 17. xv. 10. xxii. 14. 1 Cor. x. 1. see ch. iii. 25. g = Matt. 
x. 8. ch. iii. 15 ? . h ch. xxvi. 21 only τ. ich. x. 39. Gal. iii. 13, from Deut. xxi. 23. 
k = as above (i). Luke xxiii. 39 (Matt. xviii. 6. xxii. 40. ch. xxviii. 4) only. Gen. x1. 19. as 


above (i). 1 Pet. ii. 24. 


27. o repevs D}-gr([and lat]: txt D5) Lucif,. 
28. rec ins ov bef mapayy. (making it a question, which has evidently been occa- 
sioned by ἐπερωτησενῚ, with D[-gr] FPN? rel 36 syrr sah 2th [arm Ath, Bas, Chr, Cyr, ] 


Thdrt: om ABN?! vulg D-lat copt Ath, Cyr, Lucif,. 
om Ist xa: D}(and lat: ins 3). 
exe.vov D'-gr(txt D8) sah. 


[Chr, ] Cyr, Thdrt. 
Cyr,. εφαγαγειν D!(txt D8). 


29. rec ins o bef zerp., with 13. 36 ΤῊ]: 
amoxp. to εἰπαν, adding at end of ver o δε πετροξ evmev προ5 avTous. 


D!-gr. ] (ειπαν, so ABEN.) 
30. ins de bef θεος AN copt[-wilk]. 


the case. 28. δέον ἐρωτῆσαι πρῶτον, 
πῶς ἐξήλθετε; ὡς οὐδενὸς γενομένου, ἐρω- 
τῶσι λέγοντες" κιτιλ. Chrys. The same shy- 
ness of open allusion to the names or facts 
connected with Jesus and the spread of his 
doctrine may be traced in the ὀνόματι 
τούτῳ, and the ἀνθρώπου τούτου, and 15 ἃ 
strong mark of truth and circumstanti- 
ality. ‘ Fugit appellare Jesum: Petrus ap- 
pellat et celebrat, vv. 30, 31.’ Bengel. 
ἐπαγ. ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς not meaning, that divine 
vengeance would come on them for the 
murder of Jesus : but with a stress on ἡμᾶς 
—that the people would be incited to take 
vengeance on them, the Sanhedrim, for that 
murder. The preceding clause (wemAnp. 
k.7.A.) shews this to be their thought. 
Compare the pointed address of Peter 
to the Sanhedrim, ch. iv. 8—12, and the 
distinction between them and the people 
in iv. 21. This being so, the resemblance 
between this expression and the impreca- 
tion of the people in Matt. xxvii. 25 must 
not be too closely pressed, though the coin- 
cidence is too striking to escape notice. 
29.] Peter, by word of mouth ; the 
Apostles, as a body, by assent, implied in 
his own utterance aud their silence. There 
is no ellipse of ἄλλοι before ἀπόστ. 
This defence of Peter divides itself into the 
propositions of an ordinary syllogism—(1) 
The statement of the general truth that we 
must obey God rather than men: (2) The 
reduction of the present circumstances 
under that general truth, as being the 


for διδασκ.. AaAew A lect-17 
ἐπληρωσατε AX Chr, 


om ABEHPNR rel [Bas,] Chr,—D! omits 
[for δει, de 


ins Tov maida αὐτου bef ino. E. 


work of the God of their Fathers—shewn 
in his having raised and glorified Jesus, 
for a definite purpose, to give, &e. (3) The 
identification of themselves with the course 
of action marked out by the πειθαρχεῖν 
δεῖ... in that they were bearing witness 
to God’s work, under the inspiration of the 
Holy Spirit given them as men obedient to 
God. The whole is a perfect model of 
concise and ready eloquence, and of unan- 
swerable logical coherence ; and a notable 
fulfilment of the promise, δοθήσεται ὑμῖν 
ἐν ἐκείνῃ TH ὥρᾳ τί λαλήσητε (Matt.x. 19). 

πειθαρχεῖν) much stronger than 
ἀκούειν, ch. iv. 19,—as their conduct, in 
persisting after prohibition, had been more 
marked and determined. That was a mere 
‘ listening to’ the proposition then made to 
them: this, a course of deliberate action, 
chosen and entered on. @eg—opposed 
to τῆς 55. ὑμῶν of the H. P.; and to 
ἀνθρώπου τούτου. In the background, 
there would be the command of the angel, 
ver. 20: but it is not alleged: the great 
duty of preaching the Gospel of Christ is 
kept on its highest grounds. 80. τῶν 
mat. ἣμ.7 thus binding on Christ and his 
work, to the covenant whereof all present 
were partakers. ἤγειρεν | both from 
the emphatic position of the verb, and 
from the context, it must refer to the 
resurrection, not merely, as in Matt. xi. 
11, Luke i. 69, Judg. iii. 9, to raising up 
in the ordinary sense. ὑμεῖς, answering 
to the ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς ofthe H.P. ἐπὶ ξύλου] 


ἘΣ 


27—33. 


ΠΡΑΈΞΕΙΣ AIMOSTOAON. 


57 


8] rovtov ὁ Geos ™ ἀρχηγὸν καὶ σωτῆρα " ὕψωσεν Τῇ m - ch. iii 15 
reff. 
δεξιᾷ αὐτοῦ, ° δοῦναι ° μετάνοιαν. τῷ sg καὶ 54 ἄφεσιν", "ἘΞ - ch. meee 


4 ἁμαρτιῶν. 


32 Kal ἡμεῖς ἐσμὲν αὐτοῦ 


oc — xi, 18. 
2 Tim. ii. 25. 


a TUDE τῶν 
5 e P id Wisd. xii. 19. 


* ῥημάτων τούτων, * καὶ TO πνεῦμα [t δὲ] τὸ ἅγιον, ὃ ἔδωκεν 155. Antt. xx. 


ὁ θεὸς τοῖς " πειθαρχοῦσιν αὐτῷ. 


q Matt. xxvi. 28. 
xiii. 31. Job xvi. 20. 
u ver. 29 reff. 


$1. for δεξια, δοξη D}(caritate D-lat: txt D?) sah Iren-int,. 
B §1(83 disapproving) Chr; em: tw Chr). 


D}(and Jat) sah eth-rom. 
$2. for εσμεν αὐτου, ev avtw B 69}. 


Chr, Did: 


Luke i. 77. iii. 3. ch. ii. 38. Col. i. 14 al. 
s double gen., Phil. i. 25. ii. 30. Heb. xiii. 


100-5 Iren-int, : 
apt. bef ἐσμεν A am D-lat Syr Iren-int, : 
syr places αὐτου aft pnuator : 


pax iii, 29. 
33 Οἱ δὲ ἀκούσαντες ” Epni.i. 

He χ. 22 7. 
ἂν ΞΞΊ ΘΕ i. and Acts passim. constr., ch. 
ch. iii. 24 reff. 


ins του bef δουναι 
ins των bef auapr. D>.—add ἐν avtw 


αυὐτω m: om ἐσμεν eth: 
om αὐτου AD'R g ἢ vulg Syr [coptt] 


txt (avrov was prob omd from not being 


understood, and transposed from being thought to belong to τ. ρηματων TovTwyr) 


D5EHP 36 (eth) [arm] Chr,. 
rel 36 Chr, Thi-sif. 


compare reff. and the similar contrast in 
ch. ili. 14, 15. The manner of death is 
described thus barely and ignominiously, 
to waken compunction in the hearers, to 
whom the expression was well known as 
entailing curse and disgrace on the victim. 
31, 32.] apxny. κ. σωτ., not, ‘to be 
a Prince and a Saviour: but the words 
are the predicate of rovrov—asaP. anda 
5. ἀρχηγόν, as ch. iii, 15, which see. 
K. σωτ. not = τῆς σωτηρίας. Jesus was 
to be King and Captain of Israel, and also 
their Saviour. The two offices, though 
inseparably connected in fact, had each its 
separate meaning in Peter’s speech: ὦ 
Prince, to whom you owe obedience— 
a Saviour, by whom you must be saved 
from your sins. τῇ δεξιᾷ, by (not ἐο) 
His right hand, as in ch. ii. 33, where see 
note. The great aim here, as there, is to 
set forth God as the Dorr of all this. 
δοῦναι, in his Kingly prerogative; per. x. 
ad. ap.., to lead to salvation (εἰς σωτηρίαν, 
as 2 Cor. vii. 10: εἰς ζωήν, as ch. xi. 18) 
by him asa Saviour. Somewhat similarly 
Bengel: ‘ pet., qua Jesus accipitur ut Prin- 
ceps: &peo. qua accipitur ut Salvator, 
The key to this part of the speech is 
Luke xxiv. 47—49, where we have, in our 
Lord’s command to them, the same con- 
junction of μετ. κ. ἄφεσ. ἅμ. —and i imme- 
diately follows, as here, ὑμεῖς μάρτυρες 
τούτων, appointing them to that office 
which they were now discharging,—and, 
corresponding to τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ay. of our 
text, ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐξαποστέλλω τὴν ἐπαγγε- 
λίαν τοῦ πατρός μου ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς. By con- 
joining the Holy Ghost, as a witness, with 
themselves,—they claim and assert the 
promise of Jobn xv. 26, 27: see also the 
apostolic letter of ch. xv. 28. When we 


ins taytwy bef των p. τ. D}(and lat). 
(corrn ?) ABD RX m vulg [Syr] sah arm Did, [ Chr, ] Thl-tin lven-int, 


om δε 
: ins D3E (H ?) P 


for 6, ον D'E: om Β 17.73 coptt: txt A D-corr ΗΓ ΡῚΝ rel 36. 
33. axovovtes P c ἢ 104-5 [audientes D-lat E-lat Lucif, 1. 


aft ακου. ins ταυτα E 


remember, how much of the apostolic tes- 
timony was given in writing, as well as 
by word of mouth, this declaration of Peter 
becomes an important datum for judging 
of the nature of that testimony also. See 
a very similar conjunction, 1 John v. 9. 

They were God’s witnesses, in the 
things which they had seen and heard as 
men: the Holy Ghost in them was God’s 
Witness, in purifying and enlarging by His 
inspiration that their testimony to facts, 
and in unfolding, from (and as inseparable 
from) these witnessed facts,—the things 
which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard. 
And in the Scripture THESE SAME TESTI- 
MONIES are conjoined; that of the Apos- 
tles, holy men under the guidance and 
reminding of the Holy ΤΌ" faithfully 
and honestly reporting those things which 
fall under human observation: and that 
of God the Spirit Himnse/f, testifying, 
through them, those loftier things which 
no human experience can assure, nor hu- 
man imagination compass. ῥημάτων] 
histories, things expressed in words: 
see note on Luke i. 4. τοῖς πειθ. Not 
ἡμῖν, which might make an unreal dis- 
tinction between the Apostles and the 
then believers, and an implied exclusion 
of the hearers from this gift,—but gene- 
rally, to all the πειθαρχοῦσιν αὐτῷ, by 
this word recalling the opening of the 
speech and binding all together. So that 
the sense of the whole is, ‘ We are acting 
in obedience to God, and for the everlast- 
ing good of our common Israel: and 
otherwise we cannot do.’ And a solemn 
invitation is implied. ‘Be ye obedient 
likewise. It is remarkable that a similar 
word, ὑπήκουον τῇ πίστει, is used of the 
multitude ‘of converted priests, ch. vi. 7. 


58 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AMOSTOAON. V. 
reheat διεπρίοντο καὶ © ἐβουλεύοντο * ἀνελεῖν αὐτούς. 53 ἀνα- 

only i - Ν a 

1 Chon: στὰς δέ τις ἐν TOY συνεδρίῳ Φαρισαῖος ὀνόματι ΤΓαμαλιήλ, 
τὸς: νομοδιδάσκαλος " τίμιος ὃ παντὶ τῷ λαῷ, ἐκέλευσεν “ ἔξω 

53 ν. r.) xii. , A 

10. ἐμ αν 4 ϑραχὺ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους “ποιῆσαι, 38 εἶπέν τε πρὸς Εἰ τς 

oS αὐτοὺς “Avdpes ᾿Ισραηλῖται, “ προςέχετε “ἴ ἑαυτοῖς 8 ἐπὶ Ἡ +n 

9 1 
* xi 2, “ἢ ποῖς ἀνθρώποις τούτοις τί μέλλετε έν εις 88 πρὸ γὰρ. ki mo 

vii. 21 al. Luke only, exc. Matt. ii. 16. Heb. x.9. Ezek. xxvi. 8. = Ver. 27. z Luke v.17. 1 Tim. 

i. 7 only +. see Neh. viii. 7 Ald. ἃ 1 Cor. iii. 12. Heb. xiii. re Prov. iii. 15. dat., ch. vii. 

20 reff. Hom. Od. α΄. c — here only. see Job xi. 14, xxii. 23. Ken. Anab. vi. 6. 5. 25. 
d ch. xxvii. 28 reff. pare δεῖ] 1. XVil. 3. xxi. 34. ch. xx. 28. (Deut. iv. 9.) f 2nd pers., 2 Cor. vii. 11 reff. 
g = Mark vi. 52. TwUTO ἐποίησε TO Kal ἐπὶ TH θυγατρί, Herod. iii. 14. 

28 syr-w-ast sah. εβουλοντο (corrn, εβουλευ. not being understood) AB E{-gr] el 
coptt wth [arm] Chr,: επεβουλευσαντο Ὁ: εβουλευσαντο k Thi-fin: txt DHPN rel 
vulg [E-lat] syrr Lucif. 

84. εκ τοῦ συνεδριου D gr E(addg avtwy) copt: om ε. τ. συνεδρ. Syr. rec aft 
βραχυ ins τι, with (H)P rel [arm] Thl-sif: βραχυτητι o: txt ABDEN Chr,.—r. απ. 
Bp. τι Hdeo[Thi-sif]: τ. απ. εξω Bp. ποιησαι I). rec (for ανθρωπου5) αποστολου, 
with DEHP rel 86 [am? tol] syrr sah eth Chr,: txt ΑΒΝ vulg copt arm Chr,. 

35. for τε, δε Ο k [13] 58 [E-lat syr] copt. for avtous, Tous apxovTas Kat Tous 
συνεδριους D sah. eautous D'. aro των avOpwrav tovtwy E tol { copt]. 
πραττειν N. τ 

33. διεπρίοντο | sc. ταῖς καρδίαις ἃ5 ο. a Pharisee, with much more probability. 
vii. 54. From its conjunction there with Nor is the least trace of a Christian leaning 
ἔβρυχον τ. ὀδόντας, it does not appear to be found in his speech: see below [on 
to have any connexion with the phrase ver. 39]. And considering that he was a 
πρίειν Or διαπρίειν τ. 0d. with which Pharisee, opposing the prevalent faction 
Hesych. and Wetst. identify it. They of Sadduceism in a matter where the 
were cut asunder (in heart). So Persius, Resurrection was called in question,—and 
ii. 8, ‘turgescit vitrea bilis: Findor, ut a wise and enlightened man opposing 
Arcadiz pecuaria rudere credas.? And furious and unreasoning zealots,—con- 
Plautus, Bacch. ii. 3. 17, ‘Cor meum εὖ sidering also, that when the anti-pha- 
cerebrum, Nicobule, finditur, Istius homi- isaical element of Christianity was 
nis ubi fit quaque mentio.?, And Euseb.H. brought out in the acts and sayings of 
E. v. 1 (in Suicer, sub voce, where he cites Stephen. his pupil Saul was found the fore- 
other authorities also), ἐχαλέπαινον «x. δι- most persecutor,—we should, I think, be 
empiovto Kal? ἡμῶν. ἐβουλεύοντο] slow to suspect him of any favouring of the 
they were purposing, ‘taking counsel with Apostles as followers of Jesus. (See par- 
the intent,’ see reff. 34.] Γαμαλιήλ ΞΞ ticulars respecting Gamaliel collected in 
S703, (see Numb. i. 10; ii. 20,) is gene- Conybeare and Howson’s St. Paul, edn. 2, 
rally, and not without probability, assumed Vol. i. p. 69, f.) He does not here appear as 
to be identical with the celebrated Rabban — the president of the Sanhedrim, but only as 
Gamaliel, y737 (the old man), one of the ®amember, ἔξω ποιῆσαι] see reff. to put 
seven, to whom, among their Rabbis, the ©%t—‘cause to withdraw.’ They are re- 
Jews give this title Rabban (= faBSouvi, called in ver. 40. 35.] The words ἐπὶ τ. 
John xx. 16), a wise and enlightened Pha- ἀἄνθρ. Tovr. may be joined either with mpos- 
risee, the son of Rabban Symeon (tradition-  €X- ἑαυτ., or with τί μέλ. πράσσ. The latter 
ally the Symeon of Luke ii. 25) and grand- would give the more usual construction : 
son of the famous Hillel. His name often and the transposition of words is not un- 
appears in the Mischna,as an utterer of exampled in the Acts, see ch. i. 2; xix. 4. 
savings quoted as authorities. He died, 86.] A great chronological difficulty 
eighteen years before the destruction of the arises here. Josephus relates, Antt. xx. 5.1, 
city. (See Lightf.Centuria Chorogr. Matth. Φάδου δὲ τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας ἐπιτροπεύοντυς γόης 
premissa, ch. xv.) He was the preceptor τις ἀνὴρ Θευδᾶς ὀνόματι πείθει τὸν πλεῖστον 
of St. Paul (ch. xxii. 8). Ecclesiastical ὄχλον ἀναλαβόντα τὰς κτήσεις ἕπεσθαι 
tradition makes him become a Christian πρὸς τὸν Ιορδάνην ποταμὸν αὐτῷ: προ- 
and be baptized by Peter and John (Phot. φήτης γὰρ ἔλεγεν εἶναι, καὶ προςτάγματι 
cod. 171, vol. iii. p. 118 b. Winer, Realw.); τὸν ποταμὸν σχίσας, δίοδον ἔφη παρέξειν 
and in the Clementine Recogmn. (i. 65, Ρ. αὐτοῖς ῥᾳδίαν. καὶ ταῦτα λέγων πολ- 
1242), he is stated to have been at this λοὺς ἠπάτησεν. οὐ μὴν εἴασεν αὐτοὺς 
time a Christian, but secretly. The Jewish τῆς ἀφροσύνης ὄνασθαι Φάδος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ- 
accounts do not agree, which make him die émeupev ἴλην ἱππέων ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς, ἥτις Q 


94-- 97. ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 59 


- 1 Twa h = ch. vii. 18, 
from Exod. i. 
8. see ch. vi. 


A 3 
ἀνέστη Θευδᾶς λέγων εἶναί 
} 


~ «ς A 
τούτων τῶν ἡμερῶν 
ἑαυτό ee λίθη ἀνδρῶν ἀριθμὸὰ ὡς τετρα 
ἑαυτόν, ᾧ "προςεκλίθη ἀνδρῶν ἀριθμὸς ᾿ ὡς ρα- 

c ᾽ὔ id b Lal 

Koolwv ὃς τὸ ἀνῃρέθη, καὶ πάντες ὅσοι " ἐπείθοντο αὐτῷ 

© διελύθησαν καὶ Ὁ ἐγένοντο Ὁ εἰς οὐδέν. 
Ὦ 5 , e a ? a e ’ a r2 

ἀνέστη ᾿Ιούδας ὁ Τ᾿ αλιλαῖος ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις τῆς ἴ ἀπο- 


i = 1 σον. iii. 7 
reff. 

k here only Τ. 
Hom. Od. ¢’. 
138. προς- 
κλινων τοις 
« ΄ « 
Ροδίοις ὁ 
Πτολ. κατ. 
τ. ὅλην αἵ- 

m = ver. 33. n = ch. xxiil. 21. xxvii. 

ὁ here only +. διαλ. τὴν στρατιάν, Xen. Cyr. 

p Matt. xxi. 42, ch. iv. 11 and 1 Pet. ii. 7, from Ps. exvii. 22. Luke xiii. 19. Rom. xi. 9. 


37 4 μετὰ τοῦτον 


A \ 5 ᾽ , i>» Ν u ’ / > a » an 
γραφῆς, Kal aTTETTNOEV aov OTT LO@ QAVUTOV’ KAKELVOS 


= ver; 7 al. 
Prov. xxvi. 25. 


ρεσιν, Polyb. iv. 51. 5. 
ll. Gal. ν. 7. James iii. 3. 
v. 5. 43 


q ch. xiil. 25 reff. r Luke ii. 2 only+. 2 Mace. ii. 1 only. s = here only. (ver. 38.) Deut. 
xiii. 10. Herod. i. 154, and classics passim. t = Luke xxiii. 5 al. u = ch. 
xx. 30. 1Tim.v. 15. Rey. xiii. 3, constr. pregn., see ch. xiii. 8. Luke iv. 38. Rom. xvi. 20. 


36. ins μεγαν bef eavtoy D: aft, APE k o 13. 36 tol Syr Cyr, Jer, : om AI1BCH[P JX rel 
vulg syr coptt Eus, Chr,. aft ὦ ins cat D-gr. rec mposexoAAnOn, with [ c(-xoA7-) | 
f k o[13,e sil] Chr, : mposexAn@noay C}appy) : προξεκλειθησαν D-corr : προδετεθη 36: 
appositi sunt Jer,: inclinaverunt syr: adheserunt copt: secuti sunt Syr sah eth: 
accesserunt arm: txt AB[C3)8 a? Ὁ ἃ ἢ m, προξεκληθη (ttactsm) CD! KH ΠΡ a! g ], 
consensit vulg E-lat, adsensum est D-lat (the varr have been interpretations of or 
substitutions for the anak rey. in N T, προΞξεκλιθη). rec αριθ. bef avdp., with DHP 
rel vulg Chr,: txt ABCEX m demid [fuld Cyr, ]}. rec wset, with HPN? rel 36 
[Cyr,j: txt ABCDEN? h. τετρακοσιοι δὲ] [ Cyr, |. os διελυθη(ανηρεθη D4) 
au7os δι᾽ avtov D. om διελυθησαν D}(ins D4). ουθεν D 38. 

37. rec aft λαον ins ἱκανον, with [A*]HP rel 36 syrr sah [eth arm Cyr,]: pref Ek 
40 copt [Eus-mss,]: Aa. πολυν Ο D-gr [| Eus(edd Steph and Val)]: txt ΑἸΒΝ vulg 


Gmposdéxntos ἐπιπεσοῦσα πολλοὺς μὲν by no means impossible, in a historian 


ἀνεῖλε, πολλοὺς δὲ ζῶντας ἔλαβεν" αὐτόν 
τε τὸν Θευδᾶν ζωγμήσαντες ἀποτέμιουσι 
τὴν κεφαλήν, καὶ κομίζουσιν εἰς Ἵεροσό- 
λυμα. But this was in the reign of Clau- 
dius, not before the year A.D. 44; and con- 
sequently at least twelve years after this 
speech of Gamaliel’s. On this difficulty 
I will remark, that we are plainly i no 
position (setting all other considerations 
aside) to charge St. Luke with having put 
into the mouth of Gamaliel words which he 
could not have uttered. For Josephus him- 
self, speaking of a time which would accord 
very well with that referred to by Gamaliel, 
viz. the time when Archelaus went to Rome 
to be confirmed in the kingdom, says, ἐν 
τούτῳ δὲ Kal ἕτερα μυρία θορύβων ἐχό- 
μενα τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν κατελάμβανε, πολλῶν 
πολλαχόσε κατ᾽ οἰκείων ἐλπίδας κερδῶν 
καὶ ᾿Ιουδαίων ἔχθρας ἐπὶ τὸ πολεμεῖν 
ὡρμημένων. And among these there may 
well have been an impostor of this name. 
But all attempts to identify Theudas with 
any other leader of outbreaks mentioned by 
Josephus have failed to convince any one 
except their propounders: e. g. that cited 
in Biscoe from Usher, Ann., p. 797, who 
supposes him the same as Judas the robber, 
son of Ezechias, Jos. Antt. xvii. 10. 5,— 
ot Sonntag, who tries to identify him with 
Simon, mentioned Jos. Antt. xvii. 10. 6; 
B. J. ii. 4. 2,—and of Wieseler, who would 
have us believe him the same with Matthias 
ὁ Μαργαλώθου, Antt. xxvii. 6. 2, 4. The 
assumption of Josephus having misplaced 
his Theudas is perhaps improbable ; but 


teeming with inaccuracies. (See this abun- 
dantly demonstrated in an article on ‘the 
Bible and Josephus,’ in the Journal of 
Sacred Literature for Oct. 1850.) All we 
can say is, that such impostors were too 
frequent, for any one to be able to say that 
there was not one of this name (a name by 
no means uncommon, see Cicero ad divers. 
vi. 10, and Grot. ἢ. 1.) at the time spe- 
cified. It is exceedingly improbable, con- 
sidering the time and circumstances of the 
writing of the Acts, and the evident super- 
vision of them by St. Paul, the pupil of 
Gamaliel, that a gross historical mistake 
should have been here put into his mouth. 
The λέγων εἶναι of our text is curiously 
related to the ἔλεγεν εἶναι of Josephus. 
ὡς τετρακοσίων hardly agrees with 

the τὸν πλεῖστον ὄχλον of Josephus above, 
and confirms the idea that different events 
are pointed at in the two accounts. But 
the Jewish historian speaks very widely 
about such matters: see note on ch. xxi. 38. 
37.] The decided peta τοῦτον fixes 
beyond doubt the place here assigned to 
Theudas. This Judas, and the occasion 
of his revolt, are related by Josephus, Antt. 
xviii. 1. 1, Κυρήνιος δὲ .... ἐπὶ Συρίας 
παρῆν, ὑπὸ Καίσαρος δικαιοδότης τοῦ 
ἔθνους ἀπεσταλμένος, κ. τιμητὴς τῶν 
οὐσιῶν γενησόμενος. .«. - παρῆν δὲ sak 
Kup. εἰς τὴν Ιουδαίων προςεθήκην τῆς 
Συρίας γενομένην ἀποτιμησόμενός τε αὐ- 
τῶν τὰς οὐσίας, kK. ἀποδωσόμενος τὰ 
᾿Αρχελάου χρήματα. Οἱ δέ, καίπερ τὰ 
κατ᾽ ἀρχὰς ἐν δεινῷ φέροντες τὴν ἐπὶ 


60 ΠΡΑΈΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. V. 38—42. 


v ver. 36 reff. 
w Matt. xxvi. 
31 (from 

Zech. xiii. 7 


4 , \ , oe v2 θ 2 Aw 5 p ͵ θ 
ἀπώλετο, καὶ πάντες ὅσοι ᾿ ἐπείθοντο αὐτῷ "ἡ διεσκορπίσθη- 
€ \ \ Cal ’ ΄ an , \ Lal 
σαν. Kat “τὰ *vov λέγω ὑμῖν, ἡ ἀπόστητε ἀπὸ τῶν 
> θ , ’ \ z b] / “ ὟΝ δὰ a2 
ἀνθρώπων τούτων καὶ *adeTe αὐτούς: ὅτι ἐὰν ἢ 5 ἐξ 
> 4 « Ἁ [2 x ‘ ” Qn , 
ἀνθρώπων ἡ ὃ βουλὴ αὕτη ἢ τὸ “ ἔργον τοῦτο, ἃ καταλυθή- 
» \ “ ral 
σεται" 39 εἰ δὲ ὃ ἐκ θεοῦ ἐστίν, ov Ἐδύνασθε 4 καταλῦσαι 
b] / e / Ἁ f θ / g ς θῃ 40 Vv bd / θ 
αὐτούς, “ μήποτε καὶ ἶ θεομάχοι ὃ εὑρεθῆτε. ἐπείσθησαν 
\ ᾽ Ὁ Ν ΄ \ , 
ΡΩΝ ες δὲ αὐτῷ, καὶ προςκαλεσώμενοι τοὺς ἀποστόλους ὃ δεί- 
iv. 27. ; , yi al 
see Matt. xxi. pavTes ἱ παρήγγειλαν μὴ λαλεῖν * 
ae 


Ὁ = Luke xxiii. 51. ch. xxvii. 12, 42. 
e constr., here only. see note. 
vii. 19. Eur. Iph. in Aul. 1409.) 


alt 2Chron. xxix. 34 A (ἐκδ. B) only 


D-lat Eusfed Hein and Burt] Cyr,. om παντες D 95. 

38. om τα (not B!: corrd eadem manu: see table) ΕἸ. aft νυν ins εἰσιν αδελφοι 
D (εἰσιν is marked for erasure). om ὑμιν &}(ins N-corr?). rec (for αφετε) 
eagare, With DEHP rel 36 Chr,: txt ABCN. aft αὐτοὺς ins un μιαναντες Tas χεῖρας 
D 34: un μολυνοντες Tas x. vuwy EB. om αὐτὴ HP abet gh] [arm-mss] Thl-fin. 

39. for εἰ, cay E.  * OuvyjoecOe BCDEN ah Καὶ 13(appy) 86 vulg Syr sah Orig, 
Chr, Thl-fin (alteration to agree with the foregoing future, and the conditional εἰ ¢ 
see note): δυνασθε AHP rel fuld syr copt [ath] Thl-sif. rec avto (alteration to 
suit epyov), with C'HP rel [vulg-ed] demid Syr coptt Chr, Th] Gc : αὐτὸν 180: τουτου 
διδασκαλιαν Orig,: txt ABC?DEN am fuld syr eth arm. aft avrous add ovre ὑμεις 
οὔτε ot apxovTes unwy E; ovte ὑμεις ovte βασιλεις ουτε τυραννοι ἀπεχεσθαι ουν ano 
τῶν avOpwrwy τουτων D: simly 33-marg 180 demid syr-w-ast. om καὶ D!(and 


γ. 29 reff. 
y «= Luke iv. 13. 
ch. xxil. 29. 

2 Cor. xii. 8. 
Sir. vii. 2. 

- Matt. xv. 
14. Mark 


N 


2 


ee. 7 ee a 

ἐπὶ τῷ OVOMATL TOU 

ο John vii. 21. d = Rom. xiv. 20. 2 Macc. ii. 22. 

y+. Symm. only, Job xxvi. 5. Prov. ix. 18. xxi. 16. (χεῖν, 2 Mace. 

δ = 2 Cor. iv. 2 reff. h Matt. xxi. 35. ch. xvi. 37. xxii. 19 
i= ch. i. 4 reff. k ch. iv. 17 reff. 


f here onl 


for ovo, οἱ Cl3, 


lit: ins D?) 163 [syrr] coptt. 
40. for επεισθησαν, επειστ. . 


deletis”’) D'(txt b2(?)). 


ταῖς Gmoypapais ἀκρόασιν, ὑποκατέβησαν 
τοῦ εἰς πλέον ἐναντιοῦσθαι. . . .- ᾿Ιούδας 
δὲ Γαυλανίτης ἀνὴρ ἐκ πόλεως ὄνομα 
Γάμαλα... . ἠπείγετο ἐπὶ ἀποστάσει. 
And, in returning to the mention of him as 
tiie founder of the-fourth sect among the 
Jews (xviii. 1.6), he calls him 6 Γαλιλαῖος 
Ἰυύδας. From the above citation it is 
plain that this ἀπογραφή was that so 
called κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν, under Quirinus: see 
Luke ii. 2 and note. His revolt took a 
theocratic character, his followers main- 
taining μόνον ἡγεμόνα καὶ δεσπότην τὸν 
θεόν (Jos. as above). ἀπώλετο] Not re- 
lated by Josephus. διεσκορπίσθησαν] 
Strictly accurate—for they still existed, 
and at last became active and notorious 
again, under Menahem, son of Judas τοῦ 
καλουμένου Γαλιλαίου, ὃς ἣν σοφιστὴς 
δεινότατος, καὶ ἐπὶ Kupnviov ποτὲ ᾿Ἰου- 
δαίους ὀνειδίσας. (Β. Jud. ii. 17. 7; see 
also Antt. xx. 5. 2.) 38.] ἐὰν ἡ, εἰ... 
ἐστίν : implying by the first, perhaps, the 
manifold devices of human imposture and 
wickedness, any of which it might be, 
(q. d. ὅτι ἂν H ἐξ ἀνθρώπ.,) and all of 
which would equally come to nought,— 
and, on the other hand, the solemnity and 
fixedness of the divine purpose, by the 
indicative, which are also intimated, in 
our text, by the pres. od δύνασθε. 

Or perhaps the indicative is used in the 


. - es (“una litera ante ἐπ. et quatuor fere ante es 
aft Seip. ins avtous E: cesis evs D-lat. 


aft AaAew ins 


second place, because that is the case as- 
sumed, and on which the advice is founded 
[at all events the distinction ought to be 
preserved, which is not done in E. V.}. 

ἣ βουλή] The whole plan—the 
scheme, of which this ἔργον, the fact 
under’ your present cognizance, forms a 
part. 39. | The somewhat difficult con- 
nexion of μήποτε x. 6. evp. may be ex- 
plained,— not by parenthesizing ér1..... 
αὐτούς, but by understanding ‘ and ye will 
be obliged to give up your attempt’ 





(which thought is contained in od δύνασ. 


κατ. avt.), lest ye be, &c. Kat | 
Opponents not only to them, but also to 
God :—‘ even,’ in Εἰ. V., does not give the 
sense. As regards Gamaliel’s advice, we 
may remark that it was founded on a 
view of the issues of events, agreeing with 
the fatalism of the Pharisees: that it be- 
tokens no leaning towards Christianity, 
nor indeed very much even of worldly 
wisdom ;—but serves to shew how low the 
supreme council of the Jews had sunk 
both in their theology and their political 
sagacity, if such a fallacious laissez-aller 
view of matters was the counsel of the 
wisest among them. It seems certainly, 
on a closer view, as if they accepted, from 
fear of the people (see ver. 26), this 
opportunity of compromising the matter, 
which Gamaiel had designedly afforded 


ABCDE 
HPRa b 
cdigh 
ki] mo 
13 


δ 50 Ὲ IIPABEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 61 


>) al / 
Τησοῦ, καὶ } ἀπέλυσαν. ἐπορεύοντο χαίρον- 1 = ch, xxvi 
ae aed 5 EP a: : mete 
τες πὶ ἀπὸ προςώπου τοῦ " συνεδρίου, ὅτι ° κατηξιώθησαν ™ οἱ. sii. 4 
n ch. iv. 15 reff. 


Ῥ ς \ lal p "ἡ , q > On 49 r 4 , τ e 7 
ὑπερ TOV * ονοματος “ ATLUATUNVAL, ““““παᾶσαν ΤΕ ᾿ ἡμέραν 0 Luke xx. 85. 
i. 86 ν. r.) 
ὌΝ 
only. Gen. 
xxxi. 28 
compl. 2 
Mace. xiii. 12. 
3 Mace. iii. 21 
a 90 7 \ oa ς _ “ Conte te pe 
μαθητῶν ἔγενετο “ γογγυσμὸς τῶν * Ελληνιστῶν προς ἐπ ἜΡΙΣ 
6 οι 3 a nN , -~ Tonly. 
τοὺς ¥‘EBpaious, ὅτι Σ΄παρεθεωροῦντο ἐν TH * διακονίᾳ TH « Mark xii. 4. 


Luke xx. ll. 


41 Οἱ μὲν οὖν 


Ε] A tg A \ 5 ᾽ 3 > t PI] / ὃ ὃ / 
ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ Kal "κατ᾽ οἶκον οὐκ " ἐπαύοντο διδάσκοντες 
Γ ἣν ᾽ a“ 
καὶ ἃ εὐαγγελιζόμενοι τὸν χριστὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. 
5 \ re ΄ 4 , A 
VI. 1 Ἔν δὲ ταῖς ἡμέραις ταύταις “ πληθυνόντων τῶν 


νυ καθημερινῇ αἱ ὁ χῆραι αὐτῶν. 3 προςκαλεσάμενοι δὲ of Joh νεῖ. 
καθημερινῇ ai © χῆρα . Ξ΄προς μ ἐὰν 
i, 24. 11.23. Jamesii.6 only. Prov. xxii. 22. r Jer. xx. 7, 8. see Matt. xxviii. 20. 2 Pet. 11. 8. 


s ch. ii. 46 reff. 

i. 20. see ver. 7 reff. 
x ch. ix. 29 (xi. 20 rec.) only +. see 2 Mace. iv. 13. 
1 here only+. Xen. Mem. iv. 8.7, but not =. 


{not BN). 


t ch. xill. 10 reff. u constr., ch. xi. 20 reff. vintrans,, here only. Exod. 


w John vii. 12. Phil. ii. 14. 1 Pet. iv. 9only. Exod. xvi. 7, 9. 
y 2 Cor. xi. 22. Phil. iii. 5 only. Gen. xxxix. 14. xli. 12. 
a= ch. xi.29. 2 Cor. ix. 1, 12,13 (Esth. vi. 3 A 
1 Mace. xi. 58 only). b here only+. Judith xii. 15 only. c ch. ix. 39, 41 reff. 
τινι Εἰ : avrovs A. rec aft aed. ins avtous, with DEHP rel 36 vulg [syrr xth 
arm Bas, ] Chr, [Lucif,]: om ABC [coptt]. 

41. aft ovv add αἀποστολοι D 180 syr. rec um. τ. ov. bef κατηξ., with DEHP rel 
syr [arm] Chr, ΤῊ] Lucif: txt ΑΒΟΝ ad h m vulg Syr (coptt) Orig, [Bas,] Thdrt, 
Ambrst, Quest. rec aft ovou. ins αὐτου, with ὁ ἃ eth Orig,; tov κυριου τησου Ἰὰ by 
f gl? syr; moov k 0 18 vulg Thdrt, ; τ. no. 36; τ. χριστου ἃ 6 h m fuld tol [ Ens, | 
Chr, Thart, (all plainly shewing the additions to be spurious): om ABCDHPR Syr 
coptt [arm] Ammon-c. 

42. tor te, δε D vulg E-lat coptt Lucif. rec ino. bef τ. xp., with HP rel am 
Syr copt eth-rom: ine. xp. E 65 Chr,: τ. κυριον ino.,omg xp., Ck 18: 7. κυρ. ino. 
xp. D [tol Syr] sah eth-pl[Tischdf (Lucif,)]: txt ABN 36 [vulg-ed] fuld syr Bas, Cyr- 


jer, (Iren-int,).—(om ver c.) 


(παρ. VI. 1. ravras bef 7. nu. D-gr: for tavr., exervars C3 73 vulg sah. 
at end ins ev Ty διακονια των εβραιων D'(and lat). 


τὴ D'(ins D5). 


them. 40. Seipavres| See Deut. xxv. 
2,—for disobedience to their command. 
41. τοῦ ov.| Not ‘this Name’ (as 
Beng. and Kuin. [nor, ‘his Name’ (as 
E. V.)]), but the Name, κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν, viz. 
of Christ. So the Heb. ow is used Levit. 
xxiv. 11, 16: see reff. and compare τῆς 
6600, ch. ix. 2, and Euseb. H. EK. v. 18, 
κέκριται (sc. Alexander)....0¥ διὰ τὸ 
ὄνομα. ἀλλὰ OV ἃς ἐτόλμησε AnoTeias. 
42. πᾶσαν ἧἣμ.} every day, not ‘all day 
long, which would be πᾶσ. τὴν ju. 
On κατ᾽ οἶκον see note on ref. TOV χρισ. 
Ino. ] According to the true reading even 
more pointedly than in the rec., τὸν χριστ. 
is the predicate, and “Inc. the subject: 
preaching (that) Jesus (is) the Christ. 
Crap. VI. 1—7.] ELEcTION OF SEVEN 
PERSONS TO SUPERINTEND THE DISTRI- 
BUTION OF ALMS. 1}.7 δέ, in contrast to 
the former entire unity of the church: in- 
troducing that great and important chap- 
ter in her history of Judaizing divisions, 
which from this time onward disquieted 
her. ἐν τ. np. T.| See ch. i. 15 :— but 
not necessarily as there, ‘within a very 
few days: the expression is quite inde- 
finite. Some time must have elapsed since 
ch. iv. 32. ᾿Ἑλληνιστῶν --.Ἑβραίους] 
The Hellenists (from ἑλληνίζειν) were the 
Grecian Jews: not only those who were 


χειραι P. 


om 2nd 


themselves proselytes, nor only those who 
came of families once proselytized,—but 
all who, on account of origin or habi- 
tation, spoke Greek as their ordinary 
language, and used ordinarily the LXX 
version. The Hebrews were tlie 
pure Jews, not necessarily resident in 
Palestine (e. g. Paul, who was ‘EBpatos ἐξ 
Ἑβραίων, Phil. iii. 5. See also 2 Cor. xi. 
22),—nor necessarily of unmixed Jewish 
descent, else the ἐξ Ἕβρ. would hardly 
have been an additional distinction,—but 
rather distinguished by language, as speak- 
ing the Syro-Chaldaic and using the He- 
brew Scriptures. παρεθεωροῦντο | 
The use of this appropriate word shews, I 
think, that Olsh.’s supposition, that χῆραι 
implies all their poor, is not correct. 
Those poor who could attend for them- 
selves and represent their case were served : 
but the widows, who required more 
searching out at their own houses, were 
overlooked. And this because the Apostles, 
who certainly before this had the charge 
of the duty of distribution, being already 
too much occupied in the ministry of the 
Word to attend person lly to it, had en- 
trusted it apparently to some deputies 
among the Hebrews, who had committed 
this oversight. For the low estimation in 
which the Hellenistic Jews were held by 


62 


, ἈΝ 
= ch. iv. 32. δώδεκα TO 
xvii. 4. Luke , ζ 


e ral 
i. 10. xix. 37 
= peg: ell MU Ss sac 
e John viii. 29, KOVECY Raker 
ch. xii. 3. 
1 John iii. 22 


only. Ley. 

x. 19. constr., ἢ 

here only. 

f = Matt. xix. 
δ᾽ Mk., from 
Gen. il. 24. 

2 Pet. ii. 15. g ch. xi. 1 reff. 
i-- Matt. xv. 27. Luke xvi. 21. ch. xvi. 34. 
-- GK , Gen. xli. 33. 
: nm -= Col iw. δ. 
2 Mace. viii. 9. 


σοφίας, ovs 


ff. 
p -- here only. 1 Macc. x. 37. 


2. om δε D!-gr(ins D-corr!) sah. 


avtous D, eis Syr sah [eeth(Tischdf)] Cypr,. 
rel 36 { Clem, | Bas, Mae, Mare, Chr, Tht bef nu. E 13. 180. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


ἃ πλῆθος τῶν μαθητῶν εἶπαν Οὐκ 


h = here only. see Matt. ivy. 11. 
2 Kings ix. 7. (see Matt. xxi. 12 || :) 
] = ch, x. 22 reff. 


VI. 


δι . 
apeoTov 


καταλείψαντας τὸν ® λόγον τοῦ 8 θεοῦ ὃ δια- 
3 " ἐπισκέψασθε οὗν, ἀδελφοί, ἄνδρας 
ἐξ ὑμῶν EE ees ἑπτά, " πλήρεις ™ 


πνεύματος καὶ 


οκαταστήσομεν ἐπὶ τῆς P χρείας ταύτης" 
+ ἡμεῖς δὲ τῇ προςευχῇ καὶ τῇ “διακονίᾳ τοῦ λόγου 


Luke x. 40. John xii. 2. 

k = here only. Ezek. 
Heb. xi. 2, 39$. (Num. xxxv. 30.) 
Luke xii. 42. Gen. xli. 33, 41, 43. 


1 Tim. v. 10. 
ο Matt. xxiv. 45, 47. 


q = ch. xii. 25 reff. see ver. 1 reff. 


(ειπαν, so ABC.) 


aft εἰπ. ins προς 
μιν CD Thi-fin: txt ABEHP[R] 


KaTa- 


λιποντας E(k] 5. 13. 40. 180 ne 12 [ Bas, Mac, Mare, Chr}. 


3. επισκεψωμεθα B. for ovy, 5n A: 
A 13 οἷ Mare Orig-int: 


[vulg syrr copt Chr, Did-int, }. 


δε BR: om sah wth [arm Bas,}: 
τι ovuv εστιν αδελφυι επισκεψασθαι D: 
ef vu. avtwy bef ανδρ. D. 


1: om αδελφ. 
txt CEH[ Py rel 
πληρης AEHP k. 


rec aft πνευμ. ins ayov, with A C!-3(appy) EHP rel 36 [vulg-ed] demid sah Bas,, 


κυριου Syr: 


ora B C2(appy) DX) am fuld lux (syr) copt Chr). 


(The omission may 


have been made to suit ver 10: at the same time the insertion of ayiou from ver 5 was 


very obvious, and is the more probable of the two.)—®! syr omit καὶ also. 
καταστήσωμεν (corra), with HP e 13 vulg D-lat E-lat Mare, : 


Chr,. αυτης D'{-gr ](txt D(?)). 
4. nu. δε ἐσυμεθα.. 


. . Mposkaptepouytes D(sumus and perseveramus 


rec 
txt ABCDEN rel Bas, 


D-lat [ per- 


severamus also syr-mg]): mposkaptepnowuev EH | m [18] Bas, Chr, Mare. 


the Hebrews, see Biscoe, History of the 
Acts, pp. 60, 61. ἐν τῇ διακ. τ. Kad. | 
Some have argued from this that there 
must have been ‘deacons’ before: and that 
those now elected (see below on their names) 
were only for the service of the Hellenistic 
Jews. But I should rather believe, with 
De Wette aud Réthe, that the Apostles 
had as yet, by themselves or by non-official 
deputies, performed the duty. The δια- 
κονία was the daily distribution of food : 
see on ver. 2. 2.] τὸ πλῆθος τ. p..— 
‘the whole number of disciples in Jeru- 
salem :’ summoning a general meeting of 
the church. How many they were in 
number at the time, is not said. Clearly 
the 120 names of ch. i. 15, cannot (Lightf.) 
be meant. οὐκ ἀρεστόν ἐστιν] ‘non 
placet:’ it is not our pleasure: not ‘non 
gequum est,’ as Beza, Caly., Kuin., and 
thers (and E. V.), defending this render- 
ing by ἀρεστόν being used in the LXX for 
the Heb. rim: but even there it never sig- 
nifies good or right absolutely, but is used 
subjectively, with -pry3, ‘in thine eyes :’ 
see Gen. xvi. 6, ὡς ἄν σοι ἀρεστὸν ἢ : also 
Deut. xii. 28, τὸ ἀρεστὸν .. .-. ἐναντίον 
κυρίου τ. θευῦ σου. καταλείψαντας) 
For to this it would come, if the Apostles 
were to enquire into, and do justice in, every 
case of asserted neglect. διακονεῖν 
τραπέζαις It is a question whether this 
expression import the service of distribut- 
ing money (see reff. and Luke xix. 28 al.) 
—or that of apportioning the daily public 


meals. The latter seems to me most pro- 
bable, both on account of the καθημερινή 
above, and of the usage of διακονεῖν (see 
reff.). That both kinds of tables may be 
meant, is possible: but hardly probable. 
3. ἐπισκ. οὖν] The similarity to ref. Gen. 
seems to shew that the look ye out of the 
E. V. is the right rendering. μαρτυρου- 
μένους For this use of the pass. not 
found in the Gospp., compare besides reff., 
Jos. Antt. iii. 2. 5, τὸν στρατηγὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν 
ἐνεγκωμίαζε, μαρτυρούμενον ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἔπραξ- 
ev ὑπὸ παντὸς τοῦ στρατοῦ - πα Mare. 
Antonin, vii. 62, συνεχῶς ἐφιστάναι, τίνες 
εἰσὶν οὗτοι, ὑφ᾽ ὧν μαρτυρεῖσθαι θέλεις. 
ἑπτά) Some have supposed ἃ re- 
ference to the number of nations of which 
the Hellenistic Jews would perhaps be 
composed: some, to 7000, to which num- 
ber the believers would by this time amount 
(Bengel): some, to the mystic number 
seven, sO common in Jewish writings 
(Meyer, De Wette):—but the best remark 
is Lightfoot’s :—*‘ quare septem eligendi, 
dicat cui est audacia.’ Some present 
consideration of convenience probably re- 
gulated the number. ἐπὶ τ. χρείας T. | 
‘super hoc opus,’ Vulg. :—‘ ad hune usum,’ 
Grot. :—‘ over this requirement (desidera- 
tum),’ Meyer :—but the occurrence of the 
very same expression 1 Mace. x. 37, ἐκ 
τούτων κατασταθήσεται ἐπὶ χρειῶν τῆς 
βασιλείας τῶν οὐσῶν εἰς πίστιν, seems to 
make the sense business (as E. V.), duty, 
more probable. ‘The duty (see above) was, 


ABCDE 
HPNab 
edfgh 
kimo 
13 


3— 6. 


r ὕ 5 \ st 
“προςκαρτερήσομεν. καὶ 


fol / \ 
παντὸς τοῦ " πλήθους, Kal 


x / / \ / ς / \ Pir 4 
πληρήη “πιστεῶς και δον... ὦ aylov, Kab LALTTTTOV Kal 


TIPAZEILS ATIOZTOAON. 


63 


ἤρεσεν ὁ λόγος (ἃ ἐνώπιον + = ch. τ 
Ww ἐξελέξαντο Στέφανον ἄνδρα " Matt xiv. 6 


ii Mk. elsw. 

Paul ‘Rom. 

viil. 8 reff.). 
t Jer. xviii. 


IIpoyopov καὶ Nixavopa καὶ Τίμωνα καὶ οί: καὶ aie viii. 


Νικόλαον ¥ προςήλυτον ᾿Αντιοχέα, 


καὶ προςευξάμενοι 
y ch. ii. 10. xiii. 49, 


ὦπιον τῶν ἀποστόλων" 


w ch. xv. 7 reff. x ch. xix. 28 reff. 
2 ch. i, 23. iv. 7. xxii. 30. Num. xxvii. 19, 22. 


5. aft Aoy. ins ovros D Syr sah eth. 
μαθητων D. εξελεξαν Tov (sic) &. 
pose πιστεως and πνευματος δὲ}. 

B2E [13]: νικορα D-gr: 
[ Timwy syr-mg-gr |. 
6. ουτοι ἐσταθησαν D-gr Syr sah. 


not that of ministering to the Hellenistic 
Jews only, but that of. superintending the 
whole - distribution. 4.) τ. διακονίᾳ 
τ. λόγου, in opposition to the διακονία 
τραπεζῶν. ‘He partes sunt nobilissime, 
quas nemo episcopus alteri, quasi ipse ma- 
joribus rebus intentus, delegare potest.’ 
Bengel. ‘Hine apparet non frustra pre- 
candi studium commendari verbi minis- 
tris.’ Calvin. δ.) πίστεως, ---ποῦ in the 
lower sense (Kuin.) of ‘truthfulness,’— 
but in the higher of faith, the root of all 
Christian virtues: see ch. xi. 24 (De W.). 
Of these seven, Stephen and Philip 

(ch. viii. 5, 26, 40; xxi. 8) only are else- 
where mentioned. On the idea of Nicolas 
having founded the heretical sect of the Ni- 
colaitanes, Rev. ii. 6, 15 (Lightf. and Grot. 
from Iren. adv. Her. i. 26, p. 105, and 
Epiph. Her. 25, p.76),seenote ad loc. From 
his being called προφήλυτον ᾿Αντιοχέα, 
some have argued (Heius.) that he only was 
a proselyte,and none of the rest: some (Sal- 
masius), that αἰ were proselytes,—but the 
rest, of Jerusalem. But neither inference 
seems justified: rather I should say that 
the addition simply imports that he became 
better known than the rest, from the very 
circumstance perhaps of Antioch having 
been afterwards so important a spot in the 
Christian history (ch. xi. 19, note). These 
names are all Greek : but we cannot thence 
infer that the seven were all Hellenists: 
the Apostles Philip and Andrew bore Greek 
names, but were certainly not Hellenists. 
There does appear however, in the case of 
these two Apostles, to have been a con- 
nexion with Greeks of some sort, see John 
xii, 20—22. Possibly, though ἝἙ βραῖοι, 
they may not have been ἐξ Ἕ βραίων (see 
above on ver. 1), but sprung from inter- 
marriage with Hellenists. And so these 
seven may have been partly Ἑβραῖοι, 
though their names seem to indicate, and 
their office would appear to require, that 
they were connected with Hellenists, and 


vikapivoy syr-mg-gr. 
παρμενα D1(txt D-corr? (?)). 


= Luke xiv. 


5 ἔστησαν * ἐν- “ial. Num. 
xiil. 34, 
> ἐπέθηκαν v hase ch. ii. 


Matt. xxiii. 15 only. Exod. xxi. 48,49 al 
a = ch. ii. 25 reff. b ch. viii. 17,19 reff 


6 ovs 


evavtiov C. aft πληθ. ins των 


πληρης [ AC! |D[EH] P(-pis) &. trans- 
mpoxwpov E 1 -xwpos syr-mg-gr }. νικανωρα 
τειμωνα B'D [18]: τιμονα C? 


αντιοχεαν (Ὁ. 


for και, οιτινες D-gr. 


not likely to overlook or disparage them. 
The title of ‘deacons’ is no where applied 
to these seven in Scripture, nor does the 
word occur in the Acts at all. In 1 Tim. 
ili. 8 ff. there is no absolute identification 
of the duties of deacons with those allotted 
to the seven, but at, the same time no- 
thing to imply that they were different. 
And ἀνέγκλητοι, ib. ver. 10, at all events 
is parallel with our μαρτυρουμένους, ver. 3. 
The universal consent of all Christian 
writers in regarding this as the institution 
of the office of deacons should not be over- 
looked: but at the same time we must be 
careful not to imagine that we have here 
the institution of the ecclesiastical order 
sonamed. The distinctness of the two is 
stated by Chrysostom, Hom. XIV. p. 115, 
ὁποῖον δὲ ἄρα ἀξίωμα εἶχον οὗτοι, καὶ 
ποίαν ἐδέξαντο χειροτονίαν, ἀναγκαῖον μα- 
θεῖν. ἄρα τὴν τῶν διακόνων; καὶ μὴν 
τοῦτο ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις οὐκ ἔστιν: ἀλλὰ 
τῶν πρεσβυτέρων ἐστὶν 7 οἰκονομία. ὅθεν 
οὔτε διακόνων, οὔτε πρεσβυτέρων οἶμαι τὸ 
ὄνομα εἶναι δῆλον καὶ φανερόν. ἀλλὰ τέως 
εἰς τοῦτο ἐχειροτονήθησαν. So also Cicu- 
menius in loc.: τοὺς ἐκλεγέντας εἰς διακό- 
νους ἐχειροτόνησαν, οὐ κατὰ τὸν νῦν ἐν 
ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις βαθμόν, ἀλλὰ τοῦ διανέ- 
pew μετὰ ἀκριβείας καὶ ὀρφανοῖς καὶ χή- 
pais τὰ πρὸς διατροφήν. See Suicer sub 
voce. But that the subsequent office 
of deacon was founded upon this appoint- 
ment is very probable. The only one of 
these seven who appears in the subsequent 
history (ch. xxi. 8), is called Φίλιππος 6 
εὐαγγελιστής, probably from the success 
granted him as recorded in ch. viii. 12. In 
these early days titles sprung out of reali- 
ties, and were not yet mere hierarchical 
classifications. 6.1 ἐπέθηκαν, viz. the 
Apostles. Their office of giving themselves 
to prayer is here specially exercised. 

The laying on of hands, the earliest men- 
tion of which is connected with blessing 
oniy (Gen. xlviii. 14), was preseribed to 


64 


αὐτοῖς τὰς ὃ χεῖρας. 


Ὁ = ch. xi.1. 
d = ch. vii. 17. 


xii. 24 al. 
Exod. i. 7. 
e as above (d). 
ch. xix. 20. 
Matt. vi. 28. ᾿ 
Rake = WL TEh 
al.t trans., 
1 Cor. iii. 6. 
fas above (d). 


ch. ix. 31. 
1 Pet. i. 2. 
see ver. 1. 

g ch.i. 15. Luke 
ν. 29. Vie 17. 
Ezek. xxiii. 
24. h = Rom. vi. 16,17. x. 16 al. 

y. 8. j ver. 5. k ch. vii. 36 reff. 


TIPASEIZ AMOSTOAON. 


Deut. xx. 12. see Rom. i. 5. xvi. 26. 


VG 


7 Καὶ ὁ “ λόγος τοῦ ° θεοῦ * ηὔξανεν, 
καὶ ““ ἐπληθύνετο ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν μαθητῶν ἐν ἱἱερουσαλὴμ 
σφόδρα, πολύς τε ξὄχλος τῶν ἱερέων * 


ξ , i -“ 
ὑπήκουον ‘TH 


8 Στέφανος δὲ πλήρης χάριτος καὶ δυνάμεως ἐποίει 
Κ répata καὶ σημεῖα μεγάλα ἐν τῷ λαῷ. 


91 ἀνέστησαν δέ 


τινες τῶν ἐκ τῆς συναγωγῆς τῆς λεγομένης Λιβερτίνων 


i Luke xviii. 8. ch. xiii. 8. 
1- - Luke x. 25. Mark xiv. 57,60. 2 Chron. xiii. 4, 6. 


ἡ. for θεου, κυριου DE vulg{[with fuld tol] syr Chr/-txt, Orig-int,]: txt ABCHP rel 


jam demid Syr coptt arm Chr-comm, ]. 
ιουδαιων N!eo [Syr Thl-fin]. 
AE g vulg [syrr] Chr). 


μανθανοντων E. for sepewr, 


umnkovoy av (or rather av, Scriv) D!: -ovey 
at end ims του ευαγγελίου syr-mg. 


8. rec (for xagitos) πιστεως (corrn from ver 5), with HP rel [Chr,]: xaorros κ. 
mot. E: xapitos @cov wth: txt ABDN k 36 vulg Syr coptt arm Bas, Did{-int, Procl, 1. 


transp rep. and σημ. EK 40. 96. 


aft Aaw add δια Tov ovouaros Kupiov incov 


xp. Dsah Aug; δια του ονοματος Tou κυρ. mo. xp. k 13; ev [τω] ονοματι tov κυριου E; 


δ. τ. ον. κυρ. syr-w-ast. 


9. καθ o aveot. τινες E: adversus quem &e E-lat. 


Moses as the form of conferring office on 
Joshua, Num. xxvif. 18, and from that 
time was used on such occasions by the 
Jews. From its adoption by the Apostles, 
it has ever been the practice of the Chris- 
tian church in ordaining, or setting apart 
her ministers. It was also used by the 
Apostles on those who, having been bap- 
tized, were to be fully endowed with the 
gifts of the Holy Spirit: see ch. viii. 17 ; 
xix. 6, and Heb. vi. 2. 7.) καί (not 
‘therefore,’ as Kuin.), and, i.e., on this 
measure being completed; as would be 
the case, seeing that these seven were not 
only servants of tables, but men full of 
the Holy Ghost and of wisdom :—and we 
soon hear of the part which Stephen bore 
in the work. πολὺς ὄχλ. τ. ἱερέων) The 
number of priests who returned from Ba- 
bylon, Ezra ii. 36—39, was 4289: and the 
number would probably have much in- 
creased since then. No evasion of the his- 
torian’s assertion is to be attempted. Ca- 
saubon, approved by Beza and Valcknaer, 
would read, πολύς Te ὄχλος, Kal τῶν ἱερέων 
(sc. Ties) ὑπ. ; and Heinsius, Wolf, Kui- 
noel, and Elsner attempt a distinction 
between ὄχλος τῶν ἱερ., ‘sacerdotes ex 
plebe,’ and the ‘sacerdotes docti.’ But, 
besides that the words will not bear this 
meaning, the distinction is one wholly un- 
known in the N.T. At this time was 
probably the culminating point of popu- 
larity of the church at Jerusalem, As 
yet, all seemed going on prosperously for 
the conversion of Israel. The multitude 
honoured the Apostles: the advice of Ga- 
maliel had moderated the opposition of the 
Sanhedrim: the priests were gradually 
being won over. But God’s designs were 
far different. At this period another great 


om Ist των ᾿ξ. των 


element in the testimony of the church is 
brought out, in the person of Stephen,— 
its protest against Pharisaism. This ar- 
rays against it that powerful and zealous 
sect, and henceforward it finds neither 
favour nor tolerance with either of the 
parties among the Jews, but increasing 
and bitter enmity from them both. 
8—Cu. VII. 60.] THE accusaTION, 
DEFENCE, AND MARTYRDOM OF STEPHEN. 
8.1 This is the first instance of any, 
not an Apostle, working signs and won- 
ders. The power was perhaps conferred 
by the laying on of the Apostles’ hands; 
though, that having been for a special pur- 
pose merely, and the working miracles 
being a fulfilment of the promise, Mark xvi. 
17, 18, to all believers, I should rather refer 
the pone to the eminence of Stephen’s 
faith. χάριτος. divine grace (not ‘ fa- 
vour with the people’): the effects of which, 
the miracles. were called χαρίσματα. 
9] Λιβερτίνων is rightly explained 
by Chrysostom: of Ῥωμαίων ἀπελεύθεροι. 
Philo, Legat. ad Caium, § 23, vol. ii. p. 568, 
speaks of τὴν πέραν τοῦ Τιβέρεως ποταμοῦ 
μεγάλην τῆς Ῥώμης ἀποτομὴν... . κατεχο- 
μένην κα οἰκουμένην πρὸς ᾿Ιουδαίων, and 
adds, Ῥωμαῖοι δὲ ἦσαν οἱ πλείους ἄπελευθε- 
ρμωθέντες᾽ αἰχμάλωτοι γὰρ ἀχθέντες εἰς 
Ἰταλίαν, ὑπὸ τῶν κτησαμένων ἠλευθερώ- 
θησαν, οὐδὲν τῶν πατρίων παραχαράξαι 
βιασθέντες (p. 1014, Potter). Tacitus, Ann. 
ii. 85 (A.D. 19), relates, “ Actum et de sacris 
Egyptiis Judaicisque pellendis: factum- 
que Patrum consultum, ut quatuor millia 
libertini generis, ea superstitione infecta, 
queis idonea etas, in insulam Sardiniam 
veherentur .. . . ceteri cederent Italia, nisi 
certam ante diem profanos ritus exuissent.’ 
In this Josephus agrees, Antt. xviii. 3. 5, 


1 Tim. 


ogo C. 


Οὐ ves... 

ABCDE 

HPrab 

edfgh 

klmo 
13 


7—12. TIPAS EIS ATOSTOAON. 65 
καὶ Κυρηναίων καὶ ᾿Αλεξανδρέων καὶ τῶν ™ ἀπὸ Κιλικίας τὰ -ch.ii.s vet 

Ὰ ἔ n and constr., 
καὶ ᾿Ασίας " συνζητοῦντες τῷ Στεφάνῳ, 10 καὶ οὐκ "ἴσχυον 


Mark viii. 11. 
ix. 14+. w. 
> A lal rs A na ᾿ / , 
P ἀντιστῆναι TH σοφίᾳ καὶ TO 4 πνεύματι ᾧ ἐλάλει. 11} τότε 


πρός, ch. ix. 
29. 


o = Matt. viii. 


YU a 
τὑπέβαλον ἄνδρας " λέγοντας OTL ἀκηκόαμεν αὐτοῦ "λα- 38. ch. xv.10. 
A τὸ , 9 eS ; xxv. > 
λοῦντος t ῥήματα ἃ βλάσφημα " εἰς Μωυσῆν καὶ τὸν θεόν. , Mit τος, 
12 w / τ \ \ \ \ , \ ch. xiii. 8. 
2 * συνεκίνησάν τε τὸν λαὸν καὶ τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους καὶ Kom. ἴα. 19. 
~&e ev. 
xxvi. 37. Job xli. 2. q = Lukei.l7al. Dan. vi. 3. r here onlee®. Josh. 
xxiii. 4 Symm. so UTOBANTOS, Jos. B. J. v. τὺ, 4. 5 constr., ch. xv. 27. 2 Pet. ii.4. Winer. 


edn. 6, $ 45. 1. t ch 
i. 13. 2 Tim. iii. 2 only. Isa. lxvi. 3 only. 
viii. 4. Bel and Dr. 9 Theod. 
λεγομενων AN k [13] coptt Chr-mss). 
(συνζητ.. so AB!CDEN.) 
10. for και, οιτινες D: om kau sah. τὴ TOD. τὴ OVTN EV QUTW K. TW TY. TW αγίω 
w ελαλει, δια TO ελεγχεσθαι avTous (διοτι eAeyXovTO E) um (er D!: um D?) αυτου μετα 
πασης παρρησιαϑ᾽ μὴ δυναμενοι ουν (ov D!) αντοφθαλμειν (so syr-mg, ἐεπιδὴ οὐκ δυναντο 
αντιλεγιν E) τη αληθεια DE: simly from δια τὸ ἐλεγχ. am? syr-mg. 
11. λέγοντες AN, so probably })}. [λαλουντας Ε}} λεγοντος δὲ! [om ΑἸ(ΔΡΡΥ)]. 
βλασφημιας D-gr X}(but corrd) 137 vulg [arm]. 


. xi. 14 reff. 
Wisd. i. 6 al.) 
w here only τ. 


om kat agias AD'(and lat: ins 3). 


u-= 2 Pet.ii.ll. Rev. xiii. 5 only}. (1 Tim. 
v constr., Mark iii. 29. 2 Macc. 


12. ins και Tavta εἰποντες bef συνεκ. τε Εἰ 


relating a story as one of its causes, in 
which Ida, a freedwoman, was the agent of 
the mischief. Here then we have abundant 
reason for numbers of these Jews “ libertini 
generis’ having come to Jerusalem, being 
among the eeteri who were ordered to quit 
Italy : and what place so likely a refuge for 
Jews as Jerusalem ? Those who find 
a difficulty in this interpretation suppose 
them to have been inhabitants of Libertum, 
a town in Africa propria, or proconsularis, 
from which we find an episcopus Liberti- 
nensis sitting in the synod of Carthage in 
411 (so Suidas, Λιβερτῖνοι, ὄνομα ἔθνους, 
—Schleusn., al.); or conjecture Λιβυστίνων 
to have been the true reading (so the Arm. 
version, Libyorum, (cum., Lyra, Beza, 
Le Clere, al.),—or even Λιβύων τῶν κατὰ 
Κυρήνην (Schulthess) ;—or suppose them 
(Lightf.) to have been freedmen from Jew- 
ish servitude,—or Italian freedmen, wlio 
had become proselytes. (The Arabic ver- 
sion given in the Paris polyglott curiously 
renders it Corinthiorum.) But none of 
these suppositions will bear examination, 
and the best interpretation is the usual one 
—that they were the descendants of Jewish 
freedmen at Rome, who had been expelled 
by Tiberius. There is no difficulty in their 
having had a synagogue of their own: for 
there were 460 or 480 synagogues at Jeru- 
salem (Vitringa, Synag. p. 256. Lightf., 
Meyer). Κυρηναίων] See ch. ii. 10, 
note, ᾿Αλεξανδρέων) Two of the tive 
regions of Alexandria were inhabited by 
Jews (see Jos. Antt. xiv. 7. 2, 10.1; xix. 5. 
2 al.). It was also the seat of the learning 
and philosophy of the Grecian Jews, which 
was now at its height. This metropolis 
of the Hellenists would certainly have a 
synagogue in Jerusalem. I understand 


Vou. {T. 


three distinct synagogues to be meant, 
notwithstanding the somewhat equivocal 
construction, —and λεγομένης only to apply 
to the unusual term Λιβερτίνων. TOV 
ἀπὸ K.] It seems doubtful whether this 
genitive also depends on συναγωγῆς. At 
first sight it would seem not, from the 
repetition of τῶν, answering to the τῶν 
before. But then we must remember, that 
as Κυρηναίων and ᾿Αλεξανδρέων both belong 
to towns, and towns well known as the 
residences of Jews, a change of designation 
would be necessary when the Jews of whole 
provinces came to be mentioned, and the 
synagogue would not be called that of the 
Κίλικες or ᾿Ασιανοί (ch. xx. 4), but that of 
ot ἀπὸ K. «.’A.:—and, this being the case, 
the article could not but be repeated, with- 
out any reference to the τῶν before. 

Cilicia was at this time a Roman province, 
the capital being the free city of Tarsus, see 
note on ch.ix. 11. Asia,—not exactly 
as in ch. ii. 9, where it is distinguished from 
Phrygia,—here and usually in the Acts 
implies Asia proconsularis, a large and im- 
portant Roman province, including Mysia, 
Lydia, Caria, and Phrygia—kuown also as 
Asia cis Taurum. 11.] Neander well 
remarks (PH. u. Leit., p. 81 ff.) that this 
false charge, coupled with the character of 
Stephen’s apologetic speech, shews the real 
character of his arguments with his oppo- 
nents :—that he seems to have been the first 
who plainly set forth the transitory nature 
of the law and temple, as compared with 
the permanence of the latter and better co- 
venant, thus being ina remarkable manner 
the forerunner of St. Paul. 12.) τὸν 
λαόν, first,—that by means of the popular 
feeling they might act upon the πρεσβ. x. 
yp. the members of the Sanhedrim. 

μ᾽ 


66 TIPAZEIS AIIOSTOAQN. VI. 13--15. 


‘ “- \ 5 , , / 
xabsol., Luke TOUS γραμματεῖς, καὶ * ἐπιστάντες Y συνήρπασαν αὐτὸν 


ἜΣ. Ἀ- Zech. Ἢ ” ᾽ ‘ Ζ , 13 a ” , / 
πω, Καὶ 7YaYOY Els TO 2 συνέδριον, εἐστησαν TE μάρτυρας 
Reiss A , « y , 
ἔμ αι, 99. ἢ ψευδεῖς λέγοντας Ὃ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος οὐ ° παύεται 
only. Sth t es t >, XG d \ -“ e lA »“" e ΄ / \ nw 
γι. 35. aMace. t ῥήματα ‘had@v ἃ κατὰ τοῦ “ τόπου τοῦ “ ἁγίου καὶ τοῦ 

. 27. lv 

΄ , \ > “~ ’ ev » col « 

τ: _\s reff. VOMOU. 14 ἀκηκόαμεν yap αὐτοῦ λέγοντος ὅτι ᾿Ϊησοῦς ὁ 
ach, 1. 99 τ A - , \ ΄ =. 
δ τεῦ. 8. Ναζωραῖος οὗτος ἱκαταλύσει τὸν τόπον τοῦτον καὶ 

ev. ii, 2. : - ἃ Ht: " eh a) Bs - = 
xxiSonly. 8 Ἰλλάξει τὰ " ἔθη ἃ ᾿' παρέδωκεν ἡμῖν Μωυσῆς. 1 καὶ 
32 (xxx. 9). k 2 ΄ , Cyaan .“ εν ἢ ᾿ 3 es 
see cor. xv. " ἀτενίσαντες εἰς αὐτὸν ἅπαντες οἱ |KabeCowevor ἐν TO 
18. 

and constr., Ζ / “4 ‘ ᾽ > Pole dah , > ἐν 
cand constr, Ζ συμψεδρίῳ εἶδον τὸ πρόςωπον αὐτοῦ ὡςεὶ πρόςωπον ἀγγέ 


a Matt. vu. λου. VII. | εἶπεν δὲ ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς ™ Ke [™ ἄρα] ταῦτα " οὕτως 


xii. 32. 


e Matt. xxiv. 15. ch. xxi. 28 only. Ps. Ixvii. 5. f = Matt. xxvi.61 ||. 2 Cor. v.1: Ezra v: 2». I €or. 
xy. 51, 52 retf. h = Lukei. 9. ii. 42. ch. xv. 1. xxi. 31 al. Luke only, exc. John xix. 40. Heb. 
x. 25+. 2 Macc. x. 25. i= 1 Cor. xi. 2, 23.. 2 Pet. 11.21. Jude 3. k ch. i. 10 reff. 


Luke ii. 46. John iv. 6. xi. 20. xx. 12. ch. xx. 9 only. Ley. xii.5. Job xxxix. 


nch, xii. 15. xvii. 11. xxiv. 9 


1 Matt. xxvi 55. 
m ch, viii. 22 reff. 


om 2nd τους ΟἹ k. 
ob) coptt [zth(Tischdf) }. 
13. cor. δε H 18. 40. 96 E-lat copt: και ἐστ. Ὁ. aft Wevd. ins kata(kar D-corr) 
avtov D [ (eth) }. λεγοντες &. out. bef o av@p. C[om ovr. 13]. ree aft pnu. 
ins βλασφημα (insertion from ver 11), with EHP (k) 36 lux eth arm [Chr,] Procl, Thi: 
om ABCDX rel vulg syrr coptt [Chr, Proci, 1 --- κατα τ. rom. τ. αγιου k. τ᾿ νόμου λαλων py. 
βλασφ. k 18 Chr, Pr ocl,. Aad. bef pnu. BCR (k) vulg syrr coptt [ (eth) arm(Tischdf) 
Nyss, Chr,] Procl, : txt ADEH| P] rel [arm(Treg) | Chr, Thi. rec aft ay. ins TovTov 
(to agree with ver 14: or ee because the meeting of the Sanhedrim seemed to 
have been in a part of the temple), with BC 13 rel 36 tol syrr [copt] sah Chr, [Nyss, 
Procl, 1: bef, k: om ADEHPNabcefhlo vulg eth arm Nyss-ms Chr-comm Damase,. 


27. Ezek. xxvi.16 only. 


om επισταντες &. aft ἡγαγον ins αὑτὸν A 6 (Syr syr-w- 


14. “Ov B}(corrd appy eadem manu). 


15. nreviGov δε avtw D'-gr(txt D*(and lat)): om εἰς N‘(ins X-corr!). 
e Thi-sif: om 18: txt (see proleg) Di? 
aft ayy. ins ectwtos ev uweow avtwy D: Tov θεου sah eth. 


τες, mavtes ABCD[!|EN! 
καθήμενοι D c 137-80. 


CnapP. VIT.1. aft apy. ins tw στεφανω DE tol [71 coptt ]. 


1 
for a παρεδ., απερ εδωκεν Ρ ἃ 781, 116-23. 
for απαν- 


JHP rel Chr). 


om apa (as unnecessary ) 


ΑΒΟΝ 36: ins D-gr EHP relsyr [(arm)] Chr, : enim E-lat: not expressed in vulg D-lat 


[Syr(appy) eth ]. τουτο D. 
ἐπιστάντες The same _ persons,—acting 
now by the authority of the Sanhedrim ; 
Saul, among of ἀπὸ Κιλικίας, being, as 
is afterwards (ch. vii. 58) implied, among 
the foremost,—came upon him (see reff.), 
and seized him. 13. ψευδεῖς) The 
falsehood of their witness consisted, as in 
the similar case of our Lord, in taking 
Stephen’s words out of their context, and 
misrepresenting what perhaps, totidem 
verbis, he had actually said. τοῦ TOT. 
τ. ay.| The temple, see reff. 14: We 
inay either take the words thus, ὅτι Ἰησοῦς 
ὁ Ναζωραῖος, οὗτος κατ., “that Jesus of 
N., he it is who shall destroy’ . (see 
ch. vii. 35; 1 Cor. vi. 4), or ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
ὁ Ναζωραῖος οὗτος, κατ., ‘ that Jesus, this 
Nazarene, shall destroy . , —or, which 
seems by far the best, take: the whole to- 
gether, that this Jesus of N. shall destroy, 
asin Εἰ. V. Compare 6 Παῦλος οὗτος, cli. 
xix. 26. 15.| It is a question with re- 
gard to this verse, Does it relate any super- 
natural appearance, glorifying the face of 
Stephen,—or merely describe the calm and 


holy aspect with which he stood before the 
council? The majority of Commentators 
suppose the latter: and certainly the fore- 
going description of Stephen would lead us 
to infer, that there was something remark- 
ably striking in his appearance and de- 
meanour, which overawed his adversaries. 
But both from the plain language of our 
text, well understood among the Jews to 
signify supernatural brightness (see exam- 
ples in Wetstein), and from the fact that in 
Luke’s own narrative we have supernatural 
brightness associated with angelic appear- 
ances more than once (see Luke ii. 9; ch. 
xii. 7), I should be inclined to think that the 
face of the martyr was lighted up with a di- 
vine radiance. That the effect on those pre- 
sent was not such as to prevent the examina- 
tion proceeding, is no argument against this 
view : in the very mildness of the question 
of the H. P. which follows, I see the trace 
of some unusual incident exercising an in- 
fluence over him. Chrysostom (who does 
not, however, seem to adopt the above in- 
terpretation, his τοῦτο kal ἡ δύξα Μωυσέως 


ABCDE 

HPxrab 

edfgh 

klmo 
13 


MER 2. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAQN. 


67 


"eye; 2 ὁ δὲ ἔφη "Avdpes ἀδελφοὶ καὶ πατέρες, ἀκούσατε. ° here only. Ps 


ὁ “θεὸς τῆς “5 δόξης Ῥὠφθη τῷ “ πατρὶ ἡμῶν «᾿Αβραὰμ 


p ch. ii. 3 reff. 
ii. 21 only. 


2. αδελφη (sic) D!-gr(txt D?). 


being apparently only rhetorical) explains 
well the effect on the council: ἐπίχαριν 
δὲ αὐτὸν δοκεῖ μοι ποιῆσαι τὸν θεόν, τάχα 
ἐπεὶ ἔμελλε τινὰ ἐρεῖν, καὶ ἵνα εὐθέως τῇ 
mposdyer καταπλήξῃ αὐτούς. ἔστι γάρ, 
ἔστι καὶ mpdswra χάριτος γέμοντα πνευ- 
ματικῆς ἐπέραστα τοῖς ποθοῦσιν εἶναι, καὶ 
αἰδέσιμα τοῖς μισοῦσι καὶ φυβερά. ἢ καὶ 
ὡς αἰτίαν τοῦτο εἶπεν, δι ἣν ἠνέσχοντο τῆς 
δημηγορίας αὐτοῦ. τί δαὶ ὃ ἀρχιερεύς ;... 
ὁρᾷς πῶς μετὰ ἐπιεικείας ἡ ἐρώτησις καὶ 
οὐδὲν “ἕως φορτικὺν ἔχουσα; In Act. Homil. 
xv. p. 120. Cuap. VII. 1.] On the 
H. P.’s question, see Chrys. just quoted. 
It is parallel with Matt. xxvi. 62, but 
singularly distinguished from that question 
by its mildness: see above. 2—53: | 
STEPHEN’S DEFENCE. In order to under- 
stand this wonderful and somewhat diffi- 
cult speech, it will be well to bear in 
mind, (1) that the general character of it 
is apologetic, referring to the charge made 
against him: but (2) that in this a; ology, 
forgetting himself in ‘the vast subject 
which he is vindicating, he every where 
mixes in the polemic and didactic element. 
A general synopsis of it may be thus given : 
(1) He shews (apologetically) that, so far 
from dishonouring Moses or God, he be- 
lieves and holds in mind God’s dealings 
with Abraham and Moses, and grounds 
upon them his preaching ; that, so far from 
dishonouring the temple, he bears in mind 
its history and the sayings of the prophets 
respecting it ; and he is proceeding,—when 
(interrupted by their murmurs or inatten- 
tion ? but see note, ver.51) he bursts forth 
into a holy vehemence of invective against 
their rejection of God, which provokes his 
tumultuary expulsion from the council, and 
execution. (2) But simultaneously and 
parallel with this apologetic procedure, he 
also proceeds didactically, shewing them 
that a future Prophet was pointed out by 
Moses as the final Lawgiver of God’s 
people,—that the Most High had revealed 
His spiritual and heavenly nature by the 
prophets, and did not dwell in temples 
made with hands. And (3) even more re- 
markably still does the polemic element run 
through the speech. “ J¢is not 1, but you, 
who from the first times till now have re- 
jected and spoken against God.” And this 
element, just appearing ver. 9, and again 
more plainly vv. 25—28, and again more 
pointedly still in ver. 35, becomes doninant 


EF 


q Luke i. 73. (xvi. 24, 30.) John viii. 39, 53 (56). 


XXViii. 3. see 
1 Cor. ii. 8. 
Heb. ix. 5. 
ῬΈΣ Χ ΧΗ 1. 9. 
Rom. iy. (1) 12,16. James 


in vv. 39—44, and finally prevails, to the 
exclusion of the apologetic and didactic, in 
vv. 51—53. That other connected pur- 
poses have been discovered in the speech, 
as e.g. that so ably followed out by Chrys. 
Hom. xv.—xvii. (similarly Grot. and Calv.), 
of shewing that the covenant and promises 
were before the law, and sacrifice and the 
law before the temple, —is to be attributed 
to the wonderful depth of words uttered 
like these under the immediate inspiration 
of the Holy Spirit, presenting to us, froin 
whichever side they are viewed, new and 
inimitable hues of heavenly wisdom. Many 
of these will be brought out as we advance. 
The question, from what probable 
source Luke derived his report of this 
speech, so peculiar in its character and cita- 
tions as to bear, even tothe most prejudiced, 
decisive evidence of authenticity, can be 
only conjecturally answered: but in this 
case the conjecture can hardly be wrong. 
I have discussed the point in the Prolegg. to 
this vol. ch. i. § ii. 12 (a). Another ques- 
tion has been, in what language the speech 
was delivered. (1) It isa hardly disputable 
inference from ch. vi. 9, that Stephen was 
a Hellenist: (2) his citations and quasi- 
citations for the most part agree with the 
LLXX version. Hence it seems most pro- 
bable that he spoke iz Greek, which was 
almost universally understood in Jerusalem. 
If he spoke in Hebrew (Syro-Chaldaic), 
then either those passages where the LXX 
varies from the Hebrew text (see below) 
must owe their insertion in that shape to 
some Greek narrator or to Luke him- 
self,—or Stephen must have, in speaking, 
translated them, thus varying, into He- 
brew: either supposition being in the high- 
est degree improbable. 2. ἄνδρ. ad. 
x. twat.| So Paul, ch. xxii. 1, before a 
mixed assembly of Jews. The ἄνδρ. a8. 
would embrace all: the war. would be a 
title of respect to the members of the San- 
hedrim, in this case, but hardly in ch. 
EXIM. Dis ὃ θεὸς τ. δόξης) Not = θεὸς 
ἔνδοξος, but the God of (i. e. who possesses 
and manifests Himself by) Glory, viz. the 
Shechinah, see Exod. xxiv. 16, 17, and ver, 
55. The words τῷ πατρὶ ἡμῶν decide 
nothing as +o Stephen’s genuine Hebrew ex- 
traction. Any Jew would thus speak. 
ὥφθη . ... πρὶν ἢ κατ. avr. ἐν Xap.] This 
was the Jewish tradition, though not as- 
serted in Genesis. Thus Philo (de Abrah. 
ps : 


-- 


6S 


r Matt. 1. 18. 
Mark xiv. 30. 
ch. ii. 20. 
Isa. vii. 15. 

s Gen. xii. 1. 

t Luke i. 61. 
ver. 14 only. 
Exod, xii. 21. 
Job xxxii. 2. 

u ver. 34 (from 
Exod. iii. 10), 
Matt. xix. 
21'\. John xi. 43. 


av σοι δείξω. 

5» " . @ ,ὔ 
σεν ἐν Χαρῤῥάν. 
Rom. i. 13. 


χαρρα Kiso ver 4] m?: 


5 
εκ Tov οἰκου Tov πατρος σου E 65-7 Augs. 


TIPAZEISZ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ, 


Rey. xvii. 1. xxi. 9 only. 


Vik 


ὄντι ἐν τῇ Μεσοποταμίᾳ τ᾿ πρὶν ἢ κατοικῆσαι αὐτὸν ἐν 
4 3. 222, 3 \ Ss Ἃ > Ν ΕἾ θ ᾽ “ aes 
Χαῤῥάν, 5 καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτὸν "ἔξελθε ἐκ τῆς γῆς σου 
Ἀ lal \ A \ a A 
καὶ [ἐκ] τῆς tovyyeveras σου, καὶ " δεῦρο εἰς τὴν γῆν ἣν 
+ Tore ἐξελθὼν ἐκ γῆς Χαλδαίων κατῴκη- 
> ca , \ \ a \ / 
κἀκεῖθεν * μετὰ TO ἀποθανεῖν τὸν πατέρα 


vy ch. xix. 21 refi. 


xapa m!: χαραν D-gr vulg(not am demid fuld &c). 
3. for lst εκ. απὸ D}(txt D8, de D-lat [vulg E-lat]}). 
ins (so LXxX) ACEHPR rel 36 vss [ Orig, | Iren-int,. 


om 2nd εκ B D-gr sah Thl[-fin]: 
aft συγγ. cov ins (from LXX) και 
aft Sevpo ins εἰ D'[{-gr]. rec om τὴν 


( perhaps an error owing to similarity of endings: perhaps an attempt to render γὴν 


more indefinite), with { C3(appy, Tischdf) ΗΡ rel 36 Chr Thl: ins ABC!DER. 
και κατωκησεν D!(and lat). 
for κακειθεν, kaker ἣν, insg καὶ bef μετωκ., D! 


4. aft tore ins aBpaau D Syr. 
efmo ΤῺ]: om 65-7: em 13. 


§ 15 end, vol. ii. p. 12), having paraphrased 
the divine command, says, διὰ τοῦτο τὴν 
πρώτην ἀποικίαν ἀπὸ τῆς Χαλδαίων γῆς eis 
τὴν Χαῤῥαίων λέγεται ποιεῖσθαι. But he 
accurately distinguishes between the λόγιον 
which he obeyed in leaving Chaldea, and 
the θεὸς ὥφθη afterwards, adding a reason 
after his manner, why God could not be 
seen nor apprehended by him while he was 
yet χαλδαΐζων and an astrologer. The 
fact of his having left Ur by some divine 
intimation is plainly stated in Gen. xv. 7, 
and referred toin Neh.ix.7. It was surely 
both natural and allowable to express this 
first command in the well-known words of 
the second. But we can hardly suppose 
that Stephen adopted the pluperfect ren- 
dering of 128» in Gen. xii. 1, as the LXX 
has εἶπεν. (Josephus, ordinarily cited as 
relating the same tradition, throws, as he 
often does, the whole history into confusion, 
saying, it is true, Antt. i. 7. 1, καταλείπει 
‘7. Xaddaiavy... τοῦ θεοῦ κελεύσαντος εἰς 
τὴν Χαναναίαν μετελθεῖν, but omitting 
entirely the sojourn in Haran, and connect- 
ing the migration with an outbreak of the 
Chaldzans against him for teaching the 
worship of the true God.) Xappav | So 
the LXX for y1n, Gen. xi. 31, &e.; 4 Kings 
xix. 12; Ezek. xxvii. 29,---κάῤῥαι τῆς 
Μεσοποταμίας, Herodian iv. 13 (Ptol. v. 
18.12. Strabo, xvi. p.747),—‘ Carras cae 
Crassi nobiles,’ Plin. v. 24,—* Miserando 
funere Crassus Assyrias Latio maculavit 
sanguine Carras,” Lucan i. 104. It lay 
on an ancient road, in a large plain sur- 
rounded by mountains; it was still a 
great city in the days of the Arabian 
caliphs. See Winer, Realw. 4. pera 
τὸ ἀποθανεῖν τὸν wat. avt.| In Gen. xi. 
26, we read that Terah lived 70 years 
and begot Abram, Nahor, and Haran; 
in xi. 32, that Terah lived 205 years, and 
died in Haran; and in xii. 4, that Abram 
was 75 years old when he left Haran. 


εαν XN}, 
for ev, εἰς H 


Since then cir. 70 + 75 = cir. 145, Terah 
must have lived cir. 60 years in Haran 
after Abram’s departure. It seems 
evident, that the Jewish chronology, 
which Stephen follows, was at fault here, 
owing to the circumstance of Terah’s 
death being mentioned Gen. xi. 32, before 
the command of Abram to leave Haran ;— 
it not having been observed that the men- 
tion is anticipatory. And this is confirmed 
by Philo having fallen into the same mis- 
take, de Migr. Abrah. § 32, vol. i. p. 464, 
πρότερον μὲν ἐκ τῆς Χαλδαϊκῆς ἀναστὰς γῆς 
᾿Αβραὰμ ᾧκησεν εἰς Χαῤῥάν: τελευτήσαν- 
τος δὲ αὐτοῦ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖϑε καὶ ἐκ ταύ- 
Tns μετανίσταται. It isobservable that the 
Samaritan Pentateuch in Gen. xi. 32, for 
205, reads 145, which has most probably 
been an alteration to remove the apparent 
inconsistency. The subterfuge of under- 
standing the spiritual death of 'Terah, who 
is, as a further hypothesis, supposed to 
have relapsed into idolatry at Haran, ap- 
pears to have originated with the Rabbis 
(see Kuinoel ad loc. and Lightf. Hor. 
Heb.) on discovering that their tradition 
was at variance with the sacred chronology. 
They have not been without followers in 
modern Christendom. It is truly lament- 
able to see the great Bengel, warped by the 
unworthy effort of squaring at all hazards, 
the letter of God’s word in such matters, 
write thus: ‘ Abram, dum Thara vixit in 
Haran, domum quodammodo paternam ha- 
buit in Haran, in terra Canaan duntaxat 
peregrinum ayens, mortuo autem patre, 
plane in terra Canaan domum unice habere 
cepit.’ (This alteration of relation zm the 
land being expressed by μετῴκισεν αὐτὸν 
ety!) The way in which the diffienlty has 
been met by Wordsworth and others, viz. 
that we have no right to assume that 
Abram was born when Terah was 70, but 
may regard him as the youngest son, would 
leave us in this equally unsatisfactory posi« 


προς 

αυτον d. 

ABCDE 

HPxRab 

efgh 

klme 
13 


ὅ--. 8. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ. AMOSTOAON. 


69 


-“ Ud ’ . μ᾿ “ ͵ ὃ A 
αὐτοῦ “ μετῴκισεν αὐτὸν ELS τὴν γῆν ταύτην * εἰς ἣν ὑμεῖς w rer. 43 σειν. 


“ x val 5 \ ? πὸ ᾽ “ / 
vUV * κατοικεῖτε, ὃ καὶ οὐκ EOWMKEY αὐτῷ Y κληρονομίαν 


1 Chron. vui. 
6. (-Keota, 
see Matt. i. 


᾽ a > Ke ee a “ Ν , Σ a 
ἐν αὐτῇ, οὐδὲ * βῆμα ποδὸς: Kat ἃ ἐπηγγείλατο * δοῦναι, Mart. ii, 23. 
3 


αὐτῷ ὃ εἰς “κατάσχεσιν αὐτὴν καὶ τῷ ἅσπερματι αὐτοῦ 
© μετ᾽ αὐτόν, οὐκ ὄντος αὐτῷ τέκνου. 
οὕτως ὁ θεός, ὅτι ἔσται τὸ ἃ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ 
γῇ ὃ ἀλλοτρίᾳ, καὶ " δουλώσουσιν αὐτὸ Kai ἱκακώσουσιν 
ἔθνος 


, ΄ fy δ \ 
ETN τετρακόσια. 1 KUL TO 


Vie ὃ 

2 Chron. xix. 
Me ae i 4 Ed-vat. (not 
6 ἐλάλησεν δὲ , 48: 

f 


y = Heb. xi. 8, 
͵΄ " Josh. xiin. 14. 
TT APOLKOV €V z = here only. 
Deut. ii. 5. 
(ch. xii. 21 
reff.) 
- ΣΝ Ὁ ΄ ἃ (ΣΝ, xiii. 15. 
@ €AV ὀὁουλευσουσιν © constr., Mark 


{ 


k a 5 , ΄ Ἀ 5 \ \ om 9 , πῖνν - 
κρίνω €YW, O θεὸς εἴπεν, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἐξελεύσονται ΕΝ ΕΝ 


\ al / Δ 
kat! λατρεύσουσίν μοι ἐν τῷ τόπῳ τούτῳ. 


d Rom. ix. 7 reff. 
g Rom. xiv. 4 reff, 
only. Gen.l.c. Wisd. xix. 14. 
10. 1 Pet. iii. 13 only. Exod. v. 22 al. 
1 Matt. iv. 10 (from Deut. vi. 13). ver. 42. 


ech. xiii. 25 reff. 


(and lat: κακειθε D?). 
Bevs ἢ Syr. 


h Rom vi. 18, 22. 
1 Mace. viii. 11 only. 


ch. xxiv. 14. 


μετωνκησεν Ὠ1[-οἰκ- |(txt D*)/ EHP]. 


att κατοικ. ins καὶ οἱ πατερες vuwy DE syr-w-ast Aug, but for ὑμων, 


. xiv. 9 al. 

A, PSE GEN. xvii. 8. 
8 καὶ ἔδωκεν ¢ ver id only. 

x Num. xxxii. ὃ. 
1 Pet. ii. ll only. Gen. xv. 13. 
Tit,1i. 3:2 Pet. 1. 19 
iver. 19. ch. xii. 1. xiv. 2. xviii. 
k = 1 Cor. xi. 31; 32. . Rey. xvill. 8 xix, 2. Gen.J2c: 
Rom. i. 9al. Exon. ii. 12. (-peta, Rom. ix. 4.) 


f ver. 29. Eph. ii. 19. 
1 Cor, vil. 15, ix. 19, Gal. iv. 3. 


aft avr. ins o 


ἡμῶν D; D adds further οἱ πρὸ nuwy, syr-w-ast οἱ πρὸ υμ. 
5. for 2nd και, αλλ D [vulg| am ἄς sah Iren-int : txt ABCEHPNR rel fuld syrr eopt 


Chr Thi. 


auTny εἰς κατασχ. avTw AENahk 19. 


rec avtw bef δουναι: txt ABCDEHP bce f gl1mo [{yulg arm ].---δουναι 


for last avtw, avtou C. 


6. for ovtws, avtw ΗἸΝ k | vulg-ed Syr: om am fuld!: avtw ουτως Ὁ 49. 96 Fsah]. 


aft o θ. ins προς avtov D Iren-int, : λεγων mp. avtov Syr. 
for αὐτο, avrous D vulg coptt eth: avtw e 13. 


sixt Syr coptt eth]. 


for αὐτου, σου & [vulg- 
aft κακωσ. 


ins αὑτὸ C [Syr syr-w-ob; αὐτοὺς vulg coptt eth]; avtw 13.—Kak. αὐτο k. δουλ. E. 


7. to δε Ce 120 sah eth-pl. 


αν BD: txt ACEH[ P JX rel Chr,. 


rec δουλευ- 


σωσιν (corrn to suit LXX), with BEHPR rel vulg [ D-lat | Chr,: txt AC D-gr [sah] lren- 


int. 
efeA. ins ἐκεῖθεν EK, 


tion:— Terah, in the course of nature, 
begets his son Abram at 130 (208--- 75) : 
yet this very son Abram regards it as in- 
credible that he himself should beget a son 
at 99 (Gen. xvii. 1, 17); and on the fact 
of the birth of Isaac being out of the 
course of nature, most important Scrip- 
tural arguments and consequences ure 
founded, cf. Rom. iv. 17—21, Heb. xi. 11, 
12. We may fairly leave these Commenta- 
tors with their new difficulty: only re- 
marking for our instruction, how sure those 
are to plunge into hopeless confusion, who, 
from motives however good, once begin to 
handle the word of God deceitfully. μετ. 
aut. εἰς} In these words Stephen clearly 
recognizes the second command, to migrate 
from Haran to Canaan: and as clearly 
therefore made no mistake in ver. 2, but 
applied the expressed words of the second 
command to the first injunction, the λόγιον 
of Philo. 5. οὐκ ἔδωκεν] There is 
no oecasion here to wrest our text in order 
to produce accordance with the history. 
The field which Abraham bought for the 
burial of his dead surely did not come 
under the description of κληρονομία, nor 
give him any standing as a possessor in the 


land. To avoid this seeming inconsistency, 


rec εἶπεν bef o @., with DEHP rel 36 vss Iren-int: txt ABCR. 
Aatpevowow C!{appy | E gr. 


aft 


Schéttgen and Bengellay a stresson ἔδωκεν, 
‘agrum illum... non ex donatione divina 
accepit Abraham, sed emit, ipsa emtione 
peregrinum eum esse docente’ (Bengel). 
Kuinoel and Olshausen take οὐκ for οὔπω. 
kai before émnyy. is not ‘wet’ 
(Beza), nor is érnyy. to be construed 
pluperfect (id.); and he promised is the 
simple rendering of the words, and the 
right one. The following καί is by Kuin. 
rendered ‘nimirum :’ but again it is only 
the simple copula, Fru>. - 6, T/A 
free citation from the LXX, with the words 
καὶ AaTp. μοι ἐν τ. τόπ. τούτῳ adapted 
and added from Exod. iii. 12. The shifts 
of some Commentators to avoid this plain 
fact are not worth recounting: but again, 
the student who would not handle the 
word of God deceitfully should be here 
and every where on his guard against 
them. The round number, 400 years, 
given here and Gen. l. ¢., is further spe- 
cified Exod. xii. 40 as 430. (See Gal. 
iii. 17, and note.) 7.) ὃ θεὸς εἶπεν 
is inserted by Stephen in passing trom the 
narrative form (τὸ σπ. αὐτοῦ) into the 
direct (kp. ἔγώ). 8.| On the institu- 
tion of circumcision, it is called a διαθήκη, 
Gen. xvii, 10, and the immediate promise of 


m = ch. iii. 25. 
Heb. ix. 4. 
kxod. xix. 5. 

n 1 Cor. vii. 19 
reff. 

o = Rom. v. 12 
reff. 

p 1 Cor. vii. 18 
reff. GEN. 
ΧΧΙ. 4. 

q here bis. 
ch. ii. 29. 
Heb. vii. 4 
only. 1 Chron. 
xxiv. 31 B. 
XXVii. 22. 

r = ch. xvii. 5. 
1 Cor. xiii. 

4, James iv. 
2. GEN. 
xxxvii. ll. 

5 = δ ν θ, 
Heb. xii. 16 
only. GEN 
XXXVil. 28, 36. 

t ch. x. 38 reff. 
GEN. xxxix. 


21, 23. 


Ὁ - ver. 34. ch. 


xii. 11. xxiii. 
Si. REVI. AT. 
Gal. i. 4. 
(Matt. v. 29. 
xviii. 9) only. 
Exod. iii. 8. 

v Rom. v. 3 reff. 

we — eh i147 
reff. σεν. 
Xxxix. 2]. 

x Mark ii. 12. 


Luke i. 6. xx. 
26. xxiv. 19. ch. viii. 32 only. 


TIPASEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. Vik 


2 eT 4 n coer One 5. λ 
αὐτῷ ™ διαθήκην " περιτομῆς" καὶ 5 οὕτως ἐγέννησεν TOV ABCDE 


᾽ x \ p ἢ ee A te τῶ we. , , ΗΡ δ Ὁ 
Ισαὰκ καὶ περιέτεμεν αὐτὸν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ, καὶ efgh 
; Α \ 9 , a. » \ \ , klmo 
Ioaax τὸν ᾿Ιακώβ, καὶ ᾿Ιακὼβ τοὺς δώδεκα ItaTpl- 13 


’ \ e / x 5 \ 
apyas. % καὶ ol “πατριάρχαι " ζηλώσαντες τὸν ᾿Ιωσὴφ 
5 ’ ὃ > ¥ \ t > e Ν { >’ > A 

ἀπέδοντο εἰς Αἴγυπτον: καὶ ‘Hv ὁ θεὸς ᾿ μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ 

10 καὶ ἃ ἐξείλατο αὐτὸν ἐκ πασῶν τῶν " θλίψεων αὐτοῦ, 

‘ » ᾽ a Ww / \ / ᾿ς > / \ 

καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ “ χάριν καὶ σοφίαν * ἐναντίον Φαραὼ 
, \ - / % ΝᾺ 

βασιλέως Αὐγύπτου, καὶ κατέστησεν αὐτὸν 5 ἡγούμενον 

11 ἦλθεν 
‘ ’ ¢ \ , \ 

δὲ λιμὸς ἐφ᾽ ὅλην τὴν Αἴγυπτον καὶ Χαναὰν καὶ 

/ τ ε ΄ i 

γ᾿ θλίψις μεγάλη, καὶ οὐχ “ηὕρισκον “ χορτάσματα ot 

© πατέρες ° ἡμῶν. 

Μ ie , . e , ype A A 
Αἴγυπτον ' ἐξαπέστειλεν τοὺς “ πατέρας " ἡμῶν πρῶτον, 


ΚΕ ἐν τῷ * δευτέρῳ | ἀνεγνωρίσθη ᾿Ιωσὴφ τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς 


“$a. eres | ” \ μέ \ a 5 5] lal 
Yew Atyurtov καὶ ὅλον τὸν “οίκον αὐτοῦ. 


9? ΄ . \ > 
12 ἀκούσας δὲ ᾿Ιακὼβ ἴ ὄντα § σιτία ὃ εἰς 


13 καὶ 
’ la) \ m x m b U A \ εὖ nD ΄ 
αὐτοῦ, καὶ ᾿ φανερὸν τ' ἐγένετο τῷ Φαραὼ τὸ 5 γένος 
’ / 
Iwond. 
κὼβ τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ, Kal πᾶσαν τὴν ὃ συγγένειαν 


14 ἀποστείλας δὲ ᾿Ιωσὴφ ° μετεκαλέσατο ᾿᾽Ϊα- 


Gen. vi. 8 y Luke xii. 14. vv. 27,35. Heb. vii. 28. Gen. xli. 41. 


z = Matt. ii.6. Luke xxii. 26. Heb. xiii. 7, 17,24. Deut. i. 15. a= ch. x. 2 reff. b Luke 
iv. 25. xv. 14. GEn. xli. 54. c = Luke ix. 12. [Rom.iv.1.] 2 Tim.i. 18. Lam. i. 6. d here 
only}. Gen. xlii. 27. Deut. xi. 15 al. _ ech. v. 30 reff. f constr., ch. xxiv. 10 reff. g here 
only. Prov. xxx. 22. otTos. Gen. xlii. 2. σιτα, Job xii. 11 al. = ch. xix. 22 reff. ich. ix. 30. xi. 
22 414. Gal. iv. 4,6. Lukei. 53. xx. 10,11 only. L.P. Gen. xlv. 1. k ~- here only. 1 here 


only. Gen. xlv. 1. 
25 only. Hos. xi. 2. 


8. for ογδοη, εβδομη N!. 
om ABCERX [k] Thl-sif. 


also |. 


10. (εξειλατο, so ABCDEPR® m 36 Thl-fin.) 
εναντι ὃξ k [Chr, ]. 
om BDHP rel 36 E-lat Chr,. 


m 1 Cor. iii. 13 reff. n = ch. iv. 6 reff. och. x. 32. xx. 17. xxiv. 


p ver. 3 reff. 


rec ins o bef 2nd ἰσαακ, with DHP rel 36 Chr, Thl-fin: 
aft i. ins eyevynoe E [Syr copt, which have it after iak. 

rec ins o bef 2nd ιακωβ, with D?HP rel 36 Chr ΤῊ]: om ABCD'!E® [k]. 
xapw bef av7t. D-gr: om avtw A. 
ins ep bef oAov AC E-gr δὲ g vulg syrr coptt{ Tischdf]: 
for αὐτου, τουτον B![ txt B-corr!(= B?, Tischdf) |. 


11. ree τὴν γὴν avyurrov, with EHP rel 36 syr eth [arm] Chr, : e@ oAns τῆς avyurrou 
D, super omnem terram egypti D-lat (see Lxx): txt ABCN vulg Syr coptt. 
(ηυρισκον, so B(sic: see table) EP k.) 

12. rec σιτα, with HP rel Chr, : σιτον 18 Thl-sif: σίτεια 15. 40. 100: txt ABCDER. 

rec ev aryurtw (corrn, as more usual: Meyer thinks εἰς ary. to have been a 
gloss to εξαπεστειλεν, and then to have found its way into the tat to the exclusion of 
the original ev avy., but this is far-fetched), with DHP Chr ΤῊ] : txt ABCER 40. 
εξαπεστειλαν XR}. 

18. for ev, em: D 18. εγνωρισθηὴ AB: εγνωσθὴ 25: agnitus est, E-lat: recognitus 
est D-lat: cognitus est vulg: txt CDEH[P ® rel 36 Chr,. om adeAgas P. 
ἐγενήθη D. om Tw (bef dapaw) X. rec ins tov bet wang (added for clearness), 
with DHP rel Chr: om BC.—for wwo., αὐτου AEN 40 vulg arm. 

14. ree tov mat. av. bef τακωβ, with HP rel syrr Chr, : om ιακωβ 15-8. 471.163 wth : 
txt ABCDERN a ἢ m vulg coptt arm. rec aft συγγ. ins autov ( for explicitness), 
with DE rel [vulg-ed tol Syr coptt ath]: om ABCHPR Ὁ f g m ο 86 am demid fuld 


that covenant was δώσω σοι kK. τῷ σπέρματί 
σου μετά σε THY γῆν ἣν παροικεῖς, πᾶσαν 
τὴν γῆν Χαναὰν εἰς κατάσχεσιν αἰώνιον" 
καὶ ἔσομαι αὐτοῖς εἰς θεόν, id. ver. 8. 

οὕτως, thus, ‘in this new covenant state ;’ 
—or, ‘in fulfilment of the promise of seed 
implied in the above words.’ In this word 
οὕτως lies hid the germ of the subsequent 
teaching of the Holy Spirit by St. Paul, Gal. 
iii. 9.1 Here we have the first hint 


of the rebellious spirit in Israel, which the 
progress of the history brings out. 

10.| Observe (Mey.) the simple coupling 
of the clauses by καί, as characteristic οἱ 
this speech. χάριν x. σοφ. No 
Hendiadys: favour, so that he was ac- 
ceptable to Pharaoh (see reff.): and wis- 
dom,so that Ph.consulted him and followed 
his suggestion, especially in the important 
case recorded Gen. xli. 38. κατ- 


9—16. 


4 ἐν τ ψυχαῖς ἑβδομηκονταπέντε. 


᾽ ” \ t= ΄ » \ \ ΄ u / 
ELS Αὐγυπτον, Kat ᾿ ἐτελευτησεν αὑτὸς καὶ οἱ πατερες 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. Ol 


- " ,ὔ 5 \ 
15 καὶ ὃ κατέβη ᾿Ιακὼβ a — ine xix. 
31. Jude 14, 
DEtT. x; 22. 
ri eh; i. 41 


a \ / ες ‘ \ ff. 
υ ἡμῶν, 16 καὶ " μετετέθησαν εἰς Συχὲμ καὶ “ ἐτέθησαν ἐν s~ ch. wii 


A ΄ τς δ 5 / > \ A / 
τῷ “μνήματι Yw “ὠνήσατο Αβραὰμ ἃ τιμῆς ὃ ἀργυρίου 


v Gal. i.6. Heb. vii. 12. xi. 5 bis. 
42 al. 3 Kings xiii. 31. 
xiv. 11. y attr., ch. i. 1 reff. 
ii. 6. xx. 33, Exod. xxi. 32. 


Jude 4 only. 


[3.1] arm Chr. 


Sir. xliv. 16. Deut. xxvii, 17. 
x Luke viii. 27 , Mk. xxiii. 53. xxiv.1. ch. ii. 29. 
z here only +. 


22 al. Gen, 
xii. 10. 

t ch. ii. 29 refP. 

u ch. v. 30 reff. 

w — John xix. 41, 

Rev. xi. only. Exod. 

a= ch. iv. 34 reff. b ch, 


εβδ. bef ψυχ. (see Lxx) DH a (ce) fhm: ό και ἐ D [(e)]: Ὁ syr 


Chr seem to join ev ε. π᾿ Ψ. with κατέβη tolly (see Lxx Deut x. 22). 
15. rec κατεβη δε, with BH rel coptt [arm] Chr,: κατεβη (alone) Ὁ 40. 73. 96 syr: 
txt ACEPR 36 vulg Syr eth. (From similarity of kat κατ... καὶ dropped out as in 1), 


and then δὲ was supplied.) 
perhaps it was a gloss from the marg. 


Syr: te D. 
16. μετηχθησαν D. 


éotnoev | viz. Pharaoh: a change of sub- 
ject: see reff Gen. 14. ἐν ψυχαῖς 
ἑβδομηκονταπέντε) In the Hebrew text, 
Gen, ἐπῆν 27; Hxod. 1.5; Deut x. 22, 
seventy souls are reckoned, viz. sixty-six 
born of Jacob, Jacob himself, Joseph, and 
his two sons born in Egvpt. So also 
Josephus, Antt. 11.7.4; vi. 5,6. But the 
LXX, whom Stephen follows, insert in 
Gen. xlvi. 20 an account of the children and 
grandchildren of Manasseh and Ephraim, 
five in number: and in ver. 27 read viol δὲ 
Ἰωσὴφ of γενόμενοι αὐτῷ ἐν γῇ Αἰγ., ψυχαὶ 
ἐννέα. πᾶσαι ψυχαὶ οἴκου ᾿Ιακὼβ αἱ eiseA- 
θοῦσαι μετὰ ᾿Ιακὼβ (om μετὰ ᾿Ιακώβ, and 
ψυχαί below, A, but obviously without any 
effect on the general statement) εἰς Αἴγυπ- 
Tov, ψυχαὶ ἑβδομηκονταπέιτε :—reckon- 
ing, as it appears, curiously enough, among 
the sons of Joseph, Joseph himself, aud his 
wife Asenath; for these are required to 
make up the nine, according to their ver. 
20. And similarly in Exod. i. 5, and in 
Deut. x. 22 A. (Wordsw., who is careful 
to note that A omits μετὰ Ιακώβ in Gen. 
xlvi. 27, omits the fact that it reads πέντε 
here, by stating “seventy” as the LXX 
testimony.) With regard to the various 
attempts to solve the difficulty (66 - 12 
wives, minus (Joseph and his wife, and Ju- 
dali’s wife who died in Canaan) = 75, Seb. 
Schmid and Wolf:—that Stephen spoke 
of those who were 7nvited,— Moses of those 
who went, Krebs and Loesner :—that πάν- 
τες should be read for πέντε, Beza :—Ac.), 
see above on vv. 6, 7. The remarks of 
Jerome are curious :—he is arguing, on 
Gen. 1. c., that the number really was 
seventy,—and adds, ‘ Quod si e contrario 
nobis id opponitur, quomodo in Actibus 
Apostolorum in concione Stephani dicatur 
ad populum, septuaginta quinque animas 
ingressas esse Agyptum, facilis excusatio 
est. Non enim debuit sanctus Lucas, qui 


συχεν (150) D-gr. 


om es αἰγυπτον B. (Omitted as superfluous ? or 
Tischendorf (cd 7) excludes it from the txt: 
but the authority is too weak. | He has restored it in edn 8. }) 


aft αὐτὸς ins exe: E 
rec (for ᾧ) ὅ, with HP rel Chr,. 


ipsius (istius ?) historiz scriptor est, in 
gentes Actuuin Apostoloruim volumen emit- 
tens, contrarium aliquid scribere adversus 
eam scripturam, que jam fuerat gentibus 
divulgata.’? Philo, de Migr. Abr. ὃ 36, vol. 
i. pp. 467 f., mentions both numbers (read- 
ing 75 in Gen. and 70 in Deut., see above), 
and gives allegorical reasons for both: 
and really Wordsworth’s solution, that 
Stephen includes those born of Jacob’s line 
in Egypt to shew that they ‘‘ were equally 
children of the promise with those born in 
Canaan,” is hardly better. When we come 
to understand petexadéoato. ,.maicay Thy 
συγγένειαν ἐν ψυχαῖς ἑβδομηκονταπέντε, 
as represented by tncluding, for a purpose, 
those already in Egypt, it seems to me 
that a stigma is cast on St. Stephen far 
more serious than that of mere numeral 
inaccuracy. 16.| μετετέθησαν, viz. 
αὐτὸς καὶ of πατέρες ἡμῶν, not the latter 
only,—as Kuin., Olsh., and Wordsw., to 
evade part of the difficulty of the verse. 

he facts, as reluted in the O. T., were 
these: Jacob, dying in Egypt, was (Gen. 
]. 13) taken into the land of Canaan, and 
buried in the cave of Machpelah, before 
Mamre (on the rest of the verse see below): 
Joseph, dying also in Egypt, was taken in 
a coffin (Gen. 1. 26) at the Exodus (Exod. 
xiii. 19), and finally buried (Josh. xxiv. 32) 
at Shechem. Of the burial of the other 
patriarchs the sacred text says nothing, 
but rather by the specification in Exod. 
xiii. 19, leaves it to be inferred that they 
were buried in Egypt. Josephus, Antt. 11. 
8. 2, relates that they were taken and 
buried in Hebron, and adds, B. J. iv. 9. 7, 
ὧν καὶ τὰ μνημεῖα μέχρι τοῦ νῦν ἐν τῇδε 
τῇ πυλίχνῃ (Hebron) δείκνυται, πάνυ καλῆς 
μαρμάρου καὶ φιλοτίμως εἰργασμένα :—the 
Rabbinical traditions mentioned by Wetst. 
and Lightf. report them to have been 
buried in Sychem: and Jerome (Ep. ad 


12 


Ἀ ~ tA sm \ “~ ; 
c= Ἀεν. τ. 15, παρὰ τῶν υἱῶν ᾿μμωρ τοῦ Συχέμ. 


2 Kings 
say. Bl: 

d — (here only 
2 Macc. i. 31. 

e = Luke xxi. 
28) xxii. Dal. 
Deut. xxxi. 14. 

7 ΞΞ ch. iii. 21 


= Matt. xiv. 
7%. Jer. li. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATOZTOAON. 


VIE. 


17 ἀ καθὼς δὲ 


᾿ © ἤγγιζεν ὁ χρόνος τῆς δ ἐπαγγελίας Ys * ὡμολόγησεν 
ὁ θεὸς τῷ ᾿Αβραώμ, inv—Enoev ὁ λαὸς Kai | ἐπληθύνθη 
5 , > / \ aA 
ἐν Αὐγύπτῳ, 18 Ε ἄχρι οὗ ἱ ἀνέστη βασιλεὺς ™ ἕτερος ὃς 
reff. ’ » \ ΕἸ 7, 

Εἴ igre Οὐκ ἤδει τὸν ᾿Ιωσήφ. 


: 4, 
19 οὗτος " κατασοφισάμενος τὸ 


ογένος ἡμῶν Ῥέκάκωσεν τοὺς 4“ πατέρας ‘TOD " ποιεῖν 


(xliv.) 25. 
ἐδέοντο δὲ .. ὃ δὲ ὡμολόγει, Xen. Anab. vii. 4. 13. ich. νἱ. 7 (reff.). Exon. i. Ἴ. k w. indic., 
ch. xxvii. 33. Rev. xvii. 17. see Heb. iii. 13. 1 = ch. v. 36,37. Exop. i. 8. τῇ = ch. ii. 40 al. 
n here only. Exop.i.10. Judith v. 11]. x. 19 only. o = ch. xviii. 2 reff. p ver. 6 reff. q absol., 
John vi. 58. vii. 22. ch. xiii. 32. xxvi.6. Rom. ix. δ. xi. 28. xv. 8. Heb.i. 1. 2 Pet. iii. 4 only. r=ch, 


iii. 12 reff. s = Matt. iii. 3 ||. v. 36. 


txt ABCDEN ὁ g 1m. 
EP rel: txt ABCDHR® ac h copt Chr). 


Rev. xxi. ὃ. 


aft aBp. ins o πατὴρ nuwy K(sic). 


rec euuop, with 
for του, ev BCR! [copt] sah arm: Tov ev 


AEN3 tol: tov ex syr: et Sychem D-lat: txt D gr H(P) rel vulg eth Chr. (The varr 
arise from this συχεμ having been mistaken for a place, as above.) —Tov χεμ (passing 


from v to v) P. 
17. for καθως, ws A. 


syr-txt Chr. 
19. for ovros, και D gr(om D-lat). 


Eustochium: Epitaph. Paule, 108 (27) 19, 
vol. i., p. 703) relating the pilgrimages of 
Paula to the sacred places, says: “trans- 
ivit Sichem,....atque inde divertens 
vidit duodecim Patriarcharum sepulehra.” 
These traditions probably Stephen follow- 
ed; and, in haste or inadvertence, classed 
Jacob with the rest. ᾧ ὠνήσατο 
᾿Αβραάμ] The burying-place which Abra- 
hain bought was not at Sychem, but (Gen. 
xxiii. 3—20) at Hebron, and was bought 
of Ephron the Hittite. It was Jacob 
who (Gen. xxxili. 19) bought a field where 
he had pitched his tent, near Sychem, of 
the children of Hamor, Shechewm’s father: 
and no mention is made of its being for a 
burying-place. The two incidents are cer- 
tainly here confused : aud no ingenuity of 
the Commentators ‘has ever devised an es- 
cape from the inference. The mention of 
a few such attempts may suffice. — (1) The 
omission of "ABpadu (Beza, Valck., Kuin., 
Schott., al.) against all manuscript evi- 
dence (not excepting E, the reading of 
which, variously stated by Meyer and 
Tischendorf, has been ascertained by in- 
spection),—and against the construction 
also; for after μετετέθησαν, ᾿Ιακώβ could 
hardly be the subject to ὠνήσατο :---(2) ren- 
dering, against all grammar, while omitting 
᾿Αβραάμ, ὠνήσατο ‘emptuim erat’ (Kuin.) : 
— (3) construing ᾿Αβραάμ, Abrahamides, 
i. e. Jacob (Surenhus. al.) :—(4) that of 
Wordsworth, made up of—omitting Jacob 
from the grammatical construction - (see 
above) ;—proving, from Jerome and Bede 
(without any allusion to the passage of 
Josephus above cited!), that the other 


[for xpov., xatpos A. | 


rec ὠμοσεν, With HP p rel 


rec aft matepus ins nuwy, with ACEHP rel 


patriarchs were buried at Shechem :—a 
priori reasons why Stephen should have 
chosen to bring torward Shechem and not 
Hebron ; reasons (see Wordsw.’s note) not 
very creditable, if they existed : ἄς, &e. 

The fact of the mistake occurring where it 
does, will be far more instructive to the 
Christian student than the most ingenious 
solution of the difficulty could be, if it 
teaches him fearlessly and honestly to re- 
cognize the phenomena presented by the 
text of Scripture, instead of wresting them 
to suit a preconceived theory. I entirely 
ugree with Wordsworth, that “there is 
nothing in these difficulties which invali- 
dates the claims of St. Stephen to Inspira- 
tion,’ any more than those expressions 
in Scripture “invalidate its inspiration,” 
which imply that the sun revolves round 
the earth. But as Wordsw. lives in days 
when men are no longer burnt for asserting 
that the earth moves, he surely might 
abstain from railing in such unmeasured 
terms (see his Acts, p. 35, col. i.) at those 
who in contending for common fairness 
and honesty find it necessary to carry some- 
what further the same canon of reasonable 
interpretation. Humble searchers after 
divine truth will not be terrified by being 
charged with “assumption and conceit,” or 
being told that their exegesis can produce 
no result but “degeneracy, degradation, 
disbelief, and demoralization.” But they 
will deeply feel it to be their duty, to 
caution the student against all crooked and 
disingenuous ways of handling the word of 
God. “Non tali auxilio, nec defensoribus 
istis.” 17.) καθώς, not ‘when’ (as 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON. 10 


» ᾿ a » Ν A - A ἃ 
τὰ ᾿ βρέφη " ἔκθετα αὐτῶν ‘eis τὸ μὴ " ζωογονεῖσθαι. t Lureis, 
o) x 2 x .% x a as ; ΜᾺ we ᾿ Νὶ Silt ig 
20x gy *@ *xaip@ ἐγεννήθη Μωυσῆς καὶ nv Y ἀστεῖος Prim. Ηϊ, 16. 
Ζ A θ a ἃ ΔΊ 7 rn A > a “, A 1 Pet. ii. 2 
τῷ θεῷ. ὃς *aveTpadn μῆνας τρεῖς ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ τοῦ ont. — 
s ’ ᾿ 9 , 9 ἣΨ > ͵ . = 1 Macc. i. 61. 
2] ὃ θ δὲ c d *: ΣΝ θ “ Ps. viii. 3 Aq. 
TAT pos. ἐκτεθέντος δὲ © αὐτοῦ ἃ avetNaTo αὐτὸν ἡ θυγά- , Ps. λιν 8 A 
\ \ a? θ , ὍΣ 3a ε a e.? 7 Ezek. xlii. 3 
τὴρ Φαραὼ καὶ " ἀνεθρέψατο “ αὐτὸν ἑαυτῇ “ εἰς υἱόν. Aiiusin 
Hexap. 
ie ΄ fol I > ΄ 
2 καὶ ᾿ ἐπαιδεύθη Μωυσῆς ἐν πάσῃ σοφίᾳ Αὐγυπτίων, ἣν ιἐκτιθέναι, 
\ Ν Ν ? , \ a oC ΄ Vee r 
δὲ δ δυνατὸς ἐν λόγοις καὶ ἔργοις αὐτοῦ. 73 ὡς δὲ " ἐπλη- Bey 
A a ke \ , νι Hist. ii. 7. 
ροῦτο αὐτῷ 'ἱ τεσσερακονταετὴς χρόνος, * ἀνέβη ἐπὶ τὴν Philo, Vit 
᾿ οὐδ. ἢ 3, 
vol. ii. p. 88. ἔκθεσις, Wisd. xi. 14.) v ch. iii. 19. Rom. i. 11, 20 al. w Luke 


xvii. 33. 1 Tim. vi. 13 only. Exod. i. 17, 18, 22 al. 

ἐν τῷ K. TOUT., Mark x. 30. 
James ii. 5. 
2 Cor; i. 12; 

b -- here only $. Wisd. xviii. 5. (ch. xi. 4 reff.) see ver. 19 reff. 
= here only. 
f ch. xxii. 3. 

h — Luke xxi. 24. ver. 30. ch. ix. 23. xxiv. 27. 
k w. ἐπί, 1 Cor. ii. 9 only. Isa. lxv. 16. Jer. iii. 16. w. ἐν, Luke xxiv. 38 only. 


1. ἐν ἐκείν. τ. K., Matt. xi. 25. 
ii. 2. z dat., Jonah iii. 3. 
x. 9. xxiii. 6. xxx. 8 (Heb.). 
vii. 4 BR F(not A) ἄς. only. 
ec constr., John viii, 30. xii. 37. 
5. ch. xiii. 22. Isa. xlix, 6. 
g ch. xviii. 24 reff. 
xiii. 18 only. 


2 Cor. x. 4. 
Luke i. 15. 


36 am-corr! vss Chr,: om BDX am! fuld. 


rel 36 Chr: ra Bpe¢n avtwy εκθετα m p: txt ABCR. 


x here only. ἐν αὖτ. τ. K., Luke xiii. 

y Heb. xi. 23 only. Exon. 

(1 Cor. ix. 2.) Winer, edn. 6, ὁ 31. 4 a. see Gen. 
a here bis, ch. xxii. 3 only t+. Wisd. 


Exop. ii. 10. see ch. νυ. 33 reff. e = ver. 


2 Tim. ii. 25 (1 Cor. xi. 32 reff.). Prov, xxix. 17. 
Gen. xxv. 24. ich. 


rec exOeta bef ra βρεφη, with DEHP 
aft ζωογον. ins Ta appeva EB. 


20. rec aft matpos ins αὐτου, with DE g mo 13 Thl: om ABCHP rel Chr.—N? has 
pov, but marked for erasure by the same hand. 


21. rec εκτεθεντα Se avtov, with EHP rel: txt ABCD p 36. 


(ανειλατο, 50 


ABCDE Εἰ p [-Aero H(Treg, expr) ].)—add εἰς (παρα D) τὸν ποταμὸν DE syr-w-ast. 


om αὐτον (aft ανειλατο) ac eh Κ o Chr, ΤῺ]. 


om καὶ D!-gr(ins D? or 4). 


om αὑτὸν (aft ave@p.) D}(and lat) ο, ins syr-w-ob; for eavrn, αὐτὴ D! 180: txt D%. 


om εἰς B. 


22. rec om Ist ev, with Β D-corr HP rel 36 vulg Orig-ms, [Eus, Did,] Chr, : 


ins 


ACER vulg-ms coptt Orig, Ps-Just, Bas, Thdrt,.—macav τὴν σοφιαν D! | Clem,(om 


τὴν) Chr, |. 
[arm] Chr,. 


for δε, te D E-gr | [vulg Syr sah!: txt ABCHPR rel 36 E-lat copt 
rec ins ev bef epy., with E-gr P g] m 13 vulg: 


om A B(sic: see 


table) CDHN a Ὁ fh o p 36 E-lat Chr,.—epyors k. ev λόγοις C.—ev Aoyw Κ. ev epyw k. 
rec om αὐτου (as unnecessary), with HP rel syr Ps-Just Chr,: ins ΒΟ ΕΝ 


p 36 vulg Syr coptt [eth arm}. 
23. μ' erns (sic) bef avtw D, 


E. V., Beza, Kuin.), but as, ‘in proportion 
as.’ See ref. 19. τοῦ ποιεῖν] 80 that 
they exposed, see ref. Meyer maintains 
that the inf. of the purpose is not to be 
departed from,—‘ in order that they might 
expose :’ but I do not see that this mean- 
ing would express the fact. The purpose 
is afterwards expressed, εἰς τὸ k.7.A. 

20. aor. τῷ θεῷ] add to reff. (Meyer), 
Hesiod, Op. 825, ἀναίτιος ἀθανάτοισιν, --- 
and Msth. Agam. 352, θεοῖς ἀναμπλάκητος. 
The expression here seems borrowed from 
tradition: Josephus calls the infant Moses 
maida μορφῇ θεῖον. Philo de vita Mos. 
ἃ 3, vol. il. p. 83, says, γεννηθεὶς οὖν 6 παῖς 
εὐθὺς ὄψιν ἐνέφῃνεν ἀστειοτέραν ἢ κατ᾽ 
ἰδιώτην. 22.) That Moses was in- 
structed in the wisdom of the Egyptians, is 
not found in the O. T., but derived from 
tradition, and following as a matter of 
course from his adopted station as the son 
of Pharaoh’s daughter. This wisdom of the 
Egyptians, celebrated by so many ancient 
writers (see Wetst. ad loc.), consisted mainly 
in natural philosophy, medicine, and ma- 
thematics, and its. teachers were the 


for em, εἰς H, 


priests. Philo de vita Mos. § 5, p. 84, enters 
into minute detail: ἀριθμοὺς μὲν οὖν κ. 
γεωμετρίαν, K. τήν τε ῥυθμικὴν K. ἅρμονι- 
κὴν κ. μετρικὴν θεωρίαν, K. μουσικὴν τὴν 
σύμπασαν, διά τε χρήσεως ὀργάνων, κ. 
λόγων τῶν ἐν Ταῖς τέχναις, κ. διεξόδοις 
τοπικωτέραις, Αἰγυπτίων οἱ λόγιοι παρ- 
ἔδοσαν. κ. προξέτι τὴν διὰ συμβόλων 
φιλοσοφίαν, ἣν ἐν τοῖς λεγομένοις ἱεροῖς 
γράμμασιν ἐπιδείκνυνται, κ. διὰ τῆς τῶν 
ὥων ἀποδοχῆς, ἃ καὶ θεῶν τιμαῖς γεραί- 
povot. τὴν δὲ ἄλλην ἐγκύκλιον παιδείαν 
Ἕλληνες ἐδίδασκον" οἱ δ᾽ ἐκ τῶν πλῆησιο- 
χώρων, τά τε ᾿Ασσυρίων γράμματα, κ. τὴν 
τῶν οὐρανίων Χαλδαϊκὴν ἐπιστήμην. 
δυνατὸς ἐν λόγοις) So Josephus calls 
Moses πλήθεσιν ὁμιλεῖν πιθανώτατος, but 
late in his course, during the journey 
through the wilderness ;—when the di- 
vine Spirit, as the book of Deuteronomy 
ubundantly testities, had turned his “ slow- 
ness of speech’ into the most fervid elo- 
quence. That he was so thus early, durin 
his Egyptian course, was probably reported 
by tradition, but hardly seems to agree 
with Exod. iv. LO—16. - 23, τεσσερα- 


74 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. VII. 


1= ch. xv. 36. 
Matt. xxv. 36, 
43. James i. 27. 
Judg. xv. 1. 

m ch. x. 36 reff. 
Exop. ii. 11. 

n 1 Cor. vi. 7. 

2 Cor. vii. 12. 
Isa. i. 17. 

o here only. 

Isa. lix. 16. 


» , a 3 4 \ “ 

K καρδίαν αὐτοῦ | ἐπισκέψασθαι τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ τοὺς 

ΠῚ ΤᾺ | / o4. \ ὃ “ ἢ Ἰὸὃ / Oo 3 , 
υἱοὺς ᾿Ισραὴλ. 5} καὶ ἰδών τινα ™ ἀδικούμενον 5 ἠμύνατο 

καὶ P ἐποίησεν Ρ' ἐκδίκησιν τῷ " καταπονουμένῳ " πατάξας 
5 , 4 oF / \ ΄ \ 

τὸν Aiybrriov.A% ἐνόμιξεν δὲ ' συνιέναι τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς 


[αὐτοῦ] ὅτι ὁ θεὸς “Sia χειρὸς αὐτοῦ " δίδωσιν ἡ σωτηρίαν 


p Luke xviii. 9 BS e \ 3 Ps 26 ΝΣ = , κ᾿ τὸς 
7, Β only. οὶ t 26 x 
i.Sonly. αὐτοῖς" οἱ δὲ οὐ ' συνῆκαν. τῇ τε * ἐπιούσῃ ἡμέρᾳ Σ ὠφθη 
x11, 19 > ca , \ , > \ > eee 
‘nt αὐτοῖς * μαχομένοις, καὶ ἃ συνήλασεν αὐτοὺς εἰς εἰρήνην 
r 2 Pet. ii.7 τ γ δ ‘ > - ¢ a b 7 , ? a 
only. εὐπὼν Ανδρες ἀδελφοί ἐστε [ὑμεῖς7" " ἵνα τί ἀδικεῖτε 
2 Mace. viii. Σ ἣ ᾿ 
2 5 o7 “ 2 A ͵ > , > reas’ 
‘ib comnl, ἀλλήλους ; 27 ὁ δὲ ἀδικῶν τὸν “ πλησίον ἃ ἀπώσατο αὐτὸν 
vat ΕἾ only. ee , \ r , : 
s=Matt.xxi. εἰπὼν Τίς σὲ “κατέστησεν ἄρχοντα καὶ "δικαστὴν ἐφ᾽ 


31 τ, from 
Zech. xiii. 7. 
Exon, ii. 12. 
tw. OTL, Matt. 
xvi. 12. xvii. 


Qn ζ \ -“ \ , ao? A 
ἡμᾶς ; “8 μὴ ὅ ἀνελεῖν με σὺ θέλεις " Ov τρόπον § ἀνεῖλες 
ἰἐχθὲςὶ τὸν Αἰγύπτιον ; 3 ἔφυγεν δὲ Μωυσῆς δέν τῷ 


τὴ See ἈΠῸ ] Φ ’ ΄ - \ ee m ΄ 3 A M ὃ ΄ - 
0. 4Ὁ8., Matt. (Ὁ. al a ἥ y 
a + 12 oy@ TOUT f K EVYEVETO TTAPOLKOS ἐν 7 aolaph, OU 


uch. xi. 30 reff. w — Lukei.7l. 1 Kings 
xiv. 45. Jos. Antt. ii. 9. 7. x ch. xxiii. 11. xvi. 11 reff. 1 Chron. xx. 1. see Matt. vi. 11 and note. 
Σ ch. ii. 3 reff. z John vi. 52. 2 Tim. ii. 24. Jamesiv.lonly. Exod. xxi. 22. a here onlyt. 2 Macc. 
iv. 26,42. v. 5 only. συνελάσας τὰ θηρία. Xen. Cyr. i. 4. 14. συνελαυνόμενος ἄκων εἰς μάχην, Plut. (655. 
p. 728 (Wetst.). b 1 Cor. x. 29 reff. ec Rom. xiii. 9, 10 reff. Exon. ii. 13. d Rom. 


(from Isa. vi. 9, 10). v pres., ch. xvi. 38 reff. 


xi. 1, 2 reff. e ver. 10 reff. Exon. ii. 14. f ver. 35. Luke xii. 11 only. Exod. 1.c. g—ch. 
v. 33 reff. h ch. i. ]l-reff. i Johniv. 52. Heb. xiii. 8only. 4 Kiags ix. 26. k — Matt. 
vi.7. John xvi. 30. 1 Pet. ii. 12. 1 =: Luke i. 29: ch. v. 5 al: m ver. 6 reff. Exon. ii. 22. 


ins tov bef επισκ. Ἐ 180. em 2nd tous B. 

24. aft adic. ins ex Tov γενους avtov DE Syr syr-w-ast eth.—om avr. D-gr. 
aft avy. add (from Exod ii. 12, LXX) καὶ ἐκρυψεν αὑτὸν ev TH ἀμμω D eth. 

25. ενομιζον D-gr 13. om Ist αὐτου KCN vulg(am demid, not tol): ins ADEHP 
rel. rec aut. bef σωτ., with EHP rel syrr sah [(zth) arm] Chr: txt ABCDN 
m p vulg copt. for οἱ, ov X'(but corrd). om ov D!-gr(ins D-corr!). 

26. elz (for re) δε, with EP vulg coptt [arm]: txt ABCD?HN rel 36 syrr eth Chr, 
ΤῊ] (e.—for τη τε, tote Ὁ], aft μαχ. (-vos D'-gr: txt D*) ins καὶ εἰδὲεν avtous 
αδικουντας [9)}. συνηλλασσεν ΒΟΙΝ ὁ sah eth, reconciliabit vulg, reconciliavit 
D-lat: συνηλλασεν H p: txt AEP rel [copt eth arm, appy] Chr. (Tke varr appear 
to be occasioned by explanations of the origl συνηλασεικ) αυτοις (ΠΗ. om 
vuets (as unnecessary) ABCEN p vulg sah arm Chr, : ins HP rel 36 (syr copt) [eth].— 


τι ποιειτε avdpes αδελφοι iva τι αδικειται ers(om εἰς D2) aAAnAous Ὁ. 


27. εἰπας VD. 
ABCHPR® in? p 13: txt DE rel Chr. 
28. (€x9es, so BICDR.) 


for και, ἡ E [demid copt }. 


nuwv (from LXX, Exod ii. 14) 


29. ουτως και epuyadevoey Mavons D1(txt D‘): εφυγαδευσεν δε Μωυσην E. 


κονταετὴς xp. | μέγας γενόμενος M., Exod. 
ii. 1), LXX. The exact age was traditional, 
see Lightf. ἀνέβη] No nominative 
(as διαλογισμός. Kuin.) must be supplied : 
it is impersonal; see reff. 24.) τὸν 
Αἰγύπτιον, from the history being so uni- 
versally known, that the agent in the ἀδικία 
would be readily supplied: see Winer, edn. 
6, § 67. 1, d. 25. | The present, δίδω 
σιν, sets forth the work of liberation as 
already begun by the act just related, 
see reff. Here we have again the 
resistance to the Holy Spirit hinted: see 
ver. 51, and note on ver. 2. 26. | 
αὐτοῖς, to them, two of them, taken as 
representing his brethren the children of 
Israel. συνήλασεν, not imperf., ‘he 
endeavoured to unite.:’ the aorist will not 
bear this sense: nor is it needed :—the 


act, on Moses’ part, was complete ;—not 
‘he would have set them at one’ (E. V.), 
but, he set them at one. If the explana- 
tory reading συνήλλασσεν be taken, we 
then have the imperfect foree—* he was 
reconciling,” or “ attempted to reconvile,” 
then. ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί should be 
tuken together, as in Gen. xiii. 8, ἄνθρωποι 
ἀδελφοί ἐσμεν ἡμεῖς. See also ch. ii. 14 
(De W.). 21.) The further progress 
of resistance to the Spirit on the part of 
Israel. 29. Μαδιάμ] So LXX, Exod. 
ii. 15, for yo. Winer (Realw, ‘Midian’) 
supposes this Madian to have been a nomad 
detachinent of the more settled Midianites, 
—which at that time was encamped in the 
neighbourhood of Sinai and Horeb. For 
Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, is not found 
there, in Exod, xviii. 1 ff, but comes to 


ABCDE 

HPxNab 

efghk 

lmop 
13 


94.-- 84. 


" g Ca Ν / 
ἐγέννησεν υἱοὺς δύο. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑἸΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


\ ΄ lal , 
30 καὶ "πληρωθέντων ἐτῶν τεσσερά- « - 


~ 
ct 


ver. 23. 
o ver. 26, 
Exon. iii. 2. 


s 


Oo v θ 2 “ b] A > pat lal Ὑ “ » 
κοντα 5 ὠφθη αὐτῷ ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τοῦ ὄρους Σινᾶ ἄγγελος πον ii. 


ἐν PI φλογὶ ἢ πυρὸς * βάτου. 
μαΐζεν τὸ 


‘ ΄ \ a 18, xix. 12. 
δ] ὁ δὲ Μωυσῆς ἰδὼν 5 ἐθαύ- Ps. sail 
“ , Ἢ τὰ = τ “3 
ὅραμα" προςερχομενου δὲ αὐτοῦ α κατανοῆσαι Ἔος 


viii. 10. 


ν / Ἂ 7 39 ᾽ \ ς΄ θ \ “ , 
ἐγένετο φωνὴ κυρίου “3 Kyo ὁ θεὸς τῶν πατέρων gr svore (>). 


σου, ὁ θεὸς ᾿Αβραὰμ καὶ ᾿Ισαὰκ καὶ ᾿Ιακώβ. 

de γενόμενος Μωυσῆς οὐκ ἐτόλμα " κατανοῆσαι. 
δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ κύριος * Λῦσον τὸ 5) ὑπόδημα τῶν ποδῶν σου" 
ὁ γὰρ τόπος ἐφ᾽ ᾧ ἕστηκας γῆ ἁγία ἐστίν. 


5 constr., Luke vii. 9. Jude 16. Job χχχὶϊ. 22. 
exc. Matt. xvii. 9. Gen. xlvi. 2. 
v — John x. 35., ch. x. 13. xiii. 32. 
x. 11 Theod. 
iii. 11. Luke xv. 22. 
Gen. xxii. 17. 


δνυω D}(txt DS). 


30. aft καὶ ins μετα ταυτα D. 


Gen. xv. 1, 4. 


Gen. xiv. 23. 


x — Luke iii. 16 | Mk. J. ch. xiii. 25. 


Luke xvi. 24 


w Ὁ" 
EVT POLO only. Judg. 
ys s ili. 22. 
Oe r Luke vi. 44 
ELTTEV | Mk. xx. 37. 
ver. 30 only. 
Exop. iii. 
34. 2 > . &c. Deut. 
XxXxiii. 16. 
» LOWV Job xxxi. 40 
only. 
Xen. Cyr. iii. 1. 38. tch. ix. 10 418. Actsonly, 
Ὁ Luke xii. 24, 27. ch. xi.6. Heb.iii. 1. Gen. xlii. 9. 


w ch, xvi. 29. Heb. xii. 21 only. Ps. xvii. 7. Dan. 
Exon. iii. 5. as above (x). Matt. 


z here only. Exop. iii. 7 al. fr. constr., Heb. vi. 14, from 


πλησθεντων avtTw ετὴ D!(txt D2(and lat)). 


rec aft ayyeAos ins κυριου (natural addn, and here occasioned by Exod iii. 2, LXX), 


with DEHP rel Syr [th arm]: om ABCX p vulg coptt. 
txt BDHPX p rel syr coptt [wth arm] Chr ΤῊ] 


ACE 36 vulg Syr: 


πυρι φλογος (see note) 


31. rec εθαυμασε (corrn to historical tense), with ABC rel vulg [syrr coptt zth 


arm] Chr: txt DEHPN Ὁ f g 1m p 36 Aug, 
0 Κυριος ειἰπεν auTw λεγων D Syr eth. 

rec aft κυρ. ins προς avtor, with CEHP rel vulg-| clein } 

om ABR p am demid syr copt arm [ Aug, ]. 

eyw εἰμι θ. E vulg not am fuld) D-lat. 

rec ins ὁ θεὸς bef to. and bef sax., with (D)EHP rel [vulg(with am 

(om o, twice, D:) om ABCN p [fuld] syrr [sah] arm. 


mposep. av. (κ)αι κατ. 1)}. 
εκ Tou ουρανου λεγουσα K. 
sah Chr : 

32. om o (bef 1st θεο5) CH': 
2nd @.) C. 
demid tol) copt] eth Chr Thi: 


om To οραμα A. και 
for κυρ.» 


om oa (bef 


(The insertion has prob been to suit Lxx, which D does still more closely by omg 


the artt.) pwvons bef yevouevos &. 

33. om o (bef κυρ.) A. 
προς avtov 1). λυσαι D4(?) 142. 
k.—oov bef 7. 1. B. 
txt ABCD‘X p.—for εφ w, ov D!: 


visit Moses from a distance. See also 
Numb. x. 29 ff. υἱοὺς δύο! Exod. ii. 
22; iv. 20; xviii. 3. 80. ἐτ. Teac. | 
This follows from the tradition of ver. 23, 
combined with Exod. vil. 7, ‘Moses in 
palatio Pharaonis degit xL annos, in Mi- 
diane XL annos, et ministravit Israel xb 
annos.’ Bereshith Rabba, f. 115. 3. (Mey.) 

Σινὰ] Horeb, Exod. iii. 1. But 
both were points of the same mountain 
range,and the names were convertibly used. 
In Exod., Levit., and Numb., the law is said 
to have been given from Stzaz; in Deut. 
from Horeb. ‘The desert of Mount Sina’ 
is the desert in which Mt. S. is situated. 
So ‘the Peak of Derbyshire,’ originally no 
doubt some single hill, has come to mean 
the whole district in which that hill is 
situated. ἄγγελος] Here, as con- 
tinually in the O. T., the angel bears the 
authority and presence of God Himself: 
which angel, since God giveth not his 
glory to another, must have been the great 
Angel of the covenant, the 135 7D of Isa. 
Ixiii. 9, ‘the Angel of His Presence.’-—the 


for kup., θεος Ἐς 
aft vmod. ins σου ex ΟἹ [syrr eth]: 
rec for ep, ev (corrn to suit LXX), with EHP rel 36 Chr, : 
add ov ((συν C') lect-13 arm. 


eToAunoev NX. 
for 1st clause, καὶ eyeveto φωνὴ 


ex C2E 


Son oF Gop. See below on eis διαταγὰς 
ἀγγέλων, ver. 53. - Stier remarks, that 
this second appearance of God, to Moses (see 
ver. 2), introduces the /ega/ dispensation, as 
the first, to Abraham, the patriarchal. 

The readings of the LXX, as well as of our 
text, vary between πυρὶ φλογός (B) and 
φλογὶ πυρός (A). The- Heb. is wana. 
The construction is, in the fiery flame (or, 
the flaming fire) of a bush. 32. | 
The order of Exod. iii. 6, is here somewhat 
varied. The command to put off the shoe 
was given on the approach of Moses, and 
before these words were spoken. οὐκ 
ἐτόλμ. καταν. -Ξ εὐλαβεῖτο κατεμβλέψαι, 
LXX. 33.] See Josh. v. 15. Putting 
off the sandals was a mark of reverence. 
The priests performed all their ministra- 
tions barefooted. The Arabs to this day 
continue the practice: they always enter 
their mosques barefooted. Among the 
Pythagoreans it was a maxim, ἀνυπόδητος 
Ove x. mposkivet, Iamblich. vita Pythag 
105 (Mey.). So Juvenal, Sat. vi. 158, 
‘Observant ubi festa mero pede sabbata 


16 


ἃ here onlr. 


TIPAZEIS ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


Vil. 


Exod. Le. τὸ bs " - ᾿ , 
Teurd i τοῦ ἢ στεναγμοῦ αὐτῶν ἤκουσα, και “ κατέβην ἃ ἐξελέσθαι 
viii. 26 ΄ κ ~ “ ’ ν᾽ 

Ὁ Rom avrous: καὶ νῦν “ δεῦρο ἀποστείλω σε εἰς Αἴγυπτον. 
1. 96. o< a ‘ aA ᾽ , , . 
᾿Ξ ὅση αἰ 5. 39 τοῦτον τὸν Μωυσῆν ὃν ‘npvycavto εἰποντες Tis σὲ 
᾿.-. μας cot. ow ΄ x ΄ - e ἈΝ x 
ier Wnts κατέστησεν ἄρχοντα Kat ὃ δικαστήν ; τοῦτον ὁ θεὸς καὶ 
1. xxi. 9. x (ἃ ᾿ ΄ Ἶ \ ‘ ; 
Gen. παῖε: ἄρχοντα καὶ * λυτρωτὴν ἀπέσταλκεν * σὺν γειρὶ ἀγγέλου 
Σ - Matt. x. he 

= -ε- nr , ΕΣ 9 ~ , 26 > ΕῚ ΄ 
hu top 1 ὀφθέντος αὐτῷ ἐν τῇ ™ βάτῳ. 50 οὗτος " ἐξήγαγεν 
αἱ ‘ ΄ ΄ \ - ΠῚ ὅν ΚΝ Ἀ 
x ver. 10 reff αὐτοὺς 5 ποιήσας Ῥ τέρατα Kat σημεῖα ev yn ΔΑιγύπτῳ καὶ 
h ver. 27 reff. 
i her πῖτ. > > ΄“- / x ? = 3 , » ΄ 

τε σαῖς. ἐμ ἃ ἐρυθρᾷ θαλάσσῃ καὶ ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ἔτη τεσσεράκοντα. 
2 Ps. xvill. a> ΄ e a € ¥ - fia > x 
Liaise 2 οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ Μωυσῆς ὁ εἴπας τοῖς υἱοῖς ᾿Ισραὴλ 


ἢ , 7 ‘4 ς \ a 7 ~ 
kew,=100r. Προφήτην ὑμῖν " ἀναστήσει ὁ θεὸς ἐκ τῶν ἀδελφῶν ὑμῶν 


ii. 3 reff. m ver. 30 reff. n absol., Mark xv. 20. ch. v. 19. o = ch. ti. 22. John 
xii. 37 al. p in N. T. alw. το. onu., ch. ii. 19, 22,43 al5. Matt. xxiv.24) Mk. John iv. 18. Rom. 
χτ. 19. 2Cor. xii. 12. 2 Thess. ii.9. Heb. ἴϊ. 4 only. Exop. xi. 10. q Heb. xi. 39 only. Exod. x. 19. 


r — Matt. xxii. 24. ch. iii. 22, from Devr. xviii. 15, 18. 


34, και ἰδων yap Ὁ}. 
ακηκοα Ὦ 9. νυνι C?. 


om μου θ᾽} and lat }‘ins D>). 


for avrwy, αὐτου BD [Syr}. 
rec αποστελω, with HP rel (here, though 


αποστειλω is accordg to LXX, the corrn to -eXw was so very obvious, that I have re- 
tained the more unusual form, esp as the authorities in its favour are so strong): 
αποστελλῶ a: txt ABCDEN c p Chr. 

35. aft δικαστ. ins ep ἡμων CDR p 36; ed nuas Ek o Chr Thi-fin: so, tol Syr syr-w- 
ast coptt eth arm (corrn to suit LXX and ver 27): om ABHP rel vulg Thl-sif. 
ree om 2nd και, with ACHP rel vulg [Syr coptt arm] Chr: ins BDE p syr: it is 
supplied by δὲ! or X-corr!. apxnyov ἃ ἃ h Chr,. for Autpwtny, δικαστην Ni: 
λυτρωτην δικαστὴν RS. rec απεστειλεν. with CHP rel Chr: txt ABDEN € p. 
ree (for συν) ev, with HPN rel 36 D-lat [Syr copt eth arm] Chr [?]: per manum vss: 
txt ABC D[-gr! E ¢ p 13 vulg syr sah Chr, (ev has appy arisen from a confusion witt 


the last syll of απεσταλκεν. 


I cannot see the force of Meyer's reasoning, that συν 


is a corrn setting forth more strikingly the superhuman powers of Moses). 


36. ins o bef ποιησας D! -gr]. 
EHPR® Chr,. 
txt ABCEHPN ἢ k 1m 0 p 36 sah Chr,. 

37. om Ist ο DH a b’ cefho/[Chr,]. 
with EHP rel 36 Cur: txt ABCDN p. 
[Syr copt arm Chr, ] : 


for yn, τη BC m D-lat sah: om Ὁ}: txt A D-gr 
ree avyuztov, with D rel [vulg E’-lat syrr copt eth arm] Thl-fin: 


rec εἰπὼν (corrn to more usual form), 
rec ins xupios bef o Geos, with CEHP rel 


om ABDX p vulg sah 2th: for θεος, κυριος syr [ Chr, 1. 


rec aft Geos ins ὑμων, with [P] Ὁ m 13: ἡμων EH rel Thi: om ABDN® p vulg syrr 


coptt 2th [arm]. om vuwy NR. 
reges.’ On the sanctity of the place, 
Chrys. remarks,—ovdauou ναός, Kk. ὃ τόπος 
ἅγιος τῇ ἐπιφανείᾳ κ. ἐνεργείᾳ τοῦ χριστοῦ. 
84.} ἰδὼν εἶδον, LXX. Emphatic, 
to express the Tx? πὶ of the Heb., as 
often elsewhere. The instances commonly 
cited from the classics, of the phrase φεύ- 
yov ἐκφεύγειν, Herod. v. 95; Aristoph. 
Acharn. 177; Nub. 168; Eur. Phen. 1231, 
&c., do not apply : for, as Porson observes, 
‘in his locis simplici verbo conatus, compo- 
sito effectus indicatur.’ ἀποστείλω᾽ 
aorist subjunctive, as LXX, Exod. iii. 10. 
See Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 41. a. 4. a. 35.) 
The second τοῦτον is repeated emphati- 
cally. So viros again, vv. 36, 37, 38 [to 
impress on them God’s choice of one 
whom they rejected]. ἠρνήσαντο. 
ver. 27. The rejecter of Moses there is 
regarded as the representative of the 
sation: see pote on αὐτοῖς, ver. 26. In 


this express mention of the rejection of 
Moses by the Jews and his election and 
mission by God, the parallel of Jesus 
Christ is no doubt in Stephen’s mind, and 
the inference intended to be drawn, that 
it does not follow that GoD REJECTS 
those whom THEY REJECTED. The 
difficulty of ἀπέσταλκεν has caused it to 
be altered into the historic tense, az- 
έστειλεν. But the perf. sets forth not 
only the fact of God’s sending Moses then, 
but the endurance of his mission till now 
—him hath God sent: with a closer 
reference than before, to Him whom God 
had now exalted as the true ἄρχοντα x. 
λυτυωτήν. See ch. v. 81. 37.] See 
ch. iii. 22, notes. Our text has probably 
been altered to agree verbally with the 
former citation. 38.] γίνομαι μετά is 
not a Hebraism, as Kuin. : see reff. 

That Moses conversed with both the Anget 


‘ 4 ial ~ a > , 
2 εἶδον τὴν ὁ κάκωσιν Tod λαοῦ μου τοῦ ἐν AtyuTTT@, Kal ABCDE 


HPxab 

efghk 

Ilmop 
13 


35—A41. 


, ? ff ΄ 
δ ὡς ἐμέ. δοὗῦτος ἐστιν oO 


τῷ ὄρει Σινᾶ καὶ τῶν " πατέρων " ἡμῶν, ὃς 
A . lal vad : 
για Υ ζῶντα ὅ δοῦναι ἡμῖν, 55 ᾧ οὐκ ἠθέλησαν 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩ 


, 
᾿ γενόμενος ἐν 
2 2 ἐρήμω *‘ μετὰ τοῦ ἀγγέλου τοῦ λαλοῦντ ὑτῷῶ € 
ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ἵμ v ayy OUVTOS αὐτῷ ἐν 


IN 17 
. 44 
τῇ u εκκλησιᾳ 5 ; τ ΕΞ 

t ch. ,χ. 19. 


χχ. 13. Mark 
0 7 = ΄ xvi. 10. 
¥ ἐδέξατο * λό- « = ch. xix. 35, 
β , 39, 41. see 
a notes. Deut. 
UT 1) KOOL xxxii. 1 


(axxi. 30), 


, ΄ , ΄ - by ν > ΄ ‘ " ΄, 
γενέσθαι οἱ ἡ πατέρες * ἡμῶν, ἀλλα > ἀπώσαντο και © ἐστρά- « ch. ¥. Hick. 


b] a / > “ > 7 
φησαν ἐν Tals καρδίαις αὐτῶν εἰς Αἴγυπτον, 


w = 2 Cor. τί. 


40 εἰπόντες τῷ 


x Rom. iii. 2. 


Heb. τ. 12. 
᾿Ααρὼν ἡ Ποίησον ἡμῖν θεοὺς οἱ “ προπορεύσονται ἡμῶν" ὁ ὕει iv. τὶ 
ly. Num 
ζ only im. 
yap ᾿ Μωυσῆς οὗτος, ὃς 8 ἐξήγαγεν ἡμᾶς ἐκ γῆς Αὐγύπ- a 
> 76 ea) ap tS 5 ae ee 4] eS. 4 Heb. iv. 12. 
TOU, ουκ OLOALMEV TL EVYEVETO auT®@. Kat εμοσχόποι- .- We bo 
5 - ΟῚ 2 ᾽ , τς hf © ἢ a 1.23. see Ps. 
σῶν EV TALS ἡμέραις EKELVALS Καὶ Javnyayov - θυσίαν τω exvilt. 50. , 
z= ver. 5. ch. 
>? , \ > / 3 ΄σ ” A ΄σ --- φῇ. 
Ἰ εἰδώλῳ, καὶ ᾿' εὐφραίνοντο ἐν τοῖς "εργοις τῶν " χειρων ΣΒΣΥΡΥΘΕ 
πὰ ass. 
a2Cor.ii.9. Phil. ii. 8only. Prov. iv. 3. Ὁ ver. 27. Jer. ii. 37. ᾿Ξ Matt. xviii. 
3. 1 Kings x.6. Lam. 1. 20. see ver. 42. d Exop. xxxii. 1. e Lukei. 76 only. Exod. 
xiv. 19. Josh. x. 13. f constr., Rev. ii. 26. iii. 12. g see ver. 36. h Matt. 
viii. 13. 1 Mace. iv. 27. i here only+. Exop. xxxii. 8. j = here only. 3 Kines 
iii. 1d al. k abs., Matt. ix. 13. Heb. viii. 3 al. Gen. xlvi. 1. 11 Cor. x. 19 reff. 
m ch. ii. 36. Luke xii. 19. Rom. xv. 10. 2 Cor. ii. 2. Gal. iv. 27. τ. ἐν, Rev. xviii. 20. 1 Kings ii. 1. 


n Rev. ix. 20 (Heb. i. 10, from Ps. ci. 25; only. 


woe D!. 


quem audistis E-lat}) rel 36 vulg syrr copt , eth arm]: 


Chr, Thl-sif. 
38. om 2nd του D!(ins D§). 
vuw [BI]. 
39. for w, or: D-gr. 
aft ἐστρ ins καὶ NX! (but corrd). 
ins ΑΒΟΝ 36. 40 [coptt Cyr-p] Did-e. 
Iren-int, 
40. εἰπαντες D. 


of the covenant and our fathers, implies 
that he was the mediator between them, 
as indeed ὃς ἐδέξατ. Ady. ¢. more plainly 
declares. ἐκκλησίᾳ probably, the as- 
sembly held (Exod. xix.) for the promul- 
gation of the law at Mt. Sinai, not ‘the 
Church’ generally : but the article does not 
determine this: it would be expressed, 
whichever meaning we take. Wordsw. ob- 
serves on the meaning which the words 
ἢ ἐκκλησία ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ carry for the 
student of Christian prophecy, Rev. xii. 
1—6. λόγια ζῶντα) living, see reff., 
not = ζωοποιοῦντα (Grot., Kuin.), ‘ life- 
giving :’ still less to be understood ‘given 
viva voce’ (Pisce. Alberti). So Soph. (Ed. 
Tyr. 482, τὰ μεσόμφαλα γᾶς ἀπονοσφίζων | 
μαντεῖα" τὰ δ᾽ αἰεὶ | ζῶντα περιποτᾶται. 
39. | Another instance, brought 
home again by the words ot πατέρες 
ἡμῶν, of rejection of God's appointed 
messenger and servant. ἐστράφησαν 
they turned back in their heart to Egypt: 
not, ‘they wished to return to Egypt,’ of 
which in Exod. xxxii. there is no trace (but 
later, in Num. xiv. 4), and which would 
hardly suit “προπορεύσονται ; ; but ‘they 
apostatized i in heart to the Egyptian idola- 
tries.’ The very title by which Aaron 


Ps. exxxiv. 15. 


vuwy NX: ome. 


(adda, so ABCDEHX k ο.) 
rec om ev, with DEHP rel vulg Chr., Thi Iren-int, : 


: txt ABCDE p 36. 40 vulg Syr θέρει farm]. 

aft ovros ins 0 ανθρωπος N. 

γεγονεν (corrn to LXX, Exod xxxii. 1), with DEHP p rel Chr, : 
41. for avnyayov, arnyovto D!(avnyorto D-corr’: 


Isa. xxxvii. 19. 


rec aft eue ins avrov ἀκουσεσθε (from LXX), with CDE (ακονεσθε D[? |, 


om ABHPNafghlmp sah 
for εδεξ.. εξελεξατο B. 
απεστρ. D τη. 


τῇ καρδια HP rel syr copt zth-pl Chr, Thi 

om avtev D. 
o etayaywr E. 
txt ABCR 36. 
txt D-corr). 


proclaims his idol, is, ‘ These be thy gods, 
O Israel, which brought thee up out of 
the land of Egypt,’ Exod. xxxii. 4. See 
also Neh. ix. 18. 40. προπορ.} As 
God had done in the pillar of the cloud 
and fire. The plural is not (as Kuin.) put 
for θεόν, but is used categorically : not per- 
haps without implying also, that the only 
two religions were, the worship of Jehu- 
vah, and that of idols, a multitude. The 
plural is used by Aaron, see above. 
In the οὗτος may be implied, as Meyer 
suggests, ‘who was the strong opponent 
of idolatry.’ 41. ἐμοσχοποίησαν] 
apparently in imitation of Apis, a bull 
worshipped at Memphis as the living sym- 
hol of Osiris. Herod. iii. 28. Diod. Sic. 
j. 21. Strabo, xvii. 805 (Winer, Realw. 
‘Kalb’). The or was a common symbolic 
form of idols in the East; it was one of the 
cherubie forms, Fzek. i. 10; and the most 
recent discoveries at Nineveh have brought 
to light colossal bulls. Sir Gardiner Wil- 
kinson (second series, ii. 97, Winer) thinks 
the golden calves of Israel to have been 
imitations of Mnevis, a bull kept at Helio- 
polis (Diod. Sic. i. 21. Strabo, xvii. 803) 
as a living symbol of the sun. Jeroboam 
afterwards set up golden calves at Bethel 


rec 


78 


© intrans, 
(appy), here 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


ΕΣ 


αὐτῶν. 43 οἔστρεψεν δὲ ὁ θεὸς καὶ P παρέδωκεν αὑτοὺς 


only }. trans. . a ; val A gs ? a \ , 
Matty 39. TAaTpevery TH “ στρατίᾳ TOU * οὐρανοῦ, καθὼς γέγραπται 


Rey. xi. 6 9 
only. see ver. €) 
39. 


p — Rom.i. 
24, 26, 28. 
Job xvi. 12. 
constr., here 
only. see ch. 


βίβλῳ τῶν προφητῶν Μὴ ' σφάγια καὶ θυσίας " προς- 
ηνέγκατέ μοι ἔτη τεσσερώκοντα ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, " οἶκος Ἰσραήλ, 
‘ Mi ἅν ' 5 a ΄ 

43 καὶ " ἀνελάβετε τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ Μολόχ, καὶ τὸ * ἄστρον 


τ a ac , \ ᾿ ΄ ἃ ’ a 
Bek ata τοῦ θεοῦ “Pehav, τοὺς ¥ τύπους οὺς ἐποιήσατε προςκυνεῖν 
r Luke ii. 13 ’ - \ 7 a ©. τὸς Ey Jere 4 A 

only. αὐτοῖς; καὶ *petoiio ὑμᾶς ὃ ἐπέκεινα Βαβυλῶνος. 


s 3 Kings xxii. 
19. Jer. vii. 18. there only. Amos vy. 25. 
v ch, ii. 36 reff. w = here only. 
4al.) lc. only. Jos. Antt. t. 19. 8, 10. 
27. Hag. ii. 19. 


42. aft eorp. δε ins αὐτοὺς C sah. 


u = ch. xxi. 26. 
ch. xx. 13, 14. xxiii. 31. 
xxi. 25. ch. xxvii. 20. Luke only, exc. Heb. xi. 12 (from Exod. xxxii. 13). 
z ver. 4 reff. 


om των Ὁ. 


Num, χχχὶ. 50. 
x Luke 

y = here only. (ver. 

= Isa. xviii. 1. of time, Lev. xxii. 


Heb. xi. 4. John xvi. 2. 
Eph. vi. 13, 16. 2 Tim. iv. 11.) 


a here only. 


ev Tn €p. ok. wo. vef ETH 


τεσ. (see LXX-A) A: εν τὴ epnuw is in the margin of B: ev ep. bef etn τεσ. a ἢ. 


at end ins λέγει kupios C [ Cyr-p, |. 


43. rec aft θεου ins ὑμων (corrn to suit LXx), with ACE[H]PN rel vuig syr copt 


[eth Chr,]; ἡμῶν all: om BD Syr sah arm Orig, Tren-int, Philas). 


rec peppar, 


with rel [Orig,} Chr, Thl-fin : peupau D {vulg Iren-int, ]: poupa B [Orig-ms]|: ρομΦαν 
N1(Chr-ims] τ ρεμφα p vulg-mss(Lachm) [arm]: pepa H: peppa o: peppay hk 1 Qe: 
Γρεφραν Ῥ : ραφαν 180 Just: txt (A)CK(N%) g 13. 36 Syr syr-mg-gr coptt Orig-ms 


πάνυ Thl-sif Jer.—pa:pav AX [Cyr-p, }. 
lias partes D-lat, in partem E-lat. 


and Dan, and with the same proclamation : 
see 1 Kings xii. 28. 42. ἔστρεψεν] 
neuter, changed,—turned, as ἀναστρέψω, 
ch. xv. 16. No word, as ἑαυτόν, or τὴν 
γνώμην, Or τὸ mpdswrov αὐτοῦ, need be 
supplied: nor must ἔστρ. Kk. map. be ren- 
dered ‘again delivered them’ (Vitring., Ve 
Dieu, al.), a Hebraism which has no place 
in the N. T. (Mey.): nor must we under- 
stand αὐτούς (as C in var. readd.),— 
God turned them; for, though philolo- 
gically there is no objection to this, the 
sense requires that ἔστρεψεν should form 
an introduction to mapédwx«ev—God, who 
had hitherto watched over them for good, 
now provoked by their rebellion, turned, 
and delivered them up to their own ways. 

mapedwxev——not ‘suffered them to 
fall into :’ all these explainings away of 
the strong expressions of Scripture belong 
to the rationalistic school of interpreters 
(which is not modern merely: even 
Chrysostom has here εἴασε) : it was a 
judicial delivering up, not a mere letting 
alone, see reff. τῇ στρ. τ. ovp. | 
This fact is not mentioned in the Pen- 
tateuch, but may refer to the worship 
of Baal. In aftertimes we have frequent 
traces of star-worship: see 2 Kings xvii. 
16; xxi. 3,5; xxiii. 4, 5; Jer. xix. 18; 
Zeph. i. 5. See also Deut. iv. 19; xvii. 
3; Job xxxi. 26. βίβλ. τ. pod. | 
The book of the prophets, regarded as a 
whole. The citation (ref.) is from the 
LXX. μὴ σφάγ. «. θ.1 A question 
usually preceding a negative answer, see 
Matt. vii. 9; Rom. xi. 1; 1 Cor. ix. 
8 al.: but not always: see Matt. xii, 23 


for emek., emt (Ta we)pn D}(txt D4) ; in 


(xxvi. 22); John iv. 29; viii. 22. Winer, 
edn. 6, ὃ 57. 3, Ὁ. There is no stress on 
μοί (‘Is it to Me that ye offered, Ke. (i.e. 
to me only ?’) as Rosenm., Heinr., Olsh., 
Kuin., Stier: the position of μοί in the 
sentence will not allow of this). I should 
take the question here according to the 
usual construction, and understand it as 
a reproach, implying that God does not 
receive as offered to Him, sacrifices in 
which He has been made to share with 
idols :—it is not true that ye offered to 
Me (but no stress on Me) sacrifices, Kc. ; 
‘I regard it as never having happened.” 
43.] The answer, by God Himself: 
Yea, avedaBere, ye { took up, i.e. ] carried 
about with you, (uot My tabernacle as 
your sole or chief holy place, but) the taber- 
nacle (n120, the portable tent for theimage: 
Diod. Sic. xx. 65, mentions the ἱερὰ σκηνή 
in the Carthaginian camp) of M., &e. 
Stephen was not the sole dishonourer, ἐΐ 
a dishonourer, of the holy place—their 
fathers had done it before. Μολόχ] 
So the LXX: the Heb. has 09351, ‘of your 
king;’—the LXX probably followed an- 
other reading (Ὁ 35 is actually found in 577 
Kennicot and 440! De Rossi), or perhaps 
explained the expression by the cognate 
name of this god. Moloch (Winer, Realw.): 
was the Phoenician Saturn: his image was 
of brass with the head of an ox, and out- 
stretched arms of a man, hollow; and 
human sacrifices (of children) were offered, 
by laying them in these arms and heating 
the image by a fire kindled within. The 
rigid prohibitions of the worship of Moloch 
(Ley. xviii. 21; xx. 2—5) were openly 


ABCDE 


HPxRa b 

cfgnk 

lmop 
13 


42 


42—45. 


44 7 b ὶ ῃ Ὁ f Ὁ “> © i © Hua 2 Ὁ Rev. xv. 5 
ἡ " σκηνὴ τοῦ " μαρτυρίου ἣν τοῖς ° πατράσιν “ ἡμῶν ἐν 
ο / \ e lal a 
τῇ ἐρήμῳ καθὼς 4 διετάξατο ὁ λαλῶν τῷ 
Ἀ ‘ / c ΄ (? "» 
αὐτὴν κατὰ τὸν “τύπον ὃν ἑωράκει, 45 
Β ὃ ὃ , ς c 7 ο [ὦ lal \ I rt , na 
γον 8 διαδεξάμενοι οἱ “πατέρες “ ἡμῶν μετὰ “Inood ἐν TH 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAON. 19 


only. Exod. 
XXVil. 2] al. 


Μωυσῇ ποιῆσαν κ᾿" 
τ NU αν ech. ν. 30 reff. 
ἣν καὶ feisnya- amia.,ch. 


xxiv. 23. 

1 Cor. vii. 17. 
xi. 34. 
i. 5 only t. 


Tit. 


h ΄ - 3 a iw k 222 e θ \ ᾽ ag 
KATAGDVEOEL TWYV ἐθνῶν ων ἐξῶσεν O €0S aTo TT pos- e -- Heb. viii. 5, 


xxv. 40. 
h ver. 5 only. 
xxiv. 9. 


Phil. iii. 17 al. 
Num. xxxii. 5. 


lich. ν 41. Rev. xx. 11: 


f= here only. Xen. Rep Ath/ii. 3. 
Viater., che 1. 1 ref. 
Num. xx. 6. 


from ἔχον. 
g here only. 2 Chron. xxxi. 12 
k = here (ch. xxvii. 39) only. Jer. 
DEUT. xi. 23. 


44. rec ins ev bef τοῖς, with ΠῚ τον καἰ 36 syr Thl-fin : [ewm vulg-clem am’, apud 


eth :] om ABCD?2PN p rel am! fuld lux E-lat copt Chr, Thl-sif. 
om ὁ D. 
εορακεν DH, ewpanev Ἐ 36. 


om k m 13. etatato N}, 
ma(...)umov (? παρατυπονὶὴ I)!(txt D4). 
45. μ. ιησουν 1)᾽, cum gesum D-lat. 


transgressed by Ahaz, 2 Kings xvi. 3; by 
Manasseh, ib. xxi. 6; see also xxiii. 10; 
Jer. vil. 31; xxxii. 35. In the kingdom 
of Israel this abomination had been long 
practised, see 2 Kings xvii. 17; Ezek. xxiii. 
37. We tind traces of it at Carthage (Diod. 
Sic. xx. 14), among the Pheenicians (Q. 
Curt. iv. 3. 23. Euseb.-laud. Const. xiii. 4. 
Porphyr. de Abstin. ii. 56),—among the 
Cretans and Rhodians (Porphyr. ibid.), 
and the Assyrian colonists at Sepharvaim, 
2 Kings xvii. 31. τὸ ἄστρον τοῦ θ. Ῥε- 
dav | Heb. jr3, Chitin; but what the mean- 
ing of either this or Ῥαιφάν (LXX) is, we 
have nothing but conjecture to inform us. 
The principal opinions have been (1) that 
of Kircher, who maintains ‘Peay (Ῥηφάν) 
to be a Coptic word, signifying the planet 
Saturn, and answering to the Arabic 
‘Kewan:’ (2) that cf Hengstenberg, Au- 
thentie des Pentat. 110 ff., who entirely 
repudiates Kircher’s interpretation, and 
supposes Ῥηφάν to have arisen from a mis- 
reading of} for 702. But Winer (Realw.) 
prefers the former opinion, and supports it 
by the authority of eminent modern Coptic 
and Arabic scholars. De Wette and 
Hengstenberg believe }2 to be an appella- 
tive noun, and would render it, Geftell, the 
carriage or frame, on which the star or 
linage was carried: ‘imaginem idolorum 
vestrorum, Vulg. Amos. 1]. 6. Wordsw. 
after Cyr. alex. in Catena, supposes pepar to 
signify σκότισμα, or blindness, and suggests 
that the name may have been one given by 
the Jews in contempt, like Beelzebub, to 
the god of the Ekronites. See Smith, 
Bibl. Dict., art. Remphan, Βαβυλῶνος 
Δαμασκοῦ, LXX and Heb. The fulfilment 
of the prophecy would make it very natural 
to substitute that name which had become 
inseparably associated with the captivity. 

44. ἡ σκ. τ. papt.| In opposition 
to the ox. just mentioned : but also in pur- 
suance of one of the great aims of the 
speech, to shew that holiness is not con- 
Jined to locality or building. This part of 


υμων Ago: 
αὐυτη (sic) &. κατα TO 
efewoev EK N(but corrd) 5. 13. 180. 


his subject Stephen now enters on more 
particularly. The words 7 ox. τ. μαρτ. 
are the LXX rendering of τὴ ὅν (Num. 
xvi. 18, 19 al.) ‘ the tabernacle of the as- 
sembly ’ (or ‘congregation,’ Εἰ. V.). They 
apparently derived the latter word from 
ay, ‘testatus est,’ instead of 1, ‘con- 
stituit.’ τύπον | (ref.) : another con- 
trast, cf. τύπους ods ἐποιήσατε, ver. 43. 
45. εἰςήγ.) absolute: introduced, 

viz. eis τὴν γῆν :—not connected with ἐν 
τῇ Katacx.,—see below. _ διαδεξ." 
Having inherited it, 1. 6. succeeded to its 
custody and privileges. The sense of ‘suc- 
cessores,’ ‘qui majores exceperunt,’ is un- 
grammnatical ; as also is that of ‘ postea,’ 
* deinceps.’ ἐν τῇ κατασχέσει at 
(or ‘in’) their taking possession. The 
Vulg. rendering, ‘in possessionem gen- 
tium,’ is philologically inadmissible ; ‘in 
terram a gentibus occupatam ’ (Calvin, De 
Dieu, Grot., Kuin.) is still worse. The 
passage of the LXX, Num. xxxii. 5, δοθήτω 
ἢ γῆ αὕτη τοῖς οἰκέταις σου ἐν κατασχέσει, 
brought forward to justify these render- 
ings, is directly against them. The word 
is one of those examples of verbal nouns in 
-ois where the meaning hovers uncertainly 
between the act of doing and the thing 
done. Such is often the case with καύχη- 
σις in St. Paul. Cf. for a very near ap- 
proach to the concrete meaning of this 
word, Num. xxvii. 4,7. But, abstract or 
concrete, it always, as might be expected 
from the very composition of the word, is 
used of that final and settled possession 
which Israel took of the land, not of that 
transitory possession from which the gentes 
were driven out. So that Wordsw.’s 
rendering, “the portion, or possession of 
the Gentiles,’ is out of the question. 
The martyr combines rapidly a con- 
siderable period, during which this κατά- 
σχεσις and this expulsion was taking place 
(for it was not complete till the time of 
David) in order to arrive at the next 
great event of his history, the substitution 


80 


Mm) = "2! Tim, 1. 
18. 

n Luke i. 30. 
Heb. iv. 16 
only. Gen. 
xxxiil. 10. 

© constr. (but 
not ellips.), 
ch. iii. 14 reff. 
see Eccl. il. 10. 

p PSA. cxxxi. 

5. == Heb. 

*xil. 17. see 

Hos. xii. 8. 
2 Pet. 3.13, 
I4only. Ps. 
xxv. 8. 

ΓΙ CHron. 
XXVili. 6. 
Matt. vii. 24, 
26. Luke vi. 
48, 49 (but 
οἰκίαν). 

5 abs., Luke i. 
32, 35, 76. vi. 35 only. 


? Ar φ' 
σεν QavuT@ OLKOV. 


“Ὁ 


Deut. xxxii. 8 al. 


IPAZBEI> AITOZTOAON. 


τῆς * καταπαυσεώς μου; 


Vit 


, a e ΄ e oe 46 & a e a A ὃ a 
wou τῶν © πατέρων " ἡμῶν, 16 ἕως τῶν ἡμερῶν Aaveid, ὃς 
mn e n ,ὔ b] , a -“ \ ο ᾿ ’ Ρ ς a 
εὗρεν "χάριν ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ “ ἡτήσατο ? εὑρεῖν 
/ A - ’ [νὰ lal 
«σκήνωμα TO Ἐθεῷ ᾿Ιακώβ' *7 Σολομῶν δὲ * ῳκοδόμη- 
Q » Ss 
48 ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ὁ "ὕψιστος ἐν * χειροποι- 
΄ a © / 
ήτοις ἃ κατοικεῖ, καθὼς ὁ προφήτης λέγει, 49." Ὃ οὐρανός. 
, fol a“ a “ 
μοι θρόνος, ἡ δὲ γῆ " ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν μου" * ποῖον 
΄ / ΄ ΄ / 
τοῖκον " οἰκοδομήσετέ μοι, λέγειν κύριος, ἢ τίς Y τόπος 
ὅ0 οὐχὶ ἡ "χείρ μου ἐποίησεν ταῦτα 
7 = / Ν nr 
πάντα; *!” σκληροτράχηλοι καὶ “* ἀπερίτμητοι τῇ ἃ καρδίᾳ 
καὶ τοῖς " ὠσίν, ὑμεῖς ἀεὶ τῷ πνεύματι τῷ ἁγίῳ ἴ ἀντιπί- 


{ οἢ. xvii. 22. Mark xiv. 58. Eph. ii. 11. Heb. ix. 11, 24 


only. Isa, 11. 18. u of God, ch. xvii. 24. Matt. xxiii. 31, Eph. ili, 17 only. (see Eph, ii. 22.) Ps. ii. 8. Isa. 
Ivii. 15. v Isa. Ixvi. 1. w ch. ii. 35 reff. x ch. iv. 7 reff. y - ch. iv. 31. 
z Web. iii. 11,18. iv 1,3, &c., only. Deut. xii.9 — Ps. cxxxi. 14. a see ch. xi. 21 reff. b here 
only. Exod. xxxiii. 3,5 al. c here only. d Ezek. xliv. 7. Jer. ix. 26. e Jer. vi. 10, 


fhere only. Num. xxvii. 14. Herodian vi. 3. 


46. om ἡτησατο NX}. 


rel 36 vulg syrr [coptt zth arm] Chr,. 
47. σαλωμων AC: σαλομων XN. 
Thil-sif. 


48. o de vy. ov(om ov D-lat) κατοικ. ev χειρ. D. 


σκηνωμα bef evp. D. 


οικοδ. Bi(sic: see table) Ὁ. 


* οἴκῳ BDHR!: θεω ACEPRS 
eautw CH 


rec aft χειροπ. ins vaos (ea- 


planatory gloss: or from ch xvii. 4), with HP rel 36 [arm] Cur, Aug, : om ABCDER 


p vulg syrr coptt 2th Pamph-int,. 


syr [arm ]). οιἰκοδομησατε B 42. 
εστιν D [k] 13 Thdrt,. 


for τις, ποιος (as LXX) D. 


for καθως, ws D: καθως καὶ E-gr(and lat’) 76. 
49. for μοι, μου D}(txt D8): add eorw D. 


και ἢ yn (as LXX-B) B vss(not vulg 
at end add 


50. παντα bef ταυτα (ef Lxx) ACDEP 1m: txt BHN p rel [vulg syrr Cyr-p, ]. 
51. for τη καρδια, καρδιαις (corrd to plur to suit the plur subject) ACD [Cyr-p, |: ταις 
καρδιαις τὰ ὁ Chr, [cordzbus vulg syr wth arm]: καρδιας B(sic: see table): txt EHP 


of the temple of Solomon for the taber- 
nacle, 46. ἡτήσατο] asked permis- 
sion, see 2 Sam. vii. 2 ff., in which this 
request is made through Nathan the pro- 
phet, and at first conceded by Nathan, 
though afterwards, on a revelation made 
from God, denied :—not ‘ wished’ (Grot., 
Kuin.: ‘desired, E. V.). The vow (a 
species of prayer) here referred to, is de- 
fined by the words εὑρεῖν σκήνωμα, to be 
that mentioned Ps. exxxi. 1—5 (LXX). 
48.| But, though Solomon built 
Him an house, we are not to suppose, for 
all that, that He is confined to earthly 
spots. καθὼς ὁ mp. X.| We have in 
substance the same declaration by Solomon 
himself at the dedication of his temple, 
1 Kings viii. 27; see also the beautiful 
prayer of David, 1 Chron. xxix. 1O—19. 
The citation is freely from the LXX. 
The student will not fail to be interested in 
observing the apparent reference to this de- 
claration in Stephen’s apology, by St. Paul, 
ch. xvil. 24, 51.] I do not think there 
is any occasion to suppose an ¢nterruption 
from the audience to have occasioned this 
outbreak of holy indignation. At each se- 
parate recital (vv. 9, 25, 35, 39 ff.) he has 
dwelt, with continually increasing fervour, 


on the rebellions against and rejections of 
God by His people. He has now brought 
down the history to the establishment of 
the temple worship. From Solomon’s time 
to his own, he saw but a succession of 
apostasies, idolatries, rejection of God’s 
prophets:—a dark and loathsome cata- 
logue, terminated by the betrayal and 
murder of the Just One Himself. It is 
not at all beyond probability, to believe 
that the zeal of his fervent spirit was by 
the view of this, the filling up of the mea- 
sure of their iniquities, kindled into a flame 
of inspired invective. I find that this is 
also Neander’s view, in opposition to the 
generality of Commentators (P.u. L.,p.92), 
as also that of Prof. Hackett, in his com- 
mentary on the Acts: and I cannot but 
think it far the most probable. ἐνταῦθα 
λοιπὸν καταφορικῶς τῷ λόγῳ κέχρηται. 
πολλὴ ἣν παῤῥησία μέλλοντος αὐτοῦ ἄπο- 
θνήσκειν" καὶ γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο οἶμαι αὐτὸν 
εἰδέναι, Chrysost. σκληρ. κ.- ἀπερ.] 
Words and figures familiar to the prophets 
in speaking of the rebellious Israel : see, 
besides rett., Deut. ix. 6.13; Neh.ix. 16:— 
Deut. x. 16; xxx. 6 Heb. See also Rom. 
ii, 29. ὠσίν] I should hardly think of 
any allusion to Ps. xl. (xxxix.) 6,—becanse 


ABCDE 
HPx ab 
cefghk 
lmop 
13 


46—d4. 


TTETE, ὃ ὡς οἱ ὃ 


φητῶν οὐκ i ἐδίωξαν οἱ " 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ: 


h 


5] 


7, ec a \ ¢ a i = 
πατέρες ὃ ὑμῶν Kat ὑμεῖς. 83 τίνα τῶν προ- g Matt. vi. το. 
πατέρες 


Kap ὍΡΟΥ Ἷ Thucyd. viii. 
υμῶν ; καὶ ATTEKTELVAD κα ἢ τ 95 coe 
i Matt. v. 10, 


\ > f re A 
τοὺς * προκαταγγείλαντας περὶ τῆς | ἐλεύσεως τοῦ ™ δικαίου, | 11. ch. ix.'s, 
11. ch, 


Hee Soi ia 


Kal A ς A 4 > -“ iad os γε 
οὗ νῦν ὑμεῖς " προδόται καὶ ° φονεῖς ἐγένεσθε, 85 Ῥοἴτινες 1,881. Ps. 


Ν᾿ , >) 
“ἐλάβετε τὸν νόμον ἴ εἰς ὃ διαταγὰς «ἀγγέλων Kal οὐκ 


 ἐφυλάξατε. 


ake 
k ch. iii. 18 
only +. 
1 here only. 


Ld 3 ’ x Qn 
54° Axovovtes δὲ ταῦτα " διεπρίοντο ταῖς ™abs.,= ch. 


iii. 14. xxil. 
14. 1 Pet. iii. 18. see James v. 6. n J.uke vi. 16. 2 Tim. iii. 4only +. 2 Macc. v.15. x. 13, 22 
only. o Matt. xxii. 7. ch. iii. 14, xxviii. 4. 1 Pet. iv. 15. Rev. xxi. 8. xxii. 15 only. 4 Kings 
ix. 31 compl. Wisd. xii. 5 only. p -: ch: x. 41 reff. q = John vii. 39. Rom. 
iv. ll al. Hos. xiii. 1. r - ch. ii. 39. vill. 20. 5 Rom. xiii. 2only. Ezraiv. ll only. see 
Gal. ili. 19. t = ch. xvi, 4 reff. uch. v. 33 only}. 1 Chron. xx. 3 only. 


p rel [tol] spec Syr coptt [Eus,] Ath, Cyr-jer, [Orig-int,]—add ὑμων δὲ o [Syr sah]. 


for ws, καθως Ὁ). 
52. for οἱ war. vu., εκεινοι D'(txt DS), 
m. (ins της D%) eA. D!. 


ins και bef vuwy D 


t[ -gr]. 


om καὶ vues 1) [ Orig-int, ]. 
απεκτ. αὐτου TOUS προκαταγγελλοντας 


rec γεγενήσθε (corrn to appy more suitable tense, see 


note), with HP rel Chr, Thl: txt ABCDEN k p Orig, [Cyr-p, ]. 


53. εφυλαξεσθε A. 


the LXX have rendered ‘mine ears hast 
thou opened’ by σῶμα κατηρτίσω μοι. 

τῷ Tv. τ. ay. ἀντ. Apparently a reference 
to Isa. Ixiii. 10. The instances as yet had 
been confined to of mat. ὕμ. : now he has 
arrived at their own times. The éwo are 
taken up again in the next verse. 

52. τίνα τ. mpod.| See Matt. xxiii. 81 ff. : 
2 Chron. xxxvi. 16: where the same general 
expressions are used of their persectiting 
the prophets. Such sayings are not to be 
pressed to the letter, but represent the 
uniform attitude of disobedience and hos- 
tility which they assumed to the messengers 
of God. See also the parable, Matt. xxi. 
35. τοὺς mpoK. | The office of ail the 
prophets, see ch. iii. 18. The assertion is 
repeated, to connect them, by this title, 
with Him, whom they announced. 

τοῦ Sixaiov| Schéttg. vol. ii. p. 18, has 
shewn from the Rabbinical writings that 
this name was used by the Jews to de- 
signate the Messiah. See reff. and note on 
James v. 6. προδόται) By Judas’s 
treachery, of which the Sanhedrists had 
been the accomplices; Matt. xxvi. 14—16: 


—doveis, by the hands of the Romans; ch. 


ii. 23, note. ἐγένεσθε is preferable not 
only on account of its manuscript autho- 
rity, but as being the Aistorical tense, like 
the rest. It was probably altered to the 
perfect, as suiting the time then presext, 
better than the aorist. 53.] ‘The use 
of οἵτινες, instead of oi, so very frequent 
in the Acts and Epistles, occurs when the 
clause introduced by it contains a further 
explanation of the position or classification 
of the person or persons alluded to, and 
not when the relative serves for simple 
identification. See Rom. i. 25, 32. 

eis διαταγὰς ἀγγέλων Many explanations 
nave been given. Chrys. διαταχθέντα 
vouov λέγει, τὸν ἐγχειρισθέντα αὐτῷ BC 


Vormert, 


ἄγγελον τὸν ὀφθέντα αὐτῷ ἐν TH βάτῳ: 
and (ἔς. νόμον λαβόντας διατάξεις ἔχον- 
τα, αἵτινες ἰσάγγελον ἐποίουν πολιτείαν 
ἔχειν τοὺς τελοῦντας αὐτόν. Heinsius 
and Lightfoot understand by ἀγγέλ. the 
prophets: Grot., Calov., and Krebs, ‘pre- 
sentibus angelorum ordinibus, taking δια- 
ταγάς = διατάξεις in the sense of divi- 
sions of an army (Judith viii. 36), in which 
it never occurs,—not to say that εἰς will 
not bear this: Beza, Calv., Pise., Elsn..,. 
Hamm,, Kuin, &e., “αὖ aagelis promul- 
gatum, which eis will not bear (ἐν): 
Winer, Gr, edn.-6, ὃ 32. 4, Ὁ, ‘as com- 
mands of angels’ (but see below), which, 
however, was not the fact (Mey., who 
refers to Jos. Antt. xv. 5. 3, ἡμῶν τὰ καλ- 
λιστα τῶν δογμάτων Kal τὰ ὁσιώτατα τῶν 
ἐν τοῖς νόμοις Ob ἀγγέλων παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ 
μαθόντων) :—the Syriac version, ‘per man- 
datum angelorum:—Vulg. and Caly., 
‘in dispositione (or .-onibus) angelorum : 
Schotte., ‘per ministerium angelorum, 
These three last are precluded by the fore- 
going remarks. The key to the right ren- 
dering seems to be the sithilar expression. 
in ref. Gal., 6 νόμος διαταγεὶς δι᾿ ay- 
γέλων. The law was given by God, but, 
announced by angels. The people received 
God’s law then, εἰς διαταγὰς ἀγγέλων, 
at the injunction (a sense of διατ. amply 
justified, see Palm and Rost’s lex. διάταξις, 
and Polyb. iv. 19. 10; 87. 5: and preferred 
by Winer in his last edn., ut supra) of 
angels. So Matt. xii. 41, μετενόησαν eis 
τὸ κήρυγμα ᾿Ιῶνα, ‘they repented at the 
preaching of Jonas.’ The only other le- 
gitimate rendering, ‘as the injunctions of 
angels,’ comes under the objections made to 
Winer’s former view, above. . 54—60. | 
EFFECT OF: THE SPEECH: STONING OF 
STEPHEN. 54. | Svemp., see note on ref, 

55.| Certainly, in so far as the vision 


G 





82 


y here only. 

Ps. xxxiv. 16 
al. see Matt. 
vili. 12 al. 

w = Matt. xv. 
32. Luke 
xxiii. 28. 
Rev. i. 7. 

x ch. ii. 30 reff. 

y Luke iv. 1. 

~ ch, vi. 5. xi. 
24 only. 

ach. i. 10 reff. 

a ch. ii. 25 reff. 

b Mark v. 15. 
John ix. 8 al. 

ec Luke ii. 23 
(from Exod. 
xili. 12). 
xxiv. 31 &c. _ 
ch, xvi. 14. xvil. 3. 

e = here only. Isa. hii. 15. 

xiv. 5. τμῆμα, Rev. xvill. 21.) 
ihere bis. Matt. xxi. 35. xxiii. 37 ||. 


ἑστῶτα Tov θεοῦ. 


L.-only, exc. Mark xii. 34. 


54. ακουσαντες δε αὐτου J). 
ins αὐτων Ek Syr sah eth. 


55. aft πληρης ins πίστεως και N o [Syr copt(Tischdf) }. 
for τ. θεου, αὐτου C 1 Thi-tin. 


rov 6. ect. D. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ: 


f Matt. viii. 8321}. 
pen i. 1d τοῆ. 
(John viii. 5, v. στ.) ch. xiy. 5. 


ch. xix. 29 only. 


om tavuta N}. 


VIT. 55—60. 


καρδίαις αὐτῶν καὶ " ἔβρυχον τοὺς ὀδόντας “ ἐπ᾽ αὐτον. 
55 X ὑπάρχων δὲ " πλήρης Y πνεύματος " ἁγίου, * ἀτενίσας 
εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἶδεν δόξαν θεοῦ καὶ ᾿Ιησοῦν ἑστῶτα ἐκ 
δεξιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ, δ καὶ εἶπεν ᾿Ιδοὺ "Ὁ θεωρῶ τοὺς οὐρανοὺς 
¢ διηνοιγμένους, καὶ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου " ἐκ δεξιῶν 
57 4 κράξαντες δὲ ἃ φωνῇ “ μεγάλῃ “ συν- 
ἐσχον τὰ ὦτα αὐτῶν καὶ ᾿ὥρμησαν ὃ ὁμοθυμαδὸν ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν, 
58 καὶ © ἐκβωλόντες ἔξω τῆς πόλεως | ἐλιθοβόλουν. 


καὶ οἱ 


d Matt. xxvii. δ0. ver.6% Rev. vi. 10 ἃ], 2 Kingg xix. 4. 
1 Kings xv. 19. 2 Mace. x. 16. (-μή, ch. 
h = Matt. xxi. 39 ||. Luke iv. 29. Lev. xiv. 40. 


Heb. xii. 20 only. Exod. viii. 26 al. 


και eBp. τε Ὁ]. aft οδ, 


ino. Tov κυριον εκ δε. 


56. rec avewyuevous (corrn to more usual word), with D-corr! HP rel 36 Epiph, Chr, 


fNyss, Antch,] Thdrt,: nvewyu. Dt: txt ΑΒΟΝ p Ath, Cyr-jer,. 


eat. bet ex δεέ. 


ACEN! m [vulg-ed demid syrr copt arm ath-pl] Epiph, Chr, { Antch, ]. 


58. aft ex. ins αὑτὸν A k 13 [Syr syr-w-ob] sah Thil-fin. 


of Stephen was supernatural, 1t was not 
necessary that the material heavens should 
have been visible to him; but from the 
words ἀτενίσας εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν it would 
seem that they were. We are not told 
where the Sanhedrim were assembled. It 
does not seem as if they were convened ‘n 
the ordinary session room: it may have 
heen in one of the courts of the temple, 
which would give room for more than the 
members of the Sanhedrim to be present, as 
seems to have been the case. ἑστῶτα; 
A reason why the glorified Saviour was 
seen standing, and not sitting, has been 
pleasingly given by Chrysostom (in Cra- 
mer’s Catena): τί οὖν ἑστῶτα καὶ οὐχὶ 
καθήμενον ; ἵνα δείξῃ τὴν ἀντίληψιν τὴν 
εἰς τὸν μάρτυρα᾽ καὶ γὰρ περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς 
λέγεται “ ἀνάστα ὃ θεός. Similarly Gre- 
gory the Great, Hom. ii. 29, vol. i. Ρ 1572, 
‘Stephanus stantem vidit, quem adjutorem 
habuit.’ 
ed. Migne, ‘pro martyre surgit, Quem 
tune stare videt ; confessio nostra sedentem 
Cum soleat celebrare magis.”? (See also 
the collect for St. Stephen’s day.) But 
not perhaps correctly: for ‘help’ does not 
seem here to be the applicable idea, but the 
co ifirmation of his faith by the ecstatic 
vision of the Saviour’s glory at God's right 
hand. I should be rather disposed to 
think that there was reference in the vision 
to that in Zech. iii. 1, where Zech. sees 
Ἰησοῦν τὸν ἱερέα τὸν μέγαν, ἑστῶτα πρὸ 
mposémov ἀγγέλου κυρίου. Stephen, under 
accusation of blaspheming the earth/y 
temple, is granted a sight of the dearen/y 
temple ; being cited before the Suddacee 


So also Arator, i. 611 ff. p. 124, | 


aft ελιθ. ins αὐτὸν Ὁ 


High Priest who believed neither angel 
nor spirit, he is vouchsafed a vision of the 
heavenly HieH Prikst, standing and 
ministering at the throne amidst the 
angels and just men made perfect. 

56.] This is the only time that our Lord 
is by human lips called the Son or Maw 
after His ascension (Rev. i. 13; xiv. 14, 
are not instances). And why here? I 
believe, for this reason. Stephen, full of 
the Holy Ghost, speaking zow not of 
himself at all (ver. 55), but entirely by the 
utterance of the Spirit, repeats the very 
words, Matt. xxvi. 64, in which Jesus Him- 
self, before this council, had foretold His 
glorification ;—and assures them that that 
exaltation of the Son of Man, which they 
should hereafter witness to their dismay, 
was already begun and actual. 58. 
ἔξω τ. wod.| See Levit. xxiv. 14. ‘Locus 
lapidationis erat extra urbem: omnes enim 
civitates muris cincte paritatem habent ad 
castra Israelis.” Babyl. Sanhedr. ad loc. 
(Meyer.) Cf. also Heb. xiii. 12, 13. 
ἐλιθοβόλουν) they stoned him: an an- 
ticipation of the fact, the details of which 
follow : not, ‘they prepared to stone him ? 
now ‘jam in itinere ad supplicii loeuin petu- 
lanter eum lapidibus lacessebant’ (Heinr.): 
nor need we conjecture ἐλεθολόγουν with 
Markland. Stoning was the punishment 
of blaspheming, Levit. xxiv. 16. The ques- 
tion whether this was a legal proceeding on 
sentence, or a tumultuary one, is not easy 
to answer. It would appear from John 
xviii. 31, that the Jews had not legally the 
power of putting any man to death (see 
note there), Certainly, from the narrativa 


APCDE 
HPxab 
fehkl 
mop 13 


ἃ επι- 
καλον- 
μενον... 
ABCDE 
HPxab 
dtghk 
ΟΡ 
13 


VALE Fat 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATOTTOAON. 83 


k , 1 ᾽ :Q A ne / Φνς. ..δὲ ΠῚ A A ’ . 
μάρτυρες 'amedevto τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτῶν ™ παρὰ τοὺς πόδας x = Deut xvii. 
, , ~ " is a 
n νεανίου καλουμένου Σαύλου, δ0 καὶ 1 ἐλιθοβόλουν τὸν 1 Matt. xii. 14. 


Στέφανον ° ἐπικαλούμενον καὶ λέγοντα ἸΚύριε Ἰησοῦ δέξαι 25. 
8 


τὸ Ῥπνεῦμά μου. 


5 / K / \ t = / > “ ? \ e / 
μεγάλῃ Kuple, μὴ “στήσῃς αὑτοῖς ταύτην τὴν apapTiay, 


VIII. 1 Σαῦλος δὲ ἣν 


\ a ’ \ u2 / 
καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν ἃ ἐκοιμήθη. 


Rom. xiii. 12. 


Eph. iv. 22, 

Cal: it 

‘ \ \ ͵ , aa / eb. xii. 

60.4 θεὶς δὲ Ta γόνατα " ἔκραξεν * φωνῇ 3; times 
ii. 1 only. 
= 2 Macc. 


viii. 35. 
m ch. iv. 35 reff. 
n ch. xx. 9 reff, 


- a A 3 , lal ’ f \ aA ᾿ 
ἡ συνευδοκῶν TH” ἀναιρέσει αὐτοῦ. ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν ἐκείνη τῇ οὐ Mey 


461} Mt. J. Ecel. xii, 7. 
3 Kings viii. δέ. ras above (q). 
tmet., here only. propr., Matt. xxvi. 15? 
v 1 Cor. vii. 12, 13 reff. w here only. 


Syr syr-w-ast coptt [eth]. 
p rel 36 vss Chr,.—eaut. B. 


q ch. ix. 40. xx. 36. xxi. 5. 
Rom. x1. 4 reff. 
2 Kings xiv. 26. 

Num. xi. 15. 


p = Luke xxiii. 

Mark xv.19. Luke xxii. 41 only +. see 
Heb. xii. 12, s ver. 57. 

Ὁ = 1 Cor. vii. 39 reff. 


Luke v. δ, 
Zech, xi. 12. 


om avrav HP abl fg¢him Thi-sif: ins A(B)CDEX 
aft veay. ins twos D [tol] Syr arm: τοὺ fh 13. 


59. aft imo. ins χριστε ( ἃ 40 Chr, | Kuther, j. 


60. om δε D?[-gr](ins D-corr!): τε e. 
om RN}. 
στησεις D!(txt D%) d 180 [στησας ΟἽ]. 


φωνὴν μεγαλὴν D!: φωνην μεγαλὴ C! γ᾿: 


add λεγων 1) [vulg-ed} am [demid(not fuld lux)] spee [Syr] copt. 
rec τὴν au. bet tauvt., with ΕΗ ΡΝ rel | D-lat 


Ep-of-ch- Lyons Orig, Bas,Nys, | Chr, Thdrt,: txt ABCD vulg spec Petr, Iren-int, Cypr,. 


before us, and from the fact of a bloody 
persecution having taken place soon after 
it, it seems that the Jews did, by connivance 
of, or in the absence of the Procurator, 
administer summary punishments of this 
kind. But here no sentence is recorded : 
and perhaps the very violence and zelotic 
character of the execution might constitute 
it, not an encroachment on the power of 
the Procurator, as it would have been if 
strictly in form of law, but a mere out- 
break, and as such it might be allowed to 
pass unnoticed. That they observed the 
forms of their own law, in the place and 
manner of the stoning, is no objection to 
this view. ot μάρτυρες] See ref. 
[where it is enacted that the hands of the 
witnesses were to be first on the criminal 
to put him to death, and afterward the 
hands of all the people]. They dis- 
encumbered themselves of their loose 
outer garments, &ste εἶναι κοῦφοι καὶ 
ἀπαραπόδιστοι εἰς τὸ λιθοβολεῖν. Theo- 
phyl. ἀπέθεντο] to keep them. 

Such notices are deeply interesting, when 
we recollect by whom they were in all 
probability carefully inserted. See ch. xxii. 
19, 20, and note on ch. xxvi. 10 :—from 
which it appears that Saul can certainly 
not have been less than thirty at this time. 
He was a member of the Sanhedrim, and 
soon after was despatched on an important 
mission with their authority. 59.] The 
attempt to escape from this direct prayer 
to the Saviour by making Ἰησοῦ the geni- 
tive, and supposing it addressed to the 
Father,—in the face of the ever-recurring 
words κύριος Ἰησοῦς (see Rev. xxii. 20 
especially), and the utter absence of any 
instance or analogy to justify it,—is only 
characteristic of the school to which it 
belongs. Yet in this case it has been fa- 


G 


voured even by Bentley and Valcknaer, who 
supposed θεόν to have been omitted in the 
text, being absorbed by the preceding -ον, 
But if any such aecus. had been used, it 
would certainly have been τὸν θεόν. 

δέξαι τὸ wv. p.| The same prayer in sub- 
stance had been made by our Lord on the 
cross (ref. Luke) to’His Father. ‘To Him 
was now committed the key of David. 
Similarly, the young man Saul, in after 
years: πέπεισμαι OTe δυνατός ἐστιν τὴν 
παραθήκην μου φυλάξαι εἰς ἐκείνην τὴν 
ἡμέραν, 2 Tim. i. 12. 60.| The 
more accurate philological Commentators, 
De Wette and Meyer, deny that στήσῃς 
here can, as ordinarily explained, refer to 
weighing (reff. Matt.; Jer. xxxix. (xxxii.) 
10), since not the sim, but the punish- 
ment, would be the thing weighed out, — 
and it would be harsh to take the one 
for the other, in a sentence of this kind. 
Meyer would understand ἱστάναι as op- 
posed to ἀφιέναι, THY ἁμαρτίαν, “ Fix not 
this sin upon them: but De Wette, as 
seems to me more probably, renders it 
Reckon not this sin to them (‘lay not this 
sin to their charge,’ E. V.), supporting this 
by Rom. x. 3. This again was some- 


' what similar (though not exactly, see vote 


there) to our Lord’s prayer, Luke xxiii. 34. 
ἐκοιμήθη) Not a Christian expres- 
sion only: Wetstein, on Matt. xxvii. 52, 
cites Jewish examples: and we have in 
the Anthology, iii. 1. 10, τῇδε Σάων ὁ 
Δίωνος ᾿Ακάνθιος ἱερὸν ὕπνον | κοιμᾶται" 
θνήσκειν μὴ λέγε τοὺς ἀγαθούς. But it be- 
came the usual Christian term for death. 
Its use here, when the circumstances, 
and the actors in them, are remembered, 
is singularly touching, from the contrast. 
Cuap. VIII. 1—8.] Persecution oF 
THE CHURCH BY SAUL, CUNSEQUENT ON 
Ω 


ad 


NM 


jr 


84 


x ὃ σον. xii. 10 
reff. 

y ch. xiii. 50, 

z ver, 4. ch. xi. 


TIPASEIS AIOSTOAON. 


Vit 


ed 2S a eae Yo} ee ee ΣῪΝ 

ἡμέρᾳ ἑωγμος meyay - ἐπι τὴν EKKANTLAV τὴν EV ἱερο- 
/ ΄ \ ios ’ \ \ ΄ , 3 he 

σολύμοις" TAVTES δὲ 2 διεσπάρησαν κατὰ τὰς *“ χωρᾶς τὴς 


) 7 , “« / \ ~ > , 9 

bee, Ιουδαίας καὶ Σαμαρείας πλὴν τῶν ἀποστόλων. * » συν- 
15. ᾿ Ν \ ‘Suis ” ὃ ou rm \ 4 / 

= peg nnke εκομίσων δὲ TOV Στέφανον ων Pes εὐλαβεῖς Kal ἐποιῆσαν 
xxi. 2 

ἔων AO \ , , > r a \ » / \ 

john iv 9. ἃ κρητετὸν μέγαν ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ. 3. Davros δὲ © ἐλυμαίνετο τὴν 
only. Ezek. ᾿ . \ \ ” > r ag ΄ 

: ite 15. ty ἐκκλησίαν i κατα TOUS OLKOVUS 5 εὐςττορευομέενος A συρων 

» here only ζ, 

, OF Ud \ vad j / > - ΄ 
jobs. τὸ | τε ἄνδρας καὶ γυναῖκας | παρεδίδουν εἰς * φυλακήν. 
Ajax, 1047. 

ο πνεῖν 5 reff. ἃ here only. Gen. 1.10. Micahi. 8. e here only. — 2 Chron. xvi. 10. and constr., 
Ps. lxxix. 13. f =: Luke xiii. 22. ix. 6. viii. 1. gch. iii. 2. Mark i. “21 al. h Jolin 
xxi. 8 ch. xiv. 19. xvii. 6. Rev. xii. 4 only. 2 Kings xvii. 13. _ iconstr., Luke xxi. 12. xxiv. 7. ch. 
xxii.4. 2Cor.iv. ll al. Isa. xxxiv. 2 al. fr. k ch. v. 19 reff. 2 Kings xx. ὃ. 


Cuap. VIII. 1. & 0 join σαυλος .. . αὐτου to ch vii. 
ree παντες τε, With A Κα: om δὲ δὲ! 18, 47: και παντες δὲ" [et omnes vulg 
Syr eth]: txt BCDEHP p rel syr coptt Ps-Eus Isid, Chr). 
aft arog. add ot ἐμειναν ev cepovoaAnu D! sah Aug). 

2. συνκομισαντες [omg δε] D!-gr(txt D*): 
rec εποιησαντο, with EHP rel Chr,: txt ABCDN k p Chr, Thart,. 


D sah. 


lat) E-gr eth. 
8. o Se co. 1). ελυμήηνατο K-gr. 
mapediSous(sic) 0). 


THE DEATH OF STEPHEN, 1. συνευδ.] 
See reff. : and compare his own confession, 
ch. xxvi. 9—11. From this time, the nar- 
yative takes up Saul, and, at first with con- 
siderable interruptions (ch. viii. x. xi. xii.), 
but after ch. xii. 1 entirely, follows his 
history. ἐν ἐκ. τῇ ἥμ. can hardly mean, 
as some (Dr. Burton, De Wette, Mever, 
Stier) would render it, on that very day, 
viz. when Stephen was stoned. For what 
follows, πάντες δὲ διεσπάρησαν . . cannot 
have happened on the same day, but would 
take some little time: and it is hardly al- 
lowable to render ἐγένετο ‘ broke out” We 
have ἐν ἐκ. τῇ ἡμέρᾳ used indefinitely, Luke 
vi. 23; John xiv. 20; xvi. 23, 26. In Luke 
xvii. 31 it has direct reference to a ἡμέρα 
just mentioned. πάντες] Not per- 
haps iterally,—or some of them soon 
returned: see ch. ix. 26—30. It may 
describe the general dispersion, without 
meaning that every individual fled. 

Σαμαρείας Connected with ver. 4: this 
word is not without importance, as intro- 
ducing the next step in the dissemination 
of the Gospel, according to our Lord’s 
command in ch. i. 8. πλὴν τῶν 
ἀποστόλων) Perhaps, from their exalted 
position of veneration by the people, the 
persecution did not extend to them: per- 
haps they remained, as possessed of supe+ 
rior firmness and devotion. But this latter 
reason is hardly applicable, after the com- 
mand of our Lord, ‘ When they persecute 
you in one city, flee to another.” Matt. 
x. 23. Stier (Reden ἃ. Apostel, i. 253) 
refers their remaining to an intimation of 
the Spirit, to stay and strengthen those 
who were left (ἑτέρους γενέσθαι θράσους 
αἴτιοι, Chrys.). Mr. Humphry (Comm. 
vn Acts) cites an ancient tradition, men- 


aft weyas ins καὶ OAenbers 
om της D'(ins D2), 


συνεκομισαντο bo. 


for δε, re D®(and 


ins τοὺς bef avdpas δ᾿ (Δ 3. disapproving). 


tioned by Clem. Alex., Strom. vi. 5 [43], 
end, p. 762 P, from the Praedicatio Petri 
(and by Euseb. H. E. v. 18), that the 
Apostles were ordered by our Lord to re- 
main at Jerusalem twelve years: φησὶν ὃ 
Πέτρος εἰρηκέναι Toy κύριον Tots ἀποστόλοις 
᾿Ἐὰν μὲν οὖν τις θελήσῃ τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ μετα- 
νοῆσαι διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματός μον πιστεύειν ἐπὶ 
τὸν θεόν, ἀφεθήσονται αὐτῷ αἱ ἁμαρτίαι" 
μετὰ δώδεκα ἔτη ἐξέλθετε εἰς τὸν κόσμον, 
μή τις εἴπῃ Οὐκ ἀκηκόαμεν. But this could 
not be the case, as we have Peter and Johu 
going down, to Samaria, ver. 14. 

2. ἄνδρ. εὐλαβεῖς) Whether Jews or 
Christians is not certain. Ananias is so 
called, ch. xxii. 12 (not in rec.), and he 
was a Christian. At all events, there is 
no contrast implied in the δέ (as Mey.), 
‘Yet, notwithstanding the persecution and 
dispersion, pious men were found who, 
&e.:’ the δέ is merely the transitional par- 
ticle-—and, so far from its being any un- 
usual thing to bury an executed person, it 
was commanded among the Jews. Olshau- 
sen thinks that, if they had been Chris- 
tians, the term ἀδελφοί would have been 
used: but this does not seem by any means 
certain: we can hardly reason so minutely 
from the diction of one section in the nar- 
rative to that of another, especially in the 
case of a section so distinct and peculiar as 
this one. (Besides, ἀδελφοί in this sense 
does not occur till ch. ix. 30: see reff. 
there.) Probably they were pious Jews, 
not yet converts, but hearers and admirers 
of Stephen. 3. ἐλυμαίνετο] Properly 
used of wild beasts, or of hostile armies, 
devastating and ravaging. (See examples 
in Kuin.) κατὰ τοὺς οἴκους, enter- 
ing (the houses) from house to house,— 
a pregnant coustruction. σύρων) So 


ABCDE 
HPxrab 
dtghk 
lmop 
13 


συγ ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 85 


4 Οἱ μὲν οὖν ' διασπαρέντες ™ διῆλθον " εὐαγγελιζόμενοι 1 ver. 1. 


m abs., ver. 40. 


Ν 7 / a ‘ ARE 
τὸν "λόγον. ὃ Φίλιππος δὲ "κατελθὼν εἰς πόλιν τῆς FR 35. χη 
! 9 / ΄-“ Ν , Lal c. 25. Luk 
Σαμαρείας " ἐκήρυσσεν 1 αὐτοῖς τὸν χριστόν. ὁ * προςεῖχον +. isomy. * 
ings xxvi. 


\ « ") lal , = ΄ \ a , 8 € 22. 
δὲ of ὄχλοι τοῖς λεγομένοις ὑπὸ τοῦ Φιλίππου " ὁμοθυμα- 7, ssonty. 
, 2 a 3 ΄ > \ \ / a ἃ ΞΞ iw.’ 
Sov, ‘év τῷ ἀκούειν αὐτοὺς καὶ βλέπειν τὰ σημεῖα &°anix 3 
" ᾿ ch. ix. 32 al. 


3 / \ \ » , 
ἐποίει" 1 πολλοὶ yap τῶν ἃ ἐχόντων τὰν πνεύματα Waa (Lake only, 
΄“ a 7 > ΄ \ aaa ati 
Gupta “ βοῶντα φωνῇ μεγάλῃ * ἐξήρχοντο, πολλοὶ δὲ 2 ace. Ee 
154, ΧΙ. 


22) only. : p = with acc. of person, 1 Cor. i. 23. Phil. 1. 15. Κ΄ 7- XP. L.P. kK. τ. ἰησ.» 
ch. ix, 20 reff. K. χρ. (σ΄. 2 Cor. iv. 5. see 2 Cor. i. 19. q so ch. xx. 2. Matt. iv. 23. Luke 
iv. 15. 2 Cor. ii. 18. r -— and constr., vv. 10, 1]. ch. xvi. 14. 1 Tim. i. 4. iii. 8. iv. 1,13.. Tit. 


s ch. i. 14 reff. 


i.]4. Heb. ii.1. vii. 13, 2 Pet. i. 19 only. 
w Luke xviii. 7, 38. ch. xvii, 6 al. 


u Mark iii. 30 only. v ch. v. 16 reff. 
x = Matt. xii. 43, xvii. 18. ch. xvi. 8 al. 


4. ndA@ov &! [sah(Tischdf) ]. 
demid) Syr eth }. 

5. καλελθων D!-gr(txt D8). ins τὴν bef πολ. (exegetical addition. 
art is not needed, see note) ABN m. καισαριας N!. 

6. rec for δε, τε, with E-gr HP rel (zth-pl) (Chr, ]: txt ABCD?X ah p 36 vulg E-lat 
syr coptt.—ws δὲ ἡκοῦον παν οἱ oxAo. mposetx. Tas Aey. D}(corrd to txt by D* and- 
corr). om tov D'(ins D8) f. for ομοθ., ( . « « « .} ovto or -re D}(txt D3). 

αὐτου N}(perhaps: s added or renewed by &*). 

7. rec roAAwv (alteration to avoid the difficulty: see note. Meyer's account, that etnp- 
χετο was first altered to-ovro to suit πνευματα [the converse is much more probable |,and 
then πολλων to -οι to furnish aplur nom to ἐξηρχοντο, seems to me very unlikely), with HP 
rel copt [arm] Chr,: (... )((ap)a) ὃ (απο D*) πολλοῖς D?: txt ABCEN p 86 vulg syrr 


Ps. v, 2. t ch. ix. 3 reff. 


Gen, xxxix. 14. 


at end add tov θεου E vulg(with am tol, not fuld 
The 


sah [ eth-pl(Tischdf) }. 


Philo, in Flacce. 9, vol. ii. p..526, συρόμενοι 
K. πατούμενοι διὰ τῆς πόλεως ἁπάσης 
ἐξαναλώθησαν. mapedivov| viz. to the 
gaolers—so παραδιδοὺς εἰς φυλακάς, ch. 
xxii. 4. 

4 1138.1 PREACHING OF THE GOSPFI 
IN SAMARIA BY PHILIP. 4.] μὲν οὖν 
resumes the subject dropped at the end of 
ver. 1, and determines this verse to be the 
opening of a new section, not the close of 
the former. διῆλθ.] See reff. evayy.- 
τ. Moy. | Here first we become acquainted 
with the missionary language so frequent 
in the rest of the book: and we have τὸν 
λόγον, an expression very familiar among 
Christians when the book was written, for 
[the fuller one which must have prevailed 
at first] τ. A. τοῦ θεοῦ. 5. Φίλιππος | 
The deacon; not, as apparently implied in 
the citation from Polycrates in Eus. H. Εἰ. 
iii. 31, v. 24, one of the twelve: this is 
precluded by vy. 1 and 14. And it is 
probable, that the persecution should have 
been directed especially against the col- 
leagues of Stephen. Philip is mentioned 
again as ὁ evayyeAtorhs,—probably from 
his having been the first recorded who 
εὐηγγελίσατο τὸν Adyov,—in ch. xxi. 8,— 
as married and having four daughters, 
virgins, who prophesied. πόλιν τ. 
Σαμ.7 Verbatim as John iv. 5, in which 
rase it is specified as being Sychar (Sichem). 
As the words stand here (πόλιν = τὴν 


rec wey. bef pwn: txt ABCDEH PX rel vulg Chr. 
χετο (see above), with HP rebChr: txt ABCDER k p [sah(Tischdf) arm ]. 


rec εξηρ- 
aft πολλ. δε 


᾿ πόλιν, after εἰς, compare also 2 Pet. ii. 6), 


seeing that Σαμάρεια (vv. 9, 14; ch. ix. 
31; xv. 3) signifies the déstrict, I should 
be inclined to believe that Sychem is here 
also intended. It was a place of rising 
importance, and in after-times eclipsed the 
fame of its neighbour Samaria, which latter 
had been, on its presentation by Augustus 
to Herod the Great, re-fortified and called 
Sebaste, Jos. Antt. xv. 7. 3, and 8.5. It 
still, however, bore the name of Samaria, 
Jos. xx. 6. 2,—where, from the context, 
the district can hardly be intended. 
αὐτοῖς | The inhabitants, implied in πόλις, 
6. mposetxov .. .1 If this place 
was Sychem, the narrative in John iv. will 
fully account for the readiness with which 
these people received the κήρυγμα τοῦ 
χριστοῦ---- the proclamation of the Christ.’ 
7.7 According to the reading in the 
text, which is too strongly upheld by 
manuscript authority to be rejected for 
the easier ordinary one, πολλοί is a “ nomi- 
nativus pendens’ (compare ch. vil. 40; 
Rev. iii. 12. Winer, edn. 6, § 29. 1), For 
in the case of many who had unclean 
spirits, they crying out with a loud 
voice, came out: ἐξήρχοντο being plur., 
as often when the neuter plural betokens 
living agents; see Winer, edn. 6, § 58. 3, 
a.” ip. πολλοί has probably been 
altered to πολλῶν, to agree with τῶν 
ἐχόντων, on the difficulty being perceived. 


860 


TPAZEIS AITOSTOAQN. 


Vuk 


yLukev. 18, J παραλελυμένοι καὶ * χωλοὶ ὃ ἐθεραπεύθησαν" 8 ἐγένετο δὲ 


“beng λα: 33. χλὴ \ 2 pe 'χ, . - 
ΚΘ only, Ἶ 
coe gah. xii. 770 7) Xapa εν ΤῊ σιολει E€KELVI) 
12. 1 Macc 
ix. 55. 
& Matt. xi. 5. 
oo. iii. 2. Lev. xxi. 18, a Matt. iv. 23. xvii. 18 . 


xlii. 17 (only ?). 


chere onlyt. (-yos, ch. xiii. 6. τΎεια, ver. 11.) 


9 > ‘ ’ ’ , 
ἀνὴρ δέ τις ὀνόματι 


+ 7 b - ΄“ >] ~ , c , \ d ᾽ ’ 
Σίμων ὃ προὔπῆρχεν ἐν τῇ πόλει “ μαγεύων καὶ ἃ ἐξιστά- 


(Sir. xviii. 19.) b Luke xxiii. 12 only. Job 


ἃ -avwy here only. trans. 


Luke xxiv. 22 only. see Job xii.17. Eur. Frag. Αὐγή 1, νῦν δ᾽ οἶνος ἐξέστησέ με. 


ins καὶ E 13 syr Chr). 


om καὶ D}(ins D*) m. 


e%eparevovto Ὦ 13. 


8. rec kat ey., with EHP rel syr: xapa τ. wey. ey. D-gr [Syr (sah)]: txt ABCR p 


copt. 
fuld [sah] eth. 
9. mpovrapxwr D-gr. 


om καὶ D}(ins D?’). 


rec x. μεγαλη, with DEHP rel [vulg-ed syr arm]: txt ABC p am demid 


rec εξιστων, with D?EH rel 


Chr, Thl: seducens vulg Iren-int: swadens E-lat: mentem auferens D-lat: εξεί - - . .) 


(cteotavey Wetst) D!: txt ABCPR p. 


9. Σίμων] Neander, in the course 
of some excellent remarks on this whole 
history (see further on ver. 14), identifies, 
and I believe with reason, this Simon with 
one mentioned as living from ten to twenty 
years after this by Josephus, Antt. xx. 7. 
2, καθ᾽ ὃν καιρὸν τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας ἐπετρόπευσε 
Φῆλιξ, θεασάμενος ταύτην (Drusilla) .. . 
λαμβάνει τῆς γυναικὸς ἐπιθυμίαν, καὶ Σίμωνα 
ὀνόματι, τῶν ἑαυτῷ φίλων, ᾿Ιουδαῖον, Κύ- 
πριον δὲ γένος, μάγον εἶναι σκηπτόμενον, 
τέμπων πρὸς αὐτὴν ἔπειθε Toy ἄνδρα κατα- 
λιποῦσαν αὐτῷ γήμασθαι. ‘The only ditti- 
culty seems to be, that Simon is stated by 
Justin Martyr, himself a Samaritan, to 
have been Zapapéa, ἀπὸ κώμης λεγομένης 
Γίττων. But it has struck me that either 
Justin, or perhaps more probably Josephus, 
inay have confounded Ghittim with Chit- 
tim, i.e. Citium in Cyprus. This con- 
jecture I also find mentioned in the Dict. 
of Biography and Mythology, sub voce. 
The account in Josephus is quite in 
character with what we here read of 
Simon : not inconsistent (Meyer) with ver. 
24, which appears to have been uttered 
under terror occasioned by the solemn 
denunciation of Peter. Justin goes on 
to relate that le was worshipped as a God 
ut Rome in the time of Claudius Ceasar, 
on account of his magical powers, and had 
a statue on the island in the Tiber, 
inscribed ‘Simoni Deo Sancto.’ Singu- 
larly enough, in the year 1574, a stone 
was found in the Tiber (or standing on 
the island in the year 1662, according to 
the Dict. of Biogr. and Myth.), with 
the inscription SEMONI SANCO DEO 
FIDIO SACRVM, i.e. to the God Semo 
Sancus, the Sabine Hercules, which makes 
it probable that Justin may have been 
misled. The history of Simon is full 
of legend and fable. The chief sources of 
it are the Recognitiones and Clementina 
of the pseudo-Clemens. He is there said 
to have studied at Alexandria, and to have 
been, with the heresiarch Dositheus, a dis- 
ciple of Johu the Baptist. Of Dositheus 


he became first the disciple, and then the 
successor. Origen (in Matt. Comm. § 33, 
vol. iii. p. 851) makes Dositheus also a 
Samaritan: so also contra Cels. i. 57, 
vol. 1 p. 372, and Hom. xxv. in Lue. 
vol. iii. p. 962. His own especial fol- 
lowers (Simoniani) had dwindled so much 
in the time of Origen, that he says 
νυνὶ δὲ τυὺς πάντας ἐν TH οἰκουμένῃ οὐκ 
ἔστι Σιμωνιανοὺς εὑρεῖν τὸν ἀριθμὸν οἶμαι 
τριάκοντα. καὶ τάχα πλείονας εἶπον τῶν 
ὄντων, contra Cels. ubi supra; see also ib. 
vi. 11, p. 638, and περὶ ἀρχῶν, iv. 17, p. 
176. In the Recognitiones and the Cle- 
mentina are long reports of subsequent 
controversies between Simon Magus and 
Peter, of which the scene is laid at Ceesarea. 
According to Arnobius (adv. Gentes, ii. 12, 
p. 828 ed. Migne), the Constt. Apostol. 
(ii. 14, p. 620; vi. 9, p. 932 ed. Migne), 
and Cyril of Jerusalem, he met with his 
death at Rome, having, during an en- 
counter with Peter, raised himself into the 
air by the aid of evil spirits, and heing pre- 
cipitated thence at the prayer of Peter and 
Paul. [1 saw in the church of 8. Francesca 
Romana in the forum, a stone with two 
dents in it and this inscription, ‘On this 
stone rested the knees of S. Peter when 
the demons carried Simon Magus through 
the air.’ | The fathers generally regard him 
as the founder of Gnosticism : this may be 
in some sense true: but, from the very little 
authentic information we possess, it is im- 
possible to ascertain how far he was identi- 
tied with their tenets. Origen (contra Cels. 
v. 62, p. 625) distinctly denies that his fol- 
lowers were Christians in any sense: Aav- 
βάνει τὸν Κέλσον, ὅτι οὐδαμῶς τὸν Ἰησοῦν 
ὁμολογοῦσιν υἱὸν θεοῦ Σιμωνιανοί, ἀλλὸ δύ- 
ναμιν θεοῦ λέγουσι τὸν Σίμωνα. μα- 
yevov | Not to be joined with προῦπῆρχεν 
(as in E. V. and Kuin.), which belongs to 
ev πόλει: exercising magic arts, such as 
then were very common in the East and 
found wide acceptance; impostors taking 
advantage of the very general expectation 
of a Deliverer at this time, to set them- 


ABCDE 

HPxrab 

dfghk 

ΟΡ 
12 


ΤΙ, pus 
TOU... 
ABCDE 
HLPR a 
bdfgh 
kimo 


pls 


8—13. TIPAZEIS, AMOSTOAON. 87 


‘ ” a 
νων τὸ “ ἐθνος τῆς Σαμαρείας, λέγων εἶναί ἧ τινα ἑαυτὸν “ = Matt. xi. 
of ' Ω κι ᾧ oe 
"μέγαν 10 @ μικροῦ = EWS ς with adj., 
: ΄ ΄ : ae as an a 
'weyarou λέγοντες Οὗτός ἐστιν ἡ * δύναμις τοῦ θεοῦ ἡ φοβερόν τι 


eb. x. 27. 
θέαμα, 


Ὁ προςεῖχον πάντες ‘amo 


λ / tr 1] h al ΟΝ > a \ 4. ἢ ¢€ - Ρ : 
καλουμένη μεγάλη. προςεῖχον δὲ αὐτῷ διὰ τὸ ' ἱκανῷ Lucian, Phi- 
͵ A , ; Z opat.8. 
ἱχρόνῳ ταῖς τὶ μαγείαις " ἐξεστακέναι αὐτούς" 15 ὅτε. 66% BUM 
Ψ ΄ Las a i . 48, h. 
ο ἐπίστευσαν τῷ Φιλίππῳ  εὐαγγελιζομένῳ περὶ τῆς 1 βα- xix.27. 
7, τι Ἂς i FNAL = rt Heh. iv. 14. 
q a al > ἣ 2 4 ee 
σιλείας τοῦ 4 θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ ὀνόματος ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ, ἐβαπ- % 2.21. 
, ΕΣ ὃ Ν a 13 ς΄ δὲ , \ > \ 10. 
τίζοντο ἀνὸρες TE καὶ γυναῖκες. ὁ δὲ Σέμων καὶ αὐτὸς bh ver. 6 τοῦ. 
a f : Ἀν τ rs ‘ i Heb. viii. 11, 
ἐπίστευσεν, καὶ βαπτισθεὶς " ἣν * προςκαρτερῶν τῷ Did-_ from ter. 
ΧΧΥΊΙΙ, 
A na \ / , 1.) 
im7™@, ᾿ θεωρῶν τε σημεῖα καὶ " δυνάμεις peyaras γινο- «ORF 16. 
1 Οὐδ τ. 18; 


1 Luke viii. 27. xx. ἢ. ch. xiv. 3. 
Rom. xvi. 28. m here only +. see ver. 9. 


xxvi'. 9 only. see ch. ix. 23,43. dat. of duration, Luke viii, 


24. 
n 2 Cor. v. 13 reff. perf., here only, 


29. 


o = Matt. xxi. “8 ἡ. John v.24. 1Johnv. 10 al. Gen. xv. 6. p w. περί, here only. see ch. vii. 52. 
q ch. xix. 8 reff rconstr., ch. li. 5 reff. s = ch. i. lt reff. t ch. vii. 56 reff. 
u = Matt. xi. 20, 21, 23. and ||. Mark vi. 2. ch. ii. 22. 1 Cor. xii. 10. Gal. iii. 5$. 


om το E. εθος B?. 
10. zposeryay®. om παντες HP rel eth-pl Iren-int,: ins ABCDER® k p 18 vss Chr,. 
rec om καλουμενη(α5 appearing unnecessary, and being difficult, see note), with HLP 
rel Syr sah eth-pl Chr: ins ABCDEX p 13 vulg syr copt eth-rom arm Orig, Iren-int,. 

11. μαγιαις ACDEHR f 13. εξιστακεναι ACEH k mo: txt BDLPR rel. 

12. του φιλιππου ευαγγελιζομενον N!. rec ins τα bef περι, with HLP rel Chr, : om 
ABCDER p 36 vulg syrr [coptt } eth. for θεου, κὺ RN}. rec ins Tov bef ino. (with 
13): om ABCDEHLPN rel Chr Thl.—om ima. 18. | om τε A lect-12 vss(some). 

13. ins καὶ bef mposk. D?. Geopwr(sic) X. for τε, Ta B. transp. σὴμ. and 
δυν. ΕΗ ΠΡ rel syr Chr: txt ABCDN k m p 13. 36 vulg Syr coptt eth [arm ].---μεγαλα 
E o syr-w-ast zth-pl: om HLP rel: txt ABCDEN k m p 18 vulg Syr coptt ath-rom Chr. 


selves up by means of such trickeries as 
‘some great ones.’ We have other exain- 
ples in Elymas (ch. xiii.): Apollonius of 
Tyana; and somewhat later, Alexander of 
Abonoteichos: see these latter in Dict. 
of Biogr. and Myth. τινὰ μέγαν] 
Probably not in such definite terms as his 
followers later are represented as putting 
into his mouth: ‘Ego sum sermo Dei... 
ego paracletus, ego onmipotens, ego omnia 
Dei.’ Jerome on Matt. xxiv. 5, vol. vii. 
p. 193.6 10. ἢ Suv. τ. 0. ἢ καλουμένη 
μεγάλη] Neander (]. ὁ.) and Meyer think 
that they must have referred to the Adyos, 
the creating and governing manifestation 
of God so much spoken of in the Alexan- 
drine philosophy (see extracts from Philo in 
note on Jolni.1. The term, but by no 
means with the same idea, was adopted by 
the Spirit, speaking by John, as belonging 
to the Son of God: see the same note, end), 
and must have regarded Simon as an in- 
carnation of the λόγος (the μητρόπολι5 πα- 
σῶν τῶν δυνάμεων Tov θεοῦ, Philo), so that 
their erroneous: belief would form some 
preparation for the great truth of an in- 
carnate Messiah, preached by Philip. But 
to this De W. well replies, that we can 
hardly suppose the Alexandrine philosophy 
to have been so familiar to the mass of the 
people, and refers the expression to their 
popular belief of a great angel (Chron. 


Sam. 10), who might, as the angels were 
called by the Samaritans the powers of 
God (for which he refers to Reland, de 
Samar. § 7. Gesen. Theol. Samar. p. 21 ἢ), 
be designated as ἡ δύν. τ. 0. ἡ καλουμένη 
μεγάλη. καλουμένη rests on such 
strong manuscript authority, and is so un- 
likely to have been inserted (the idea of a 
scholium to indicate the force of the art. 
(Bloomf.) is quite out of the question, 
no such scholium being here needed), that 
both on external and internal grounds it 
must form part of the text. The lit. ren- 
dering will be, This man is the power of 
God which is called great: the sense, 
‘This man is that power of God (see above) 
which we know as the great one.’ 
λεγομένη, found in a few later mss., is an 
explanation of καλ. by a more usual word. 
11. ἐξεστακέναι can hardly be as 
E. V., transitive, “he had bewitched them:” 
there appears to be no example of the per- 
fect being thus used. 13. | ‘Simon saw 
his followers dropping off, and was him- 
self astounded at the miracles wrought by 
Philip: he therefore thought it best himself 
also to acknowledge this superior power. 
He attached himself to Philip, and was bap- 
tized like the rest: but we are not, as the 
sequel shews, to understand that the preach- 
ing of the Gospel had made any impression 
on his heart, but that he accounted for what 


rT a — - 
89 ΤΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ: ΧΗΣ 
τ - | ΄ \ Tee ¢ , 

vmid., Matt, μένας YeEiotato. 1: ᾿Ακούσαντες δὲ οἱ ἐν ᾿Ιεροσολύμους ΑΒΟΡΕ 
xii. 59. a > ’ 4 wx δι <i, ign , \ χν , - HLPRa 
Markiit2 ἀπόστολοι OTL δ δέδεκτα, ἡ Σαμάρεια τὸν 55 λόγον τοῦ pyafgh 
ii. 47. ch. ii, 7, 12. ix. 21 only. Gen. xliii, 33. w Luke ix. 53. 2 Cor. xi. 4. x Luke viii. 13. ch. kK] mo 

xi. 1. xvii. 11. 1 Thess. i. 6. 11.13. Prov. iv. 10. y ch. xi. 1 reff. pi3 


γινομενα EHLP rel : om C 126-80 lect-25: tx’ ABDN k m p 18. 
14. ἱερουσαλημ Ὁ. 


C'D'R}. 


he saw in his own fashion. He was con- 
vineed, from the works which Philip did, 
that he was in league with some powerful 
spirit : he viewed baptism as the initiation 
into communion with that spirit, and ex- 
pected that he should be able to make use 
of the higher power thus gained for his 
own purposes, and unite this new magical 
power to his own. All were baptized who 
professed belief in Jesus as the Messiah: 
there was therefore no reason for rejecting 
Simon, considering besides, that from the 
nature of the case he would for the time 
have given up his magieal practices.’ 
Neander, Pfl. u. Leit. p. 102. ‘Hoe 
Simonis exemplo clare patet, non conferri 
omnibus indifferenter in Baptismo gratiam, 
que illic figuratur. Papistarum dogma est, 
Nisi quis ponat obicem peccati mortalis, 
omnes cum signis recipere veritatem et 
effectum. Ita magicam vim tribuant Sacra- 
mentis, quasiabsque fide prosint. Nos autem 
sciamus offerri nobis a Domino per Sacra- 
wnenta quiequid sonant annexe promis- 
siones, et non frustra nec inaniter offerri, 
modo fide ad Christum directi:ab ipso 
petamus quicquid Sacramenta promittunt. 
Quamvis autem nihil illi tune profuerit 
Buaptismi receptio, si tamen conversio postea 
secuta est, ut nonnulli conjiciunt, non ex- 
tincta fuit nec abolita utilitas. Sepe enim 
fit, ut post longum tempus demum opere- 
tur Spiritus Dei, quo efficaciam suam Sa- 
cramenta proferre incipiant.’ Calvin in loc. 

14—24.| Mission ΟΕ PETER AND 
JOHN TO SAMARIA. A question arises 
on this procedure of the Apostles :—whe- 
ther it was as a matter of course, that the 
newly baptized should, by the laying on of 
hands subsequently, receive the Holy Ghost, 
—or whether there was in the case of these 
Samaritans any thing peculiar,which caused 
the Apostles to go down to them and per- 
form this act. (1) The only analogous 
case is ch. xix. 5,6: in using which we 
wust observe that there it is distinctly 
asserted that the miraculous gifts of the 
Spirit followed the laying on of Paul’s 
hands; and that by the expression ἰδών 
in ver. 18, which must be taken literally, 
the same is implied here. And on this 
point the remarks of Calvin are too im- 
portant to be omitted: ‘Hic occurrit 
questio. Dicit enim tantum fuisse bap- 
tizatos in nomine Christi, atque ideo non- 
dum fuisse Spiritus participes. Atqui vel 
Imapewm et omni virtute et gratia carcre 


εξισταντο 


Baptismum oportet, aut a Spiritu sancto 
habere quicquid efficacie habet. In Bap- 
tismo abluimur a peccatis : atqui lavacrum 
nostrum Spiritus sancti opus esse docet 
Paulus (Tit. iii. 5). Aqua Buaptismi san- 
guinis Christi symbolum est: atqui Petrus 
Spiritum esse predicat, a quo irrigamur 
Christi sanguine (1 Pet. 1. 2). In Baptis- 
mo crucifigitur vetus noster homo, ut sus- 
citemur in vite novitatem (Rom. vi. 6): 
unde autem hoe totum, nisi ex sanctifica- 
tione Spiritus? Denique Baptismo nihil 
reliquum fiet, si a Spiritu separetur. Ergo 
Sanaritanos, qui vere Christum in Bap- 
tismo induerant, Spiritu quoque vestitos 
fuisse neganduin non est (Gal. iii. 27). 
Et sane Lucas hie non de communi Spiri- 
tus gratia loquitur, qua nos sibi Deus in 
fihos regenerat, sed de singularibus illis 
donis, quibus Dominus initio Evangelii 
quosdam esse preeditos voluit ad ornandum 
Christi regnum.’ And a little after: ... 
‘ Papiste, dum ficticiam suain confirmatio- 
nem extollere volunt, in hane sacrilegam 
vocem prorumpere non dnbitant, semi- 
cbristianos esse, quibus manus nondum 
fuerunt imposite. (See this asserted by 
Wordsworth, in loc. p. 40, col. 2, 
bottom.) Hoc jam tolerabile non est, 
quod quum symbolum hoc temporale esset, 
ipsi perpetuam legem finxerunt in Ec- 
ΘΙ δι με. 2h Atqui fateri coguntur ipsi 
quoque, Ecclesiam nonnisi ad tempus donis 
istis fuisse ornatam. Unde sequitur, im- 
positionem manuum, qua usi sunt Apostoli, 
finem habuisse, quum effectus cessavit’ (in 
loc.). And yet after this, Wordsw. refers 
to. “Calvin here,” “in whose opinion,” 
says R. Nelson, “this passage in the 
Acts shews that Confirmation was insti- 
tuted by the Apostles.’ This example 
may serve to suggest extreme caution in 
trusting to Wordsw.’s reports of the opi- 
nions of the Fathers and ecclesiastical 
writers. The English church, in retaining 
the rite of confirmation, has not grounded 
tt on any institution by the Apostles, but 
merely declared the laying on of hands on 
the candidates, to certify them (by this 
sign) of God’s favour and goodness towards 
them, to be, ‘ after the example of the holy 
Apostles.’ Nor is there any trace in the 
office, of the conferring of the Holy Ghost 
by confirmation ;—but a distinct recogni- 
tion of the former reception of the Holy 
Spirit (at Baptism), and a prayer for the in- 
crease of His influence, proportioned to the 


14—18. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ AIOSTOAON. 


89 


“ \ » γ΄ Κ 
5 θεοῦ, ἀπέστειλαν πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἸΠ]έτρον καὶ ᾿Ιωάννην, | οἵ- τ}. xxiv.1, 


22. Gen. 
xlii. 3. 


τινες * καταβάντες *rposnvEavTo "περὶ αὐτῶν ὅπως °° λάβω- 4 Lune vi. 28, 


be nr ςο “ 10 » 7 \ s 4.4.53 3 \ > A 

ow ὃς πινεῦμα “ ἅγιον: 16 οὐδέπω yap ἣν ἐπ᾽ οὐδενὶ αὐτῶν 3. 
g / ," σ “~ 

ἃ ἐπυπεπτωκός, © μόνον δὲ [δ βεβαπτισμένοι " ὑπῆρχον © εἰς 


\ {3 “ / >) “- 
τὸ ἰὄνομα τοῦ Kupiov ᾿Ιησοῦ. 


i o + ae ᾽ ΄ \ be 2 ΄ 
χεῖρας ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς, καὶ *° ἐλάμβανον 
ΟὟ: , er - a“ lal a 
18 (dav δὲ ὁ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς * ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν 


« here 3ce. ch. (ii. 38) χ. 47. xix. 2. John xx. 22. 
4.12. ch. xiii. 11. xix. 17. Rev. xi. 11 only. 
v. 36 al. 
ch. x. 48. g 1 Cor. x. 2. 
Wal. Jamesii. 15. 2 Pet. i. 8. ii. 19. 11]. 11. 
ix. 18. ch. vi. 6. ix. 12, 17. xiii. 3 al. 
2 Chron. xxv. 27, 


for θεου, xv RN}. 
13 Eus, (Did, ] Chr). 


16. om wv. 16, 17 (similarity of endgs) 13. 
for ez, emt D'(txt D-corr!) : ev ΕἸ, 
for κυρ., χριστου HLPadefgh1: aft xu ww ins χρὺ ἢ). 


txt ABCDENX p 36 Did, Chy,. 
pi(?)). εβαπτισμ. δὲ. 


r / . 
17 τότε ἰέπετίθεσαν τὰς 


Gen. xv. 12. see Rom. xv. 3. 
f Matt. xxviii. 19. ch. xix. 5. 
Gal. iii. 27. 

w. part., ch. xix. 36 only, 


ὍΣΟΙ ἢν 3: iv: 

1 Thess. 
v. 25. 
2 Thess. 1. 11. 
ili. 1. Heb. 
xiii. 18 only. 
Ps. Ixxi. 15) 

b John vii. 39. 


i ‘ i 89. 

be ρεῦμα; ἡ ΔΎΣΙΝ Rem unis 
ii. 12. 2 Cor. 
xi.4. Gal. 


iii. 2. 
ἃ of the Spirit, ch. x. 44. xi. 15 only. = Luke 
e Matt. vili. 8. Mark 
1 Cor. i. 13,15. w. ἐπί, ch. ii. 38. ἐν, 
Luke xi. 13. xvi. i4. ch. ii. 30. Rom. iv. 
i Num. xxvii. 18. Matt. 
2 Tim,i.6. Heb. vi. 2 only ¥. see 


(Rom, vi. 3.) 
h 


k 1 Tim, iv. 14. 


rec ins tov bef πετρ., with HLP rel [Did,]: om ABCDEN 0 p 


15. mposevé. B. 
rec (for ovderw) ovrw, with HL[ P] rel : 
ovdeva D! (txt 


17. rec ἐπετιθουν, with D!EHLP rel Chr, Thl: txt A B(-@0cav) Ο(-θεισαν) D-corr! or 2 


No p 36 Eus, Did, Cyr-jer,. 


18. rec (for ιδων) θεασαμενος, with HLP rel [Chr,] Thi: txt ABCDEN b'd kop 


maturer life now opening on the newly 
confirmed. (2) If then we have here xo 
institution of a perpetual ordinance, some- 
thing peculiar to the case before us must 
have prompted this journey. And here 
again wehavea question: Was that moving 
cause in the Samaritans, or in Philip ? 
J believe the true answer to the question 
will be found by combining both. Our 
Lord’s command (ch. i. 8) had removed 
all doubt as to Samaria being a legitimate 
field for preaching, and Samaritan converts 
being admissible. (So also with regard to 
Gentile converts,—see ch. x., notes: but, 
as the church at this time believed, they 
must be circumcised, which the Sainaritans 
already were,—and keep the law, which 
after their manner the Samaritans did.) 
The sudden appearance, however, of a body 
of baptized believers in Samaria, by the 
agency of one who was not one of the 
Apostles,—while it would excite in them 
every feeling of thankfulness and joy, 
would require their presence and power, 
as Apostles, to perform their especial part 
as the divinely appointed Founders of the 
Church. Add to this, that the Samaritans 
appear to have been credulous, and easily 
moved to attach themselves to individuals, 
whether it were Simon, or Philip; which 
might make the Apostles desirous to be pre- 
sent in person,and examine, andstrengthen 
their faith. Another reason may have been 
not without its influence: the Jewish 
church at Jerusalem would naturally forthe 
most part be alienated in mind from this 
new body of believers. Thehatred between 
Jews and Samaritans was excessive and 
unrelenting. It would therefore be in the 
highest degrce important that it should be 


shewn to the church at Jerusalem, that 
these Samaritans, by the agency of the 
same Apostles, were partakers of the same 
visibly testified gifts of the one Spirit. The 
use of this argument, which was afterwards 
applied by Peter in the case of the Gen- 
tiles, unexpected even by himself, ch. xi. 
17,—was probably no small part of the 
purpose of this journey to Samaria. 

14. ἸΤέτ. «. Iwav.] Perhaps éwo, in ac- 
cordance with the δύο δύο of their first 
missionary journey (Mark vi. 7): so Paul 
and Barnabas afterwards (ch. xili. 2): and 
the same principle seems to have been 
adhered to even when these last separated : 
Paul chose Silas, Barnabas took Mark. 
PETER,—because to him belonged, in this 
early part of the Gospel, in a remarkable 
manner, the first establishing of the 
church ; it was the fultilment of the pro- 
mise ἐπὶ ταύτῃ TH πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν 
ἐκκλησίαν. It was he who had (in com- 
mon with all the Apostles, it is true, but 
in this early period more especially com- 
mitted to him) τὰς κλεῖδας τῆς βασιλείας 
τῶν ovpayav,—who opened the door to the 
3000 on the day of Pentecost, now (as a 
formaland ratifying act) to the Samaritans, 
and in ch, x. to the Gentiles. So far, is 
plain truth of Scripture history. The mon- 
strous fiction begins, when to Peter is at- 
tributed a fixed diocese and successors, and 
to those successors a delegated power more 
like that ascribed to Simon Magus than 
that promised to Peter. This is the last 
time that JOHN appears in the Acts. He 
is only once more mentioned in the N. T. 
(except in the Revelation), viz. as having 
been present in Jerusalem at Paul’s visit, 
Gal. ii. 9. 15. wposyvé.} So laying 


90 


Ἰ pres., ch. xvi. 
38 reff. 

m Luke xi. 13. 
John iil. 34. 
ch. v. 32. xv. 
8. 1 Thess. 
iv. 8 (1 John 
iv. 13). 

n= Matt. xxv. 
20. 2 Kings 


p= Matt. x. 1 
ΣΙ. fr. 1 Macc. 
i. 15. 

r Matt. vii. 13. 
Rom. ix. 22. 
1 Tim. vi. 9. 
Heb. x. 39. 
Rev. xvii. 8, 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ATLOSTOAON: 


“, es i b] θῶ Ν i A be 
Wa @ εαν eETLUG) TAS χείρας 


διὰ ° ἄτων δ κτᾶσθαι. 
XPNM 


ἔστιν ὃς εὐθεῖα ἃ ἔναντι τοῦ θεοῦ. 


VILE 


\ a , “- 
ἀποστόλων "" δίδοται τὸ ™ πνεῦμα, " προςήνεγκεν αὐτοῖς 
0 ΄ 19 ΄ / 5] \ \ p 2g , / 

χρήματα 1" λέγων Aote κἀμοὶ τὴν Ρ ἐξουσίαν ταύτην, 


λαμβάνῃ ° πνεῦμα ὃ ἅγιον. 


90) Il / δὲ 4 Ν > ‘ ἜΣ ᾽ ’ὔ Ul \ \ 
étpos δὲ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτὸν 'Γὸ ἀργύριόν σου σὺν σοὶ 

> . os ΄ \ lal a , 
“i. 20. εἴη V εἰς S ἀπώλειαν, ὅτι τὴν ‘ δωρεὰν τοῦ θεοῦ "" ἐνόμισας 


ς ” 
21 οὐκ ἔστιν σοι *Y μερὶς οὐδὲ 


"ἢ a 5 a , / e \ / 
δ» κλῆρος ἐν τῷ *OYW τούτῳ" ἢ γὰρ "καρδία σου οὐκ 


99 
92 


“ μετανόησον οὖν © ἀπὸ 


τῆς ἱ κακίας σου ταύτης, καὶ δεήθητι τοῦ κυρίου, ὃ εἰ ὃ ἄρα 


ll. Isa. xxxil. 2. s 2 Pet. ii. 1 &c. iii. 7, 16. t = ch. ii. 38 reff. u Matt. x. 34 41. Wisd. 
xiii. 2 al. τ constr., ! Cor. vii. 36. 2 Mace. vii. 19. Ps. xlix. 13 Symm. w ch. xxii. 28 reff. 
x Luke x. 42. ch. xvi. 12. 2 Cor. vi. 15. Col. i. 12 only. LP. y Deut. xii. 12. xiv. 27. xviii. 1. Isa. 
lvii. 6. see Col. i. 12. see AT Te eee es ore 15: a — Luke iv. 36. ch. xv. 6. b here 
only. Ps. Ixxvii. 37. e Luke iii. 4 1, 5 (from Isa. xl. 3,4). ch.ix. 11. xiii. 10. 2 Pet. 11, 15 only. 
d Luke i. 8 only. Exod. xxviii. 34 (38) al. fr. e here only. Jer. vill. 6 only. see Heb. vi. 1. (= μ. Ex, 
Rev. ii. 21 414. ἐπί. 2 Cor. xii. 21.) f = ] Cor. xiv. 20 reif. δ ch. (vil. 1] xvii. 22. Mark 

xi. 13 only. Xen. Mem. ii. 2.2. Anab. iil. 2. 22. 


13. 36 Constt, Bas, Chr, Damase[-ms, | Taras,. 


rec aft mv. ins To aytov (common 


addition, and suspicious wherever there is any variation in MSs), with ACDEHLP = 


36 vss [ Bas, ] Chr: om BN sah Constt). 
19. ins παρακαλῶν και bef Aey. Ὁ. 


36 Constt, Cyr-jer, Chr, [Bas, Damasc-ms, ] Taras, : 


ins καγω D. 
20. avtous N!. 
αργυριον σου to ch x. 4.) 
21. μερος E 1. 
word), with EHLP rel Constt 1 


‘aras: 


22. rec for κυρ., θεου (corrn from ver 21: 
txt ABCDEN Κα p18 syr coptt arm Constt, Bas, Chr, Ambr,. 


Taras, [Iren-int,] : 
αφηθησεται cov D}(txt D*) 1}. 


on of hands is preceded by prayer, ch. vi. 6; 
xiii. 3. 18. ἰδών] Its effects were 
therefore visible (see above), and conse- 
quently the effect of the laying on of the 
Apostles’ hands was not the cnward but 
the outward miraciudous gitts of the Spirit. 
προςήν. αὐτ. χρήματα] De W. ex- 
cellently remarks, ‘ He regarded the capa- 
bility of imparting the Holy Spirit,— 
rightly.as something conferred, as a de- 
rived power (see ref. Matt.), but wrongly, 
as one to be obtained by an exlernal 
method, without an inward disposition: 
and, since in external commerce every 
thing may be had for gold, he wanted to 
buy it. This is the essence of the sin of 
Simony, whichis intimately connected with 
unbelief in the power and signitication of 
the Spirit, and with materialism.’ 
Clearly, from the narrative, Simon himself 
did not receive the Spirit by the laying on 
of hands. His nefarious attempt to treat 
with the Apostles was before he himself had 
been presented to them for this purpose. 
20.| The solemn denunciation of Peter, 
like the declaration of Paul, 1 Cor. vi. 18, 
has reference to the perishableness of all 
worldly good, and of tho-e with it, whose 
chief end is the use of it (see Col. ii. 22), 
‘Thy gold and thou are equally on the way 
to corruption τ thy gold, as its nature Is: 


om to and gov D'(ins D4), 


om yep D}(txt D3) 177]. 
evavtiov Ch p 13 Bas, Chr, : 


mposnveyxay Ὠ)᾽} -οΥ (txt D4). 


Steph (for εαν) av, with DH a b?g hlmo 


txt ABCELPR rel. aft επιθω 


(Δ... D-lat is wanting from τὸ 


rec evwmiov (corrn to more usual 
txt ABD® 36. 
or doctrinal ?), with HLP rel vulg Syr 


thou with it, as having no higher life than 
thy natural corrupt one: as being bound in 
the σύνδεσμος THs ἀδικίας. The expression 
of Peter, 1 Pet. i. 7, χρυσίου τοῦ ἀπολλυ- 
μένου, isrernarkably parallei with this (see 
too 1 Pet. i. 18). évdptoas | aor. thou 
thoughtest: not ‘thou hast thought, as 
E. V. ‘The historic force of the tense is to 
be kept here: the Apostle uses it as looking 
forward to the day of ἀπώλεια, “ Let thy 
lot be a7., and that because thou thought- 
est,’ &e. κτᾶσθ.] to acquire, not pass. 
as E. V., ungrammatically. 21. μερὶς 
. κλῆρος] synonymous: the first ht., 
the second fig. (see ref.), but not without 
reference perhaps to the κληρονομία of the 
kingdom of God, the κλ. ἄφθαρτος, 1 Pet. 
4. τῷ Ady. τούτ.] The matter 
now spoken of, —‘to which I now allude.’ 
εὐθεῖα Hardly, ‘right before God,’ 
E. V., but thy heart is not right,—sin- 
cere, single-ineaning,—in God’s presence, 
‘as God sees it :’ i. e., ‘seen as it really is, 
by God, is not in earnest in its seeking 
after the gospel, but seeks it with un 
worthy ends in view.’ 22.] εἰ ἄρα, 
if perhaps (not “κέ sane,’ which it will 
not bear: see on its meaning, “if, which 
none can say,” Hartung, Partikellebre, i: 
440): and the uncertamty refers, not to 
the doubt whether Simon would repent 


ABCDE 
HLPxa 
bdfgh 
klmo 
pls 


© εἰς... 
ABCDE 
HLPNa 
bedfg 
hkim 
opls3 





19—26. ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ. ATIOSTOAQN. 91 
Ὁ ἀφεθήσεταί σοι ἡ ἱ ἐπίνοια τῆς καρδίας σου" 39 * εἰς yap  — Rom. iw. 
Im γολὴν τὴν χγικρίας καὶ 5Ρ σύνδεσμον Ρ ἀδικίας ὁρῶ σε ὄντα. 1) bre ome 
24 ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ Σίμων εἶπεν Δεήθητε ὑμεῖς ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ εὐνῇ 
πρὸς τὸν κύριον, ὅπως μηδὲν " ἐπέλθῃ ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ ὧν εἰρήκατε. δ καὶ. 
“ὃ Οἱ μὲν οὖν "διαμαρτυράμενοι καὶ ἱλαλήσαντες τὸν "pba F 
Lam. iii. 15. 


t ΄ a r u £ ΄ > «ς , , 
λόγον τοῦ κυρίου. " ὑπέστρεφον εἰς ᾿Ιἱεροσόλυμα, TrodAAS | Lam. iii. 1 ᾿ 
from Ps. ix. 


Te κώμας τῶν Σαμαρειτῶν “ εὐηγγελίζοντο' 30 ἄγγελος 


Ἴ (21). -Eph. 

iv. 31. Heb. 
xii. 15 only. Ὁ Eph. iv. 3. Col. ii. 19. 111. 14 only. L.P. p here only. Isa. lviii. 6. 
rch. xiil. 40 reff. s Luke xvi. 28. ch. ii. 40 417. 1 Thess. iv. 6. Heb. ii. 6. L.P.H. Jer. vi. 10. 
t = ch. xi. 19 reff. ἢ u Luke 1. 56 al. fr. Luke only, exc. (Mark xiv. 40 rec.) Gal. i. 11. Heb. vii. 
1. 2 Pet. ii. 21. Gen. xiii. 10. v Matt. ix. 35. Luke ix. 52 al. fr. Josh. xiii. 30. 


w constr., Luke iii. 18. ch. xiv. 15, 21. xvi. 10. Isa. xl. 9 (3). 

23. ἣν (= ev? eis D*) yap πικριας xoAn(xoans D?) κ. συνδεσμω(συνδεσμον D?) Ὁ], 

for opw, θεωρω DE Constt, Chr,. 

24. om o EH. aft εἰπὲν ins πρὸς avtous D (eth). ins παρακαλω bef 
δεηθ. D 137-80 syr-w-ast Constt,. D! has altered δεηθητε to δεηθητι. for u7ep, 
περι D!(txt D?) 96. for κυρ., θεον (see above, ver 22) Dk m ο 18 demid fuld syrr 
(but κυριον syr-mg) eth. for em cue, μοι D: euore: om em C. INS TouTwy 
των κακων bef wy D. for wy, ov D)(txt D2): ws L. aft εἰρ. ins κακων E: 
μοι D, D! syr-mg add also os[om syr-mg] πολλα κλαιων ov διελυμπανεν. 

25. διαμαρτυρομενοι LPR ἃ Ε] ο Thi-sit;. for κυρ.. θεου A 68 demid Syr copt 
[arm]: om τ. x. 8. 41. 65. rec ὑπέστρεψαν (alteration to historic tense), with 
CEHLP rel vss Thi: txt ABDN p 36 vulg. rec ιερουσαλὴμ (corrn to 
common form, see ver 26. It has been suggested that -σολυμα occurs here as belong- 
ing to a narrative in whieh this form has been the one used, see vv. 1, 14; whereas 
in the follg narrative, -σαλημ is used, vv 26, 27), with HL[P] rel: txt ABCDEN c k 
o p 13. 36 [vulg] Chr [ Aug, ]. for τε, δε D. rec ευηγγελισαντο (see above, 
on υπεστρ.), with HLP rel E-lat syr copt [tb] Chr ΤῊ] : txt ABCD E-gr δὲ p 36 vulg 


[syr arm] sah Aug,. 


or not (see below on γάρ) : but as to 
whether or not his sin may not have come 
under the awful category of those unpar- 
donable ones specified by our Lord, Matt. 
xii. 31, towhich words the form ἀφεθήσεται 
seems to have a tacit reference. Peter does 
not pronounce his sin to have been such, 
but throws in this doubt, to increase the 
motive to repent, and the earnestness ot his 
repentance. This verse is important, taken 
in connexion with John xx. 23, as shewing 
how completely the Apostles themselves re- 
ferred the forgiveness of sins to, and left 
it in, the sovereign power of God, and not 
to their owndelegated power of absolution. 

23.] yap gives the reasons, not why 
it would be difficult for forgiveness to take 
place, but why he had such extreme need 
of repentance and prayer, as being tied 
and bound by the chain of sin. ὄντα 
eis] ἃ pregnant construction—having 
fallen into and abiding in: notto be taken 
(as Kuin., &c.) as ‘ amounting to,’—‘ totus 
quantus es, nil nisi venenum amarum es et 
colligatio iniquitatis,’ which is very harsh, 
and improbable: nor (as Stier) is it pro- 
phetic, as to what would be the conse- 
quence, if he did not repent: ‘J see that 
thou wilt come to, ἄς. Least of all must 
it be said, here or any where else, that εἰς 
is put for ev. I cannot too often remind 
my younger readers, that it is a funda- 


mental maxim of all sound scholarship, 
that xo word is ever put for another. 
χολ. πικρ.} see reff. ‘the gall which is 
the very seat and essence of bitterness ’— 
a very gall of bitterness. The poison of 
serpents was considered to be seated in 
their gall: so χολὴ ἀσπίδος ἐν γαστρὶ 
αὐτοῦ, Job χχ. 14. See Plin. H.N. xi. 37. 
24.| Simon speaks here much as 
Pharaoh, Exod. (viii. 28; ix. 28) x. 17,— 
who yet hardened his heart. afterwards 
(Stier). It is observable also that he 
wishes merely for the averting of the 
punishment. The words ὅπως μηδὲν ἐπ- 
ἔλθῃ ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ ὧν εἰρήκατε seem remark- 
ably to set forth the mere terror of the 
carnal man, without any idea of the éuébe- | 
coming another man in thoughts and aims. 
25—40. | CoNVERSION OF THE AZTHIO- 
PIAN EUNUCH BY PHILIP’S TEACHING. 
25.) μὲν οὖν indicates (see note on 
ver. 4) that the paragraph should begin 
here, not at ver. 26 as commonly. 
κώμας τ. Sap.| It is interesting to recall 
Luke ix. 52, where on their entering into 
a κώμην Sau, the same John wishes to 
call down fire from heaven, καὶ ἀναλῶσαι 
αὐτούς. On constr. (evayy. w. accus.), see 
reff. The gradual sowing of the seed 
further and further from Jerusalem is 
advancing : not only is this eunuch to carry 
it to a far distant land, but Philip is sent 


92 


x = Matt. ix. 
9. Lukei. 39. 
iv. 29. ch. 
ες 17. 
Jonah iii. 2. 

y = ver. 36. 
ch. xxv. 6. 
(xxvii. 12.) 


Phil. iii. 14. Josh. v. 7. 
vii. 13, 14. ii 


Prov. vii. 27. 


26. πορευθητι CD.—avacras mop. 1) 40. 
B! repeats τὴν odor. 


for em, εἰς H: om p. 
disapproving). om ἐστιν p. 


toa desert road, away from town or vil- 
lage, to seek him. The imperfects (altered 
in the rec., see var. readd., into aorists) 
are significant. They were on their way 
back to Jerusalem, and were evangelizing 
the Samaritan villages, when the angel 
spake (aor.) to Philip. 26. | An angel, 
visibly appearing : not ina dream, — which 
is not, as some suppose, implied by ἀνα- 
στηθι, see reff. The ministration of angels 
introduces and brings about several occur- 
vences in the beginning of the church, see 
ch. v.19; x. 3; xii. 7 (xxvii. 23). The 
appearance seems to have taken place in 
Samaria, after the departure of Peter and 
John ; see above, on the imperfects. 

He would reach the place appointed by 
a shorter way than through Jerusalem : 
he would probably follow the high road 
(of the itineraries, see map in Conybeare 
and Howson’s St. Paul) as far as Gophua, 
and thence strike across the country south- 
westward, to join, at some point to which 
he would be guided, the road leading from 
Jerusalem to Gaza. Γάζαν] The south- 
ernmost city of Canaan (Gen. x. 19), in 
the portion of Judah (Josh. xv. 47), but 
soon taken from that tribe by the Philis- 
tines, and always spoken of as a Philistian 
city (1 Sam. vi. 17; 2 Kings xviii. 8 ; Amos 
i. 6—8 ; Zeph. ii. 4; Zech. ix. 5). In Jer. 
xlvii. 1, we have ‘before Pharaoh (Necho ?) 
smote Gaza,’—implying that at one time 
it was under Egypt. Alexander the Great 
took it after a siege of five months (Q. Curt. 
iv.6,7. Arrian, Alex. ii. 26), but did not 
destroy it (as Strabo relates in error, xvi. 
759, see below in this note), for we find it 
_ a strong place in the subsequent Syrian 
wars, see 1 Mace. (ix. 52) xi. 61, f.; xiii. 
43 (xiv. 7; xv. 28; xvi. 1); Jos. Antt. xiii. 
5.5; 13. 3 al. It was destroyed by the 
Jewish king Alexander Jannzus (96 A.c.), 
Jos. Antt. xiii. 13. 3, after a siege of a year, 
but rebuilt again by the Roman general 
Gabinius (Antt. xiv. 5. 3),—afterwards 
given by Augustus to Herod (xv. 7.3), and 
finally after his death attached tothe pro- 
vince of Syria (xvii. 11. 4). Mela, in the 
time of Claudius, calls it ‘ingens urbs et 
munita admodum,’ with which agree Euse- 
bius and Jerome. At present it is a Jarge 
town by the same name, with from 15,000 


NPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ: 


τ ch. xxil. 6 only. 
b = here only? 


_wavys from Jerusalem to Gaza. 


ν 480} 


Ν I] / Ν / , oy 
δὲ κυρίου ἐλάλησεν πρὸς Φίλιππον λέγων *’AvacrnOr 
7, ᾿ ear 
Kal πορεύου Y κατὰ * μεσημβρίαν ἐπὶ τὴν ὃ ὁδὸν THY ὃ κατα- 
, Ε δὴν 1. \ 9 ΄ 4 “ > \ b μέ 
βαίνουσαν ἀπὸ ‘lepovcadnp εἰς Τ᾿άξαν: αὕτη ἐστὶν ὃ ἔρη- 


Gen. xviii. 1. 


for kata, mpos E 130-80 Chr,. 
aft 2nd τὴν ins καλουμενὴν N1(N 


to 16,000 inhabitants (Robinson, ii. 640). 
The above chronological notices shew that 
it cannot have been ἔρημος at this time: 
see below. αὕτη ἐστὶν ἔρημος ] The 
words, I believe, of the angel, not of Luke. 
There appear to have been two (ifnot more) 
The Anto- 
nine itinerary passes from Jerus. to Eleu- 
theropolis—Askalon—Gaza. The Peutin- 
ger Table, Jerus.—Ceperaria—Eleuthero- 
polis—Askalon—Gaza. But Robinson (ii. 
748. Winer, Realw.) found an ancient road 
leading direct from Jerusalem to Gaza, 
through the Wadi Musurr, and over the 
Beit Jiibrin, which certainly at present is 
ἔρημος, without towns or villages. Thus 
the words will refer to the way : and denote 
the way of whichI speak to thee is desert 
(Schéttg. cites from Arrian, iii. p. 211, 
ἐρήμην δὲ εἶναι τὴν ὁδὸν δι’ ἀνυδρίαν). 
Besides the above objection to applying 
ἔρημος to Gaza, there could be no possible 
reason for adding such a specification here, 
seeing that Gaza had nothing to do with 
the object of the journey, and the road 
would be designated the road from Jeru- 
salem to Gaza, whether the latter city was 
inhabited, orin ruins. ‘Those who apply 
épnuos to Gaza, have various ways of re- 
conciling the apparent discrepancy with 
history : most of them follow Bede’s ex- 
planation, that the ancient city was ἔρημος, 
and that the Gaza of this day was another 
town nearer the sea. But how this helps 
the matter 1 cannot perceive, unless we 
are to suppose that the deserted Gaza and 
the inhabited Gaza were so far apart that 
it was necessary to specify which was 
meant, because there would be from Jeru- 
salem two different roads,—of which no 
trace is found, nor could it wellbe. Some 
again suppose (Hug, al.) that the Acts were 
written after the second Gaza was de- 
stroyed (Jos. B. J. ii.18. 1), just before the 
destruction of Jerusalem, and that Luke 
inserts this notice: but to what purpose ? 
and why zo more such notices? In the 
passage of Strabo, commonly cited to sup- 
port the application of ἔρημος to Gaza, 
ἔνδοξός ποτε γενομένη, κατεσπασμένη δ᾽ 
ὑπὸ ᾿Αλεξάνδρου (the Great, according to 
Strabo, which it was not) καὶ μένουσα 
ἔρημος, the last three words are wanting in 


a here only. see Matt. 


ABCDE 
HLPRa 
bedfg 
hkim 
opls 


TIPABRE!'S ATIOSTOAON. 


γος eee Pe ‘ 
os. 51 καὶ * ἀναστὰς ἐπορεύθη. καὶ ἰδοὺ ἀνὴρ Alors «rere &e., 

? , i ; 5 times and 

c ie d € e A Matt. xix. 
εὐνοῦχος 4 δυνάστης Kavoakns “" βασιλίσσης Αἰθιόπων, 1c) ony, 
ἃ ον \ / a / 3. iA ἃ usth. 11. al. 
ὃς ἣν ἐπὶ πάσης τῆς ὅ γάζης αὐτῆς, ὃς ἐληλύθει ἃ προς- ἃ Luke i. 52," 
. Vi, 19 

, 9 ¢ / > Φ 7 ¢ / vices “ἡ 
κυνήσων εἰς ᾿Ιερουσαλήμ, “5 ἣν τε ὑποστρέφων καὶ καθ- sBlyzheie 


fi k 2_\ ΡΥ Τῆς 5) a τ» ͵ \ viii. 1. 
NMEVOS €7T lL TOV APHMaTos QvUTOU και QAVEYLYWO KEV TOV e Matt. xii. 42 
{| L. . Rev. 
Eph: iv. 6. 4 Kings x. 5. 
ἢ abs., John iv. 20. xii. 
= Matt. xix. 28. xxiii. 2 al. 
2 Cor. iii. 2,15. 4 Kings xix. 14. 


27. rec ins τὴς bef Bac. (corn), with HL[P] rel Chr, Thl: om ABCDEN p.—D! 
adds Tivos. avtrov Di(txt D?). © om 2nd os AC!D'X? vulg sah (e{ -txt] (eorra 
for constr sake, to prevent avnp being pendent, and make it the nom to ἐληλύθει) : ins 
BC?D2EHLPRN? rel syr [arm] Chr [e¢ Syr eth, Aie copt]: ὡς 13. om εἰς DI: εν 
D?L. 

28. for re, δε BC E-lat syr coptt Chr). om 150 καὶ (as unnecessary to the constr) 
D}(ins D?) 40 vulg copt. om του (. on avtov [)᾽(1η5 D?). om 2nd και DX} 
ace f13(not Ist «. as Sz) [sah arm Thl-sif] (adopted by Lachm and Tischdf 1819. 
The omissions in this case seem to me very like attempts to escape from the repetitions 
of και, which however are characteristic of this section, see v 27, vv 36, 38, 39. The 
te in A may have the same source).—avayiwwokwv D vulg[legensque | sah.—for k. avey., 


Jer. xxxvi. (xxix.) 2. f = ch. xii. 20. Rom. ix. 5, 
ghere only. Ezra vii.21. Esth. iv. 7. see Luke xxi. 1 ||. John viii. 20, 
20. ch. xxiv. 11. Jer. xxxiii. (xxvi.) 2. i ver. 25 reff. 
lhere &c., 3ce. Rev. ix. 9 only. 4 Kings x. 15. m ch, xv. 21. 


xviii. 7 only. 


some edd. and are supposed to have been ὦ 
gloss from the Acts. Others suppose épn- 
μος to signify ‘ wnfortified,’ which standing 
alone it cannot. Besides, this notice would 
be wholly irrelevant ;—and would probably 
not have been true,—see Mela above. The 
objection of Meyer to the interpretation 
given above, that if ἔρημ. referred to 7 ὅδός, 
the article would be expressed, is not valid: 
the emphasis is on αὕτη; ‘that way, of 
which I speak, is desert:’ not, ‘is the desert 
one: no reference is made to the other. 
27. εὐνοῦχος | The very general use 

of eunuchs in the East for filling offices of 
contidence, and the fact that this man was 
minister to a female sovereign, makes it 
robable that he was literally an eunuch. 
f not so, the word would hardly have been 
expressed. No difficulty arises from Deut. 
xxill. 1, for no inference can be drawn from 
the history further than that he may have 
been a proselyte of the gate, in whose case 
the prohibition would not apply. Nay, the 
whole occurrence seems to have had one 
design, connected with this fact. The walls 
of partition were one after another being 
thrown down: the Samaritans were already 
in full possession of the Gospel: it was 
next to be shewn that none of those physical 
incapacities which excluded from the con- 
gregation of the Lord under the old cove- 
nant, formed any bar to Christian baptism 
and the inheritance among believers ; and 
thus the way gradually paved for the great 
and as yet incomprehensible truth of Gal. 
iii. 28. Kavdaxys | As Pharaoh among 
the Egyptians was the customary name of 
kings, so Candace of the Queens among the 
‘Ethiopians in upper Egypt (Αἰθίοπες ὑπὲρ 
Αἰγύπτου οἰκοῦντες, Dio Cass. liv. 5),—in 
the island of Meroe, Plin. vi. 29, where he 


says, ‘Ipsum oppidum Meroen ab introitu 
insulze abesse LXX m. pass. . . . Regnare 
foeminam Candacen, quod nomen multis 
jam annis ad reginas transiit. . . . Cate- 
rum cum potirentur rerum /thiopes, in- 
sula ea magne claritatis fuit.’ γάζης] 
A Persian term. Q. Curt. iii. 18, 5, ‘ pe- 
cuniam regiam, quam gazain Perse vocant.’ 
See Virg. An. i. 119. ὃς ἐληλύθει..." 
This did not only Jews and proselytes, but 
also those pious Gentiles who adhered to 
Judaism,—the proselytes of the gate, see 
John xii. 20. Euseb. ii. 1, prope fin., 
speaking of this eunuch says, ὃν πρῶτον 
ἐξ ἐθνῶν πρὸς τοῦ Φιλίππου δι’ ἐπιφανείας 
τὰ τοῦ θείου λόγου ὕργια μετασχόντα, τῶν 
τε ἀνὰ τὴν οἰκουμένην πιστῶν ἀπαρχὴν 
γενόμενον κιτ.λ.. taking for granted that 
he was a Gentile. There were (see below, 
ch. xi. 21) cases of Gentile conversion 
before that of Cornelius; and the stress of 
the narrative in ch. x. consists in the mis- 
cellaneous admission of all the Gentile 
company of Cornelius, ahd their official 
reception into the church by that Apostle 
to whom was especially given the power. 
We may remark, that if even the plain 
revelation by which the reception of Cor- 
nelius and his company was commanded 
failed finally to convince Peter, so that 
long after this he vacillated (Gal. ii. 11, 12), 
it is no argument for the eunuch not being 
a Gentile, that his conversion and baptism 
did not remove the prejudices of the Jewish 
Christians. 28. ἀνεγίνωσκεν | aloud, 
see ver. 30. Schéttg. quotes from the 
Rabbis: ‘Qui in itinere constitutus est, 
neque comitem habet, is studeat in Lege.’ 

He probabiy read in the LXX, the 
use of which was almost universal in Egypt. 
The word πευιοχή below (see on ver. 32) 


94 


absol., ch. x. σσροφήτην Ἡσαΐαν. 
neo or ae ρ 1) ἢ 


ΠΡΑΞΕῚΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ: 


VIII. 


¢ Ν “" - / 
29 εἶπεν δὲ TO " πνεῦμα τῷ Φιλίππῳ 


/ a 4 , 
on tukex, ἸΤρόςελθε καὶ 5. κολλήθητι τῷ ἅρματι τούτῳ. 3 P προς- 
. 2. (ck id rn 
Sisret, δραμὼν δὲ ὁ Φίλιππος ἤκουσεν αὐτοῦ ™ ἀναγινώσκοντος 
Ἐς οὐδ exc. εὐ τ se \ ΄ὔ \ a q? , q r , ἃ 
Matt. xix...“ Hoatiay τὸν προφήτην, καὶ εἶπεν 2° Apa 4 γε" γινώσκεις ἃ 
p Mark ix.15. τὴ ? ΄ τ AY oe A Ν x / vA 
x. 17 oniy. ἀναγινώσκεις ; 51 ὁ δὲ εἶπεν Πῶς yap ἂν δυναίμην, ἐὰν 


Gen, xviui. 2 


μή τις " ὁδηγήσῃ με; 


al. 
q interrog. here 


only. se , ΄ \ > A 
Lukesii,s, βάντα καθίσαι σὺν αὐτῷ. 
- Mark iv. A > ; : ἘΞ e 
13. Luk m , . 
3. Luke ἣν ™ ἀνεγίνωσκεν ἣν αὕτη Qs 
Dan. ix. 25. 
δ Matt. xv. 
14. Luke vi. y ῳ > ss ; Η͂ y δὲ 
ss. John 4 ἄφωνος, οὕτως οὐκ © ἀνοίγει TO © στόμα αὐτοῦ. 
xvi. 13. Rev. 
vii. 7 only. 


Ps. xxiv. 5. 
t constr., Mark 
v.17. Luke viii. 41. 


= Lake v. 19. xix. 4 al. 


/ s 
' παρεκάλεσέν Te TOV Φίλιππον “ava- 


ἋΣ ἡ δὲ" περιοχὴ τῆς “ γραφῆς 


Χ πρόβατον ἐπὶ Y σφαγὴν 


Ζ ” θ \ e a ᾽ \ b > / lal c Ι > \ 
“XO, καὶ ὡς αμνος εναντιον TOU κειραντος AVUTOV 


33 ἐν τῇ 


, i A Co / > ἴω ἢ," θ \ δὲ i \ 
ταπεινώσει αὐτοῦ ἡ ὃ κρίσις αὐτοῦ " ἤρθη, τὴν [δὲ] | γενεὰν 


3 Kings xii. 18. v here only $. 4 Kings 


xix. 24. Ps. xxx.21. (-έχειν, ch. xxiii. 25.) w = Rom. ix. 17 reff. x Matt. x. 16. Mark 
vi. 34. Isa. lili. 7. y ee viii. 36 reff. zch. ν΄, 21. xxv. 6,23. Dan. iii. 13. 
a John i. 29, 36. 1 Pet.i. 19 only. Exod. xxix. 38 al. fr. b ch. vii. 10 reff. e ch. xviii. 18. 1 Cor. 
xi. 6 bis only. Gen. xxxi. 19. d = 1 Cor. xii. 2. (xiv. 10.5 2 Pet. ii. 16 only. Isa.l.c. Wisd. 


iv. 19. 2 Macc. iii. 29 only. 
iii. 21. James i. 10 only, 
22. John i. 29 al. 


Gen. xvi. 11. 
i = Matt. xi. 16 al. 


avey. τε A; avery. δε 40. 


e = here only. (ver. 35.) 


g = James ii. 13. 


Ps. XXXViil. 9. 
2 Pet. ii. 11. 


f Luke i. 48. Phil. 
b= ch; xxii. 


no. bef τ. προφ. C m vulg(not am fuld demid). 


30. rec τὸν mp. bef no. (corrn to same order as previously), with EHLP p rel syr 


copt [arm(Treg)] ΤῊ] : 
(οδηγησει B'[oday. | CLE |& [13).) 
fk }! m o! 36 [Ps- ]Ign, Chron). 


syr sah : 


is not decisive (Olsh.) against this (as if 
there were περιοχαί only in the Hebrew, 
not in the LXX), as it would naturally be 
used as well of one as the other by those 
cognizant of the term. Besides, must 
there not have been περιοχαί in the copies 
of the LXX read in the synagogues ? 
29.) This is the first mention of that inner 
prompting of the Spirit referred to again, 
probably ch. xiii. 2, but certainly ch. x. 
19; xvi. 6, 7. Chrysostom understands 
the words of the appearance of an angel, 
but the text hardly allows it. KoAX. | 
no stress—attach thyself to.  30.} apa 
ye = Yor, but... . .; q- d.-It is “well. 
thou art wellemployed: but ...? On the 
force of dpa, used ‘ ubi responsio expecta- 
tur negans id de quo erat interrogatum,” 
see Hermann on Viger, p. 821. The γε 
strengthens the apa, implying the passing 
over of all other considerations, and select- 
ing this as the most important: see Har- 
tung, Partikellehre, i. 376 f. It assumes, 
modestly, that he did not understand what 
he was reading. γινώσκ. ἃ avay. | 
So 2 Cor. iii. 2. So too Cato (Wetst.), 
‘ Legere et non intelligere nec legere est.’ 
* Valck. compares the celebrated ‘parono- 
miasia of J ulian the Apostate, ἀνέγνων, 
ἔγνων, κατέγνων, and the courageous 


judgment.’ 


txt ABCN 13 vulg sah [Syr eth arm(Tischdf) ] Chr,. 
31. om yap E ὁ 105 sah [Syr copt eth arm ]. 


om αν A. με bef 05. C. 


for τε, δὲ E coptt. 
32. rec κειροντος (so LXX- Bel 3b), with BP p rel Orig, 


: txt (so Lxx-4x%2) ACEHLN 


ουτος HL f m? ὃ 19. 
33. om Ist αὐτου (corrn to LXX) ABN vulg. 
ins EHLP p 13 rel tol copt (arm] Chr Thl Iren-int, [imss and edd yary |. 


om δε (corrn to LXX ?) ABCR vulg 


reply of the Christian Bishop | to Dw 
ἀνέγνως, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἔγνως εἰ yap eyvws, 
οὐκ ἂν κατέγνως." Wordsw. 31.) 
yap gives the reason of the negative whicn 
is understood. The answer expresses at 
once humility and docility. 32.] Per- 
haps it is best to render, The contents of 
τ: 8 (passage of) Scripture which he was 
reading were as follows: see περιέχει, 
1 Pet. ii. 6. Cicero indeed appears to use 
περιοχή in the sense of a ‘ paragraph,’ or 
‘chapter ;’? ad Attic. 11. 25, ‘At -ego ne 
Tironi quidem dictavi, qui totas mepiexds 
persequi solet, sed Spintharo syllabatim.’ 
The citation is from the LXX-A, with 
only the variation of αὐτοῦ inserted after 
ταπεινώσει (and [δέ] before γενεάν). 
o3. ἐν τῇ ταπεινώσει αὐτοῦ H κρίσις αὐτ. 
ἤρθη] Heb. ‘He was taken away by dis- 
tress and judgment’ [so in the margin of 
kK. V.|: i.e. as Lowth, ‘by an oppressive 
γενεὰν αὐτοῦ) i.e., the 
age in which He shall live—‘ the wicked- 
ness of his contemporaries.’ The fathers, 
and Bede (and so Wordsworth), explain 
‘ His generation’ of His eternal Sonship 
and His miraculous Incarnation. But 
the Heb. does not seem to bear this out. 
See the meaning discussed at length, and 
another interpretation defended in Stier, 


woe LAUT“ 

πω D. 

ABCEH 

LPNab 

edfgh 

klmo 
p 1s 


29--38, ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ AMOZTOAON, o% 


2 aw » / or vy ᾽ \ nw A 
αὐτοῦ τις " διηγήσεται ; ὅτι " αἴρεται ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἡ Gann) κ conste., here 


lal > \ Ν ς b] nn - 3 . ἥ 
αὐτοῦ. 51 ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ᾿ εὐνοῦχος τῷ Φιλίππῳ εἶπεν ας ταις 
\ ! e / , κ᾿ 10.) 1 Chron. 
Ὁ Δέομαί ™ σου, περὶ τινος Ο προφήτης λέγει τοῦτο; περὶ xii.9. see 
ς nan oN Cu CoS, / 25 1 5) ἢ ἃ ee , ch. ix. 27 reif. 
ἑαυτοῦ ἢ περὶ ἑτέρου τινός ; 35.5 ἀνοίξας δὲ ὁ Φίλιππος , 3°15, 


7 Ὶ ᾿ 7 2 A oe a absol., L tk 

τὸ " στόμα αὐτοῦ Kal 5“ ἀρξάμενος ἀπὸ τῆς Ρ γραφῆς ταύτης Views che 
A \ ’ “ 97 ΄ 

4«εὐηγγελίσατο αὐτῷ τὸν ᾿]ησοῦν. “Ὁ ὡς δὲ ἐπορεύοντο 


\ Le , καὶ 2 / (ad “ὁ lal 
τ κατὰ τὴν ὁδόν, ἦλθον ἐπί τι " ὕδωρ, καὶ φησιν ὁ | εὐνοῦ- 


only. 
n = Mate. v. 2. 
xili. 35, from 


Swine oN... οἱ Ξ, / 4 A 9 \ , Ps. Ixxvii. 2. 
yos ᾿Ιδοὺ vdwp τί κωλύει pe βαπτισθῆναι ; 58 καὶ ἐκέ- on τον, 
ylil. 14. 
Job iii. 1. see Eph. vi. 19. 6 chi. i, 22 reff. p ch. i. 16 reff. ae constr., 
ch. xi. 20 reff. r ver. 26 reff. s = John iii. 23. 
34. om τουτο B-txt: ins B!-marg. for eav., avrov H. τινος bef 


ετερου EK. 


35. om ο E[H] ο 137. 

36. vdwp (2nd) δὶ, 

(37. rec inserts εἰπε δὲ 0 Φιλιππος εἰ πιστευεις εξ OANS τὴς Kapdias εξεστιν αποκριθεις 
δὲ εἰπε πιστεύω τον υἱιον του θεου ει"αι TOY τἡσουν χριστον, With (Ε) and 16 others 
specified by Scholz(addg “alii permulti”’) [vulg-ed tol] am? demid syr-w-ast arm Iren- 
er(and int) Thl-fin-txt Cypr, Jer Aug Praedest Pacian—aft δὲ ins αὐτῶ KE fe arm j|—om 
o φιλ. [6] 36 syr [arm ]—for εἰ, εαν K—aft καρδ. ins cov Τὰ [tol syr-w-ast arm | Cypr— 
for εξεστιν, σωθησει KE; alii aliter—aft mor. E has εἰς tov xp. Tov viov τ. 8.—spec 
reads the whole thus et respondens spado. ait Credo filium dei esse Chr Jes. : om 
ABCHLP® 13(sic) rel and 44 others specified by Scholz(addg “ alii plurimi”’) am}? fuld 


aft ταυτης ins καὶ N!(N* disapproving). 








syrr coptt eth Chr, Thl-sif. 


(The insertion appears to have been made to suit the 


Jormularies of the baptismal liturgies, it being considered strange that the eunuch 
should have been baptized without some such confession.) ] 


Jesaias, &e., pp. 466—-470. Cf. also 
Gesenius’ Thesaurus under 447. 
34. ἀποκριθείς) to the passage of Scrip- 
ture, considered as the question pro- 
posed: not, to the question in ver. 30. 
We can hardly suppose any immediate re- 
ference in ἑτέρου τινός to Christ. 

36. τὶ ὕδωρ] In the scholia to Jerome’s 
Epitaph of Paula (not in Jerome himself) 
on the words, ‘A Betlisur venit,’ we have, 
‘hee etate Hieronymi vocabatur Beth- 
sura: vicus est in tribu Juda, obvius vige- 
simo lapide euntibus ab Hierosolyma Che- 
bron. Juxta hune fons est ad_ radices 
montis ebulliens, qui ab eadem in qua 
gignitur humo sorbetur. In hoe fonte 
putant eunuchum Candacis Regine bapti- 
zatum fuissé.’? Jerome’s own words (Ep. 
108 (27) ad Eustochium, 11, p. 700) are: 
‘cepit per viain veterem pergere que 
ducit Gazam .... et tacita secum volvere, 
quomodo Eunuchus Xthiops, gentium po- 
pulos preetigurans, mutaverit pelle:n suam, 
et dum vetus relegit instrumentuin.tontem 
reperit Evangelii. Atque inde ad dex- 
teram transit. A Bethsur venit Escol’... 
where no reference is made to the tradition, 
save what may be inferred from the men- 
tion of Bethsur. Eusebius also (περὶ τό- 
πων) states it to be twenty miles south of 
Jerusalem in the direction of Hebron: and 
so it is set down in the Jerus. Itin. and the 
Peutinger Tab. (Howson’s map.) Pocock 


found there a fountiin built over, and a 
village called Betur on the left. Fabri 
describes the fountain as the head ofa con- 
siderable brook, and found near it the ruins 
of a Christian church. There is no impro- 
bability in the tradition except that, even 
supposing a way going across from Hebron 
straight to Gaza to be called ἔρημος, this 
would not be on that portion of it, but on 
the high road (Winer, Realw.). τί 
κωλ. μ. Bar. | There is no reason for sup- 
posing Philip to have preached to him the 
necessity of baptism : Lis own acquaintance 
with Jewish practices, aud perhaps his 
knowledge of the progress of the new faith 
in Jerusalem, would account for the pro- 
position. [37.] The authorities against 
this verse are too strong to permit its in- 
sertion. It appears to have been one of 
those remarkable additions to the text of 
the Acts, common in D (which is here 
deficient) and its cognates: few of which, 
however, have found their way into the re- 
ceived text. This was made very early, as 
Irenaeus hasit. The manuscripts which con- 
tain it vary exceedingly: another strong 
mark of spuriousness in a disputed pas- 
sage. Sve var. readd. Wordsw. retains it, 
citing Bornemann as doing the same; but 
it is Bornemann’s principle that all these 
insertions of D and its coguates formed 
part of the original text: so that his au- 
thority goes fur nothihg. Wordsw. alse 


96 TIPAZEIS ATIOSTOAON. VIII. 39, 40: 
t=Matt.xx. λεῦσεν ἵἱ στῆναι TO " ἅρμα, Kal ᾿ κατέβησαν ἀμφότεροι εἰς ABCEH 
32. Luke ΜΕ ΤΣ δ , Ἢ : Nad 
vii, U. Josh. τὸ ὕδωρ, 6 τε Φίλιππος καὶ ὁ | εὐνοῦχος, καὶ ἐβάπτισεν « ἀτε ἃ 
4 Kings xiii. DSi 9 # \ Peay | 2 A “ x A kKlmo 
ia αὐτόν. ὅτε δὲ " ἀνέβησαν ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος, " πνεῦμα p13 


u vv. 28, 29. 
v = John v. 7. 
w Matt. iii. 
161. Gen. 
xli. 2. 
x Luke iv. 18. 
ch. v. 9. 
2 Corsi. 17, 
3 Kings xviii. 
12. y — John vi. 15. 2 Cor. xii. 2, 4. 
xxi. 21. zhere only. Josh. tii. 4. 
ver. 20 reff. b absol., ver. 4 reff. 


“ 


Χ / ᾽ \ / \ > Τὸ > Ν 

Χ κυρίου ἡ ἥρπασεν τὸν Φίλιππον, καὶ οὐκ εἶδεν αὐτὸν 
ς fa , \ \ eQv > “ 

οὐκέτι ὁ ἱεὐνοῦχος, ὅ ἐπορεύετο γὰρ τὴν ὅ ὁδὸν αὐτοῦ 


χαίρων. 40 Φίλιππος δὲ εὑρέθη ὃ εἰς "Αζωτον, καὶ ὃ διερ- 


Rev. xii. 5. ἥρπαζεν ὃ ποταμός, Xen. Anab. iv. 3.6. Judg. 
a= ch. ii. 27. xx. 11. Matt. ii. 23. Luke xi.7 al. see 


38. εἰς To vdwp bef augdorepo: E ο k 187-80 syr copt Chr,. 

39. [aveBn (for -Byoav) C 137. (13 def.) | for ex, ato E c f o 1837-77-80. 
ayyeAos Kuplov npTagev Tov φιλιππὸν ayyedos Se κυριου Al: mvevua αγιον εἐπεπεσεν 
emt Tov evvovxov αγγελος δε (see note) A-corr! 15-8. 27-9. 36. 60. 100 arm, syr stands 
thus πνευμα κυριου (αγιον syr-mg) ἔεπεπεσεν emt Tov evvovxoy ayyeAos δὲ kKupiov: 
Jerome’s testimony is doubtful. On Isa Ixiii. 14, vol. iv. p. 754 [vol. iii. p. 470, ed 
Bened. |, “ Spiritus Domini ductor ejus fuit,” he says, id est, gregis Domini, Spiritum 
autem hic Angelum debemus intelligere, qui ductor fuit populi Israel, juxta illud quod 
scriptum est (Ps civ. 4, Heb i. 14). Consideremus illud quod in Act. Ap. scribitur, 
* Spiritus Domini rapuit Philippum, et non vidit eum ultra eunuchus,” an super Angelo 
debeamus accipere. Sunt qui Angelum in Spiritu sancto hee fecisse testentur. But in 
Dial. adv. Lucif. 9, vol. ii. p. 182 [vol. iv. pt ii. p. 295], he says Inde venit ut sine chris- 
mate et episcopi jussione, neque presbyter, neque diaconus jus habeant baptizandi. .. 
Ut enim accipit quis, ita et dare potest: nisi forte eunuchus a Philippo diacono baptizatus 
sine Spiritu sancto fuisse credendus est, de quo seriptura ita loquitur “ Et descenderunt 
ambo . . et quum abscederent ab aqua, Spiritus sanctus venit in Eunuchum.” St 
autem illud objiciendum putas quia “ Cum audivissent ... (vv 14—17)”—: txt is sup- 
ported by Chr (who says οὐκέτι ἄγγελος ἀλλὰ τὸ πνεῦμα αὑτὸν ἁρπάζει) and by Did(who 


explains spiritus domini by angelus doiminc). 


states that tt is found in the codex amia- 
tinus of the vulgate, which ἐέ is not, except 
as a correction a secunda manu.] 

38. ékeA.| viz. the eunuch. 39. tv. 
κυρ. ἥρπ. τ. Φ.} The reading, ‘the Spirit 
fell on the Eunuch, and an angel of the 
Lord caught away Philip,’ is curious, and 
has probably arisen from a desire to con- 
form the results of the eunuch’s baptism to 
the usual method of the divine precedure, 
and the snatching away of Philip to his com- 


mission, ver. 26. But the Spirit did not fall: 


on the Samaritans after baptism by Philip. 
The text clearly relates a supernatural 
disappearance of Philip: compare μήποτε 
ἦρεν αὐτὸν πνεῦμα κυρίου. 4 Kings ii. 16; 
no interpretation (as Eichhorn, +Kuin., 
Olsh., Meyer) of his being suddenly hurried 
away by the prompting of the Spirit, 
will satisfy the analogy of the above- 
cited passage, and of (see below) a parallel 
one in Luke’s own Gospel. The ἁρπάζειν 
of ref. John, which Meyer cites to justify 
his view, tells in my mind the other way ; 
the fear was lest the multitude should come 
and carry Him off to make Him a King: 
and in the reff. 1 have therefore marked 
the two as bearing the same meaning. 
οὐκ εἶδεν αὐτὸν οὐκέτι) Not ‘never saw 
hiin from that day,’ though (see below) 
that. meaning may be indirectly included : 


αὐτου bef τὴν odor Β. [13 def. ] 


—but as Luke xxiv. 31, αὐτὸς ἄφαντος 
ἐγένετο am αὐτῶν, and as in the strictly 
parallel words of 4 Kings ii. 12, οὐκ εἶδεν 
αὐτὸν €r1,—after the going up of Elijah. 
These last words in my view decide the 
question, that the departure of Philip was 
miraculous. γάρ] refers to what 
follows (ᾧ. δὲ efp.). Philip was found at 
Azotus: if the eunuch had gone that way, 
he might have met with him again: but 
he did not, for he went from the fountain 
on his own way, which did not lead through 
Azotus. 40. εὗρ. eis "AL.] A constr. 
pregnans,—was borne to, and found at. 
The word εὑρέθη again appears to refer to 
4 Kings ii. 17. AZzOTUS or ASHDOD 
(Josh. xiii. 3; 1 Sam. v. 5 al.) was one of 
the five principal cities of the Philistines, 


never, though nominally in Judah, tho-. 


roughly subjugated by the Jews :—it was 
tuken by Tartan the Assyrian general (Isa. 
xx. 1),—again by Psammetichus, Herod. ii. 
157; Jer. xxv. 20,—again by Judas Mac- 


cabeeus (1 Mace. v. 68) and Jonathan (ip. 


x. 84), and by the latter destroyed ;—re- 
built by Gabinius (Jos. Antt. xiv. 5. 3. 


B. J. i. 7.7), and belonged to the kingdom » 


of Herod, who left it in his will to his sister 
Salome (Antt. xvii. 8, 1; 11.5). At pre- 
sent, it is a small village, retaining the name 


Esdud, but no remains. (Robinson, ii. 629 ;- 


TXi ED 2 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ. 97 


3 / 14 
XOmevos “ εὐηγγελίζετο τὰς πόλεις πάσας, 4 ἕως τοῦ « constr. ver 
9 rei, 
ἐλθεῖν αὐτὸν εἰς Καισάρειαν. 


d constr. w. inf 


« A Y A 1 Ki ν 
IX. 1 Ὃ δὲ Σαῦλος ἔτι “ ἐμπνέων ' ἀπειλῆς καὶ φόνου τι. 3Κιπος 
Σ : ἢ Α᾽ ᾿ , xxii. 27B, F 
Ε εἰς τοὺς μαθητὰς τοῦ Kupiov, ἃ προςελθὼν τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ (mtr) ee 


> \ ? \ 5 al. fr. 
ἐπιστολὰς ‘eis Δαμασκὸν “πρὸς e here only. 


and constr., 


Q i 7 LA i » 3 lal k 
ἡτήσατο ‘Tap αὑτοὺ 


Josh. x. 40 B (om gen., ἃ Ald.). {-νευσις, Ps. xvii. 15.) f ch. iv. [17] 29. Eph. vi. 9 only. Job 

xxiii. 6. g ch. xxiii. 30. Rom. viii, 7 al. h = Matt. xxvii. 581] L. John xii. 21. ch. 

xxiii. 14 al. 3 Kings xxi. (xx.) 13. ich. iii.2. John iv.9. Jamesi.5. 1 John v.15 only. Deut. 

x. 12. k = ch. xv. 30. xxiii. 25,33. Rom. xvi. 22 al. L.P., exc. 2 Pet. iii. 1,16. Neh. ii. 7. 
lconstr., here only. see 2 Cor. iii. 1. 


40. ras πολ. πα. bef ev. A. (ms 13 is very much defaced from viii. 30 to ix. 1, 
out the words κωλυει με βαπτισθηναι kar can be read, thus shewing the omn of ver 37 ; 
again, in ver. 39, almost the only syllables legible are πνευμα κυριου np, thus shewing 
that cod. colb, does not here, as frequently elsw, agree with A’s peculiar reading. Such 
are the results in two verses alone of Dr. Tregelles’ painstaking collation of the 


mutilated parts of this important ms.) 


Cuap. IX. 1. for er, ors B1: om NX! 1] 24-6. 78. 126 sah. 


2. επιστολας bef παρ avrou ὃς. 


iii. 1, 232. Winer, Realw.) τὰς πό- 
λεις πάσας] viz. Ekron, Jamnia, Joppa, 
Apollonia, on the direct road: or, if he 
deviated somewhat for the purpose, Lydda 
also (which seems implied ch. ix. 32). 
Καισάρειαν] See note, ch. x. 1. 

Cuap. ΙΧ, 1—30.] CoNVERSION OF 
SAUL. 1.] The narrative is taken up 
from ch. viii.3, but probably with some in- 
terval, sufficient perhaps to cover the events 
of ch. viii. ἐμπνέων) Meyer charges 
the ordinary interpretation, ‘ breathing,’ 
i.e. as in Εἰ V., ‘ breathing out,’ with an 
arbitrary neglect of the composition of the 
word. He would render it ‘ évhaling,’ with 
the partitive genitives signifying the ele- 
ment. But the sense would thus be flat ; 
and there seems to be no need for pressing 
the sense of the compound verb. We should 
perhaps hardly render it breathing out,— 
but breathing; his ‘spiritus,’ inhaled or 
exhaled, being ἀπειλὴ x. φόνος. So ἔθ᾽ 
αἱματόεντος ἀναπνείων ὀρυμαγδοῦ, Q. Cala- 
ber, xiv. 72, and πνέων θυμοῦ, Aristeen. I. 
ep. 5 (Kuin.). ἐμπνέων, προςελθών] 
As σοὶ πιστεύσας, μεταναστάς, (id. Col. 
172, where Hermann remarks, ‘Si recte 
observavi, ea est hujus constructionis ratio, 
ut precedat illud participium, quod, sepa- 
ratim enunciata sententia, indicativus esse 
verbi debet : ut hoc loco sensus sit, ὅτι σοὶ 
ἐπίστευσα, μεταναστάς-.᾽ τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ] 
See table in Prolegg. to Acts ;—it would 
be Theophilus,—brother and successor to 
Jonathan, who succeeded Caiaphas, Jos. 
Antt. xviil. 5. 3. 2. ἐπιστολάς] of 
authorization; written by the high priest 
(in this case, but not always, president of 
the Sanhedrim) in the name of πᾶν τὸ 
πρεσβυτέριον, ch. xxii. 5. εἰς Aa- 
paokdv | Damascts is probably the oldest 
existing-city in the world. We read of it 


Vor, ἘΠ" 


in Abraham’s time (Gen. xiv. 15; xv. 2): 
then no more till David subdued it (2 Sam. 
vill. 6) : it became independent again under 
Solomon (1 Kings xi. 24 ff.), and from that 
time was the residence of the kings of Syria 
(1 Kings xv. 18; xx. 1 ff.), who were long 
at war with Israel and Judah, and at last 
were permitted to prevail considerably over 
Israel (2 Kings x. 32; Amos i. 3, 4) and to 
exact tribute from Judah (2 Kings xii. 17, 
18, see also 2 Kings xiii. 3, 22, 25). Da- 
mascus was recovered to Israel by Jero- 
boam II. (cir. 825 a.c. 2 Kings xiv. 28). 
Not long after we find Rezin, king of 
Syria, in league with Pekah, king of Israel, 
against Ahaz (2 Kings xv. 87). Ahaz in- 
vited to his assistance Tiglath-pileser, king 
of Assyria, who took Damascus and slew 
Rezin, and led the people captive (2 Kings 
xvi. 5—9; Isa. viii. 4). From this time 
we find it subject to Assyria (Isa. ix. 11 ; 
x. 9; xvii. 1), then to Babylon (2 Kings 
xxiv. 2; Jer. xxxv. 11),—Persia (Arrian. 
Alex. ii. 11, Δαρεῖος τῶν χρημ. τὰ πολλὰ 
aroha πεπόμφει eis Δαμασκόν, Strabo, xvi. 
756; Q. Curt. iii. 12. 27),—the Syrian 
Seleucide (1 Mace. xi. 62; xii. 32),—and 
from the time of Pompey (64 A.c.), to the 
Romans, and attached to the province of 
Syria (Jos. Antt. xiv. 4.5; 9.5). Many 
Jews were settled there, and the majority of 
the wives of the citizens were proselytes, 
Jos. B. J. ii. 20. 2. On its subjection to 
Aretas, see below, ver. 24, note. It was 
later the residence of the Ommiad Caliphs, 
and the metropolis of the Mahommedan 
world. (Conybeare and Howson, edn. 2, 
vol. i. p. 106.) At present it is a large 
city, with (Burckhardt) 250,000 inhabit- 
ants, nearly 70,000 of whom are Chris- 
tians. It is situated most beautifully, in 
a large and well-watered plain, on the river 


H 


98 TIPAREIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. ΙΧ, 


κ ΄ v 77 ce a m “ὃ βι ΑΜ 

τὰς συναγωγάς, ὅπως ἐάν τινας εὕρῃ τῆς ™ οδοῦ ὄντας 

ἄνδρας τε καὶ γυναῖκας, δεδεμένους ἀγάγῃ εἰς 'ΓἱἽερουσαλήμ. 

3 ΠῚ > δὲ a ‘ θ 02 , ey p b] / a A 
ἐν δὲ τῷ πορεύεσθαι ° ἐγένετο αὐτὸν ἢ ἐγγίζειν τῇ Aa- 


m = ch. xviii. 
26. xix. 9, 
23. xxii. 4. 
xxiv. 14, 22. 

n Matt. xiii. 4, 
25. ch. iii. 26. 
viii. 6 al. 


“- > ‘ , lal \ 
Ezek. ix.8. μασκῷ, “ἐξαίφνης τε αὐτὸν " περιήστραψεν φῶς ἀπὸ 
Ὁ constr., ch. Η 43 

iv. 5 reff. a > “ \ Ἂ > \ x “ 9 " \ 
p dat, Luke TOU οὐρανοῦ, 4 Kab πεσὼν ἐπὶ THY γῆν δ ἤκουσεν sa i 
Wil, 12. Ξε 7 ᾽ a \ ΄ 7 ΄ [ὦ \ 
25. ον. χοῦ. λέγουσαν αὐτῷ Σαοὺλ Σαούλ, τί με * διώκεις ; ὅ εἶπεν δὲ 
XXI1. 6. 


Exod. xxxii. 
8, 


Tis εἶ [σύ], κύριε ; ὁ δὲ Eye εἰμι ᾿Ιησοῦς, ὃν σὺ " διώκεις. 
4 Mark xiii. 36. 


Luke ii. 13. ix. 39. ch. xxii. 6 only. Prov. xxiv. 22. 


rch. xxii. 6 only +. 
9. xxvi. 14. Johniii, 8. Rev. νυν. llal. Exod. xxxii. 18. 


s W. acc., ch. xxii. 
t = ch. vii. 52 reff. 


for ras, τα Β]. for εαν, αν NCE Chr, 1. 
ovr. 13 [vulg E-lat coptt]. 

3. rec καὶ εξαιφν., with EHLP rel Chr,: txt ABCN p. rec περιηστραψεν bef 
avtov, with EHLP 18 rel [vulg syrr arm] Chr: txt (ΑἸΒΟΝ τὴ p.—aut. φως 7. A.— 
[elz] περιεστρ. [with] C3; so, appy, but perh περιαστρ. Al: περιστρ. Cl. * ἐκ (corrn 
from ch xxii. 6 ?) ABCLN ἃ p Thl-fin, de vulg E-lat: απο EHP 18 rel Thl-sif. add 
σκλήρον σοι προς KevTpa λακτιζειν (from ch xxvi. 14) E 180 am? Syr syr-w-ast (adding 
a note that these words are not here in the text, but where Paul gives the account of 
himself). 

5. a om (as ||) ov, with ABEHLPX rel: ins Ὁ. rec aft o Se ins κυριος εἰπεν 
(xupios appears to have been an insertion to avoid the apparent insufficiency of ο δε ;— 
erev, from ch xxvi. 15), with HLP 13 rel syrr [sah] Chr, Thl; κυριο5 προς avrov E o 
11. 27-9. 662; κυριος 100 Hil; εἰπεν δὲ k p!3 43. 105-37 copt ἢ arm: om ABC p?* 36. 
vulg. aft ina. add o Ναζωραιος (from ch xxii. 8) ACE [demid] Syr syr-w-ast copt 
zeth Hil, Augy. 

5, 6. rec att διωκ. (omg adda) adds oxAnpoy σοι προς κεντρα λακτιζειν τρεμων TE Kat 


ovr. bef rns 05. AN p [syrr eth]: om 


Chrysorrhoas (Barrada), which divides 
into many streams (see 2 Kings v. 12), 
and fertilizes the plain (Strabo, xvi. 756, 
H Δαμασκηνὴ χώρα διαφερόντως ἐπαινου- 
ycévn),—bounded on all sides by the desert. 
See Winer, Realw., from which the above 
is mainly taken: Vitringa in Jesaiam, p. 
650 ff. (Notitia Damasci et Regni Dama- 
sceni), and a vivid description in C. and H., 
pp. 104—108. πρὸς τ. συν. | 1. 6. to the 
presidents of the synagogues, who would 
acknowledge the orders of the Sanhedrim, 
and could, under the authority of the Eth- 
narch, carry them out. τῆς ὁδοῦ] Not 
‘this way, E. V., which rendering should 
be kept for the places where the pronoun is 
expressed, as ch. xxii. 4,—but the way, 
viz. of ‘salvation,’ ch. xvi. 17, or ‘of the 
Lord,’ ch. xviii. 25. (The genitive, as τῆς 
γνώμης εἶναι, see 1 Cor. i. 12.) The ex- 
pression ‘THE WAY’ had evidently become 
a well-known one among Christians (see 
reff.) ; and it only was necessary to prefix the 
pronoun when strangers were addressed. 

The special journey to Damascus 
presupposes the existence of Christians 
there, and in some numbers. This would 
be accounted for by the return of many 
who may have been converted at the Pen- 
tecostal effusion of the Spirit, and perhaps 
also by some of the fugitives from the per- 
secution having settled there. This latter 
is rendered probable by Ananias’s ἤκουσα 


amd πολλῶν περὶ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς τούτου, Ver. 13. 
8.) The journey from Jerusalem was 
probably made on the Roman road, i. e. 
that of the Itineraries, by Neapolis (Sichem) 
and Scythopolis, crossing the Jordan ὃ. 
of the lake Tiberias,—Gadara, and so to 
Damascus. Or he might have joined,— 
either the Petra road, by Jericho and Hesh- 
bon, and so by Botsrah to D.,—or the 
Egyptian caravan-track, which passes to 
the north of the lake of Tiberias, and near 
Ceesarea Philippi. In either case the jour- 
ney would occupy from five to‘six days, the 
distance being 130 to 150 miles. 
περιήστρ. «.T.A.| It was (ch. xxii. 6) περὶ 
μεσημβρίαν,--- πα from ch. xxvi. 13, the 
light was ὑπὲρ τὴν λαμπρότητα Tod ἡλίου. 
These details at once eut away all ground 
from the absurd rationalistic attempt to ex- 
plain away the appearance as having been 
lightning. Unquestionably, the inference 
is, that it was a bright noon, and the full 
splendour of the oriental sun was shining. 
His companions saw the light, and 
were also cast to the ground, ch. xxvi. 
13, 14; xxii. 9, see below on ver. 7. 4. 
λεγουσαν αὐτ. τῇ ‘EBpatd: διαλέκτῳ, ch. 
xxvi. 14, And it isa remarkable undesigned 
coincidence, that the form Σαούλ should 
have been preserved in this account, and 
rendered in Greek in the translation of 
Paul’s speech in ch. xxii. In ch. xxvi., 
where he was speaking in Greek before 


ABCEH 
LPNab 
fedfgh 
kimo 
pls 


9-7. ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 99 
ὃ ἀλλὰ " ἀνάστηθι καὶ εἴςελθε εἰς τὴν πόλιν, καὶ ΣΙ Ὁ ΤῊ 
Υ λαληθήσεταί σοι ὅ τι σε δεῖ ποιεῖν. 7 οἱ δὲ ἄνδρες οἱ 34%," , 
w ᾿ x A ς ΄ χ ὃ , > 3 \ al. 3 Kings 
συνοδεύοντες αὐτῷ εἱστήκεισαν * ἐνεοί, ἀκούοντες μὲν x. Gris 
v=ch x . 


1 Cor. xiv. 8. Ezek. iii. 22. 
x here only. Prov, xvii. 28. 


xxii. 10. 


where only+. Wisd. vi. 23 (25) only. (-8¢a, Luke 
ii. 44.) 


Isa. lvi. 10. Ep. Jer. 41 only. 


θαμβων εἰπε κυριε TL με BeAELs ποιησαι και ὁ κυριος προς avTov (from ch xxvi. 14, and 
xxii. 10. Inserted by Erasmus from the Latin: in his annotations on “Durum est 
tibi ” he says “ In grecis codicibus id non additur hoc loco, cum mox sequatur, Surge ; 
sed aliquanto inferius, cum narratur hee res.” See Treg on the Printed Txt p 23), 
with no Greek manuscript as far as Griesbach (“codices greci, quantum scimus, nulli’’), 
Scholz (repeating Gb’s words}, and Tischdf are aware—vulg(demid fuld) syr-w-ast(but 


varies, and syr ins ἀλλα) eth(but varies) arm(ed-usc : 


Hil,(tpeu. to ποι., omg the former part) : 


but addg αλλα) Thl-ed-fin-txt 


αλλα is inserted and the rec omitted by all 


our manuscripts, by 23 others which Scholz specifies, by am! tol(Tischdf) Syr coptt 


[arm-zoh | Chr. 
6. εἰδιθι Β. 
Ἐ-ΡῪ : om σε k. 


rec om ὅ, with EHLP 13. 86 rel: 


ins ΑΒΟΝ p. dec bef σε 


7. rec evveot, with L rel [Chr- edits txt ABCEHPX a b! ἢ m p 13 syr-mg-gr. 


for μεν, δὲ (omg de follg) p. 


Festus, he inserts the words τῇ Ἕβρ. διαλ., 
to account for the use of the form Σαούλ : 
or perhaps he spoke the solemn words, in- 
effaceable from his memory, as they were 
uttered, in Hebrew, for King Agrippa. 
(See note on Σαούλ, ver. 17.) τί pe 
διώκεις ;] A remarkable illustration of 
Matt. xxv. 45. The we is not emphatic 
(agst Wordsw.); but the very lack of 
emphasis, assuming the awful fact, gives 
more solemnity to the question. 

5. 6 δέ] That Saul saw, as well as heard, 
Him who spoke with him, is certain from 
Ananias’s speech, ver. 17, and ch. xxii. 
14,—that of Barnabas, ver. 27,—from ch. 
xxvl. 16 (ὥφθην σοι), and from the re- 
ferences by Paul himself to his having 
seen the Lord, 1 Cor. ix. 1; xv. 8. These 
last I unhesitatingly refer to this occasion, 
and not to any subsequent one, when he 
saw the Lord ἐν ἐκστάσει, ch. xxii. 17. 
Such appearances could hardly form the 
subject of autoptic testimony which should 
rank with that of the other apostles: this, 
on the contrary, was no ἔκστασις, but the 
real bodily appearance of the risen Jesus: 
so that it might be adduced as the ground 
of testimony to His Resurrection. On 
the words excluded from our text, as having 
been interpolated from ch. xxvi. 14, and 
xxii. 10, see note at xxvi. 14. It is natural 
that the account of the hzstorian should be 
less precise than that of the person con- 
cerned, relating his own history. In ch. 
xxvi. 15—18, very much more is related to 
have been said by the Lord: but perhaps 
he there, as he omits the subsequent par- 
ticulars, inciudes the revelations made to 
him during the three days, and in the mes- 
sage of Ananias. 7.] In ch. xxii. 9, 
οἱ δὲ σὺν ἐμοὶ ὄντες τὸ μὲν φῶς ἐθεάσαντο 
[κ΄ ἔμφοβοι ἐγένοντο), τὴν δὲ φωνὴν οὐκ 

Η 


ἤκουσαν τοῦ λαλοῦντός μοι. Two accounts 
seemingly (and certainly, in the letter) 
discrepant; but exceedingly instructive 
when their spirit is compared,—the fact 
being this: that the companions of Saul 
saw and were struck to the ground by the 
light, but saw οὐδένα, no person :—that 
they stood (or ‘ were fixed :’ but I should 
acknowledge the discrepancy here, and re- 
cognize the more accurate detail of ch. 
xxvi. 14, that they fell to the ground) mute, 
hearing THS φωνῆς, the sound of the 
voice, but not τὴν φωνὴν τοῦ λαλοῦντός 
μοι, the words spoken and their meaning. 
Compare John xii. 29, note. (Only no 
stress must be laid on the difference be- 
tween the gen. and acc. government of 
φωνή, nor indeed on the mere verbal differ- 
ence of the two expressions ;—but their 
spirit considered, in the possible reference 
which they might have to one and the same 
fact.) Two classes of readers only will 
stumble at this difference of the forms of 
narration; those who from enmity to the 
faith are striving to create or magnify 
discrepancies,—and those who, by the sui- 
cidal theory of verbal inspiration, are effee- 
tually doing the work of the former. The 
devout and intelligent student of Scripture 
will see in such examples a convincing 
proof of the simple truth of the narrative. 
—the absence of all endeavour to pare away 
apparent inconsistencies or revise them 
into conformity,—the bond fide work of 
holy truthful men, bearing each his testi- 
mony to things seen and heard under the 
guidance, not of the spirit of bondage, but 
of that Spirit of whom it is said, οὗ τὸ ~ 
πνασῦμα κυρίου, ἐλευθερία. I should not 
too hastily determine that this account 
has not come from Saul himself, on ac- 
count of the above differences: they are 


2 


100 


y ch. vii. 56 


zch. xxii. 1 


compl. only. 
a ch. xxiil. 12. 
Esth. iv. 16. 
b ch. vii. 31 reff. 
c = Heb. ii. 13 
only. 1 Kings 
iii, 4. 


σκόν. 
la 
οὐδὲ 5 ἔπιεν. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ. 


IX. 


μα. τῆς φωνῆς, μηδένα δὲ Y θεωροῦντες. ὃ ἠγέρθη δὲ Σαῦλος 
le. ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς, ἠνεῳγμένων δὲ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτοῦ οὐδένα 
ἔβλεπεν: * χειραγωγοῦντες δὲ αὐτὸν εἰςήγαγον εἰς Δαμα- 
9 καὶ ἣν ἡμέρας τρεῖς μὴ βλέπων, καὶ οὐκ " ἔφαγεν 
10 Ἦν δέ τις μαθητὴς ἐν Δαμασκῷ ὀνόματι 
καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐν ἢ ὁράματι ὁ κύριος 


11 ὁ δὲ κύριος πρὸς 


a ch. viii. 26 9 ; 
ε΄ ΤΌΝ Ἀνανίας. 
ne San ; ᾿ ee 

Luke xiv-21. "A μανία. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν “ Ἰδοὺ ἐγώ, κύριε. 

only. Prov. > 4 a? N \ 0 Sar τὰ \ ec \ 

cx. αὐτὸν *’Avactas πορεύθητι ἐπὶ τὴν “ ῥύμην τὴν καλου- 
Isa. xv. 8, , 592 α \ , > et dee 55 a > ἡ 
Tobit xiii 18 ξένην εὐθεῖαν, καὶ ζήτησον ἐν οἰκίᾳ ᾿Ιούδα Σαῦλον ovo- 
not S&S). ol. 

ix. 7 only. 


θεορουντες N32: ορωντες RN}. 


8. rec ins o bef σαυλος, with HLP rel: om ΑΒΟῈΝ b! p. 
BHLP rel: txt (A)CE(X) p.—nvory. A: ἡνυγ. RI. 


dghk1lo eth arm[appy] Chr ΤῊ]. 

zeth[-rom]: txt A?C E-gr HLP rel e 

above the line, but is left unfinished. 
9. for ovde, και οὐκ C. 


rec avewy., with 


for 2nd de, re HLP a b (ς 9) 


ovdev (ef ch xxii.) A'BX vulg E-lat syrr sah 
Chr Th].—in δὲ a seems to have been begun 


10. rec o κυρ. bef εν op., with HLP p rel vss [Chr,]: txt ABCERX vulg xth-rom. 
11. avaora B fuld syrr(but so also ch x. 13, 20) coptt ; and, adding και, vulg(not am) 
seth(but so also elsw when there is no varn in the Greek). ς 


no more than might arise in narrations at 
different times by the same person. 
εἱστήκεισαν] It will be well to warn 
younger readers against an error often 
found in English Commentators (e.g. Dr. 
Burton here),—that ἕστηκα is past, and 
εἱστήκειν pluperfect in signification,— 
ἐστηκα, ‘I have been standing,’ and εἱστή- 
κεισαν, ‘lad been standing.’ This error 
arises from forgetting the peculiar charac- 
ter of the verb ἵστημι with regard to tran- 
sitive and intransitive meanings. ἕστηκα 
is strictly present,—eiorthKew imperfect : 
as much so as sto and stabam. See Mat- 
thie, § 206. And this accuracy is im- 
portant here: they had πού ‘been stand- 
ing,’ but had fallen. See ch. xxvi. 14, 
πάντων TE καταπεσόντων ἡμῶν εἰς τὴν 
γῆν. Wordsw.’s explanation, that εἱστή- 
κεισαν refers to the standing still of the 
cavalcade, not to the standing of Saul’s 
companions, is untenable: for 1) the ἐνεοί, 
which qualifies the εἱστήκεισαν, forbids it: 
and 2) his justifying instances are all 
aorists, Luke vii. 14; vili. 44; ch. viii. 38, 
not perfect, which surely will not bear this 
sense of mere arrestation in a course. 

8.] On his eyes being opened (it would 
seem that he had closed them on the first 
disappearance of the vision), he saw no 
one. He explains it, ch. xxii. 11, ὡς δὲ 
οὐκ ἐνέβλεπον ἀπὸ τῆς δόξης τοῦ φωτὸς 
éxeivov. He had seen, what those with 
him had not seen, the glorious Person of 
the Lord Jesus. See below on ver. 18. 

9.] Obs. μὴ βλέπων, his personal subjective 
state: οὐκ ἔφ., the historical fact. 

οὐκ ἔφ. οὐδὲ ἔπ. There is no occasjon to 


soften these words: the effect produced on 
him by the οὐράνιος ὀπτασία (ch. xxvi. 
19), aided by his own deeply penitent and 
remorseful state of mind, rendered him in- 
different to all sustenance whatever. 

10.] Paul adds, ch. xxii. 12, with par- 
ticularity, as defending himself before the 
Jews, that Ananias was ἀνὴρ εὐλαβὴς 
κατὰ τὸν νόμον μαρτυρούμενος ὑπὸ πάν- 
των τῶν κατοικούντων ᾿Ιουδαίων : saying 
nothing of the command received by him, 
nor that he was a disciple. In ch. xxvi., 
speaking before the Roman governor, he 
does not mention him. Mr. Howson 
(edn, 2, vol. i. p. 114) remarks on the close 
analogy between the divine procedure by 
visions here, and in ch. x. Here, Ana- 
nias is prepared for his work, and Saul 
for the reception of him as a messenger, 
each by a vision: and similarly Peter and 
Cornelius in ch. x. I may add, that 
in ch. viii., where the preparation of heart 
was already found in the eunuch, Philip 
only was supernaturally prepared for the 
interview. 11.] “We are allowed 
to bear in mind that the thoroughfares 
of Eastern cities do not change, and 
to believe that the ‘straight street,’ 
which still extends through Damascus 
in long perspective from the eastern gate, 
is the street where Ananias spoke to 
Saul.” (C. and H., p. 115.) οἰκίᾳ 
Ἰούδα] The houses of Ananias and Judas 
are still shewn to travellers. Doubtless 
they (or at least the former) would long be 
remembered and pointed out by Christians ; 
but, in the long degradation of Christianity 
in the East, most such identities must have 


ABCEH 
LPxra Ὁ 
cdfgh 


klmo 
pis 


8—15. 


ματι Ταρσέα. 


TIPAZ EIS, ATIOSTOAQN, 


101 


12 ΤΣ \ So ie ΄ Lyte MA 
toou yap TT POSEVYVETAL, Kal εἶδεν ἄνδρα f absol., ch. x. 


9 reff. 


> , ᾽ ΄ a a aa 
Ανανίαν ὀνόματι eisehOovta καὶ 8 ἐπιθέντα αὐτῷ 8 χεῖρα & eh. viit. 1 

e Lage ἢ ΄ ΟῚ ΄ : h = Matt. xi. 5 
ὅπως " ἀναβλέψη. 15 ἀπεκρίθη δὲ ᾿Ανανίας Κύριε, ‘ ἤκουσα ἢ a. in gospp. 


i 3 ‘ Qn \ A > ὃ A 4 [2 k \ A 

ἀπὸ πολλῶν περὶ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς τούτου, ὅσα * κακὰ τοῖς 

ς 5 / 5 ς 

ἱ ἁγίοις σου ἐποίησεν ἐν “Ἱερουσαλήμ | καὶ ὧδε ™ ἔχει 

\ a > r ΄ 

m ἐξουσίαν παρὰ τῶν ἀρχιερέων δῆσιμι πάντας τοὺς " ἐπικα- 
Μ 

15 εἶπεν δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ κύριος 

ο Π , “ Ρ a q 2 ὮΝ a 5 t @ + “πε 
ορεύου, OTL Ῥ σκεῦος ἅ ἐκλογῆς ἐστίν μοι οὗτος * τοῦ 

4 4 be ’ὔ ΒΞ , 5 la] \ / 

βαστάσαι τὸ ὄνομά μου * ἐνώπιον ἐθνῶν τε καὶ βασιλέων 


λουμένους τὸ ὄνομά σου. 


θαι, 2 Tim. iv. 14. 
xxvii. 52. Ps. xv. 3 and freq.) 


iv. 4.) 2 Tim. ii. (20) 21. 


(1 Pet. iii. 7. 
1 Cor. x. 13 reff. 


s = here only ἢ. 


Acts, here 
3ce, and ch. 
xxii. 13 bis 
only. Isa. 
xlii. 18. 
(-Yus, Isa. 
Ixi. 1.) 

i Luke xxii. 71. 
1 John 1. 5. 

k and constr., 
4 Kings viii. 
12. w. πράτ. 
τειν, ch. 

Xvi, 28. w. 
ἐνδείκνυσ- 


1= here first. Acts, vv. 32, 41, and ch. xxvi. 10 only. Epp. passim. (Matt. 
m 1 Cor. vii. 37 reff. i 
Ὁ absol., Matt. ii. 8. ch. xxii. 21 al. fr. Jer. iii. 12. 


Ps. xxx. 12.) 


n ch. il. 21 and Rom. x. 13 reff. 
p = Rom. ix. (21) 22, 23. 2 Cor.iv.7. (1 Thess. 
q Rom. ix. 11 reff. r constr., 

t = ch. 11. 25 reff. 


12. ree aft edSev ins ev οραματι (addition to complete sense, as is shewn by its various 


position), with EHLP 18. 36 rel; aft avdpa BC: om AN p vulg coptt eth. 


rec 


ονοματι bef avanay, with HLP 13 rel [syrr]: om ov. sah eth-rom Chr,: txt ABCEX 


a hm p vulg arm. 


τας xeipas BENS: χείρας ACN! p(appy): txt HLP 13 rel 


syrr(but Syr( Etheridge) has the sing in ver 17) sah eth-pl. 


13. rec ins ο bef avavias : om ABCEH[L]PR. 


[ins καὶ εἰπεν bef κυρ. E eth. | 


rec aknkoa (corrn to seemingly more appropriate tense), with HLP 13 rel Chr, : ακηκο- 


auev lect-14: txt ABCEN p. 


rec εποι. bef τ. αγιοις σου (alteration of character- 


astie arrangement to more usual one), with HLP 13 rel [syrr coptt eth arm] Chr (ἔς 
ΤῊ] : ev cep. bef ero. A: txt BCEN m p [vulg] am demid fuld.—om gov p. 
15. rec μοι bef eor., with EHLP 13 rel coptt Archel Thdart ΤῊ] Iren-int: txt ABCN 


cm p vulg syrr Did-c [Sev-c]. 


ins των bef εθνων BC!(Cyr,). 


rec om Ist Te, 


with HLP rel Chr [Sev-c] Thdrt, Thl-sif: ins ABCEX p 13. 36 Thl-fin. 


been lost; and imposture is so easy, that 
it is hardly possible to cherish the theught 
that the spots now pointed out can be the 
true ones. And so of all cases, where we 
have not unalterable or unaltered data to 
go on. Still, true as this is, we have 
sometimes proofs and illustrations unex- 
pectedly appearing, as research goes on, 
which identify as authentic, sites long 
pointed out by tradition. Sothat our way 
seems to be, to seek for all such elucida- 
tions, and meantime to suspend our judg- 
ment: but never to lose sight of, nor to 
treat contemptuously a priori, a local belief. 

Tapoéa| The first place where 
he is so specified. TARSUS was the 
capital of the province of Cilicia, a large 
and populous city (τῆς Kid. πόλιν μεγάλην 
k. εὐδαίμονα, Xen. Anab. i. 2. 28) in a 
fruitful plain on the river Cydnus, which 
flowed through the midst of it (* Cydnos, 
Tarsum liberam urbem procul a mari se- 
cans.’ Plin. v. 27. Strabo, xiv. 673. 9. 
Curt. iii. 5. 1), with a swift stream of re- 
markably cold water. Strabo speaks most 
highly of its eminence in schools of philo- 


sophy: τοσαύτη τοῖς ἐνθάδε ἀνθρώποις. 


σπουδὴ πρός τε φιλοσοφίαν καὶ τὴν ἄλλην 
ἐγκύκλιον ἅπασαν παιδείαν γέγονεν, ds0 
ὑπερβέβληνται καὶ ᾿Αθήνας καὶ ᾿Αλεξάν- 
δρειαν καὶ εἴ τινα ἄλλον τόπον δυνατὸν 
εἰπεῖν, ἐν ᾧ σχολαὶ καὶ διατριβαὶ τῶν φιλο- 


σόφων καὶ τῶν λόγων γεγόνασι. διαφέρει 
δὲ τοσοῦτον, ὅτι ἐνταῦθα μὲν οἱ φιλομα- 
θοῦντες ἐπιχώριοι πάντες εἰσί, xiv. 674. 
He enumerates many learned men who had 
sprung from it. It was (see Plin. above) 
an “urbs libera,” i.e. one which, though 
under Rome, lived under its own laws and 
chose its own magistrates. This ‘libertas’ 


was granted to it by Antony (Appian. Civ. 


v. 7): and much later we find it a Roman, 
colony. Asa free city, it had neither the 
‘jus coloniarum,’ nor the ‘jus civitatis:’ 
see ch. xxi. 39, also xxil. 28, and note. It 
is now a town with about 20,000 inhabit- 
ants, and is described as being a den of 
poverty, filth, and ruins. There are many 
remains of the old town (Winer, Realw.). 
12. mposevxerar| This word would 
set before Ananias more powerfully than 
any other, the state of Saul. ἄνδρα 
᾽Αν. ὀν. A man, whose name in the same 
vision he knew to be Ananias. The sight 
of the man and the knowledge of his name 
were both granted him in his vision. 
13. tots ἁγίοις σου] This is the first time 
that this afterwards well-known appella- 
tion occurs as applied to the believers in 
Christ. 14.] It could hardly fail to 
have been notified to the Christians at 
Damascus by their brethren at Jerusalem, 
that Saul was on his way to persecute 
them. 15. ox. ἐκλογῆς} A genit. of 


102 


uch. x. 36 reff. 
and constr., 
Luke (iii. 7 

| Mt.) vi. 47. 
xii. 5. ch. 
xx. 35 only. 
Esth. v. 11. 


< 


Rom. i. 4. 
3 John 7 only. 
x ch, ¥..26 
reff. 
y ch. viii. 17 


ren. 
z ch. ii. 3 reff. 
a ver. 12. 
b ch. ii. 4 reff. 
c here only. 
Job xxix. 24. 
d = ch. ii. 3. 
Matt. iii. 16. 
e here only. 
Levit. xi. 9, 3 
12. (-πίζειν, Tobit xi. 13 [ἀπολεπ. NJ.) 
23. 1 Tim. iv. 4. h 
i =here only. Gen. xlviii. 2, trans., Luke xxii. 43 only. 


17. for de, te A. 
1 m [sah] eth-rom ΤῊ]. 


" τροφὴν ἐνίσχυσεν. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


» \ w e \ ~ w ’ , “ θ rn 
αὐτὸν “ ὑπὲρ τοῦ “ ὀνόματος μου παθειν. 
’ / \ PA » \ » f \ b \ hess , 
Avavias καὶ εἰςῆλθεν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν, KaLY ἐπιθεὶς ἐπ᾿ αὐτὸν 

Ν Lal s \ » / e / » , 4 

. τὰς Υ χεῖρας εἶπεν Σαοὺλ ἀδελφέ, ὁ κύριος ἀπέσταλκέν με, 


f ch. viii. 26 reff. 
h here only. μεταλ. τρ., ch. ii, 46. xxvii. 33,34. προςλ. Tp., xxvii. 36. 
2 Kings xxul. 40. }. ch. x7S8ren.e = 
τας x. bef er aut. C [coptt eth]. 

om ἢ ἤρχου N'(ins X-corr?). 
18. (απεπεσαν, so ABCEHN p [13] Thl-sif.) 


IX. 


υ υἱῶν te Ἰσραήλ" 16 ἐγὼ yap "ὑποδείξω αὐτῷ ὅσα δεῖ 


17 χ ἀπῆλθεν δὲ 


lal lal ¢ - 
Ἰησοῦς ὁ "ὀφθείς σοι ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ ἡἧ ἤρχου, ὅπως 5 ἀνα- 
a / 
βλέψῃς καὶ ὃ πλησθῆς πνεύματος ἁγίου. 
c > / > lal > \ [οἱ 5 θ lal ad ς A e ὃ 
ἀπέπεσαν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν ἃ ὡςεὶ © λεπίδες, 
δ ἀνέβλεψέν τε καὶ ἱ ἀναστὰς ἐβαπτίσθη, 19 καὶ & λαβὼν 
ἐγένετο δὲ μετὰ τῶν ἐν Δαμασκῷ 
“ Η 7 7 \ rt / “ lad 
μαθητῶν iijépas J τινάς, 59 καὶ εὐθέως ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς 


18 καὶ εὐθέως 


g = John xix. 30. Mark xv. 
nc 


om ig. HLPb dg hk 


rec απ. τ. of 0. bef aur. (more 


usual instead of more characteristic arrangement), with CEHLPX rel: txt AB m. 


ws (more usual word) ABN? p [om copt zth]. 
rec aft τε ins παραχρημα (addition for precision), with [C?]EL rel syr 


doubtful. | 


for te, δὲ C*R copt. [ΟἹ 


[sah eth arm-ms]: om ABC!HPR ἃ g 1} mp 86 vulg Syr copt arm[-ed ]. 


19. ἐενισχυθη BC}. 


rec aft ey. δε ins o σαυλος (commencement of an ecclesias- 


tical portion: so lect-12 has eyev. εἰναι tov mavdov), with HLP rel: txt ABCEN 


e p [13] vulg syrr coptt eth arm Chr). 
o Chr, Thl-fin. 


quality : as we say, ‘the man of his choice.’ 
See Winer, edn. 6, § 34. 3, b. Paul 
often uses this word oxevos in a similar 
meaning, see reff., especially Rom. ix., &c., 
where it is in illustrating God’s sovereign 
power in election. βαστάσαι, per- 
haps in reference to the metaphor in 
σκεῦος. ἐθνῶν] This would hardly be 
understood at the time: it was afterwards 
on a remarkable occasion repeated to Paul 
by the Lord in a vision (see ch. xxii. 21), 
and was regarded by him as the specific 
command which gave the direction to his 
ministry, see Gal. ii. 7, 8. Baork. | 
Azrippa, and probably Nero. 16. 
ὑποδείξω] The fulfilment of this is testi- 
fied by Paul himself, ch. xx. 23, 25: see 
also xxi. 11. 17. Σαούλ] The He- 
brew form of Saul’s name is only found 
here, and in the report of our Lord’s pre- 
vious address to him. k. πλησθῇς 
mv. ay.| I can hardly think, with De W. 
and Meyer, that these words imply that 
the Lord had said to Ananias more than 
is above related: I would rather view them 
as a natural inference from what was said 
in ver. 15. In ch. xxii. 14, where the 
command to Ananias is omitted, his speech 
contains much of the reason given in the 
command here. It is remarkable again 
how Paul, speaking there to an infuriated 
Jewish mob, gives the words spoken just 
that form which would best gain him a 
favourable hearing with them—e. g. ὁ θεὸς 


ins ovtwy bet ev δαμασκω HLP bd gkm 


τῶν πατέρων Huay,—ideiy τὸν δίκαιον, --- 
πάντας ἀνθρώπους, avoiding as yet the 
hateful word ἔθνη. He there too gives 
ἀναστὰς βάπτισαι kal ἀπόλουσαι τὰς auap- 
τίας σου, ἐπικαλεσάμενος τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ 
as part of the exhortation of Ananias. 

18. ὡςεὶ λεπίδες} The recovery of 
sight is plainly related as miraculous, the 
consequence of the divinely appointed lay- 
ing on of the hands of Ananias. And this 
scaly substance which fell from his eyes 
was thrown off in the process of the in- 
stantaneous healing. ἐβαπτίσθη] It 
has been well remarked (Olsh.) that great 
honour was here placed upon the sacra- 
ment of baptism, inasmuch as not even 
Saul, who had seen the Lord in special 
revelation and was an elect vessel, was 
permitted to dispense with this, the Lord’s 
appointed way of admission into His 
Church. 19. évicyx. | intrans. see reff. 

np. τινάς] A few days; of quiet, 
and becoming acquainted with those as 
brethren, whom he came to persecute as 
infidels: but not to learn from them the 
gospel (οὐδὲ yap ἐγὼ παρὰ ἀνθρώπου παρ- 
έλαβον αὐτό, οὔτε ἐδιδάχθην, Gal. i. 12), 
nor was the time longer than to admit of 
εὐθέως being used, ver. 20,—and indeed 
the same εὐθέως of the whole space (in- 
cluding his preaching in our vv. 20, 21) 
preceding the journey to Arabia, in Gal. i. 
16. Pearson places that journey before 
our ἐγένετο 5¢é,—which however is mani- 


ABCEH 
LPRab 
edfgh 
klmo 
p 13 


—— 


Fr.Coisl. 
contains 
vv. 23, 
24. 


16—23. 


k2 ΄ \ ’ -“ .“ 
ἐκήρυσσεν τὸν Ἰησοῦν, ὅτι 


\ ΞΖ 
21 τὸ ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες οἱ ἀκούοντες καὶ. ἔλεγον Οὐχ 
© , > ς n θ ΄ 3 Ἵ λ} \ ο > 
οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ " πορθήσας ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ τοὺς ° ἐπικαλου- 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


103 


ΠΑΝ SN 3 - ΩΝ A A 
οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς TOD θεοῦ. κ Kn. τ. ino, 


ch. xix. 13. 
2 Cor. xi. 4, 
L.P. Kn. ἢ. 
ΧΡ.» see ch. 
viii. 5 reff. 


, li lal Ἀ Ὁ > a ver. vA 
μένους τὸ Ῥὄνομα τοῦτο ; Kal ὧδε “ εἰς τοῦτο 4 ἐληλύθει, | Tirei. 2. 


σ΄ > \ -| , 
ἵνα δεδεμενους αὐτοὺς ἀγάγῃ 


22 Σαῦλος δὲ μᾶλλον " ἐνεδυναμοῦτο, καὶ * συνέχυννεν τοὺς 
\ a a ΄ 
Ἰουδαίους τοὺς κατοικοῦντας ἐν Δαμασκῷ, ἃ συμβιβάζων 
e Vv @ οὗ ? e i 93 ὃ δὲ Ww > ων x ,£ ΄, Ρ 
ὅτι Y οὗτός ἐστιν O χριστός. “5 ὡς δὲ ἡ ἐπληροῦντο * ἡμέραι 


ne is. \ 9 = ΠΣ < 36, 40. 
ohn v. 20 

ETL TOUS αρχίέερεις. ale 

m ch. vili. 13 
reff. 

n Gal. i. 13, 23 
only +. 

o ver. 14, 

ch. v. 28 (iv. 


12. James it 
i 


’ b>] a a ΄ Ὰ . 
x ἑἱκαναί, Υ συνεβουλεύσαντο οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι 7 ἀνελεῖν αὐτόν" q John xviii. 37 


Mark i. 38. r = Matt. x. 18 al. 


of Paul, and Heb. xi. 34. Ps. li. 7 (9). Judg. vi. 34 AB(not Ed-vat. F) only. 
v ver. 20 reff. 


ul Cor. ii. 16 reff. Exod. xviii. 16. 
xviii, 18. XXVil. 7L. see ch. viii. 11. 


7 Theod. ν΄. ἵνα, Matt. xxvi.4. John xi. 53 only. w. ὅτι, John xviii. 14 only. 


only. see 
Paul only, exc. here, which is 
t ch. ii. 6 reff. 


s Rom. iv. 20 4]5. 


w ch, vii. 23 reff. x ver. 43. ch. 
y constr., Rev. iii. 18 only. 1 Macc. ix. 69. see Dan. vi. 
2 ch. v. 33 reff. 


20. rec for ιησ., χριστον (doctrinal alteration ? see note), with HLP rel [arm-mss] 
Chr, : alii aliter: txt ABCEN ach p 18 vulg syrr [copt eth-rom arm-ed] Iren,[-gr 


and |-int. 
21. εξιστατο N}(but corrd). 


for ev, εἰς AN. 


εληλυθεν (alteration, not 


observing the force of the pluperf 2) E-gr HLP p rel Chr, : txt ABCX o (13) 36 E-lat. 


avayayn P (Chr, ]. 
22. aft eved. ins Tw Aoyw C, ev Tw A. ΕἸ. 


συνεχεεν Εἰ 57. 662. 137-80 Thl-fin: eovvexuvey 13: txt B'CR. 


23. ins αὐ bef nuepar H. 


festly against the sense of the text:— 
Michaelis and Heinrichs, between vv. 19 
and 20,—to which there is the same ob- 
jection: Kuinoel and Olsh., after ver. 25, 
—which the εὐθέως of Gal. i. 16 will not 
allow: Neander and Meyer, in the ἡμέραι 
ἱκαναί of ver. 23, which time however in 
our text is certainly allotted to the pro- 
gress of his preaching in Damascus, and 
the increase of the hostility of the Jews in 
consequence. See below. 20. *In- 
σοῦν] The alteration to χριστόν has pro- 
bably, as Meyer suggests, been made from 
doctrinal considerations, to fix on 6 υἱὸς 
τοῦ θεοῦ the theological sense,—that Christ 
is the Son of God—instead of that which 
it now bears,—that Jesus is the Son of 
God, i.e. that Jesus of Nazareth as ὦ 
matter of fact, is the Son of God, i. e. the 
Messiah expected under that appellation. 
Be this as it may, the following τὸ ὄνομα 
τοῦτο (ver. 21) is decisive for the reading 
Ἰησοῦν, and οὗτός ἐστιν ὃ χριστός ver. 22 
still more so. 21. πορθήσας] ‘ Mi- 
litari verbo usus est,’ Erasm. So Adsch. 
Choeph. 680, o? ᾽γώ, κατ᾽ ἄκρας ἐνθάδ᾽ ὡς 
πορθούμεθα. See also Sept. c. Theb. 176 
(194 Dind.). ἐληλύθει] had come 
here, implying the abandonment of the 
purpose. 22.| I regard the μᾶλλον 
ἐνεδυναμοῦτο, as the only words beneath 
which can lie concealed the journey to 
Arabia. Paul mentions this journey (Gal. 
i. 17) with no obscure hint that to it was 
to be assigned the reception by him, in 


full measure, of the Gospel which he 


rec συνεχυνεν, with ΑΓ B?]HLP rel: 
om Ist τους BR}. 


preached. And‘ such a reception would 
certainly give.rise to the great accession 
of power here recorded. 1 am the more 
disposed to allot that journey this place, 
from the following considerations. The 
omission of any mention of it here can 
arise only from one of two causes: (1) 
whether Paul himself were the source of 
the narrative, or some other narrator,—the 
intentional passing over of it, as belong- 
ing more to his personal history (which it 
was his express purpose to relate in Gal. i.) 
than to that of his ministry: (2) on the sup- 
position of Paul not having been the source 
of the narrative,—the narrator having 
not been aware of it. In either case, this 
expression seems to me one very likely to 
have been used :—(1) if the omission was 
intentional,—to record a remarkable acces- 
sion of power to Saul’s ministry, without 
particularizing whence or how it came: 
(2) if it was wnintentional,—as a simple 
record of that which was observed in him, 
but. of which the source was to the nar- 
rator unknown. συνέχυννεν) Chry- 
sostom strikingly says, ἅτε νομομαθὴς dy 
ἐπεστόμιζεν αὐτοὺς καὶ οὐκ εἴα φθέγγε- 
σθαι’ ἐνόμισαν ἀπηλλάχθαι τῆς ἐν τοῖς 
τοιούτοις διαλέξεως ἀπαλλαγέντες Στε- 
φάνου, καὶ Στεφάνου σφοδρότερον εὗρον 
ἕτερον. (Cramer’s Catena.) | : 
ἡμέραι ἱκαναί Zn Damascus, see above on 
ver. 19. The whole time, from his con- 
version to his journey to Jerusalem, was 
three years, Gal. i. 18. ἀνελεῖν avr. | 
ἐπὶ τὸν ἰσχυρὸν συλλογισμὸν ἔρχονται 


Crier 


104 ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. IX. 


z Ν A ΄ » A 
aconstr., Pri 24 * ἐγνώσθη δὲ τῷ Σαύλῳ ἡ ἢ ἐπιβουλὴ αὐτῶν. “ παρετη- 


i. Lev. iv. a δὲ \ \ Sr Agee \d \ “ 
ἐπ πα. 5.19. βουντο Εε καὶ TAS TUAAS ἤμερας TE Kab VUKTOS OTT@S 
ii. 30 poe. ᾽ , Or U \ e \ > fol 
aly, Esth. αὐτὸν 7 ἀνέλωσιν' 5 λαβόντες δὲ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 
ς ald. ake vi. 7. xiv. 1. Gal.iv.10. Ps. xxxvi.12. act., Mark iii. 2. Luke xx. 20 only. d gen., Luke 


xviii. 7. Rev. iv. 8al4. Ps.i.2, v. K. ἡμέρας, Mark v. 5. 1 Thess. ii.9al. Isa. xxiv. 10. acc.,ch. xx. 81 reff. 
e Matt. xxi. 36.39 Gen. χὶϊ ὃ 


24. [παυλω H.] rec παρετήρουν (mistake: see below), with HLP 13 rel: txt 
ABCER® Fr-coisl p 36 Orig,. rec for δε και, τε (the -το of παρετηρουντο being mis- 
taken for τε, no other copula was wanted: and thus δε καὶ was struck out: thus also 
the cain 1, &e as unnecessary aft δε), with HP 18 rel Syr [wth] Chr: δε L 137-80 
syr coptt arm[Gb]: txt ABCEX Fr-coisl p 36 vulg Orig. om τε A ἃ ἐκ Orig. 

for nu. to aveA., ὁπως πιασωσιν avToY nM. Kat vuKT. A. aveA. bef avrov &3, 

25. rec αὑτὸν οἱ μαθηται, with EHLP 18 rel (vulg] syrr coptt eth-pl [arm] Chr-txt, 
(Ec Thl: avtov o wad. αὐτου b: οἱ μαθηται avrov m pr(or p-corr! ἢ): οἱ μαθηται 36. 69 
lect-12: txt ABCN Fr-coisl p!(perhaps) am demid Orig(vol. ii. p. 394) Chr(érérpewe 


πάλιν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι. οὐκετι yap συκοφάντας Antipas, should, by this change of affairs, 
κ. κατηγόρους Kk. wWevdoudptupas ἐπιζη- be received into favour; and the more so, 
tovow, Chrys. Hom. xx. 24.) In as there was an old grudge between Vitel- 
2 Cor. xi. 32, Paul writes, ἐν Δαμασκᾷ 6 liusand Antipas, of which Jos. says (Antt. 
ἐθνάρχης “Apéra τοῦ βασιλέως ἐφρούρει xviii. 4. 5), ἔκρυπτεν ὀργήν, μέχρι δὴ καὶ 
τὴν πόλιν Δαμασκηνῶν, πιάσαι με [θέλων]. μετῆλθε, Γαΐου τὴν ἀρχὴν παρειληφότος. 
A somewhat difficult chronological ques- Now in the year 38 Caligula made 
tion arises respecting the subordination of _ several changes in the East, granting Itu- 
Damascus to this Aretas. Thecity, under rea to Sowmus, Lesser Armenia and parts 
Augustus and Tiberius, was attached to of Arabia to Cotys, the territory of Cotys 
the province of Syria: and we have coins to Rhemetalces,—and to Poiemon, the 
of Damascus of both these emperors, and son of Polemon, his father’s government. 
again of Nero and his successors. Butwe These facts, coupled with that of no Da- 
have none of Caligula and Claudius; and wmascene coins of Caligula and Claudius 
the following circumstances seem to point existing (which might be fortuitous, but 
to a change in the rulership of Damascus acquires force when thus combined), make 
at the death of Tiberius. Therehad been it probable that about this time Damascus, 
for some time war between Aretas, king of | which belonged to the predecessors of Are- 
Arabia Nabatza (whose capitalwas Petra), tas (Jos. Antt. xiii. 5. 2), was granted to 
and Herod Antipas, on account of the di- Aretas by Caligula. This would at once 
vorce by Herod of Aretas’ daughter at the solve the difficulty. The other supposi- 
instance of Herodias, and on account of tions,—that the Ethnarch (see on 2 Cor. 
some disputes about their frontiers. A xi. 32) was only visiting the city (as if 
battle was fought, and Herod’s army en- he could then have guarded the city to 
tirely destroyed (Jos. Antt. xviii. 5. 1). prevent Paul’s escape),—or that Aretas 
On this Antipas, who was a favourite with had seized Damascus on Vitellius giving 
Tiberius, sent to Rome for help: and Vi- up the expedition against him (as if 
tellius, the governor of Syria, was com- a Roman governor of a province would, 
missioned to march against Aretas, and while waiting for orders from a new em- 
take him, dead or alive. While on his _ peror, quietly allow one of its chief cities to 
march, he heard at Jerusalem of the death be taken from him), are in the highest 
of Tiberius (March 16, a.D. 37), and degree improbable. The above is taken in 
πόλεμον ἐκφέρειν οὐκέθ᾽ ὁμοίως δυνάμενος substance from Wieseler, Chron. des Apost. 
διὰ τὸ εἰς Γάϊον μεταπεπτωκέναι τὰ πράγ- Zeitalters, pp. 167—175. His further ar- 
ματα (Antt. xviii, 5. 3), abandoned his gument from a coin βασιλέως ᾿Αρέτα φιλ- 
march, and sent his army into their win- έλληνος does not seem conclusive, as it 
ter quarters, himself returning to Antioch: leaves the latter title altogether unac- 
Antt. ibid, This μεταπεπτωκέναι τὰ mp. counted for. It probably (C. and H. i. 
brought about a great change in the situ- pp. 101 and 182) belongs to a former Are- 
ation ot Antipas and his enemy. Antipas tas. 25.] The reading in the text, AaB. 
was soon (A.D. 39) banished to Lyons,and οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, is ambiguous. Chrys. 
his kingdom given to Agrippa, ‘is foe (seein var. readd.), al. take it as if Saul had 
(Antt. xviii. 7. 2), who had been living in disciples of his own who did this. The only 
habits of intimacy with the new emperor — escape from this inference is by supposing 
(xviii. 6. 5). It would be naturai that san unusual government of a gen. by Aa- 
Aretas, who had been grossly injured by l βόντες, such as we sometimes find in Ho- 


ABCEH 
LPNab 
cdfgh 
klmo 
pl3 


24—29. ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ATOSTOAON. 105 


\ A . 
νυκτος ᾿διὰ τοῦ ϑτειχους " καθῆκαν αὐτὸν ἱ χαλάσαντες -- 50οι. if Ty 
33 only. 


ae (ie 26,1 , S. Katee ΧΗ w 2 Cor. εἰ 
ἐν σπυρίδι. ' παραγενόμενος, δὲ : εἰς Ἱερουσαλὴμ τ τὰ 
τὸ ἐπειρᾶτο " κολλᾶσθαι τοῖς μαθηταῖς" καὶ πάντες ἐφοβοῦντο ἂς τὸ times) 
ey Siig ͵ ο “' ” 7, ο ͵΄ only. Exod 
αὐτόν, μὴ ° πιστεύοντες ° ὅτι" ἔστιν μαθητής. 77 Βαρνάβας , x2. | 
\ ’ 9s nN 4 \ , ance Tg 
δὲ “ἐπιίλαβομενος αὐτὸν ἤγαγεν πρὸς τοὺς ἀποστόλους, SPF. 
\ ts ὃ , > af - > A aa ι.5 NAME , Exod. xvii. 
καὶ 1 διηγήσατο αὐτοῖς ' πῶς ἐν TH ὁδῷ * εἶδεν τὸν * κύριον, bigs 
Kal ὅτι ἐλάλησεν αὐτῷ, καὶ " πῶς ἐν Δαμασκῷ " ἐπαῤ- sei 
ς A , A \ » cal & ~ 
ῥησιάσατο ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ. 38 καὶ ἣν μετ᾽ αὐτῶν τι κὲ only. 
Jer. xlv 
Vv 5: ’ \ Vv 53 / > ce 7 τῆ 
εὐςπορευομένος καί ἐκπορευόμενος εἰς ᾿Ιερουσαλήμ, πρ λίθος 
Ὁ 5ς , ΕῚ (ee eZ a / 99 2 / 37 ||. xvi. 
παῤῥησιαζόμενος ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου, 33 ἐλάλει TE _ 10 \only+ 
1 Matt. ii. 


1. [John viii. 2.) ch. xiii. 14. xv. 4 only. Josh xxiv. 11, 
18 834, F(not A) Ald. only. n ch. v. 13 reff. 
ν. 31 pres., ch. xvi. 38 reff. 


m ch. xxvi. 21 only. Prov. xxvi. 
o John xiv.10. Rom. x.9 1 Thess. iv. 14 al. Job 
xv. 81. p ᾿, q constr., ch. xvi. 19. xviii. 17. Luke ix. 47. (xiv. 
4.) xxiii. 27 only. (Proy. vii. 13.) gen., ch. xvii. 19 reff. r constr., Mark v. 16. ch. xii. 17 only. 
sas above (r). Mark ix. 9. Luke viii. 39. ix. 10. ch. vill. 33. Heb. xi. 32 only. Josh. ii. 23. t John 
xx. 20. (ch. xxii. 18.) ὁρᾶν 7. K., 1 Cor. ix. 1 reff, uch. xiii. 46. xiv. 3 413. Eph. 

vi. 20. 1 Thess. ii. 2 only. L.P. Prov. xx. 9 al. vhere only. Zech. viii.10. see ch. i. 21. 


Tots μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ" καὶ yap μαθητὰς εἶχεν εὐθέω:5). rec καθηκαν bef δια τ. τειχ., 
omg αὑτὸν (correction apparently, for the sake of perspicuity, to prevent λαβοντες and 
δια του τειχους being connected together), with HLP (13) rel Chr: txt ABC(E m) & 
Fr-coisl p Orig.—om avtov ΕΗ ΤΡ m rel: ins ABCR Fr-coisl p 13. σφυριδι [C JR. 

26. rec aft map. δε ins 0 cavaos (insertion as in ver 19: further shewn by o mavaos 
in E 40), with HLP 13 rel syr eth-pl [arm] Chr-txt, Thl: ο παυλος E 33-4. 105: om 
ABCR p vulg coptt eth Chr-comm. for es, εν EHLP rel Thl-sif: txt A B(sic: 
see table) CX ad ἔξ o p(Treg expr, so also Scriv) 36. επειραΐεν (corrn to more 
usual form, see reff) ΑΒΟΝ p: txt EHLP 13. 36 rel Chr. 

27. om 8rd και N!(ins N-corr!*). rec ins Tov bef ino., with EHLPN p 18 rel ; 
kupiov, A 98-mg ; του κῦ ah k lect-12: om BC mo. 

28. om και εκπ. (homeotel) HLP Ὁ df] mo Chr, Thi-sif. rec (for es) ev, with 
Hah [vulg syrr eth arm] Chr,: txt ABCELPR [m] p 18. 36 rel Chr,. (Meyer holds 
that εἰς is owing to a wish to have a prep that may apply to one or other of the par- 
ticiples: but surely no corrector would have left exmop, es together, and H which 
omits κ. ἐκπ. reads ev.) rec ins καὶ bef mapp., with EHLP rel vss Chr, Thl: om 
ABCR p 18. 40 fuld eth-rom arm. rec aft τ. κυρ. ins τησου, with HLN3 [m(omg 
rov)]13 rel wth-pl Chr,: for τ. xv, ιὖ C 3, 10-4, 38. 677. 801 Syr Chr,: om κυρ, ah: 


txt ABEPN'! p 40 vulg syr coptt zth-rom arm. 


mer, 6. g. ἀγκὰς λαβέτην ἀλλήλων, 1]. ψ. 
711; Ὀδυσῆος λάβε γούνων, Od. x. 310: 
see also ἢ]. γ. 869, 6. 371; Od. ε. 428, τ. 
480. So we have κρατήσας τῆς χειρὸς 
αὐτῆς, Luke viii. 54. But whether this is 
justified in a case where the whole person 
is concerned, as here, may be a question. 
If it is, it must be because not the taking 
and bringing him to the spot, but the act 
of laying hold of him to put him into the 
basket, is intended. διὰ τ. τείχους] 
Further particularized by the addition of 
διὰ θυρίδος, 2 Cor. xi. 33. Such windows 
in the walls of cities are common in the 
East: see Josh. ii. 15, 1 Sam. xix. 12: 
and an engraving of part of the present 
wall of Damascus in C. and H. i. p. 124. 
σπυρίδι] σαργάνῃ, 2 Cor. xi. 33. 
See note there, and on Matt. xv. 37. 
26. παραγ.7 Immediately: the purpose 
of this journey was to become acquainted 
with Peter, Gal. i. 18: a resolution pro- 
bably taken during the conspiracy of the 


Jews against him at Damascus, and in 
furtherance of his announced mission to 
the Gentiles: that, by conference with 
the Apostles, his sphere of work might be 
agreed on. And this purpose his escape 
enabled him to effect. καί] Not but: 
the δέ follows. 27.] It is very pro- 
bable that Barnabas and Saul may have 
been personally known to each other in 
youth. ‘Cyprus is only a few hours’ sail 
from Cilicia. The schools of Tarsus may 
naturally have attracted one who, though 
a Levite, was a Hellenist: and there the 
friendship may have begun, which lasted 
through many vicissitudes, till it was 
rudely interrupted in the dispute at An- 
tioch (ch. xv. 39).’ (Ὁ. and H., edn. 2, i. p. 
127.) τοὺς atroot. | Only Peter, and 
James the Lord’s brother, Gal. i. 18, 19. 
Probably there were no other Apostles 
there at the time: if there were, it is 
hardly conceivable that Saul should not 
have seen them. On his second visit, he 


106 TIPABEIS ATIOSTOAON, TX, 
\ s Ν Ἢ 
wMarki.27. Καὶ ἣ συνεζήτει ᾿ πρὸς τοὺς ' Ελληνιστάς. οἱ δὲ" ἐπεχείρουν 
= 
ix. 16. Luke x ὡς ae 30) Ξ - on b 4 ν»».» 7 
xxi 8 ΟΖ ἀμελεῖν αὐτόν. 50 4 ἐπυγνόντες Se” οἱ ἢ ἀδελφοὶ “ κατ- 
ch. vi. 9. ΄, ΡΟΝ > ΄, Modis , 5. ΟὟ > 
xchvil ἤγαγον αὑτὸν εἰς Καισάρειαν καὶ ἃ ἐξαπέστειλαν αὐτὸν εἰς 
(reff. ) . 
y Luke i. 1. ch. Ταρσόν. 
Ett Ἔ oy. ς \ 5 ’ ee » αὐ ᾽ , " 
USTN. 1X. “Ὁ. a“ 
τς τὰ 31°H μὲν οὖν © ἐκκλησία ‘kal ὅλης τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας καὶ 
“it Bony. Γαλιλαίας καὶ > ας 8 εἶχεν 8 εἰρή h οἰκοὃ 
δυο ς ας b mAKLAPELAS ELYVEV eLpyVHV, OLKOOO{LOU- 
23,only in έν ee 4 δὰ δ 8 41 4 4 ᾿ 7 
G&pp. Acts μέ νὴ Καὶ “Πορευομενὴ T@ ho @ TOU κυριου, καὶ Τῇ 
and Epp. ] / ᾿ς τ ee , m2 / $024 2 
ern τ παρακλῆσει του αγίιου “πνευμᾶτος ἐπληθύνετο" erye~ 
c en, ΧΣΙΙ, 
reff. ἃ ch. vii. 12.reff. L.P. e sing. w. two or more places adjoined, here only. f Luke 
iv. 14. xxiii. 5. ver. 42. ch. x. 37. g John xvi. 33. Rom. v. 1 only. h = ch. xx. 32. 1 Cor 
viii. 1. x. 23. xiv. 4,17, 1 Thess. v. 11. i constr., ch. xiv. 16. Jude ll only. Prov. xxviii. 26. see 
ch. xxi. 21. w. ἐν, Lukei. 6. 1 Pet. iv.3. 2 Pet. ii. 10. Josh. xxii. 5 A Ald. compl. k 2 Cor. v. 11 


(reff.) only. 1 = Rom. xii. ὃ reff. 


29. aft συνεζ, ins τε (but corrd) XN}. 


m ch. vi. 7 reff. 


ελληνας A many vss(Gir@cos): vulg has 


loquebatur quoque gentibus, et disputabat cum Grecis, but am demid &¢ omit gentibus 


(corrn from ch xi. 20). 
p [vulg] Chr,. 
30. for kaic., ιεροσολυμα A. 


rec autov bef aveA., with HLP 18 rel: txt ABCEN ah τὰ 


add δια νυκτος Εἰ, νυκτος c 180 Syr syr-w-ast sah. 


om 2nd αὐτὸν (as unnecessary) AE a? h: ins BCHLPX® p rel. 
31. rec at μεν ovy exxAnoim [add πασαι E] &e εἰχον . . οἰκοδομουμεναιΐ -μενοι ἘΠ) x. 
mopevouevar| -μενοι ΕΠ] ἄς ἐπληθυνοντο (see note), with EHLP rel syr Chr, [Aug,]: txt 
ABC®8 p 18 vulg Syr coptt eth arm Dion, Thl-fin. 


saw John also (Gal. ii. 9). Perhaps he 
never saw in the flesh any other of the 
Apostles after his conversion. διηγή- 
σατο] viz. Barnabas, not Saul. 29. 
“Ἑλληνιστάς | See ch. vi. 1 and note. This 
he did, partly, we may infer, to avoid the 
extreme and violent opposition which he 
would immediately encounter from the 
Jews themselves,—but partly also, it may 
well be believed, because he himself in the 
synagogues of the Hellenists had opposed 
Stephen formerly. 30. ἐπιγνόντες 
δὲ. . . .7 There was also another reason. 
He was praying in the temple, and saw 
the Lord in a vision, who commanded him 
to depart, for they would not receive his 
testimony :—and sent him from thence to 
the Gentiles: see ch. xxii. 17—21 and 
notes. His stay in Jerusalem at this visit 
was fifteen days, Gal. i. 18. εἰς Και- 
odpetav] From the whole cast of the sen- 
tence, the κατήγαγον and ἐξαπέστειλαν, we 
should infer this to be Cesarea Stratonis 
[see on ch. x. 1], even if this were not 
determined by the word Καισάρεια used 
absolutely, which always applies to this 
city, and not to Cwsarea Philippi (which 
‘De Dieu, Olsh., and others believe to be 
meant [see Matt. xvi. 13 and note]). From 
Gal. i. 21, it would appear that Saul about 
this time traversed Syria (on his way to 
Tarsus ?). If so, he probably went by sea 
to Seleucia, and thence to Antioch. The 
ἐξαπέστειλαν looks more like a ‘sending 
off’ by sea, than a mere ‘sending forward ’ 
by land. εἰς Tapodv | towards, ‘for,’ 
Tarsus. He was not idle there, but cer- 
tainly preached the Gospel, and in all pro- 


bability was the founder of the churches 
alluded to ch. xv. 23 and 41. 

91.) FLOURISHING STATE OF THE 
CHURCH IN PALESTINE AT THIS TIME. 
Commencement of new section: compare 
μὲν οὖν, and note, ch. xi. 19. The reading 
ἐκκλησία can hardly (as Meyer) be an 
alteration to suit the idea of the unity of 
the church,—as in that case we should have 
similar alterations in ch. xv. 41; xvi. 5, 
where no variations are found in the chief 
mss. More probably, it has been altered 
here to conform it to those places. This 
description probably embraces most of the 
time since the conversion of Saul. De 
Wette observes, that the attention of the 
Jews was, during much of this time, dis- 
tracted from the Christians, by the at- 
tempt of Caligula to set up his image in 
the temple at Jerusalem, Jos. Antt. xviii. 
8. 2—9. οἰκοδομουμένη) See Matt. 
xvi. 18. It probably refers to both exter- 
nal and internal strength and accession of 
grace. Paul commonly uses it of spiritual 
building up: see reff. πορ. τῷ dB. | 
walking in the fear: for construction see 
reff.:—not ‘following after the fear’ 
(Winer, edn. 2, ὃ 31.1; not in edn. 6, 
see § 31. 9),—nor ‘ walking according to 
the fear’ as their rule (Meyer), — nor 
‘advancing in the fear’ (Beza, Wolf). 

kK. τ. παρακλ. τ. Gy. wv. ἐπληθ.] 
And was multiplied (το ἢ.) by the exhor- 
tation of (i. e. inspired by) the Holy 
Spirit. This is the only rendering which 
suits the usage of the words. ‘Those of 
the Vulg. ‘consolatione replebantur,’—of 
Kuin., ‘adjumento abundabant, are un- 


AKCEH 
ΠΡῚΝ ἃ Ὁ 
cedfgh 
klmo 
p 13 


i atl ti ia 


80 ---8ὅ, 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΏΝ. 


107 


vero δὲ Πέτρον " διερχύόμενον διὰ πάντων ° κατελθεῖν » w. διά, 


\ \ \ p ς / \ 
καὶ προς TOUS aylovg TOUS 


4 κατοικοῦντας 
5 lal » / , An 
33 εὗρεν δὲ ἐκεῖ ἄνθρωπόν twa ὀνόματι Aivéay 1 ἐξ ἐτῶν 


Matt. xii. 43. 
i Cor.-x. 1: 
2 Cor. i. 16. 
Levy. xxvi. 5. 
(with acc.,ch. 
xiii. 6 reff.) 


Λύδδα. 


/ >] \ / 
ὀκτὼ 5 κατακείμενον ἐπὶ ᾿κραβάώττου, ὃς ἦν ἡ παραλελυ- ο οἰ. νι. δ 


μένος. 


Ω ΠΥ ΠΣ 2 θ ΔῸΣ a Ἁ 35 
Oo χρίστος αναστηῦν Kal στρωσον σεαυτῳ. 7 
’ / Ww > / \ to. 3. oN / ΄ q An 

εὐθέως ἀνέστη, KAL ELOAV αὑτὸν TTAVTES OL * κατοίκουντες 15) 


30. ch. xxviii. 8. Prov. vi. 9. 
here (ch. v. 42 v. r.) only. (ch. xviii. 5.) 
151} 1... only. Job xvii. 13. Ezek. xxiii. 41. 


t ch. v. 15 reff. 


constr., here only. 


reff. 
p ver. 13. 


\ 3 > κίννε / » , ww” ral 
34 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ο Πέτρος Atvéa, tatai σεῦ Inoods 2 inte cn.i. 


y 2. 19 rela on 
Και t= Luke viii. 
27 al. (3 
Kings xviii. 


s = Marki. 
u ch, viii. 7 reff. v ino. ὃ χρ. 
w = ver. 6 reff. x Mark xi. 8 bis || Mt 


Esth. iv. 3. 


32. rec Avddav (here and in ver 86 alteration to an inflected form from the original 
Avdda: cf εἰς Avdda παρελθων Jos. BJ ii. 19.1), with CEHL rel 36 Chr, : λυδαν Pm 
57: txt ABN 19. 40. (13 def here.)—X has ev Avdda, but ev is marked for erasure by 


&! or corr). 


33. rec aw. bef ovou., with HLP rel 36 Chr, Thl-sif: om ονομ. 13: txt ABCEN 


k m p vulg syrr arm (coptt eth) Thl-fin. 


rec κραββατω, with (EHL[P]) 18 rel 


Thi: txt ABCN p.—xpaBBar. ΒΞ; κραβαττ. AB'CEHLPR?: κραβακτ. &?. 
34. ins o κυρ. bef ino. A 15-8. 36. 40. 68 vulg[not fuld demid] sah eth arm Thl-fin, 


Ambr,. 


om 2nd o (alteration to the Name ino. xp.) B'(but “ superadditur”) CX ὁ 


13 [Thl-fin]: ins AEHLP p rel Chr, [Thl-sif}. 


exampled, see reff. Neither must 77 
παρακλ. be coupled with τῷ φόβῳ, as in 
EK. V., and by Beza and Rosenmiiller, 
which would leave oixodou. standing by 
itself, and render the sentence totally un- 
like Luke’s usual manner of writing. 
32—35.] HEALING OF ANEAS AT 
Lyppa BY PETER. This and the following 
miracle form the introduction to the very 
important portion of Peter’s history which 
follows in ch. x.,—by bringing him and his 
work before usagain. 382. διερχόμ.. ὃ. π.] 
These words are aptly introduced by the 
notice in ver. 31, which shews that Peter’s 
journey was not an escape from persecution, 
but undertaken at a time of peace, and for 
the purpose of visiting the churches. 
πάντων may be neuter, ‘all parts:’ but it 
is probably masc. and ἁγίων understood. 
Wieseler (p. 145, note) doubts whether we 
can say διέρχεσθαι διὰ πάντων τ. ἁγίων, 
—but see reff. The καί makes the masce. 
more likely, as it presupposes some ἅγιοι 
in the mind of the writer before. As 
I have implied on ver. 31, this journey of 
Peter’s is not necessarily consecutive on 
the events of vv. 1—30. But an alternative 
presents itself here; either it took place 
before the arrival of Saul in Jerusalem, or 
after his departure: for Peter was there 
during his visit (Gal. i. 18). It seems 
most likely that it was before his arrival. 
For (1) it is Luke’s manner in this first part 
of the Acts, where he is carrying on several 
histories together, to follow the one in 
hand as far as some resting-point, and then 
go back and take up another: see ch. viii. 2 
thus taken up from ἀναιρέσει αὐτοῦ, ver. 1: 
ver. 4 going back to the διασπαρέντες :--- 


ch. ix. 1 taken up from viii. 3:—xi. 19, 
from vill. 4 again:—and (2) the journey 
of Peter to visit the churches which were 
now resting after the persecution would 
hardly be delayed so long as three whole 
years. So that it is most natural to place 
this section, viz. ch. ix. 32—xi. 18 (for all 
this is contimuous), before the visit of 
Saul to Jerusalem, and during his stay 
at Damascus or in Arabia. See further on 
xi. 19. Λύδδα] Lod, Neh. vii. 37. 
A large village near Joppa (ver. 38), on the 
Mediterranean (Jos. Antt. xx. 6. 2, κώμην 
τινὰ Avddav λεγομ., πόλεως τὸ μέγεθος οὐκ 
ἀποδέουσαν), just one day’s journey from 
Jerusalem (Lightf., Cent. Chor. Matth. 
prem. cxvi.). It afterwards became the 
important town of Diospolis. 33. 
Aivéav] Whether a believer or not, does 
not appear; from Peter’s visit being to 
the saints, it would seem that he was: 
but perhaps the indefinite ἄνθρωπόν τινα 
may imply the contrary, as also Peter’s 
words, announcing a free and unexpected 
gift from One whom he knew not. 

34. στρῶσ. σεαυτ. Not ‘for the future? 
but ‘immediately,’ as a proof of his sound- 
ness. 35. πάντες... .. οἵτινες) Not 
‘all, who had turned to the Lord,’ as Kuin.: 
this would make the mention of the fact 
unmeaning,—and surely more would see 
him than the believers merely. The similar 
use of οἵτινες in the ref. shews its meaning 
to be commensurate with the preceding 
"πάντες, and to gather them into a class, of 
which that which follows is predicated. All 
that dwelt in L. and S. saw him;—which 
also (i. 6. and they) turned to the Lord. 
A general conversion of the inhabitants te 


108 


yso ch. xxiv. I, 

zch. xxvi. 20 
reff. 

a here only +. 
Diog. Laert. 
iv. 2 (Att. 
-τρις), 

b 1 (ον. χὶϊ. 

30 reff. 

c= Matt. x. 2. 

xxvi. 3. Col. 

ιν, 


d= ch. xix. 28 


2 κύριον. 


e Paul only 
(Rom. ii. 7. 
xiii, 3 alll.), 
exc. here and 
Heb. xiii. 21. 

f plur., ch. x. 
2,4, 31. xxiv. 
17 only. Dan. iv. 24 (27). see ch. iii. 2 reff. 

xiii. 4 A Ald. (-vys, B, F). (Ps. xxx. 10.) 
i. 5only. Exod. ii. 5. 

m = ch. xi. 23 al. fr. 
xxii. 5. “ 


35. (ειδαν, so AB: eda C.) 


n here only. 


ΠΡΑΞΕῚΣ ANMOSTOAON. 


om Toy &}, 


IX. 36—43, 


Λύδδα καὶ τὸν Σάρωνα, Υ οἵτινες * ἐπέστρεψαν 3 ἐπὶ τὸν 
806 Ἔν Ἰόππῃ δέ τις ἣν ὃ μαθήτρια ὀνόματι 
Ταβιθά, ἣ ὃ διερμηνευομένη “ λέγεται Δορκάς: αὕτη ἦν 
διγγλήρης “ ἀγαθῶν © ἔργων καὶ ᾿ ἐλεημοσυνῶν ἕ ὧν ἐποίει. 
37 ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ἐκείναις " ἀσθενήσασαν αὐτὴν 
ἀποθανεῖν: ἱλούσαντες δὲ αὐτὴν ἔθηκαν ἐν " ὑπερῴῳ. 
38 ἐγγὺς δὲ οὔσης Λύδδας τῇ ᾿Ιόππῃ οἱ μαθηταὶ ἀκούσαν- 
τες ὅτι Ἰ]έτρος ' ἐστὶν ἐν αὐτῇ ἀπέστειλαν δύο ἄνδρας 
πρὸς αὐτὸν ' παρακαλοῦντες Μὴ 5" ὀκνήσῃς ° διελθεῖν 


g attr., ch. i. 1 reff. 


: i John xiii. 10. ch. xvi. 33. Heb. x. 22. 2 Pet. ii. 22. 
k ch. i. 13 reff. Acts only, 3 Kings xvii. 19. 
Num, xxii. 16. ἕ 


ἢ = Matt. x.8al. 2 Kings 
Rex. 
1 pres., ch. xvi. 38 reff. 
ον. €ws, Luke ii. 15. ch. xi. 19, 22 only. Gen. 


Steph σαρωνᾶν (corrn with the 


same view as λυδδαν : but seeing tov before it, the transcriber could not make it an 
accus. fem., and has therefore made it a mase from σαρωνας, not seeing that it was 
already an accus from capwy), with b' ὁ Καὶ p 36: accapwvay f: accapwva HL a b? g ἢ 
lo 13 Chr,, acapwva Ῥ e 1061: txt BCE ἃ m (coptt) Thl-fin: cappwva [A(over an 


erasure) | δὲ. 


36. epy. bef ay. BCE m 13 vulg spec [Bas,]: txt ΛΗ] ΓΡῚΝ rel Chr, ΤῊ]. 


37. εθηκ. bef avr. AN?! 


p 40: om aut. B: txt CEHL[ P]X&* 13 rel Chr. 


ins Tw 


bef υπερ. ACE a ἢ o Orig, : om ΒΗΙΡΝ p rel Chr,. 
88. rec Avddys, with ΒΡ ΜΉ ΠΡ rel 36 [Bas, Chr, |: Avd5as AN! (possibly the original 


as ABN agree in λυδδα vv 32, 35): txt BIC|N*] p. (13 def.) 
om δυο avip. HLPabdfg hlo Chr, Thl-sif. 
(alteration to avoid the harshness of the direct constr with παρακ. 


[aft οἱ ins δὲ Η.7 
rec οκνησαι ὃ. €. avTwy 


Meyer thinks 


the direct constr has been written in the marg and found its way into the text), with 
C#(appy) HLP 18. 36 rel syrr [eth arm Bas, | Chr: txt ABC!EN p vulg spec [coptt]. 


(oxvno(..) p.) 


the faith followed. τὸν Sdpwva | 
Perhaps not a village, but (and the art. 
makes this probable) the celebrated plain 
of that name, extending along the coast 
from Cesarea to Joppa, see Isa. xxxiii. 9; 
xxxv. 2; Ixv. 10; Cant. ii. 1; 1 Chron. xxvii. 
29; and Jerome on Isa. xxxiii. and Ixv., 
vol. iv., pp. 436, 780. Mariti (Travels, 
p. 350) mentions a village Saren between 
Lydda and Arsuf (see Josh. xii. 18, marg. 
E. V.): but more recent travellers do not 
notice it. See Winer, Realw., where other 
places of the same name are mentioned. 

36—43.] Raisina oF TABITHA 
FROM THE DEAD. 36. ἐν ᾿Ιόππῃ] 
Joppa was a very ancient Philistian city, 
on the frontier of Dan, but not belonging 
to that tribe, Josh. xix. 46; on the coast 
(ch. x. 6), with a celebrated but not very 
secure harbour (Jos. B. J. ili. 9. 3: see 
2 Chron. ii. 16; Ezra iii. 7; Jonah i. 3; 
1 Mace. xiv. 5; 2 Mace. xii. 3),—situated 
in a plain (1 Mace. x. 75—77) near Lydda 
(ver. 38), at the end of the mountain road 
connecting Jerusalem with the sea. The 
Maceabean generals, Jonathan and Simon, 
took it from the Syrians and fortified it 
(1 Mace. x. 74—76; xiv. 5, 34. Jos. Antt. 
xiii. 9, 2). Pompey joined it to the pro- 


vince of Syria (Antt. xiv. 4. 4), but Cesar 
restored it to Hyrcanus (xiv. 10. 6), and it 
afterwards formed part of the kingdom of 
Herod (xv. 7.3) and of Archelaus (xvii. 
11. 4), after whose deposition it reverted 
to the province of Syria, to which it be- 
longed at the time of our narrative. It 
was destroyed by C. Cestius (Jos. B. J. ii. 
18. 10); but rebuilt, and became a nest 
of Jewish pirates (Strabo, xvi. 759), in 
consequence of which Vespasian levelled it 
with the ground, and built a fort there 
(B. J. iii. 9. 3, 4), which soon became the 
nucleus of a new town. It is now called 
Jaffa (lama, Anna Comnena, Alex. ii. p. 
328), and has about 7000 inhabitants, half 
of whom are Christians. (Winer, Realw.) 

Ταβιθά) x39, in Aramaic, answer- 
ing to ἢ" Heb., δορκάς (1. Hist. An. xiv. 
14), a gazelle. It appears also in the Rabbi- 
nical books as a female name (Lightf.): the 
gazelle being in the East a favourite type 
of beauty. See Cant. ii. 9, 17; iv. 5; vil. 3. 
Lightf. remarks, that she was probably a 
Hellenist, and thus was known by both 
names. 87. ἐν ὑπερῴῳ) No art., as in the 
expressions eis οἶκον, ‘on deck,’ &c., which 
usually occur after prepositions, cf. Middl. 
ch. vi. § 1. See 1 Kings xvii. 19. 


ABCEH 
LPN ab 
cdfgh 
klmo 


p 13 


οὐναῖ χη- 
pac A. 


ABCEL 
Prabe 
afghk 
lmop 
13 


el; TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


A ~ ἃ ke 
ἕως ἡμῶν. 389» ἀναστὰς δὲ Πέτρος ἃ συνῆλθεν αὐτοῖς" ὃν pcb. υἱῖ. 26 


109 


; , 5 avn , ὺ ky 2 ΝΑ ᾳ =ch.i. 21 
παραγενόμενον ὃ ἀνήγαγον εἰς τὸ "ὶ ὑπερῷον, καὶ * παρ- 4 re 
έστησαν αὐτῷ πᾶσαι αἱ " χῆραι κλαίουσαι καὶ " ἐπιδεικ- cs id re, 
νύμεναι ἡ χιτῶνας καὶ ἱμάτια ὅσα ἐποίει * μετ᾽ αὐτῶν οὖσα P.3N. 34. 
ἡ Δορκάς. 40 υἐκβαλὼν δὲ ἔξω πάντας ὁ ἸΤΠέτρος καὶ 1 σαν, τ 
«θεὶς τὰ * γόνατα * προςηύξατο, καὶ ἢ ἐπιστρέψας πρὸς τὸ t= 2h iv. i 


u Mark xii. 40. 


ὁ σῶμα εἶπεν Ταβιθά, ἃ ἀνάστηθι. ἡ δὲ 5 ἤνοιξεν τοὺς "ον τ 


A \ A , > , 1 Cor. vii. 8. 
ε ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῆς, καὶ ἰδοῦσα τὸν Ἰ]έτρον ἶ ἀνεκάθισεν. 1Tim.v.3, 
A a , ὃ Sith : , cra y 
41 ὃ δοὺς δὲ αὐτῇ & χεῖρα " ἀνέστησεν αὐτήν" | φωνήσας δὲ y mid incre 
. ὔ ͵ A only. 2 Mace. 
τοὺς 1} ἁγίους καὶ τὰς “xnpas * παρέστησεν αὐτὴν ζῶσαν. x32. (ch. 


[> in \ Van ogee ᾽ Ὁ. fol ’ ΄ \ ᾽ 7 _Y. > 

42} γνωστὸν δὲ ἐγένετο ™ καθ᾽ τὰ ὅλης τῆς Ἰόππης, καὶ " ἐπί- “Yt 
3. 

x = Matt. xvii. 
17. John 
xiv. 9 al. 

y Mark v. 40. 
John vi. 37. 
Rev. xi. 2. 

2 Chron. 
w. πρός, Luke 
c Acts, here only. = Matt. xxvii. 
ever. 8. Matt. ix. 30. 4 Kings iv. 35. 
h trans., = here only. see Uh. ii. 24 reff. 


στευσαν πολλοὶ " ἐπὶ τὸν κύριον. * ἐγένετο δὲ ° ἡμέρας 
ΠῚ ἱκανὰ pq A 9 \ 3 ἽἼ , Pp if py lA ΣῈ; Lal 
ς Ρᾳ μεῖναι αὐτὸν ἐν ᾿Ιόππῃ Ῥπαρά τινι Σίμωνι!" βυρσεῖ. 

ἊΣ ’ , 
X. 1’Avnp δέ τις ἐν Καισαρείᾳ ὀνόματι ἸΚορνήλιος, " ἑκα- 


xxiii. 14. z ch. vii. 60 reff. a abs., ver. 12. = ch. xvi. 18. 
xvii. 4. 2 Cor. iii. 16. 1 Thess.i.9. Ezek. xlii. 18. 
52, &c. '|. Jude 9. Josh. viii. 29. ἃ = ver. 34. 


f Luke vii. 15 only +. ghere only. 4 Kings x. 15. 


i=ch.x.7. Johni. 49. ii.9 al. Tobit v. 8 (not). j ver. 13. k ch. i. 3 reff. ich. 
1. 19 reff. m ver. 31 reff. n ch. xi. 17 412, Rom. iv. 5,24. L.P. Wisd. xii.2. see 
Heb. vi. 1. Ο ver. 23 reff. p = John i. 39. ch. xvi. 15. Gen. xxiv. 55. q = ch. 
xxi. 7, 8 reff. rch. x. 6,32 onlyt+. (-σα, Job xvi. 16.) 5 τχῆς, Matt. viii. 13. ch. 


xxiv. 23 al. -xos, Matt. viii. 5, ἄς. ch. xxvii.6 al. Matt. Luke only. = Κεντυρίων, Mark xy. 39, &c. 


39. ins o bef πετρος C 6 0 130 [ Bas, ]. 
spec Chr. 

40. παντας bef ctw C m vulg spec [syrr]: om εξω 6. 
13 rel vss Chr Thl-sif: ins ABCEN p [Syr] copt Thl-fin. 
nvo.tev Εἰ sah, bef ιδουσα eeth-pl. 

41. for lst δε, re A ὁ [spec] Syr eth. 

42. om της BC!: ins AC3KLPR rel Chr,. rec πολλ. bef emor., with LP 13. 36 
rel [syrr] Chr,: txt ABCEN m p 40 vulg spec [coptt eth] arm. 
43. for ikavas, τινας C 36. αὐτὸν bef nucpas ik. μ. AEN? ah p 40: om aut. BR! 

[om ev worm L. | 


Ὁ: txt CLP 13. 36 rel Chr). 


Cuap. X. 1. rec aft τις ins nv (corrn, see ch ix. 36; not observing that the constr is 
carried on to «dev, ver 3), with P rel vss Thl: om ABCELN p 18. 36 E-lat Chr. 


περιεστησαν so Bas, | avrov ὁ vulg E-lat 


rec om Ist και, with LP 
ins παραχρημα bef 


39. πᾶσαι ai x.| The widows of the place, 
for whom she made these garments. 

ἐποίει] ‘ was making,’ i.e. used to make 
{i. 6. weave): not ‘had made.’ 40. 
ἐκβαλών] After the example of his divine 
Master, see ref. Mark. 48. Bupoei | 
From the extracts in Wetstein and Schétt- 


by their reception into Judaism. Of late, 
however, since the Ascension, we see the 
truth that the Gospel was to be a Gospel of 
the uncireumcision, beginning to be recog- 
nized by some. Stephen, carrying out 
the principles of his own apology, could 
hardly have failed to recognize it: and the 


gen, it appears that the Jews regarded the 
occupation of a tanner as a half-unclean 
one. In this case it would shew, as De W. 
observes, that the stricter Jewish prac- 
tices were already disregarded by the 
Apostle. It also would shew, in how 
little honour he and his office were held 
by the Jews at Cesarea. 

Cuap. X. 1—48.] CONVERSION (BY 
SPECIAL DIVINE PREARRANGEMENT) AND 
BAPTISM OF THE GENTILE CORNELIUS 
AND HIS PARTY. We may remark, that.the 
conversion of the Gentiles was no new 
zdea to Jews or Christians, but that it had 
been universally regarded as to take place 


Cyprian and Cyrenzan missionaries of ch. 
xi. 20 preached the word πρὸς τοὺς “EA- 
Anvas (not -caras), certainly before the con- 
version of Cornelius. This state of things 
might have given rise to a permanent 
schism in the infant church. The Hel- 
lenists, and perhaps Saul, with his de- 
finite mission to the Gentiles, might have 
formed one party, and the Hebrews, with 
Peter at their head, the other. But, as 
Neander admirably observes (Pfl. u. Leit. 
p- 111), ‘The pernicious influence with 
which, from the first, the self-seeking 
and one-sided prejudices of human nature 
threatened the divine work, was counter- 


110 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


X. 


t Matt. xxvii. τοντάρχης ἐκ * σπείρης τῆς καλουμένης ᾿Ιταλικῆς, * 2U ey. 


27 || Mk Υ ” 

ΤΗΣ xviii σεβὴς καὶ φοβούμενος τὸν θεὸν σὺν παντὶ τῷ Y οἴκῳ 
yin. CN. 

i ἢ 
xxi. 31 αὐτοῦ, * ποιῶν Y ἐλεημοσύνας hl τῷ λαῷ καὶ 5 δεό- 
only +. 

Judith xiv. 11. 2 Mace. viii, 23. xii. 20,22 only. uver.7. 2 Pet.ii.9 only. Isa. xxiv. 16. (see 
ch. iii. 12 reff.) v = vv. 22,35. ch. xiii. 16,26 al. Prov. Ἢ 7. w= ch, vii. 10. xi. 
14. xvi. 15,31 al. Gen. vii. 1. x = Matt. vi.1,2. ch. ix. 36. xxiv. 17. Tobit xii. 9. y ch. 
ix, 36 reff. z absol. w. gen., here only. Job v.8. seech.iv. 31. 1 Thess. iil. 10, 


om exatovtapx. L. σπειρας BP a b? 


σ h! lo Chr. 


2. rec aft ποίων ins τε, with LP 18 rel [syr] «th-pl Thl [Iren-int,]: om ABCEN p 40 
vulg Syr [coptt arm] eth-rom Chr, [Damasc-ms, }. 


acted by the superior influence of the 
Holy Spirit, which did not allow the dif- 
ferences of men to reach such a point of 
antagonism, but enabled them to retain 
unity in variety. We recognize the pre- 
venting wisdom of God, —which, while 
giving scope to the free agency of man, 
knows how to interpose His immediate 
revelation just at the moment when it is 
requisite for the success of the divine work, 
—by noticing, that when the Apostles 
needed this wider development of their 
Christian knowledge for the exercise of 
their vocation, and when the lack of it 
would have been exceedingly detrimental, 
—at that very moment, by a remarkable co- 
incidence of inward revelation with a chain 
of outward circumstances, the illumination 
hitherto wanting was imparted to them.’ 
1. Καισαρείᾳ) As this town bears 
an important part in early Christian his- 
tory, it will be well to give here a full 
account of it. C#SAREA (Palestine, Και- 
σάρεια τῆς Παλαιστίνης, called παράλιος, 
Jos. B. J. iii. 9:1: vii. 2.2; Antt. xiii. 11. 
2, or ἡ ἐπὶ θαλάττῃ K., Jos. B. J. vil. 1. 
3; 2.1, or Stratonis (see below),—distin- 
guished from Czesarea Philippi, see note 
Matt. xvi. 13) is between Joppa and Dora, 
68 Rom. miles from Jerusalem according 
to the Jerus. Itinerary, 75 according to 
Josephus (i.e. 600 stadia, Antt. xiii. 11. 2. 
B. J. i. 3. 5),—36 miles (Abulfeda) from 
Ptolemais (a day’s journey, ch. xxi. 8),— 
30 from Joppa (Edrisi) ;—one of the largest 
towns in Palestine (Jos. B. J. tii. 9. 1), with 
an excellent haven (Jos. Antt. xvii. 5. 1, 
Σεβαστὸς λιμήν,---ὺν κατασκευάσας ἫἩρώ- 
dns πολλῶν χρημάτων ἐπὶ τιμῇ τῇ Καίσα- 
pos καλεῖ Σεβαστόν). It was, even before 
the destruction of Jerusalem, the seat of the 
Roman Procurators (see ch. xxiii. 23 ff. ; 
xxiv. 27; xxv, 1), and called by Tacitus 
(Hist. ii. 79): Judge caput.’ It was chiefly 
inhabited by Gentiles (Jos. B. J. iii. 9. 1; 
ii. 14.4), but there were also many thousand 
Jewish inhabitants (Jos. B. J. ii. 18. 1; 
Antt. xx. 8.7; Life, 11). It was built by 
Herod the Great (Amm. Marcell. xiv. 8, 
p- 29, Bipont. Beforetime there was only a 
fort there, called Στράτωνος πύργο», Jos. 


Antt. xv. 9. 6 al.; Strabo, xvi. 758; Plin. 
v.14)—fortified, provided with a haven (see 
ch. ix. 80 ; xviii. 22; Joseph. above), and in 
honour of Cesar Augustus named Ceesarea 
(at length Καισάρεια SeBaorh, Jos. Antt. 
xvi. 5. 1). Vespasian made it a Roman 
colony (Plin. v.13). Abulfeda (Syr. p. 80) 
speaks of it as in ruins in his time (A.D. 
1300). At present there are a few ruins 
only, and some fishers’ huts. (From Winer, 
Realw.) ἑκατοντάρχης | The subordi- 
nate officer commanding the sixth part of a 
cohort = half a maniple. See Dict. of Gr. 
and Roman Antt. om. τ. καλ. “Ita. | 
A cohort (σπ.) levied in Italy, not in Syria. 
Mr. Humphry quotes from Gruter, Inser. 
i. p. 434, ‘Cohors militum Italicorum vo- 
luntaria, que est in Syria.’ Biscoe (Hist. 
of the Acts, pp. 217—221) maintains that 
this was an independent cohort, not one 
attached to a legion. The legio Italica 
(Tacit. Hist. i. 59, 64; ii, 100; iii. 22) 
was fiot raised till Nero’s time. 

2. evo. k. φοβ. τ. θ.1 i.e. he had aban- 
doned polytheism, and was a worshipper of 
the true God: whether a proselyte of the 
gate, or not, seems uncertain. That he 
may have been such, there is nothing in the 
narrative to preclude: nor does Meyer’s 
objection apply, that it is not probable that, 
among the many thousand converts, no 
Greek proselyte had yet been admitted by 
baptism into the church. Many such cases 
may have occurred, and some no doubt had: 
but the object of this providential inter- 
ference seems to have been, to give solemn 
sanction to such reception, by the agency of 
him who was both the chief of the Apostles, 
and the strong upholder of pure Judaisin. 
It is hardly possible that μαρτυρούμενος 
ὑπὸ ὅλου τοῦ ἔθνους τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων (ver. 
22) should have been said of a Gentile not 
in any way conformed to the Jewish faith 
and worship. The great point (ch. xi. 3) 
which made the present event so important, 
was, that Cornelius was ἀνὴρ ἀκροβυστίαν 
éxwv. Doubtless also among his company 
(ver. 24) there must have been many who 
were not proselytes. τῷ λαῷ] The 
Jewish inhabitants, see ch. xxvi. 17, 23; 
xxviii. 17; John xi. 50; xviii. 14 al. 


ABCFL 

Prabke 

dfghk 

lmop. 
13 


PAG ἃ ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. lll 


μενος τοῦ θεοῦ " διὰ παντός, ὃ εἶδεν ἐν Opdpare “ φανερῶς, 2 ch. ii.25 ree. 
ELAN \ ev ἥν ἢ nA 7, a Arsene hae 
ἃ ὡςεὶ περὶ “ὥραν ἐνάτην τῆς ‘Hépas, ἄγγελον TOD θεοῦ τοῖς ae. 


> , \ SX / n ΄ e i. 45. Jot 
εἰςξελθόντα πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ εἰπόντα αὐτῷ ἹΚορνήλιε. 4 ὁ δὲ Tito) onty 
Co ee / 2 38 Neh Of , > Finder ri eG 
ἀτενίσας αὐτῷ καὶ ἢ ἔμφοβος γενόμενος εἶπεν Τί ἐστιν, 44. we 
΄ 3 \ Ρ] lal @ 5 / \ e - . 
κύριε; εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ At‘ προςευχαί σου Kai ai ¥ ἔλεημο- “ TEE) att 
, Ἐ5:.}»1 | (ey m , ῃ " rn τ as Usibs 
σύναι cov * ἀνέβησαν | εἰς ™ μνημόσυνον " ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ 5. xxl 45 
a x \ a 7 ” oer ‘ 7 only, t- (yee 
Ἢ 4 - t περί) 
θεοῦ. καὶ νῦν πεβνθον ἄνδρας εἰς Ἰόππην καὶ sete ones be, 
πεμψαι Σίμωνά τινα ὃς Ὁ ἐπικαλεῖται Ἰ]έτρος: 5 οὗτος Fey. 4% 
q 4 r , , 3 a @3 erate « f ch. ii. 15 
ξενίζεται ᾿ παρά τινι Σίμωνι " βυρσεῖ, ᾧ ἐστιν οἰκία ' παρὰ only +. 
͵ (ae: Nie Fees Cs 90, ε a vite ὦ. VUKTOS, 
θάλασσαν. Tas δὲ ἀπῆλθεν ὁ ἄγγελος ὁ λαλῶν αὐτῷ, °h. τὸ 88. 
only +. g ch. iii. 12 reff, h Luke xxiv. 5,37. ch. (xxii. 9] xxiv. 25. Rey. xi. 13 


only. 1 Mace. xiii. 2 B Ald. (ἔκφ., AN compl.) Sir. xix. 24 only. 


iplur., ch, ii. 42 al.+ 
k — here only. Exod. ii. 23. 1 Mace. v.31. see ch. xxi. 31. 


= ch. xix. 27. Rom. iv. 3, &c. (from 


Gen. xv. 6) al. m Matt. xxvi. 181: Mk. only. Exod. xii. 14. Tobit xii. 12, n = Luke 
x. 21. 1 Thess.i.3al. (1 Kings xviii. 13.) O vv. 22, 29 bis. ch. xi. 18, xxiv. 24, 26. xxv. 3 
only. Gen. xxvii. 45. Num. xxiii. 7. 2 Macc. xv. 31 only. p ch. i. 23 reff. q pass. = vv. 
18, 32. ch. xxi. 16 (1 Pet. iv. 4, 12) only +. act., ver. 23 reff. r = Luke xi. 37. Johni. 40. ch. 
xxi. 7, 16. s ch. ix. 43 reff. t Matt. xiii. 1. Mark v.21. Heb. xi. 12 al. Num. 
xiii. 30. 3 Kings iv. 29. 

3. for εἰδεν, wedev (but ὦ marked for erasure) δεῖ. om εν δὲ. rec om περι 


(as unnecessary ; this is much more probable than Meyer’s suppn that περι was a gloss 
On wset: Comp περι wp. exT., ver 9), with LP rel [vulg eth] (Chr,): ins ABCEX k o 
[p] 13. 36. 40 [syrr copt] Damasc[-ms, Iren-int, |.—7rep:, omg wset, ¢ d 3. 65-7 (sah 
arin ?).—@s δὲ] [p] 36.40 Damasc[-ms, ]. rec evvarny, with 1, 19 rel : txt ABCEPN 
abghkImp. 

4. om 2nd a Ca d! τὴ p[Damasc-ms, ]. om εἰς μνήμοσυνον XN! [ Damasc-ms, |. 
rec evwmov (substitution for the less usual eumpoober), with CELP 15 rel Sevrn, 
Chr,: txt ABN p 36. 40. 

5. rec es tom. bef avip., with LP 13. 36 rel Chr,: txt ABCEN m p vulg-D-lat syrr 
coptt [eth] arm. rec om τινὰ (corrn from respect to the Apostle. This is much 
more prob than Meyer’s supposn, that τινα was inserted to conform the first om. to the 
other. The same considerations have led to the var read in ver 32), with ELPR 13 
rel demid D-lat Syr sah [eth] (Orig,) Chr, Iren-int,: ins ABC p 36 vulg syr-mg copt 
arm. Tov επικαλουμενον πετρον (corrn from ch xi. 13? or origl, and os επικαλειται 
a corrn from ver 32? the manuscript authority must decide) ELP 13 rel Thi: txt 
ABC® a ἢ p 36 Chr). 

6. σιμωνι bef τινι Ο m [vulg arm]: om tim D-lat [eth-pl]. ins 7 bef οἰκια C 
lect-12. rec aft θαλ. adds ovtos λαλήσει σοι τι σε Set ποιειν (interpolation from ver 
32, and ch ix. 6, combined: see also ch xi. 14), with [m-marg-recent] (36 ?) [vulg-ed | 
demid eeth-rom Thl-fin ; os AaAnoe: pnu. προς oe... to o1xos σου from ch xi. 14 4-marg 
8. 26-7. 73. 81 copt[-wilk]; os λαλήσει σοι 133: om ABCELPN p rel vss Chr, Thi-sif. 

7. om 2nd o LP g m lect-26, rec Tw kopynAw (explanatory corrn for avTw), 


Sedpevos τ. θεοῦ διὰ π.7 From Cornelius’s 
own narrative, ver. 31, as well as from the 
analogy of God’s dealings. we are certainly 
justified in inferring, with Neander, that 
the subject of his prayers was that he 
might be guided into truth, and if so, 
hardly without reference to that faith which 
was now spreading so widely over Judea. 
This is not matter of conjecture, but is 
implied by Peter’s οἴδατε τὸ γενόμ. ῥῆμα 
καθ᾽ ὅλης τῆς Ἰουδαίας. Further than this, 
we cannot infer with certainty; but, if 
the particular difficulty present in his 
mind be sought, we can hardly avoid the 
conclusion that it was connected with the 
apparent necessity of embracing Judaism 
and circumcision in order to become a be- 
liever on Christ. 3. ἐν δράμ. φανερῶς] 
not in a france, as ver. 10, and ch. xxii. 17, 


—but with his bodily eyes: thus asserting 
the objective truth of the appearance. 
ὡςεὶ περὶ wp. ἐν. It here appears that C. 
observed the Jewish hours of prayer. 

4. eis μνημ.] Not instar sacrifici (Ps. 
exli. 2) as Grot.: but, as Εἰ. V., for a me- 
morial, ‘so as to be a memorial.’ 

There has been found a difficulty by some 
in the fact that Cornelius’s works were re- 
ceived as well pleasing to God, before he 
had justifying faith in Christ. But it is 
surely easy to answer, with Calvin and 
Augustine, ‘non potuisse orare Cornelium, 
nisi fidelis esset.’ His faith was all that he 
could then attain to, and brought forth its 
fruits abundantly in his life: one of which 
fruits, and the best of them, was, the ear- 
nest seeking by prayer for a better and more 
perfect faith. 7. ἀπῆλθεν) So in 


112 


u ch. ix. 41 reff. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATOSTOAON. 


Χ, 


ἃ φωνήσας δύο τῶν " οἰκετῶν καὶ στρατιώτην © εὐσεβῆ TOV ΑΒβρει. 


v Luke xvi. 13. 5 - > _ 8 + τὴ ᾿ pe ia hc 
Peet iia’ ἡ προςκαρτερουντων auT@, © Kat ? ἐξηγησάμενος ἄποδα τος 
i} » yen. a > , > \ In 7 A \ 
only. Ger. αὐτοῖς, ἀπέστειλεν αὐτοὺς εἰς τὴν Ἰόππην. τῇ δὲ “ys” 


w ver. 2 reff. 
x ch. i. 14 reff. 
y ch. xv. 12, 14 


z John i. 29, 
&e. ch. xiv. “ 
20 4]. Exod. MOQ K 
xxxii. 6. ρ »ε THY. 


a here only t+. 
(-ρία, 2 Cor. 
x1. 26. τρος, 
Gen. xxxvii. 
9 


b dat., ch. ix. 
3 reff. 

e = Lukev. 19. Josh. ii. 8. 4 Kings ix.17. 

e absol., ch. ix. 12. xx. 36. f here only t. 

ΠῚ Cor. xiv. 8. 2 Cor. ix.2,3 only. 2 Macc. ii. 2%. 


k = ch. xi. δ. xxii. 17 only. (ch. iil. 10 reff.) Gen. ii. 21. xv. 12. 


WL. Rev. xix. 11. Ezek.i.1. see ch. vil. 56. 
© Mark xi. 16. John xix. 29. Exod. iii. 22. 


with LP 13 rel syr Chr: [om copt :] txt ABCEN p vulg Syr [sah] eth arm. 


Ζ ΕῚ , a 7) / > / \ -“ or b > 
ἐπαύριον * ὁδουιπορούντων ἐκείνων Kal TH πόλει ὃ ἐγγι- 

ἕόντων © ἀνέβη Πέτρος ἐπὶ τὸ ἃ δῶμα " προςεύξασθαι περὶ 

ῇ 
10 ἐγένετο δὲ f πρόςπεινος, καὶ ἤθελεν 8 γεύ- 
h , δὲ 3, ἐν Pee 2. cfm | 

σασθαι. " παρασκευαζόντων δὲ αὐτῶν ἱ ἐγένετο ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν 
- a \ > Ν ΄ ᾿ 

Κ ἔκστασις, 11 καὶ ' θεωρεῖ τὸν ™ οὐρανὸν ἃ ἀνεῳγμένον καὶ 


n a 0 al ς Ρ 50 ͵ , ΄ 
καταβα tvoV OKEVOS TL WS Oo OV7)V μεγάλην, τεσσαρσιν 
ἃ Matt. x. 27}. xxiv. 11}}. 


Luke v.19 only. 2 Kings xi. 2. 
g=ch.xx.1l. Jonahiii.7. Jos. Antt. vi. 14. 3. 
i=ch.v.5 reff. 2Chron. xiv. 14. xx. 29. 

l ch. vii. 56 reff. m Matt. iti. 

n = Matt. iii. 16. John i. 52. vi. 33 al. Gen. xxi. 12. 


pch.xi.5 only +. (-vcov, John xix. 40. Hos. ii. 9.) 


rec 


aft ox. ins αὐτου (explanatory), with LP 13. 36 rel vss Chr: om ABCEN p 40 arm. 
8. rec avtois bef απαντα, with CLP 18. 36 rel [syrr eth] Chr, : illés visum D-lat : 


txt ABEN p coptt. 


9. for exew., avtwy (corrn to correspond with αὐτοῖς above) AELN ἃ k o p 13. 36: 


av. ex. 6: txt BCP rel Chr,. 
nuepas A tol. 


for extnr, evatny N° [96]. 


aft ext. ins τῆς 


10. rec (for avtwv) ἐκεινων (probably from exewwv having been in the margin in 


some Mss at ver 9, and thus inserted here by mistake, or as in note), with LP rel 
Chr, : txt ABCEN p 18. 36 Orig,. rec ἐπέπεσεν (corrn to avoid the repetition of 
eyeveto, and to the more usual word, see ch viii. 16 reff. Meyer holds ener. to have 
been origl: but being usually said of mvevpa, and thus seeming inappropriate to 
ἐκστασις, to have been altered in conformity with ch xxii. 17, γενεσθαι ue ev εκστασει. 
But this is very careless : for, Luke i. 12, we have poBos επεπ. ew avt., and so ch xix. 
17: and xiii. 11, ewer. em avtov axAus), with EL 13 rel vss Chr: (επεσεν 19. 78. 96 


Clem :) txt ABCPR d p 36 copt Orig). 


exo. bef ἐπ aut. C coptt Orig,. | 


11. rec aft καταβαιν. ins er αὐτὸν (al avtw) (inserted to correspond with axpis euov, 
ch xi. 5), with LP rel D-lat Chr, Thl: om ABC?EN ὁ p 13 vulg syrr coptt «th [arm] 


Orig,{int,]. (ΟἹ bas perished.) 


Luke i. 38:—another token of the objective 
reality of the vision: eiseA@évta (ver. 3) 
and ἀπῆλθ. denoting the real acts of the 
angel, not the mere deemings of Cornelius. 
λαλῶν must be regarded as the im- 
perfect participle, as in John ix. 8. 
9.] By δῶμα, Jerome, Luther, Erasm., 
al., understand an upper chamber. But 
why not then ὕπερῷον, a word which Luke 
so frequently uses? It was the flat roof, 
much frequented in the East for pur- 
poses of exercise (2 Sam. xi. 2; Dan. iv. 29, 
marg.),—of sleeping in summer (1 Sam. 
ix. 26, by inference, and as expressed in 
LXX),—of conversation (ib. ver. 25),—of 
mourning (Isa. xv. 3; Jer. xlviii. 38),—of 
erecting booths at the feast of tabernacles 
(Neh. viii. 16),—of other religious celebra- 
tions (2 Kings xxiii. 12; Jer. xix. 13; Zeph. 
i.5),—of publicity (2 Sam. xvi. 22; Matt. 
x. 27; Luke xii. 3. Jos. B. J. ii. 21. 5),— 
of observation (Judg. xvi. 27; Isa. xxii. 1), 
—and for any process requiring fresh air 
and sun (Josh. 11. 6). (Winer, Realw., art. 
Dach.) ἕκτην] The second hour of 


om μεγαλην C2. 


prayer: also of the mid-day meal. 
The distance was thirty Roman miles, part 
of which they performed on the preceding 
evening, perhaps to Apollonia,—and the 
rest that morning. 10. yevo.] see reff. 
ἐκείνων is more likely to have been a cor- 
rection of αὐτῶν as applying better to the 
people of the house, than the converse. 
’ ἔκστασις The distinction of this 
appearance from the ὅραμα above (though 
the usage is not always strictly observed) 
is, that in this case that which was seen 
was a revelation skewn to the eye of the be- 
holder when rapt into a supernatural state, 
having, as is the case in a dream, no οὖ- 
jective reality: whereas, in the other case, 
the thing seen actually happened, and 
was beheld by the person as an ordinary 
spectator, in the possession of his natural 
senses, 11. τέσσ. apx.| not, ‘by the 
four corners,’ which would certainly re- 
quire the article, as in reff:,— but by four 
rope-ends. This meaning of ἀρχή is justi- 
fied by Diod. Sic. i. p. 104, who, speaking 
of harpooning the hippepotamus, says,. εἶθ᾽ 


ὃ---Ἰὅ. ΠΡΑΞΈΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. WES 


- U ’ fol a ᾽ J 
1 ἀρχαῖς [δεδεμένον καὶ] ἴ καθιέμενον ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, 15 ev «τ chix. δ 


= A / on / \ ς \ A A nan 

ᾧ "ὑπῆρχεν πάντα Ta“ τετράποδα Kat ™ ἑρπετὰ τῆς γῆς mpl. i (not 
\ tvx A A) bg SES an 13 \ 8. Ἐν Η͂ Β). Ezek. 

καὶ πετεινὰ τοῦ “ οὐρανοῦ. 5 καὶ Υ ἐγένετο φωνὴ κχινίῆ. 1.) see 


\ ͵ b) A , an \ , ξ \ a 
πρὸς avutov,*’ Avaotas Ilétpe ἃ θῦσον καὶ φάγε. Mo δὲ seh ΘΕ ΝΣ 
3 ral ΄ (v4 3, / La) . 

Ὁ παν Τ]έτρος εἶπεν Ὁ Μηδαμῶς κύριε" ὅτι ° οὐδέποτε ἔφαγον " πᾶν t ch. xi. 6. 

19 ‘ om. i. 23. 

ABCDE ἃ κοινὸν καὶ 5 ἀκάθαρτον. 15 καὶ φωνὴ ‘radu ἴδ ἐκ δευτέρου above (ἢ) 

PPL ad only. Gen. 

fara} \ 17 ἃ ε θ \ he θ 7 \ \ i , i. 24, 

ci fe πρὸς αὐτόν, A ὁ θεὸς " ἐκαθάρισεν σὺ μὴ | κοίνου. ν as above (1). 
James iii. 


13 “ΟΡ Viste was above (t u) only. x Matt. vi. 26. viii. 20 |!. xiii. 32 1). Luke 


vill. 5. xiii. 19. ch. xi. 6. Gen. i. 26. y ch. vii. 31 reff. z ch. viii. 26 reff. Dan. 
vii. 5. a= Matt. xxii.4. Luke xv. 23,27, 30. John x. 10. ch. xi. 7only. Deut. xii. 15. (ch. xiv. 
13 reff.) bch. xi. 8 only. Ezek. iv. 14. c constr., Rom. iii. 20 reff. d = Mark 


vii. 2, 5. ver. 28. ch. xi. 8. Rom. xiv. 14 (3ce). Heb. x. 29. Rev. xxi. 27 only}. 1 Mace. i. 62. 

e = ver. 28. ch. xi.8. 1 Cor. vii. 14. 2Cor. vi. 17. Rev. xviii. 2. (elsewh. always with πνεῦμα (ch. v. 16 reff.], 
exc. Eph. νυ. 5.) Judg. xiii. 14. f Matt. xxvi. 42 only t. gas above (ἢ. Mark xiv. 
72. John ix, 24. ch. xi. 9. Heb..ix. 28 only. Jer. i. 13. h = ch. xi. 9. Heb. ix. 22, 23. see 
ch. xv. 8. i= ch. xi. 9 (xxi. 28 reff.) only t. 


om δεδεμενον kat ABC?EX 40 vulg eth arm Orig, Cyr, Thdrt,: ins (C! perhaps) LP 
p rel 36 (D-lat syrr coptt) Chr,.—transp καταβαινον and δεδεμενον c 13 [(syrr) ].—also 
c has τεσσαρσιν apxas immediately aft avewy. kar; 13, at end of ver.—kartaBaivor is 
omd by lect-12 D-lat syrr sah; these vss have other varns, 6. g. celum apertum ex 
quattuor principiis ligatum vas quodam et(sic) linteum splendidum quod differebatur 
de colo in terram D-lat. 

12. rec rns yns bef 1st και (τετραποδα της yns: see ch xi. 6), with LP rel Chr: om 
τ. y. 342. 662. 163 D-lat sah [Orig-int, ]: txt ABCER p [13] (36) [vulg eth-pl(Tischdf) ] 
Syr copt arm Clem, Orig, Constt,.—ins τὰ em bef τ. yns 36. rec ins Ta Onpia Kat 
bef (τα) ep. (from ch xi. 6), with LP 13. 36 rel syr(@npia syr-mg-gr) Chr,, [«. τ. Onp. | 
aft epm. [m, aft yns] E: om ABC?N p 40 vulg D-lat Syr coptt arm Clem, Orig,|int, | 
Constt, Thdrt, Aug,.—rec ins ra bef ερπ., with LP 13. 36 rel Clem, Chr: om ABC?EX 


a 


p Orig, Constt.—(C! is illegible.) 


rec ins ta bef met. (conformn to ch xi. 6), with 


C1ELP 18. 36 rel Clem Constt [Orig,-int, Bas, ] Chr: om ABC?N p Orig,. 
14. rec for καὶ, ἡ (conformn to ch xi. 8), with C D-gr ELP p rel copt Chr [Cyr-p, | : 
txt ABN 138. 86 vulg D-lat syrr sah [arm] Clem, Orig, Constt, Cyr-c,. 


15. φωνησας Se D-gr. 


εκαθερισεν ACLP m p [15]: txt BDEX [Fr-coisl] rel. 


for συ, σοι (itacism ? as E p κυνου for row.) Ὁ 13. 


ἑνὶ τῶν ἐμπαγέντων ἐνάπτοντες ἀρχὰς στυ- 
πίνας ἀφίασι μέχρις ἂν παραλυθῇ. The ends 
of the ropes were attached to the sheet, and, 
in the vision, they only were seen. 
At all events, as Neander observes (Pfl. 
u. L. p. 126, note), these four ἀρχαί (whe- 
ther ends of ropes attached to the corners, 
or those corners themselves) are not with- 
out meaning, directed as they are to the 
four parts of heaven, and intimating that 
men from the North, South, East, and 
West, now were accounted clean before 
God, and were called to a share in his king- 
dom: see Luke xiii. 29. The symbolism 
is, as usual, fancifully exaggerated by 
Wordsw. in his note. The four ἀρχαί are 
the four gospels, because the word ἀρχή 
occurs somewhere near the beginning of 
each, &c., &c. Who can wonder, after this, 
at the distrust of all Scripture symbolism 
by intelligent, but unspiritual minds ? 
I have retained the words δεδ, καί, doubt- 
fully, because it seems difficult to account 
for their insertion, but they may have been 
omitted to assimilate our text to ch. xi. 5. 
. 12. πάντα τὰ Tet. literally: not 
‘many of each kind,’ nor ‘some of all 


Von IT. 


kinds,’ in which case the art., the sense of 
which is carried on from τὰ τετρ. to thie 
subsequent words (see ch. xi. 6), would be 
omitted :—in the vision it seemed to Peter 
to be an assemblage of all creation. 
τετρ., ἑρπ., met. | In ch. xi. 6, from which 
our text has been corrected, Peter follows 
the more strictly Jewish division: see there. 
14.] Peter rightly understands the 
command as giving him free choice of add 
the creatures shewn to him. We.cannot 
infer hence that the sheet contained wn- 
clean animals only. It was a mixture of 
clean and unclean,—the aggregate, there- 
fore, being unclean. κύριε] So Cor- 
nelius to the angel, ver. 4. 1t is here ad- 
dressed to the unknown heavenly speaker. 
On the clean and unclean beasts, &c., 
see Levit. xi. 15.] These weighty 
words have more than one application. 
They reveal what was needed for the occa- 
sion, in a figure: God letting down from 
heaven clean and unclean alike, Jew and 
Gentile,—represented that He had made of 
one blood all nations to dwell on the face 
of all the earth: God having purified there, 
signified that the distinction was now 


1 


114 TIPAEEIS. AITOSTOAON. X. 


16 τρῦτο δὲ ἐγένετο 1 ἐπὶ 1 τρίς, καὶ εὐθὺς δ' ἀνελήμφθη τὸ ancvdE 
« LPRab 
Gcadfgh 
kimop 


jch. xi. 10 
only t. 

κ ch. i. 2, 22. 

1 Mark xvi. 19. 
ch. i. 11 only. 


m a ᾽ Ν ] > / 17 e > ’ ¢ “Ὁ n 
σκεῦος εἰς τὸν ovpavov. 17 ws δὲ ἐν ἑαυτῷ " διηπόρει 


Πέτρος τί ἂν 5 εἴη τὸ Ρ ὄραμα ὃ εἶδεν, [καὶ] ἰδοὺ οἱ ἄνδρες 


4 Kings ii. 11. 43 
mci 12 vei οἱ ἀπεσταλμένοι “ἀπὸ τοῦ Kopyndiov 4% διερωτήσαντες 
wy ἡ τὴν οἰκίαν τοῦ Σίμωνος " ἐπέστησαν " ἐπὶ τὸν " πυλῶνα. 
Phe * 18 καὶ ᾿φωνήσαντες " ἐπυνθάνοντο “el Σίμων ὁ " ἐπι- 

il πρὶ καλούμενος ἸΪ]έτρος ἐνθάδε * ξενίζεται. 19 τοῦ δὲ Letpov 

sMatt, xvi. ἢ διενθυμουμένου περὶ τοῦ ? ὁράματος εἶπεν τὸ Y πνεῦμα 

αι ch αὐτῷ ᾿Ιδοὺ ἄνδρες ἕητοῦντέξς σε. 30 ἀλλὰ “ ἀναστὰς H Sov... 
aan "κατάβηθι, καὶ πορεύου σὺν “ιν. μηδὲν " διακρινόμενος, ALP 3 
ee eae seh eyo des ἀμοιυνως αὐτούς. “1 δ καταβὰς δὲ Iletpos nein 
vill. $54, | Τρὸς τοὺς ἄνδρας εἶπεν ᾿Ιδοὺ ἐγώ εἰμι ὃν ζητεῖτε" °? χὰ 
ὥς ΤΗΝ vich. i. 23 το w ver. 6 reff. x here only +. y absol., Matt 


z ch, viii. 26 reff. Gen. xxxv. 1 
(Jer. xv. 10.’ 


16. rec (for ‘ev8us) παλιν (from ch xi. 10), with D-gr LP 13 rel E-lat syr Chr, 
(ανελημφθη bef παλιν D-gr): om 15. 36 D-lat Syr sah eth-pl arm Constt, [Orig-int, | 
Ambr,: txt ABC E[-gr] δὲ p vulg syr-mg copt «th-rom. 

17. avrw Bk. D adds εγενετο. for ern, εἰ D1(txt D3). om Kat 
(corrn of Hebraism?) ABN p 36. 40 vulg [Syr coptt] arm: ins CDELP 13 rel fuld 
[syr] wth-rom Chr. * ὑπό BEN ab? ce ghop: aro ACDLP rel Chr,. om 
του (bef xopv.) D Thl-fin,. Ἐπερωτησαντες D. rec om του (bef σιμ.), with 
ELP 18 rel Thi-sif: ins ABCD ον 40 Chr, Thi-fin. 

18. επυθοντο BC. 

19. rec evOum. (prob negligence of the significant compounded verb), with Ὁ : δια- 
voovmevov 15-8. 86 Did,: add καὶ S:avoovpevou syr[+w-ast]: txt ABCDELP(R) rel 
[ Did, ] Chr.—drevOupevov &. rec avtw bef to mvevua, with DELP 13 rel [syrr 
zth Did,] Chr: om avr. B copt: txt ACN m p vulg sah. rec aft avdpes ins τρει5 
(conformn to ch xi. 11 and ver 7), with ACEN f p 13. 36 vulg Syr syr-mg [sah eth 
Did,] Thl-fin; bef avd., copt; tives arm; δυο B: om DHL[P] rel spee syr Constt 
Cyr-jer[-ms,] Chr, Thl-sif Aug, Ambr,. rec ζητουσι, with ACDE|H]LP rel 
[Constt Did Cyr-jer Chr]: txt BX p. 

20. avacra D}(txt D*) vulg [syrr| coptt. rec Stor, with LP 13 rel Constt Bas, 
[Did, Chr,}: txt ABCDEHRN ἢ p 36. 40 Cyr-jer Did, [Chr-e, ]. 

21. rote κατ. DE Syr. ins o bef πετρος DEL Ὁ ἃ o Chr, Thl-fin: om ABCHPR 
p. 13. 36 rel Thl-sif. for τ. av5., avtovs C arm. rec aft avdpas ins τοὺς ame- 
σταλμενους απὸ Tov Kopy. προς αὐτὸν (explanatory interpolation, ver 21 beginning an 
ecclesiastical portion), with H(but om του) (f) Thl-sif; τ. aweor. ὑπὸ κορν. (alone) 


iv. 1. ch. ii. 4. ‘viii. 29. xi. 12, 28. xxi. 4. Rom. viii. 16, ἄς. 
a = ch. xx. 10 reff. b = Matt. xxi. 21. Rom. iv. 20. xiv. 23. Jamesi. 6f. 


abolished which was ‘added because of 
transgressions’ (Gal. iii. 19),—and all re- 
garded in his eyes as pure for the sake of 
His dear Son. But the literal truth of 
the representation was also implied ;—that 
the same distinctions between the animals 
intended for use as food were now done 
away, and free range allowed to men, as 
their lawful wants and desires invite them, 
over the whole creation of God: that crea- 
tion itself having been purified and ren- 
dered clean for use by the satisfaction 
of Christ. The same truth which is as- 
serted by the heavenly voice in Peter’s 
vision, is declared Eph. i. 10; Col. i. 20; 
1 Tim. iv. 4, 5. Only we must be careful 
not to confound this restitution with the 
ἀποκατάστασις πάντων of ch. iii. 21; see 


notes there. 16, ἐπὶ τρίς] denoting 
the certainty of the thing revealed: see 
Gen. xli. 32. 17.) Valcknaer and Stier 
understand ἐν ἑαυτῷ, as ch. xii. 11, where 
γενόμενος is expressed (cee D in var. readd. 
here),—‘ when he came to himself,’ but 
without γενόμενος this is very harsh, and 
it surely is better not to foree from its 
obvious meaning so natural a conjunction 
of words as ἐν ἑαυτῷ διηπόρει. 18. 
φωνήσαντες | having called out (someone), 
they were enquiring. The present, 
ξενίζεται, is a common mixed construction 
between the direct and the indirect inter- 
rogation. 19.] See ch. viii. 29, note. 

20. ἀλλά] ‘make no question as 
to who or what they are,—but ’—so also 
ch. ix. 6. ἐγώ) The Holy Spirit, shed 


al 


A 


16—26. IIPASETS ATOSTOAON. 11 ἢ 


” ame ies nel ὃ y IPE , 2 δὲ K 
Tis ἢ “αἰτία Ov ἣν πάρεστε; 2 οἱ δὲ εἶπαν ορνήλιος ¢ = take ii 
7. ch. xxii. 
ΤῸ την μὰν δίκαιος καὶ *oRidaene τὸν θεόν, %- oo Maes. 
1ν. ᾿ Ὁ. 
© μαρτυρούμενός τε © ὑπὸ ὅλου τοῦ ἔθνους τῶν ᾿Ἰουδαίων, 2%2 τ. 
{2 σθ e Ai gris 3 t δ. 1 h ,ὔ , xxii. 12. 
ἐχρηματίσθη ὑπὸ ὅ ἀγγέλου 8 ἁγίου ἃ μεταπέμψρασθαί σε Rom. ili, 2. 
- 9 an No τ 2 Σ ἂν 3 John 12. 
εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ Kal ‘axodcar ἱ ῥήματα παρὰ σοῦ. 23 
7, 5 > \ / ~ ΕΞ ἀξ 12 
23 k εἰςκαλεσάμενος οὖν αὐτοὺς 1 ἐξένισεν. ™ τῇ δὲ ἐπαύριον ᾿ 35. Luke i’ 
ῃ \ ο 252 θ \ ᾽ A , os 3 δὴ 26. Hebs xi. 
ἀναστὰς ° ἐξῆλθεν σὺν αὐτοῖς, καί τινες TOV Ρ ἀδελφῶν 7 leh. 3h 3 
ay 5) ERR ped a > a 9 A \ ΠῚ Ἢ ; 
τῶν ἀπὸ ‘lormns ᾿ συνῆλθον αὐτῷ. 31 τῇ δὲ ἐπαύριον ταχῖ, (axv.) 
Vitale 


T εἰφῆλθον εἰς τὴν Καισάρειαν. ὁ δὲ ἹΚορνήλιος " ἦν ' προς- ἐχρ. αὐτῷ 


Κατα το UTT= 


lal > 4 vA a an 
δοκῶν αὐτούς, “cuyKadecapevos τοὺς VY συγγενεῖς αὐτοῦ νους ὃ 9., 


Jos. Antt. xi. 
\ \ WwW > / Le 95 e \ > , x A ow ᾽ 8. 4. 
καὶ τοὺς ἡ ἀναγκαίους φίλους. ὡς δὲ ἐγένετο * τοῦ Y εἰς- 84 να 
A \ , 3 > A ς 38 \|L. Rev. 
ελθεῖν tov Ilérpov, ὅ συναντήσας αὐτῷ ὁ Κορνήλιος τὶν tony. 


\ DEN \ / / e \ I h ver. 5 reff. 
ἃ πεσὼν " ἐπὶ τοὺς ὃ πόδας ἢ προςεκύνησεν. 28 ὁ δὲ Τ]έτρος i Jom vii 
ὐχτες 

47. Deut. xxxii. 1. k here only +. lact., = ch. (xvii. 20.) xxviii. 7. Heb. xiii. 2 
only +. Sir. xxix. 25. pass., ver. 6 reff. m ver. 9 reff. Num. Xie oc. nch. viii. 26 reff. 

ο absol., ch. vii. 7 al. Gen. xix. 14. Pp = ch. ix. 30 reff. q ch. i. 21 reff. r = Matt. 
et 5 al. fr. Ruth ii. 18. s ch. ii. 5 reff. t = Lukei. 21. 2 Pet. 111. 12 8]. Ps. exviii. 

ἃ mid., Luke ix. 1. xv. 9. xxiii. 13. ch. xxviii. 17 only+. act.,ch. v.15 reff. Exod. vii. 1). 

v tek 58. L.P., exc. Mark vi. 4. John xviil. 26. Lev. xxv. 45. w = here only (ch. xiii. 46 
reff.)+. Jos. Antt. x. 1.2, τρεῖς τοὺς ἀναγκαιοτάτους φ. αὐτῳ. x ch. iii. 12 reff. Luke xvii. 

Ne Ree παῖς sas y Matt. x. 12. Mark vi. 22. z Luke ix. 37. xxii. 10. ch. xx. 22. Heb. 


vii. 1,10 only. Gen. (Xxxil. l. {-τησις, Matt. viii. 34.) ahere only. 4 Kings iv. 37. (εἰς, 
John xi. 32 v. r.) πρός, τς v.22. παρά, Luke viii. 41. ἔμπροσθεν, Rev. x:x. 10. b= Matt. 
li. 11. viii. 2 4]. Jobi. 20 


m: om ABCDELPX p 13 rel vulg syrr coptt 2th arm Chr Thl-fin. Ins Ti θελετε 
(-ra: D) ἡ bef τις ἡ D syr (om Ist ἡ D-lat syr). for Tis ἢ, τι τῇ : OM 7 B. 

22. (ειπαν, so ABCEN p.) add προς avrov D Syr sah. aft κορν. ins τις 
D-gr Syr. for vo, vp D. 

23. tor eisk. ουν, ToTe mposkad. E[-gr]: Tote εἰσαγαγὼν o πετρος D 40 sah, intro- 
ducens vulg E-lat Syr(addg Simon); ingressus D-lat. efev. bef avr. D 40 vss. 

rec for avaotas, ὁ metpos (αναστ. being erased as unnecessary, the vacant space 
thus left in some copies has been filled up with o πετρ. the subject of the verb), with 
HLP rel Thl-sif: ἀναστ. o 7. [(] ὁ Καὶ m 13(omg 6) 86 syr Chr, Thi-fin: txt ABDX 
d p vulg Syr coptt eth. om 2nd των D. rec ins Tys bef com. : om ABCDEHLPR 
rel Chr. conmnv D'(txt D-corr!). συνελθαν D. 

24. rec καὶ τὴ (corrn appy to avoid the recurrence of τη δε, Tn δε, ο Se), with HLP 
13 rel Syr eth [arm] Chr, Thl-fin: txt ABCDEX p 40 vulg [syr] copt Thl-sif. 
exsnAbev (corrn to suit Ἐξ δὲν above) BD p [ντὶρ] syr-txt eth 'Thl-sif: συνηλθον m: 
txt AEHLP 13. 36 rel [Syr] syr-mg [coptt arm], -@ay CR. om τὴν D m 133 [Th]. 


nv mposdeXomevos avtous και συνκ. 1). for αὐτου, avtouvs B!(‘Tischdt) [om 

p]- aft φιλοὺυς add περιεμεινεν 1) syr-mg. 
25. rec om tov, with H k 36: ins ABCELPN p 13 rel Bas, Chr, ΤῊ]. aft 
modas ins αὐτου g o vulg Syr sah eth arm Thi-fin. for ver, seniiaepesigasrsins de tov 


πετρου εις την καισαριαν, Tpodpauwy εἰς των δουλων διεσαφησεν Taparyeyovevat avTOV. oO 
de κορνηλιος εκπηδησας και συναντησας αὐτω πεσων προς TOUS ποδας προξεκυνήσεν αὐτὸν 
(αυτω D-corr!) D syr-mg(but αὐτου for mposex. αυτον). 


down upon the Church to lead it into friends. So Jos. Antt. xi. 6. 4, φίλος 
all the truth, had in His divine arrange- ἀναγκαιότατος τῷ βασιλεῖ, and Xen. Mem. 
ments brought about, by the angel sent to ii. 1. 14, φίλους πρὸς τοῖς ἀναγκαίοις 
Cornelius, their coming. 23. ἐξένισεν] καλουμένοις ἄλλους κτῶνται βοηθούς. 
This was his first consorting with men These, like himself, must have been 
uncircumcised and eating with them (ch. fearers of the true God, or at all events 
xi. 3): though perhaps this latter is not must have been influenced by his vision to 
necessarily implied. τινες τῶν GO.] wait for the teaching of Peter. 25. 
Sia, ch. xi. 12: in expectation of some τοῦ eiseAO.] This, the most difficult and 
weighty event to which hereafter their tes- best supported reading, is a harshness of 
timony might be required, as indeed it was, construction hardly explicable (see Winer, 
ib. 24. ἀναγκαίους his intimate edn. 6, § 44. 4) on any principles.’ It 
Lz 


110 


TIPAZEIS ATIOSTOAON. 


X. 


ς ” ΣΆ, , d’A , Ay: Ν 9 4 2 yw 
e=: Marki.si. “ ἤγειρεν AUTOV λέγων ναστὴσι" καὶ εγω AUTOS (ἂν- 


ch. iii. 7 


, , ΟἿ \ al ᾽ lal , 7 A \ 
‘Dan. x. 10 “ἱ e y 
Dan. x10. θρωπός εἰμι. ssi συνομέλων mae εἰφῆλθεν, ΤΑΝ 
ehewonly+. εὑρίσκει ᾿συνεληλυθότας πολλούς, 538 ἔφη τε πρὸς αὐτοὺς 
(-Aos, Job ¢ - Pls θ go h "θέ ΄ » > > \ | ὃ ͵ 
xix. . Ὑμεῖς ETTLITACUE ως UUEMLTOV ἐστιν ανόρι OvOaLw 
Symm. 
f'='ch. i. 6 reff. i a a ς οδς 4 ly 5 a Le ees 
r=ch igre TeoANaTOaL ἢ * προςέρχεσθαι ᾿᾿ ἀλλοφύλῳ: κἀμοὶ ὁ 
h. xi. 16. \ Y , \ x es , 
Lukevis. θεὸς ™édevEev μηδένα " κοινὸν ἢ " ἀκάθαρτον ° λέγειν 
h 1 Pet. iv. 8 
ΔΕ ΣΤ 2 Mace. vii. 1 412, Jos. Β. J. iv.9.10. Xen. Mem. i. 1.9 (-ἐσταλ. i= ch. τ. 23 reff. k - ch. 
ix. 1 reff. Levit. xix. 33. lhere only. 1 Kings vi. 10. xiii. 3,5. 1 Mace. iv. 12, m constr., 
here only. = w. ὅτι, Matt. xvi. 21. Wisd. xiv. 4. νυ. acc., 1 Cor. xii. 31, 1 Kings xii. 23. n ver. 1é 
(reff.). o = Mark x. 18. xii. 37 al. 


26. rec avr. bef ny., with HLP rel Thl-sif: txt ABCDEN ac dfhk m [p] 13 [valg 


arm Bas, | Chr, Thl-fin. 


for avacr., τι movers 1); syr-mg has both. 


Κι QUT. 


ey. C Thdrt,: καὶ yap eyw, omg avros, Εἰ Chr,: om avtos D sah: x. yap ey. aut. 
[ὁ k 13] 187: txt ABHLPR p rel 36 Marc, Thi-sifi—rec for καὶ eyw, Kayo, with 


ADHLPabdfgh1mo 13 [Mare, Thl-sif]: txt BX p lect-12. 


aft ems ins ws 


και συ D'(and lat) E(om καὶ E-lat) copt eth. 
27. for x. συνομ. to evp., Kat erseAOwy Te και evpev D1(and lat). 


28. bef emo. ins βελτιον D Aug,[om, ]. 
αλλοφ. D-gr lect-12 Syr sah. 
p: txt ABCDER o. 


probably arose from taking the so fre- 
quent tov with the infin. almost as one 
word, and equivalent to the infin. itself. 
τοὺς πόδας viz. those of Peter. 
Kuinoel’s rendering ‘ in genua provolutus’ 
is clearly inadmissible. TT POSEKUY. | 
«Adoravit; non addidit Lucas, ‘ eum.’ 
Euphemia.” (Bengel.) May not the 
sme reason have occasioned the omission 
of αὐτοῦ after πόδας ἢ the one αὖτ. would 
almost require the other. It was natural 
for Cornelius to think that one so pointed 
out by an angel must be deserving of the 
highest respect; and this respect he shewed 
in a way which proves him not to have al- 
together lost the heathen training of his 
childhood. He must have witnessed the 
rise of the custom of paying divine honours 
first to those who were clothed with the 
delegated power of the senate (Suet., 
Octav.52, mentions, “templa etiam procon- 
sulibus decerni solere’’), and then κατ᾽ ἐξ- 
οχήν to him in whom the imperial majesty 
centered. 26. καὶ ἐγὼ ait. ἄνθρ. 
εἰμι) This was the lesson which Peter’s 
vision had taught him, and he now begins 
to practise it:—the common honour and 
equality of all mankind in God’s sight. 
Those who claim to have succeeded Peter, 
have not imitated this part of his con- 
duct. See Rev. xix. 10; xxii. 8, in both 
which cases it is ἔμπροσθ. τῶν ποδῶν τοῦ 
ayy-, Supporting the above rendering of 
ἐπὶ τ. πόδας. (See the gloss in D, ver. 25, 
digest.) 27.] The second εἰςῆλθεν [ see 
ver. 25] betokens the completion of his 
entering in; or (as De W. and Meyer) the 
former, his entering the /ouse,—this latter, 
the chamber. 28. | ὑμεῖς, you, of all 
men, (best) know: being those immedi- 


εδειξ. bef o 6. AEN vulg eth [Orig-int, ]. 


αθεμιστον 1}, ins ανδρι bef 


rec kat ἐμοι, with HLP 13 rel [Chr,]: καὶ μοι 


επεδειξ. 1). 


ately concerned in the obstruction to inter- 
course which the rule occasioned. ὡς 
ἀθέμιτον... .7 that it is unlawful, ... or 
‘how unlawful it is:’ better the former, 
because in the order of the words, ἀθέμιτον 
has the stress on it: the other rendering 
would more naturally represent ὡς ἔστιν 
ἀθέμιτον. In both the reff. the ambiguity 
is the same. There is some difficulty 
about this unlawfulness of consorting with 
those ἀλλόφυλοι who, like Cornelius, wor- 
shipped the true God. It rests upon no 
legal prohibition, and seems, at first sight, 
hardly consistent with the zeal to gain 
proselytes predicated of the Pharisees, 
Matt. xxiii. 15,— with Jos. Antt. xx. 2. 3 
(Ἰουδαῖός τις ἔμπορος, Avavias ὄνομα, πρὸς 
τὰς γυναῖκας εἰσιὼν τοῦ βασιλέως (Mono- 
bazus, of Adiabene) ἐδίδασκεν αὐτὰς τὸν 
θεὸν εὐσεβεῖν), and with the Rabbinical 
comment Schemoth Rabba on Exod. xii. 4, 
“Hoc idem est quod scriptum dicit Jes. 
lvi. 3. Et non dicet filius advene qui 
adheesit Domino, dicendo: separando se- 
paravit me Dominus a populo suo.” But 
whatever exceptions there may have been, 
it was unquestionably the general practice 
of the Jews to separate themselves in 
common life from uncircumcised persons. 
We have Juvenal testifying to this at 
Rome, Sat. xiv. 103, ‘non monstrare vias, 
eadem nisi sacra colenti: Quesitum ad 
fontem solos deducere verpos.’ And Taci- 
tus, Hist. v. 5, ‘adversus omnes alios 
hostile odium, separati epulis, discreti cu- 
bilibus,’ &. .... κἀμοί] not, ‘but 
God hath shewed me,’ as Εἰ. V.: καί can 
never have this meaning, and in all cases 
where it is so rendered we may trace the 
significance of the simple copula if we 


ABCDE 
HLPx a 
bedtg 
hkim 
op ss 


27—33. TIPASEIS ATIOSTOAON: 117 


ἄνθρωπον, 3" διὸ καὶ Ῥ ἀναντιῤῥήτως ἦλθον 4 μεταπεμφθείς. p here only τ. 


Polyb. xxiii. 


t . 
τ πυνθάνομαι οὗν, ὃ τίνι ' λόγῳ Diabla ἢ pe 3 0 Kat 5.11: (τος, 
ὁ Masel τ Το: ἔφη "Amo τετάρτης ἡμέρας ἜΣ THUTHS Pemnitesohs ie 


TS Χ ΧΙ .19. 
τῆς ὥρας Tappan [x νηστεύων καὶ] ¥ τὴν ἐνάτην. ὁ προςευχό- 5 οαπιδέκ.; Rom. 


0, 30. 


Hetee ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ μου, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἀνὴρ ἔστη * ἐνώπιόν pou vs Ὁ Maite 
eve ἐσθῆτι νὰ λαμπρᾷ, 51 καί φησιν ἹΚορνήλιε, ὃ εἰςηκούσθη John xi 58. 
σου ἡ προςευχὴ καὶ at! ἐλεημοσύναι σου 8 ἐμνήσθησαν a ἀν Ως (butsee note), 
mov τοῦ θεοῦ. * πέμψον οὖν εἰς ᾿Ιόππην καὶ ἢ μετακά- to. ix oH 

ry Cn. XX./ ren. 


Ly ἃ ΠῚ A i - 
λεσαι Σίμωνα ὃς ἰ ἐπικαλεῖται Ἰ]έτρος: οὗτος * ξενίζεται w ch. xi. 5 reff 


ἢ Sy. ih / , ἃ Ϊ ! 
ἐν οἰκίᾳ Σίμωνος |! βυρσέως ™ παρὰ θάλασσαν" ὃς ἃ παρα- τ τὰ Ὁ, 5. 
ενόμενος λαλήσει σοι]. 33° ἐξ αὐτῆς οὖν ἔπε πρό ace ohn iv. 
lv. 
γενόμενος ἢ ἐξ αὐτῆς οὖν ἔ μψα POs σέ, γον δοδη ιν, 


Ζ ὄρος ver. 9 


σύ TE καλῶς ἐποίησας " παραγενόμενος, ἃ νῦν ἃ οὖν πώντες 


reff. b Luke xxiii. 11. James ii. 2,3 only. 
v.r.) xii. 21. Jamesii.2only +. 2 Macc. xi. 8 


= Bat ii. 25 
cas above (b). Luke Pairs 4. ch. (i. 10 
d Rev. xv. 6. xviii. 14. xix. 8. xxii. 1, 16 


only +. Wisd. vi. 12 4], Cant..¥. 10,Symm, e 1 Cor. xiv. 21 reff. Ps. iv. 3. f plur., 
ch, ix. 36 reff. g pass., Rev. xvi. 19 only. Ezek. xviii. 22. mid., ch. xi. 16 al. fr. heh. 
vii. 14 reff. i ver. 5. k ver. 6 reff.. ch. ix. 43 reff. m ver. 6 reff. 

n absol., ch. xvii. 10. ο Mark vi. 25. ch. xi. 11. xxi. 32. xxiii. 80. Phil. ii. 23 only. p = 1 Cor. 
vii. oy 38 reff. 1 Mace. xii. 18, 22. q ch. xv. 10. xvi. 86. xxiii. 15 only. Gen. xlv. ὃ. 


29. avavtipntws B'D p. aft μεταπεμφ. ins up vuwy DE. 

30. for τεταρτ., της τριτης D'(txt D2(appy): nustertiana D-lat). for: ταῦτ. TNS, 
τὴ αρτι D. om νηστ. καὶ (erased perhaps, as nothing is said of fasting above, 
ver 3) ΑἸΒΟΝ p vulg copt eth arm: ins A?7DEH(L)P 13. 36 rel syrr sah.—om καὶ 


μου L. for καὶ τ. ev., THY ενατὴν τε D}[-gr]. rec aft ev. ins wpar, 
with HP 13. 36 rel Chr, : om ABCDN® p 40. Kal πρυξευχ. ATO EKT. WP. EWS EVATNS 
E. for 2nd μου, εμου &. 


31. ἡ mposevx. cov E 96. 142 lect-12 vulg D-lat: ἡ δεησις cov 6 80. 

32. for ev ou. o. B., παρα τινα o. B.(corrn from ch ix. 43) C 36. 180. om os Tap. 
Aad. σοι (to suit ver 6?) ABN p vulg copt «eth-rom: ins CDEHLP 13 rel vss Chr,. 

33. aft προς σε add παρακαλων cAGew προς nuas D(D3 and lat ins σε aft ελθ.) syr- 


w-ast. for τε, δε D E-lat coptt. 
δου D!-gr(idou D-corr!: txt D3(and lat)). 


examine. Here, for instance:—the two 
parties concerned are ὑμεῖς, κἀγώ. “ Ye, 
though ye see me here, know, how strong 
the prejudice is which would have kept me 
away: and J, though entertaining fully 
this prejudice myself, yet have been taught 
ἄς. 29. τίνι λόγῳ] on what ac- 
count: the dative of the cause: sce reff. : 
and cf. Hes. Theog. 626: γαίης φραδ- 
μοσύνῃσιν aviyayev,— Winer, edn 6, § 31. 
6. c, and Bernhardy, Syntax, ch. iii. 14. 

30. ἀπὸ ter. ἣμ.] The rendering of 


Meyer and others, ‘From the fourth day . 


(reckoned back) down to this hour have 
I been fasting, is ungrammatical; for 
(1) this would require τῆςδε τῆς ὥρας, 
and (2) ἤμην cannot possibly reach to the 
present time, but is the historical past: 
I was fasting. This being so, ἀπὸ τε- 
τάρτης ἡμέρας must indicate the time de- 
noted by #unv—‘ quarto abhinc die ’—four 
days ago; see reff. (2), which fully justify 
this rendering. De Wette’s and Neander’s 
rendering, ‘For four (whole) days was I 
(i.e. had I been) fasting up to this hour 
(i. 6. the hour in which he saw the vision),’ 
does not satisfy ταύτης τῆς Spas, which 


ins ev ταχει bef παραγ. D. for ouvy, 


must in that case be ἐκείνης, if indeed 
such an expression could be at all used 
of ‘the time when the following incident 
took place.’ The only legitimate mean- 
ing of ταύτ. τ. Sp. 1 take to be this hour 
of the day: and this meaning is fur- 
ther established by the omission of ὥραν 
after ἐνάτην. The hour alluded to 
is probably the szxth, the hour of the 
mid-day meal, which was the only one 
partaken by the Jews on their solemn 
days. (Lightf.) λαμπρᾷ) bright. In 
Luke (ref.) the brightness was in the 
‘colour: here, probably, in some super- 
natural splendour. The garment might 
have been white (as in ch. i. 10), or not,— 
but at all events, it was radiant with bright- 
ness. 31.] The two are separated 
here, which were placed together i in Ver. 4, 
and each has its pu verb: eisnk. «+. 7 
προΞευχὴ K. αἱ ἐλ... +s ἐμνήσθ. 33.] 
The reading ἐνώπ. ‘cov, for ἐνώπ. τοῦ θεοῦ, 
is remarkable, and had it more manuscript 
authority, would seem as if it might have 
been genuine. It was much more likely 
to have been altered into τ. θεοῦ (as making 
tlie expression more solemn), than the cons 


118 


r here only. 

δ ver. 48. ch 
xvii. 26. 
Matt. i. 24. 
viii. 4 1} only. 
constr., here 
only. Jonah 
ii. 11 BN3> 
Alex.(not A) 
Ald. 


t = ch. ii. 22 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ AILOSTOAON. 


X. 


- -» 7 rf a U “ 

ἡμεῖς * ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ τ πάρεσμεν ἀκοῦσαι παντα τὰ 
" προςτεταγμένα σοι taro τοῦ Ἐθεοῦ. ὅ1 υ᾽Ανοίξας δὲ 

Ν φ > 

Πέτρος τὸ ἃ στόμα eirev’ Er’ ἀληθείας ἡ καταλαμβάνομαι 
fea , ” x / e θ , 85 > » > Ν 
ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν ἡ προςωπολήμπτης O Geos, “5. ἀλλ EV παντὶ 
> \ , 

ἔθνει ὁ Υ φοβούμενος αὐτὸν καὶ 5 ἐργαζόμενος * δικαιοσύ- 


eff. ‘ a \ ΄ δ , 
oth vii.as γὴν ὃ δεκτὸς αὐτῷ ἐστιν, 50 τὸν “ λόγον ὃν “ ἀπέστειλεν 


reff. 


vy Luke iv. 25. ch. iv. 27 al. Job ix. 2. 
11. Luke xx. 21. ver. 2 reff. 
a = 1 Johnii. 29. iii. 7,10. Rev. xxii. 11. Isa. lviii. 2. 


18 only. Levit. i. 4. c Ps. evi. 20. 


for 1st τ. θεου, cov D!(and lat) vulg Syr sah eth arm[-usc]. (See note.) 


παρεσμεν D! sah. 
Bovaou.(alone) Syr : 
σοι bef παντα A. 


mapa cov(a'one) D%. 


w = ch. iv. 13 reff. 


x here only +. see James ii. 38. Rom. ii. 
z= Matt. vii. 23. Heb. xi. 33. Jamesi. 20. Ps. xiv. 2. 
b Luke iv. 19, 24. 2Cor. vi.2. Phil. iv. 


om 


aft axovcat ins βούλομενοι mapa σου D!; volumus D-lat: 


om παντα J) 96. 142 sah: ta mpost. 


rec uro, with BHLPN! p 13. 36 rel Chr: παρα E: txt ACDR*. 


* κυρίου (corrn to avoid repetition of θεου 9) ABCE® ὁ [p!(Treg) } 13. 36. 40 
vulg syr copt arm: θεου DHLP p rel Syr sah Chr.[—om tov p 18. ] 


34. ro στομα bef πετρος D [am copt eth]. 


aft to στομα ins αὐτου ACEN? 


dk o 36 [vulg-ed demid syrr coptt] «th arm: om BDHLPN! p am fuld [tol] Chr. 


καταλαμβανομενος D'(txt D? Ὁ). 
35. adAa A. estat A Constt. 


36. ins yap bef Aoy. C!/appy ] D-gr ¢ 137 [spec] Syr syr-w-ast sah. 


om ον (corrn 


to simplify the constr) AB cp vulg [D-lat] coptt «th [arm]: ins C D[-gr] EHLP(') 
rel 36 syrr Cyr-jer, Chr,. (18 def.)—ov is marked for erasure by δὲ}, or more probably 


by X-corr!?. 


verse: and the sense, ‘We are all here 
present before thee,’ follows better on the 
two preceding verses. τὰ tmpost.| Not 
doubting that God, who had directed him 
to Peter, had also directed Peter what to 
speak to him. 84. ἀνοίξας τὸ oT. } 
Used (see reff.) on occasions of more than 
ordinary solemnity. ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας Kar. | 
‘For the first time I now clearly, in cts 
fulness and as a living fact, apprehend 
(grasp by experience the truth of) what 
1 read in the Scripture (Deut. x. 17; 
2 Chron. xix. 7; Job xxxiv. 19).’ 

35.] ἀλλά gives the explanation,—what 
it is that Peter now fully apprehends: 
but as opposed to προεωπολήμπτης in 
its now apparent sense. ἐν παντὶ 
ἔθνει κιτ.λ.7 It is very important that we 
should hold the right clue to guide us in 
understanding this saying. The question 
which recent events had solved in Peter’s 
mind, was that of the admissibility of men 


of all nations into thé church of Christ. Zn _ 


this sense only, had he received any infor- 
mation as to the acceptableness of men of 
all nations before God. He saw, that in 
every nation, men who seek after God, who 
receive His witness of Himself without 
which He has left no man, and humbly 
follow His will as far as they know it,— 
these have no extraneous hindrance, such 
as uncircumcision, placed in their way to 
Christ, but are capable of being admitted 
into God’s church though Gentiles, and as 
Gentiles. That only such are spoken of, is 
agreeable to the nature of the case; for 


men who do not fear God, and work un- 
righteousness, are out of the question, not 
being likely to seek such admission. It is 
clearly unreasonable to suppose Peter to 
have meant, that each heathen’s natural 
light and moral purity would render him 
acceptable in the sight of God : —for, if so, 
why should he have proceeded to preach 
Christ to Cornelius, or indeed any more at 
ail? And it is equally unreasonable to 
find any verbal or doctrinal difficulty in 
ἐργ. δικαιοσύνην, or to suppose that δικ. 
must be taken in its forensic sense, and 
therefore that he alludes to the state of 
men after becoming believers. He speaks 
popularly, and certainly not without re- 
ference to the character he had heard of 
Cornelius, which consisted of these very two 
parts, that he feared God, and abounded in 
good works. The deeper truth, that the 
preparation of the heart itself in such men 
comes from God’s preventing grace, is not 
in question here, nor touched upon. 

36. τὸν λόγον | The construction is very dif- 
ficult. Several ways have been proposed of 
connecting and rendering this accusative. 
(1) Erasm., Wolf, Heinrichs, Kuin., &c., 
take τὸν λόγον with οἴδατε, and understand 
τὸ γεν, ῥῆμ. K.T-A. as in apposition with it. 
“The word which, &e., ye know, viz. the 
γεν. p.” But this immediate connexion of 
Ady. and οἴδ. is hardly consistent with the 
interruption of the sense by οὗτος . . . κύριος. 
(2) Meyer, and Winer, edn. 6, § 62. 3 
end, adopt virtually the same construction, 
but understand ὑμ. of. to be a taking up 


ABCDE 
HLPNa 
bedfg 
hkim 
op 13 


34—38. 


τοῖς ἃ υἱοῖς ᾿Ισραὴλ © 


h 


a nee A 
χριστοῦ" 8 ovtus ἐστιν © πάντων 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΔΩΝ. 


110 


᾿εὐαγγελιζόμενος ὦ εἰρήνην διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦ ἃ «ιν. 5". vi 
κύριος. 
τὸ i γενόμενον ῥῆμα * καθ᾽ * ὅλης τῆς lovdalas,'™ ἀρξάμενος ἧς 


23 (from 
Exod. ii. 11), 
rik, 15, 

2 Cor. iii. 7, 
Rev. ii. 
14. vii. 4. 


37 ὑμεῖς οἴδατε 


a / \ \ / 
Maro τῆς Γαλιλαίας peta τὸ βάπτισμα ὃ 5 ἐκήρυξεν « = Luke i. 19. 


3 Kings i. 42. 


3 lal ‘ , ς , = - εἰ 
Ἰωάννης, 38 Ἰησοῦν ae °amo Ναξαρέθ, Pas «ἔχρισεν, Tits, 


7.) Eph. 11, 17 only. Nah. i. 


g ch. ix. 20 reff. 


from Isa. lii. 
h = Rom. x. 12 (Gal. iv. 1) only. 


i Lukeiu.15. iii.2. John x. 35. "tk vii. 3lal. Gen. xv. 1. Jer. i. 1. k ch. ix. 31 reff. J). 

1 constr., see note. m ch. i. 22 reff. n Luke iii. 3 |j. Exod. xxxii. 5, o= ch. 
xxiii. 34. Matt. xxi. 11. Johni. 46. xi. 1. xii. 21 al. p = ver. 28 reff. q ch. iv. 27 refi. 

37. om vues B eth-rom. yevauevov E: γεγονος C ec. om pnua D. om 


Ast της D}(ins D3). 
quod factum est . 
D-lat: txt ABC D- gr E-gr H 40. 


rec aptauevov, with LP [τη] p 13. 36 rel [ Dial, ] Chr, Thdrt, ; 
. incipiens vulg E-lat Iren-int, Hil, Ambr,, q.f. . 


. cum coepisset 


aft apé. ins ae AD vulg K-lat [ Dial, ] Iren-int. 


38. rec va Caper, with AHL a b df ghlop 18 [Bas, Thdrt, Cosm,]: txt BCDEPX 


of the sense which was broken by (in. this: 
case) the two parentheses evayy. . « -- » 
χριστοῦ, and οὗτος .... κύριος. This 
also is the rendering of Εἰ. V. But it 
does not sufficiently account for the two, 
clauses parenthesized. Besides, it is an 
objection to both these, that the hearers 
did not know the Adyos—‘ noverant audi-. 
tores historiam de qua mox, non item 
rationes interiores, de quibus hoe versu.’ 
Bengel. (3) Rosenm. and others under- 
stand κατά, ‘secundum eara: doctrinam 
quam Deus tradi jussit Israelitis,’ or 
(4) take it as an accusativus pendens, 
‘ad sermonem filiis Israel missum quod 
attinet’? . . . . But an accusative is 
never found thus standing alone, unless 
there be an anacoluthon, which, (3), pre- 
cludes, and which would, if assumed in 
(4), give us a construction of unexampled 
harshness, (5) Grot. and Beza take τὸν 
λόγον ὅν, for ὃν λόγον, ‘quem nuncium,’ 
justifying it by Matt. xxi. 42, and so nearly 
(6) Kypke, ‘ verbum quod misit .. .. illud 
in omnes habet potestatem,’ a rendering 
altogether out of all N. T. analogy, as. is. 
also (7) that of Heinsius, who understands. 
λόγος as personal, ‘ Verbum quod misit 
Deus, omnium est Dominus,’ a usage con- 
fined in the N. T. to the writings of St. 
John, and, even if admissible, most. harsh 
and improbable here. (8) I agree in the 
main with De Wette, who joins τὸν λόγον 
with καταλαμβάνομαι,---ἃπὰ regards. ver. 
86 as exegetic of 671 .... δεκτὸς αὐτῷ 
ἐστι. Of a truth I perceive, &....... 
(and recognize this as) the word which 
God sent to the children of Israel, 
preaching peace (see reff.) through Jesus 
Christ: (then, for the first time, ἐπ᾽ ἀλη- 
θείας καταλαμβανόμενος this also, on the 
mention of Jesus Christ, he adds οὗτός 
ἐστιν πάντων κύριος,) He is Lord of ΑΤΙΤ, 
MEN; with a strong emphasis on πάντων. 
I the more incline to this, the simplest 
and most forcible rendering, from observ- 
ing that so far from ὑμεῖς οἴδατε being 


(Meyer’s objection) a harsh beginning to 
a new sentence, it is the very form in 
which Peter: began his address to. them 
ver. 28, ὑμεῖς ἐπίστασθε, ἄτα. :: and; as there 
it answers to κἀμοί, so here also (ver. 39) 
to καὶ ἡμεῖς-.. διὰ, Ἴησ. xp- belongs 
to εὐαγγελ., not to εἰρήνην. 37. 
τὸ ῥῆμα] the matter: not the thing, 
here or any where else: but the thing 
said, the “materies’ of the proclamation, 
in this case perhaps best ‘the history.’ 
γενόμενον] Not ‘ which took bh co 
but, which was spoken, ‘published,’ 
E. V. See reff. This meaning, which 
ῥῆμα itself renders necessary, is further 
supported by καθ᾽ ὅλης τ. *Iovd., which 
can only be properly said, and is used by 
Luke (only, see reff.) of a publication, or 
spreading of a rumour, not of the happen- 
ing of an event or series of events relating 
to one person. ἀρξ. ἀπ. τ. Pad.) It 
was from Galilee first that the fame of 
Jesus went abroad, as Luke himself re- 
lates, Luke iv, 14, 37 (44 v.r.); vii. 17; 
ix. 6 (xxiii. 5). Galilee also was the near- 
est to, Ceesarea, and may have been for this 
reason expressly mentioned. ἀρξάμενος is 
an unexpected transference of the case 
and gender into that of the prime agent, 
a construction common ‘enough in the 
Apocalypse (iv. 1 reff. )» but surprising 
in St. Luke. peta τὸ Barr.] So 
also. Peter dates the ministry of our Lord 
in ch. i. 22. (See note there.) 
38. Ἰησοῦν τ. ἀπὸ Nofl.] The personal 
subject of the γενόμενον ῥῆμα, q. ἃ. 
“Ye know the subject which was preach- 
ed . . . » viz. Jesus of Nazareth.’ 
ὡς ἔχρ. ait. | how that God anointed 
him... , not as Kuin. and Kypke, ‘how 
that God anointed Jesus of N.,’ taking 
αὐτόν as redundant by a Hebraism. 
See a construction very similar in Luke 
xxiv. 19, 20. The fact of the anoint- 
ing with the Holy Spirit, in His bap- 
tism by John, was the historical- opening 
of the ministry of Jesus: this anointing 


120 TIPASEIS AITOSTOAON. X. 
e Ἂ ᾽ - Υ x a A 
r= Luke i 1. αὐτὸν ὁ θεὸς πνεύματι ἁγίῳ Kal * δυνάμει, ὃς ὃ διῆλθεν ABCDE 
vi. 19 al. A P ᾽ Na 
sabsol.,ch. t eVepryeT@Y καὶ ἰώμενος πάντας TOUS ἃ καταδυναστευομένους bed fg 
t here only. ς..τ a 5 , ov e θ ao ᾽ x n~, 39 ΑΚ hk Im 
Peas. ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου, OTL ὁ Geos’ ἣν μετ αὐτοῦ καὶ opls 
(-της, Luke 


XXxii. 

u James ii. 6 
only. Ezek. 
xvili. 12. 

vy Lukei. 66. 
John iii. 
ch. vil. ὧν 
xviii. 10. 

Isa. lviii. 11. 
w constr., Luke 
xxiv. 48, ch. 

i. 22. ii. 32. 

11. 15. χχτε δ. x attr., ch. i. 1 reff. 
a Matt. x. 8. xi. 5. xxviii. 6 |!. Rom. iv. 25. 
c Rom. x. 20 only, from Isa. Ixv. 1. 


k m vulg coptt Chr, Did [Bas, Iren-int, ]. 
D3 adding avtov) syrr arm Bas, Faustin,. 
bef mvevu. D. 


Thl[-fin, }. καταδυναστευθεντας D: 
39. vues A D-gr. 


ἡμεῖς 


μάσαντες ἐπὶ * ξύλου. 
e / \ 
ἡμέρᾳ Kal 


autov D. 
ain [arm] Chr Cosm Iren-int. 


rel [vulg] fuld [Syr(appy)] coptt Cosm Iren-int: 
(ανειλαν, so ABCDER® p 13.) 


tol syr arm Chr). 


W μάρτυρες πάντων 
“- \ 
40 τοῦτον ὁ θεὸς 


τῷ λαῷ, ἀλλὰ μάρτυσιν τοῖς 
[ 4 


1 Cor. xv. 4, &e. 
d here only +. see ch. ini. 20. 


rec aft nu. ins ἐσμεν, with HLP 13 rel [vulg] Cosm, : 
ABCDER p 86 syrr eth [arm] Chr, Iren-int-mss,[-ed-Stieren ]. 
om ev (bef sep.) BD p [vulg-ed] demid fuld: 
rec om 38rd καὶ (its force not being seen), with 13 


sa ar > / ” A / 
“ὧν €ETTOLNOEV EV TE ΤΊ) χώρᾳ 


a ¢ / ἃ \ J “ 
τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων καὶ ἐν ἱΙερουσαλήμ' ὃν καὶ ¥ ἀνεῖλαν * Kpe- 


a ἤγειρεν τῇ τρίτῃ 


\ A / > x 
> ἔδωκεν αὐτὸν “ ἐμφανῆ γενέσθαι *! ov παντὶ 


/ 3, 
ἃ προκεχειροτονημένοις ὑπὸ 


2 οἷν. v. 30 (reff.) 
b = ch. ii. 4 reff. 


y = ch. v. 23 reff. 
Isa. xxvi. 19. 


for ws exp. avt., ov exp. D}(and lat : 
ins ev bef my. ay. EL Ὁ m. ay 


for os, ovros D tol Syr sah Iren-int Faustin: ws δὲ! 13 lect- 12 


for διαβ., σατανα K-gr. 
om 
for πάντων, 


ins ACEHLPR 13. 36 rel 
ins ABCDEHLPX® rel 36 am demid 


40. ins ev bef τη Tp. nu. Ο X1(N3 disapproving) m: μετὰ τὴν τριτὴν nuepay Di(and 


lat). 


however was not His first unction with 
the Spirit, but only symbolic of that which 
He had in His incarnation: so Cyril in 
Johan. lib. xi. vol. vii. p. 993, οὐ δήπου πάλιν 
ἐκεῖνό φαμεν ὅτι τότε γέγονεν ἅγιος 6 κατὰ 
σάρκα χριστός, ὅτε τὸ πνεῦμα τεθέαται 
καταβαῖνον ὃ βαπτιστής᾽ ἅγιος γὰρ ἦν καὶ 
ἐν ἐμβρύῳ καὶ μήτρᾳ... . ἀλλὰ δέδοται μὲν 
εἰς σημεῖον TE βαπτιστῇ τὸ Gé€aua:—which 
unction abode upon Him, John i. 32, 33, 
and is alleged here as the continuing 
anointing which was upon Him from God. 

Stier well remarks, how entirely 
all personal address to the hearers and all 
doctrinal announcements are thrown into 
the background in this speech, and the 
Person and Work and Office of Christ put 
forward as the sole subject of apostolic 
preaching. καταδυναστ.} Subdued, 
so that he is their duvaor:js,—and this 
power used for their oppression. Here, it 
alludes to physical oppression by disease (see 
Luke xiii. 16) and possession: in 2 Tim. 
11. 26, a very similar description is given of 
those who are spiritually bound by the 
devil. ὁ θεὸς ἦν μετ᾽ αὐτ.] So Nico- 
demus had spoken, John iii. 2; and pro- 
bably Peter here used the words as well 
known and indicative of the presence of 
divine power and co-operation (see Judg. 
vi. 16): beginning as he does with the 
outer and lower circle of the things re- 
garding Christ, as they would be matter of 
observation and inference to his hearers, 
and gradually ascending to those higher 
truths regarding His Person and Office, 


for avrov, avtw D!! avtw μεν D3(Scriv) ] 0 45. 


which were matter of apostolic testimony 
and demonstration from Scripture,—His 
resurrection (ver. 40), His being appointed 
Judge of living and dead (ver. 42), and 
the predestined Author of salvation to all 
who believe on Him (ver. 43). 39. 
καὶ ἡμεῖς] Answering to ὑμεῖς οἴδατε, 
νοῦ. 57. ‘ You know the history as matter 
of universal rumour: and we are witnesses 
of the facts.’ By this ἡμεῖς Peter at once 
takes away the ground from the exagge- 
rated reverence for himself individually, 
shewn by Cornelius, ver. 25 (Stier): and 
puts himself and the rest of the Apostles in 
the strictly subordinate place of witnesses 
for Another. ὃν Kal avetA.] Whom 
also they killed. καί is not ‘yet,’ as 
Kuinoel, but merely introduces, in this 
case passing over it without emphasis, a 
new fact in this history. He even omits 
all mention of the actors in the murder, 
speaking as he did to Gentiles: a striking 
contrast to ch. ii. 28 ; iii. 14; iv. 10; v.30, 
—when he was working conviction in the 
minds of those actors themselves. 

κρεμ. ἐπὶ ξ. So also ch. v. 30, where see 
note. 41.] Bengel would understand 
συνεφ. Kk. συνεπ. of previous intercourse 
during His ministry, and parenthesize ov 
παντὶ av7Tg,—finding a difficulty in 
their having eaten and drunk with Him 
after His Resurrection. But this would 
wake the significant οἵτινες (* people 
who”).... αὐτῷ very flat and unmean- 
ing, especially after ver. 39: whereas the 
fact of their having eaten and drunk with 


——————— ee μια σ᾽.Ν 


0+ VEKPWV 


ABDE 
HLPxX a 
bedfg 
hklm 


opl3s 


39—44. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON. 


121 


A AES »"Ἢ 6 “, f ΄ \ g , ’ A 
τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῖν, " οἵτινες f συνεφάγομεν Kal 8 συνεπίομεν αὐτῳ « Matt. xvi. 28. 


\ \ ἢ > ΄“ \ Φ lal 
"wera τὸ ἱ ἀναστῆναι αὐτὸν ‘ ἐκ νεκρων. 


ch, v. 16. vii. 
53 (note). 
xiii. 31. 
Heb. vii. 5. 


42 καὶ * παρήγ- 


εἰλεν ἡμῖν κηρύξαι τῷ λαῷ καὶ "' διαμαρτύρασθαι ὅτι tivsexn> 
γείλεν ἡμῖν κηρύξαι τῷ λαῷ καὶ μαρτύρασ f Luke ἀν. 5. 


m > , ᾿ e n id , e ἣν lal θ cal 0 A , 
QUTOS ἐστιν ο"ὠρισμένος ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ °KpiTNS ζώντων 
7 / “A lal 
43 P rovT@ πάντες οἱ προφῆται 4 μαρτυροῦσιν, 


\ ΄-“ 
Kat VEKPOV. 


ch. xi. 3. 

1 Cor. v. 11. 
Gal. ii. 21 
only. Gen. 
xliii. 32. 

Ps. c. 5 only. 


A a “ » , an / 
᾿ἄφεσιν * ἁμαρτιῶν λαβεῖν " διὰ τοῦ " ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ πάντα κε here only. 


t πιστεύοντα 


reff. 1 Chron. ii. 24. 

xvii. 3. Eph. v. 14. see ch. iv. 2. 
m Matt. vili. 17. Luke xxiv. 21 al. 

Anthol. xii. 158. 7. 


TOV τεἰς auTov. - 


= Luke iv. 22. 


i Mark vi. 14. ix. 9,10. xii. 25. 
k dat. and aor., ch. xvi. 18 reff. 


o= 2 Tim. iv. 8. James v. 9. 
John iii. 26. ch. xiii. 22. xv. 8 al. 


Esth. vii. 1 
only. Judg. 
v. 11 Symm. 
h ch. xix. 21 
Luke xvi. 31. xxiv. 46. John xx. 9. ch. 
1 ch. viii. 25 reff. 
n = ch. xvii. (26 reff.) 31. σὲ,..θεὸν ὥρισε δαίμων, 
Ps. vii. 11. p ch. ix. 20 reff. 
rch. v. 31 reff. s = ch. iv. 30 reff. 


44 τι λαλοῦντος Tov 


t John ii. 11 and passim. ch. xiv. 23. χῖχ. 4ά, Rom. x. 14 8]. 


41. ἡμιν bef υπο τ. 6. C syrr sah [Tren-int, Vig, ]. 


aft ovved. ins avtw C syr. 


aft cuver. avTw ins και συνανεστραφημεν D? syr: συνεστρ. D!}, conversi D-lat : 


add further avtw nuepas μ syr-w-ast. 


om autov D [ E-corr ]. aft νεκρων add 


neepas μ D sah eth; 5: nuepwv τεσσαρακοντα Εἰ. 


42. for mapnyy., evereiAato D. 


for avtos, ovros (corrn, but unnecessary) BC 


D-gr E-gr Π[6 sil, Tischdf] k 18 syrr coptt: txt AHPN p rel vulg D-lat E-lat xth 


Chr, Cosm, Iren-int, 


43. tovrov HL: τουτο τη} [o] 19. 662. 78 lect-2. 


Him after His Resurrection gives most 
important testimony to the reality and 
identity of His risen Body. And there is 
no real difficulty in it: Luke xxiv. 41, 43 
and John xxi. 12 give us instances; and, 
even if συνεπίομεν is to be pressed, it is 
no contradiction to Luke xxii. 18, which 
only refers to one particular kind of drink- 
ing. προκεχ. UT. τ. θεοῦ] Had not 
Peter in his mind the Lord’s own solemn 
words,—ovts δέδωκάς μοι ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου, 
John xvii. 6? 42. τῷ Aad] Here as 
elsewhere (ver. 2; John xi. 50 al. fr.), the 
Jewish people: that was all which, in the 
apostolic mind, up to this time, the com- 
mand had absolutely enjoined. The further 
unfolding of the Gospel had all been 
brought about over and above this first 
injunction. Ch. i. 8 is no obstacle to this 
interpretation ; for although literally ful- 
filled by the leadings of Providence, as 
related in this book, they did not so un- 
derstand it when spoken. κριτ. ἵ. κ. 
vexp.] So also Paul, ch. xvii. 31, preach- 
ing to Gentiles, brings forward the appoint- 
ment of a Judge over all men as the cen- 
tral point of his teaching. This expression 
gives at once a universality to the office 
and mission of Christ, which prepares the 
way for the great truth declared in the next 
verse. It is impossible that the living 
and dead here can mean (as the Augsburg 
Catechism, and Olshausen) the righteous 
and sinners:—a canon of interpretation 
which should constantly be borne in mind 
is, that a figurative sense of words is never 
admissible, EXCEPT WHEN REQUIRED BY 
THE CONTEXT. Thus, in the passage of 
John v. 25 (where see notes), the sense of 


νεκροί is determined to be figurative by 
the addition of καὶ viv ἐστιν after Spa, no 
such addition occurring in ver. 28, where 
the literally dead, οἱ ἐν τοῖς μνημείοις, are 
mentioned. 43. πάντες ot pod | 
All the prophets, generically: not that 
every one positively asserted this, but that 
the whole bulk of prophetic testimony an- 
nounced it. To press such expressions to 
literal exactness is mere trifling. See ch. 
111. 21, 24. ad. ap. AaB. «.7.A.] The 
legal sacrifices, as well as the declarations 
of the prophets, all pointed to the remis- 
sion of sins by faith in Him. And the 
universality of this proclamation, πάντα 
τὸν πιστ., is set forth by the prophets in 
many places, and was recognized even by 
the Jews themselves, in their expositions 
of Scripture, though not in their practice. 

44.| Peter had spoken up to this 
point: and was probably proceeding (ef. év 
τῷ ἄρξασθαί με λαλεῖν, ch. xi. 15) to in- 
clude his present hearers and all nations 
in the number to whom this blessing was 
laid open,—or perhaps beyond this point 
his own mind may as yet have been not 
sufficiently enlightened to set forth the 
Full liberty of the Gospel of Christ,—when 
the fire of the Lord fell, approving the sa- 
crifice of the Gentiles (see Rom. xv. 16): 
conferring on them the substance before 
the symbol,—the baptism with the Holy 
Ghost before the baptism with water: and 
teaching us, that as the Holy Spirit dis- 
pensed once and for all with the necessity 
of circumcision in the flesh, so can He also, 
when it pleases him, with the necessity of 
water-baptism : and warning the Christian 
church not to put baptism itself in the 


122 TIPAZEEIS, ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. X. 45—48. 
me ’ A ce - nals \ ou a) ὦν 
uch.viiils Πέτρου τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα " ἐπέπεσεν TO ἣ πνεῦμα TO ἅγιον 
re 
v 2 Cor, v. 13 Ἀσὰ if - ᾿ ) ‘ ᾿ ro 45 δ ΚΣ 
nn ἐπὶ TAVTAS TOUS ἀκούοντας TOV hoyoV. καὶ * ἐξέστησαν 
ν οἷ. xi. 2 ew Ww a x \ eo y a a , 
Rom.iv-1% Οὐ “ ἐκ “ περιτομῆς “πιστοὶ OTOL συνῆλθον τῷ Let pa, ...πιστοι 
sal. ii, 12. ᾿ ᾿ 


Col. iv. 11. 

Tit.i. 10 only. 
x= ch. aw i. 

2 Cor. vi. 15. 


“ \ ΣΎΓΕ \ » ς 2 ὃ \ a eo. , _ Τῇ. 
OTL: Καὶ ETL TA ἔθνη ?) WDE TOU aylou TTVEUMATOS ABDE 
ΗΝ δ 


, ,, “ , ’ 
ἃ ἐκκέχυται. 1% ἤκουον γὰρ αὐτῶν λαλούντων " γλώσσαις deat g 


Eph, i. 1. τ \ , , 3 ᾿ , hkliv 
Col. i. 2 al. ¢ 2f), ᾿ 
_Gokea καὶ © μεγαλυνόντων τὼν θεόν. τότε ἀπεκρίθη ἹἸ]έτρος pis 
- ch. ii. 38 » Υ , \ ΓΙ , ᾿ -- A / 2 -“ \ 
ee ony 474 Μήτι τὸ ὕδωρ δύναται * κωλῦσαί τις "ToD μὴ βαπ- 
a -xetv, ch. il. θῇ ΄ “ \ bh a ἃ ἄν " " 
᾿ἤτεῆς τισθῆναι τούτους, οἵτινες To πνεῦμα τὸ » ἅγιον ἔλαβον 
»ch. i. 4 Τὸ Ἢ e e σι ae , / \ - “Ὁ ἣν 
ὁ τ Lukei 46, ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ; + Προςέταξέν τε αὐτοὺς * ἐν τῷ * ὀνόματι 
xix. 17. a , k θῇ , We ΄ “Ὁ m2 
Phi.i20. Τοῦ κυρίου ὃ βαπτισθῆναι. τῶτε ἱ ἠρώτησαν αὐτὸν ™ ἐπι- 
(..P., exc. ᾿ 
δα ἀπ μεῖναι " ἡμέρας " τινάς. 
τἰϊ. 26. δ d Matt. vii. 16. John iv. 29. Mal. iii. 8 Β. e = Buke vi. 29. f Gen. xxiii. 6 
g 1 Cor. x. 13 reff. h ch. viii. 15, 19 neff iconstr., here only. (see ver 33 reff.) «Isa. xxxvi. 21 


k see ch. viii. 16 reff. l constr., ch. xvi. 39 reff. 
al. L.P. (exc. John viii. 7.) Exod. xii. 39 Bi 


44. aft er: ins δε P? be f go (syrr) sah [ (ath) ]. erecev (mistake ? or simple 
word for compound) AD 13. 36 [rel]: txt BEHLPN [m] ὁ p. 

45. for ovo, οἱ B vulg D-lat coptt: txt A D-gr EHL| ΡῚΝ 13. 36 rel Chr, Rebapt,. 

συνηλθαν BN. του my. τ. ay. B(sic: see table) D3 40 [vulg Rebapt}: του 
nv. ay. D': txt AKEHLPR p 18. 36 rel Chr. 

46. from Aadourtwy to . . v Tov θεον is obliterated in D! (seeing (1) that D¢ fils up the 
space with txt written “laxius,” (2) that Wetstein reports D! to have read peyaduveww 
(omg και ?), and (8) that D-lat has prevaricatis linguis : we may conjecture that D! 
possibly may have read yAwooas SiauepiCoueva:s). for tote amexp., εἰπεν δε D. 

rec ins o bef πετρ., with DEHLP rel: om ABN p Chr). . 

47. rec κωλ. bef δυν., with D-corr HLP 13 rel Chr: «wAai(corrd by D5) τ. δυν. Ὁ}: 
δυν. τ. KwA. E240: [om κωλ. [ἃ] :] txt ABN p. for τουτους, avtous D-gr. 
rec καθως (0077) to more usual expr: or to suit ek xv. 8), with EHLP rel: wsmep Ὁ: 
txt ABN a chk p 13. 40 Epiph, Chr-comm, [ Iren-c, ]. 

48. for τε, δε BEN ἃ p 13 syr coptt: txt AHLP rel vulg eth [arm] Chr, Rebapt,.— 
Tote mposet. D Syr. avtots AN 33. rec βαπτισθ. bef ev τω ov. τ. K., With 
DEHLP rel vss Chr Rebapt: txt ABN p 40 am demid [fuld tol arm] Cyr-jer,. 
for Tov Kup., inoouv χριστου (eorrn, as giving more precision to the baptismal formula) 
ABERX ὁ dk p? 18. 36 am [tol demid] syr coptt [arm] Cyr-jer, Chr, Jer Rebapt,: τ. 
κυρ. ino. xp- D p! fuld [vulg-clem Syr] : 7. κυρ. mo. a h 88. 42.57: txt HLP rel. 

for npwt., παρεκαλεσαν D. ins πρὸς autous bef επιμειναι D-corr vulg-ed 
Syr [coptt(Tischdf)] ath, so but diaper. D!, 


: m ch. xxi. 4, 10. xxviii. 12, 14. 1 Cor. xvi. 7,8 
n chy ix. 19. xv. 36. xvi. 12. uxiv. 24. xxv. 13 only, 


place which circumcision once held. See 
further in note on Peter’s important words, 
ch. xi. 16. The outpouring of the Spirit 
on the Gentiles was strictly analogous to 
that in the day of Pentecost; Peter himself 
describes it by adding (ch. xi. 15), ὥςπερ 
καὶ ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς ἐν ἀρχῇ. Whether there was 
any visible appearance in this case, cannot 
be determined: perhaps from ver. 46 it 
would appear not. 45.) We do not read 
that Peter himself was astonished. He 
had been specially prepared by the vision: 
they had not. The λαλεῖν γλώσσαις 
here is identified with the A. ἑτέραις yA. 
of ch. ii. 4, by the assertion of cb. xi. 15, 
just cited ;—and this again with the ἐλά- 
Aovy γλώσσαις of ch. xix. 6:—so that the 
gift was one and the same throughout. 
On the whole subject, see note, ch. ii. 4. 

47.] One great end of the unexpected 
effusion of the Holy Spirit was entirely to 


preclude the question which otherwise 
could not but have arisen, ‘ Must not these 
men be eircumcised before baptism ?? 
τὸ ὕδωρ. .. τὸ πνεῦμα) The TWO great 
PARTS of full and complete baptism: the 
latter intinitely greater than, but not 
superseding the necessity of, the former. 
The article shouid here certainly be ex- 
pressed: Can any forbid THE WATER to 
these who have received THE SPIRIT? 
The expression κωλῦσαι, used with 
τὸ ὕδ., is interesting, as shewing that 
the practice was to bring the water to 
the candidates, not the candidates to 
the water. This, which would be implied 
by the word under any circumstances, 
is rendered certain, when we remember 
that they were assembled in the house. 
48. προςέταξεν) As the Lord Him- 
self when on earth did not baptize (John 
iv. 2), so did not ordinarily the Apostles 


XI. 1—4. ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ AIIOSTOAQON. 123 


ΧΙ. 1 Ἤκουσαν δὲ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Kal οἱ ἀδελφοὶ οἷ ο = ch. ii. 46. 
ὄντες ο κατὰ τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν ὅτι καὶ τὰ ἔθνη ν ἐδέξαντο τὸν 3, 2 Mace 
4 λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ. 2 ὅτε δὲ τ ἀνέβη Πέτρος εἰς “lepovca- "vir 

λήμ, 8 διεκρίνοντο πρὸς αὐτὸν ‘ot t ἐκ ' περιτομῆς Sen 14. xii, M4, 
γοντες ὅτι ἃ εἰςῆλθες u πρὸς ἄνδρας vw ἀκροβυστίαν ν ἔχοντας εν, 80 αἱ, 
καὶ *ovvépayes αὐτοῖς. 4Υ ἀρξάμενος δὲ Πέτρος “ ἐξ- Τὸ ον 
ἐτίθετο αὐτοῖς " καθεξῆς λέγων δ Ἐγὼ " ἤμην ἐν πόλει" isu 
᾿Ιώππῃ “ προςευχόμενος, καὶ εἶδον ἐν ἃ ἐκστάσει " ὅραμα, ἀρ ἐγ ραν 

! καταβαῖνον * 


q ch. vi. 7. viii. 


w. dat., Jude 
9. Jer. xv. 10, 


ys ς f 506 2% 2 teh. x. 45 
σκεῦός τι ὡς * ὀθόνην μεγάλην τέσσαρσιν ἐὰν 
’ lal / la lal 9 ᾽ 
ἴ ἀρχαῖς 8 καθιεμένην ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, καὶ ἦλθεν " ἄχρι 


Ὁ ch. x. 3. xvi. 


40. xvii. 2. 
Luke i. 28. 
> a ? ἃ Me] , [ὁ / 
ἐμοῦ. 6 εἰς ἣν tarevicas * κατενόουν καὶ εἶδον TA! τετρά- Mark xv 3. 


A a \ \ / Ν \ ς \ \ \ vy here only. 
ποδα τῆς γῆς καὶ τὰ θηρία καὶ τὰ 1 ἑρπετὰ καὶ TA“ Gen. xxiv. 
14 
w here and Paul (Rom. iii. 30 all8.) only. x ch. x. 41 reff. y ver. 15. 
wii. 21.) xviii. 26, xxviii. 23 only. (Job xxxvi. 15.) λόγον ἐκθήσομαι, Jos. Antt. i. 12. 2. 
iii. 24 reff. + bconstr., ch. x. 30. xxii. 19, 20 (Paul). Mark xiv. 49, Gal. i. 22. 
c absol., ch. x. 9 reff. d ch. x. 10 reff. e ch. vii. 31 reff. 
g ch. ix. 25 reff. ; h = ch. xiii. 6. xx. 4. xxviii, 15. 2 Cor. x. 13,14. 
ich. i. 10 reff. k ch. vii. 31, 32 reff. Ich. x. 12 (reff.). 


ἘΞΞ ΘΝ, 

ach. 

see ch. ii. 5 reff. 
f ch. x. 11 (reff.). 
Rey. xiv. 20, xviii. ὃ $. 


Cuap. XI. 1. ἀκουστὸν δε eyeveto τοῖς am. Κ. τοις ad. οἱ ev TH ιουδ. D Syr (audito 
vero apostoli &e D-lat, rots ev τ. ιουδ. 101). edetaro D!(txt D5). 

2. rec καὶ ore (alteration because the fact related seems a consequence of, rather 
than opposed to, ver 1?), with HLP 13 syrr eth Chr,: txt ABER p 36 vulg coptt 
[arm ]. rec ιεροσολυμα, With (D)EHLP 13. 36 rel Chr: txt ABN p. D reads 
the verse thus: ὁ μὲν ovy πετρος δια tkavov xpovov nbcAnoa(-cev D°) πορευθηναι evs 
ἱιεροσυλυμα' Kat προεφωνησας Tous adeApous Ka επιστηριξας αὐτοὺς (thus far also syr- 
w-ast, prefixing et benedicebant Deo, and adding ewiit [and w-ob] et docuit 608, και ore 
aveBn K.T.A., aS in 160) πολὺν λογον ποιουμενος δια των xwpwy (civitates D-lat) διδασκων 
avtous’ os Kat (quia et) κατηντησεν avTus Kat απηγγιλεν αὐτοις THY Xap Tov θεου" 
οἱ δε (quia erant) εκ περιτομης adeApa: διεκρινοντο προς αὐτον ( judicantes ad eum). 

3. rec mp. av. ar. ex. bef εἰδηλθες, with EHLP 18 rel syrr Chr, Thl-sif: txt ABDN 
ah p vulg coptt «th arm Thl-fin. evsnAbev and συνεφαγεν K(sic: see table) Lc p 
13. 36 Syr syr[-txt(ctra mg) arm-zoh ]. ins σὺν bef avras D!. 

4, rec ins o bef werpos, with HLP rel: om ABDER p 13. 40 Chr,. 
καθεξης D. om καθεξης [1.]} 41] copt. 

5. sor. bef πολ. D copt. om mposevxomevos X!. om 2nd ev D!-gr(ins 
D-corr!) 96. καταβαινων (error?) Aap. τετρασιν D Epiph,. rec 
axpis, with B2EH[L]P 13. 36 rel: ews D: txt AB'LR]. 

6. om τα (1st and 8rd) D}(ins 195). om της yns P 3. 73. 80!: ins aft θηρια ἃ g, 
aft eprera II Syr. in epmera, ep is written above the line by X?. om 4th τα D. 


ins ta bef 


CUMCISED. 


(see 1 Cor. i. 13—17, and note). Perhaps 
the same reason may have operated in 
both cases,—lest those baptized by our 
Lord, or by the chief Apostles, should 
arrogate to themselves pre-eminence on 
that account. Also, which is implied in 
1 Cor. i. 17, as compared with Acts vi. 2, 
the ministry of the Word was esteemed by 
them their higher and paramount duty 
and office, whereas the subordinate minis- 
tration of the ordinances was committed to 
those who διηκόνουν τραπέζαις. ἐν τῷ 
év.] = ἐπὶ τῷ ὀν., ch. ii. 88, where see 
note. Wahl compares ἀποκτείνειν ἐν τῇ 
προφάσει ταύτῃ, Lysias, p. 452. 

Cuap. XI. 1—18.] PETER JUSTIFIES 
BEFORE THE CHURCH IN JERUSALEM, HIS 
HAVING CONSORTED WITH MEN UNCIR- 


1. κατὰ τ, “Iovd.] in 
Judza, or perhaps more strictly, through- 
out Judea. (See reff.) ὅτι κ. τ. Ev. | 
They seem to have heard the fact, without 
any circumstantial detail (but see on τὸν 
ἄγγελον below, ver. 18); and, from the 
charge in ver. 3,—from some reporter who 
gave the objectionable part of it, as is not 
uncommon in such cases, all prominence. 
2.1 of ἐκ περυτομῆς must have come 
into use later as designating the circum- 
cised generally: in this case all those 
spoken of would belong to the cireum- 
cision. Luke uses it in the sense of the 
time when he wrote the account. 
4.) «Having begun, set forth to them?’ 
i. ὁ. began and set forth: not for ἤρξατο 
ἐκτιθέναι. as Kuinoel. 5.| ἦλθ. ἄχρι 


194 
᾿ Lal Cal 
mch.x.13,14 | 9reTeeva TOU οὐρανοῦ. 


reff. 
n Matt, xv. 11 


Theod. 
r eh. x. 33 reff. 
s ch. x. 17 reff. 


. , > Ν , , 
teh. 3-19 πῆ μένος ἀπὸ Καισαρείας πρὸς με. 
veff. ᾿ > An 

v Matt. viii.5 μοι " συνελθεῖν αὐτοῖς. 

al, fr. ὃ Kings 


xiii. 7. 

w Matt. viii. 33. 
Luke viii. 20. 
eh. xv. 27. 
Gen. xiv. 13. 

x σταθείς, 
Luke xviii. 
11,40. xix. 
8. ch, ii. 14. 
v. 20. xvii. 
22. χαν. 18. 
xxvii. 21. ΣῪ 

y ch. x. 5. 

2 Luke ii. 17, 
50. John iil. 
34. ch. vi. 
11,13. Deut. 
xviii. 20. 

d ch, ix. 3 reff. 


ach, iv. 9, 12. 
e ver. 4. ch. i. 1 reff. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ AITOSTOAON: 


μοι ™’ Avaoras Πέτρε ™ θῦσον καὶ φάγε. 
ὃ i. ᾿ πῇ m is. ey Pee ΝΕ ἘΞΑ 
αμῶς κύριε, OTL ™ κοινὸν ἢ ™ ἀκάθαρτον οὐδέποτε ἢ εἰς- 
A \ , 
-ἤλθεν " εἰς τὸ" στόμα μου. 5 ἀπεκρίθη δὲ φωνὴ ° ἐκ δευτέρου 
> a > aA Ww e θ ‘ 02 0 ΄ \ \ ὦ , 
ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ “A o Geos ° ἐκαθάρισεν σὺ μὴ ° κοίνου. 
10 “ Ν > / p > \ / \ q ’ / θ / 
τοῦτο δὲ ἐγένετο Ρ ἐπὶ τρίς, καὶ “ ἀνεσπάσθη πάλιν 
¢ \ ΄ 
ἅπαντα εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν. 


Rom. v. only. Hos. i. 7. b= 
f ch. viii. 16 reff. 


ΧΕ, 


7 ἤκουσα δὲ καὶ φωνῆς λεγούσης 
8 εἶπον δὲ ™ Mn- 


1 καὶ ἰδοὺ τ ἐξ αὐτῆς τρεῖς 


yy ὃ 8 5 / pees \ 1 ey 3 e * ” > 
avopes ὃ ἐπέστησαν ἐπὶ τὴν οἰκίαν ἐν ἡ ἔημην, ἀἁπεσταλ- 


12 εἶπεν δὲ τὸ ‘ πνεῦμά 


Φ \ ead 
ἦλθον δὲ σὺν ἐμοὶ Kal οἱ EE ἀδεὰλ- 
\ ΚΝ \ ν Peels θ > \ 5 fa} ᾽ ὃ ΄ 
got οὗτοι, καὶ " εἰτήλθομεν εἰς τὸν οἶκον τοῦ ἀνδρός, 
? / “ lal > li lad 
13 ν ἀπήγγειλέν *TE ἡμῖν πῶς εἶδεν τὸν ἄγγελον ἐν TO 
Ὁ ΄ ’ , AD ΄ 
οἴκῳ αὐτοῦ * σταθέντα καὶ εἰπόντα αὐτῷ ᾿Απόστειλον εἰς 
ig | , \ Υ / Ἔν δὰ y ’ ΄ 
ὄππην καὶ ¥ μετάπεμψαιν Σίμωνα τὸν Y ἐπικαλούμενον 
Πέτρον, 13 ὃς Σ λαλήσει 5 ῥήματα πρός σε ὃ ἐν οἷς ὃ σωθήσ 
βον, 1) βρη é 
a εἰς τ 
σὺ καὶ πᾶς ὁ “οἶκός σου. 
κι a ἢ > > 7 “ 
λαλεῖν [ἐπέπεσεν τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς, 8 ὥςπερ 


18 a 2 Ν ae ” / 
54éy δὲ τῷ “ ἄρξασθαί pe 


Matt. i. 21. ch. ii. 40. c= ch. x. 2 reff. 


g ch. iii. 17 only. 


7. rec om Ist και, with HLP rel syr Chr, Thl-sif: for nx. δὲ και, καὶ ne. Ὁ 15-8. 36 Syr 


zth: txt ABEX o p 18 coptt. 
8. era D. 


φωνὴν λεγουσαν D. 
rec ins παν bef κοινον (insertion from ch x. 14), with HLP rel: om 
ABDEX ¢c o p 18. 36 vulg syrr sah arm Chr, Epiph, Damase. 


αναστα D-gr}(txt D5) [vulg]. 


of αἀκαθαρτον, δὲ] 


wrote only axa, X-corr! supplied -θαρ, δὲδ -τον. 
9. rec ins μοι bef dwvn (from ch x.15), with EHLP rel syrr eth [arm-zoh ] (Epiph ?) 
Chr,: om ABN p 36. 40 vulg coptt arm[-use ].—eyeveto (add δὲ D? and lat) φωνὴ ex 


του oup. προς me D. 
ex δ. ἢ 4. 


ex δευτ. bef gw. BH a ἢ syr [eeth-p!(Lischdf) arm] Chr, : om 


10. rec παλιν bef ἀνεσπ. (see ch x. 16, where παλιν was introduced in this order), 
with EHLP rel Chr,: txt ABDN p [13] 40 vulg [syr] copt 2th arm. 


11. Ἐἣμεν AB D-gr 8 40: erant D-lat: μὴν EHLP p 13. 36 rel vss [arm ?] Chr,. 


εμε N}. 


12. rec μοι bef το mv. (corrn of arrangement), with EHLP 13. 36 rel syrr [eth arm] 


Chr, : txt ABDN p vulg coptt. 


rec aft αὐτοῖς ins μηδεν d:axpwomevor (interpola- 


tion from ch x. 20, as is shewn by the number of variations: some tnserting it 
accurately, some from memory), with HLP rel Chr,; μηδεν διακριναντα A B(sic: see 


table) δὲδ p13: μηδεν διακρινοντα EX! 36: om D syr. 


om 2nd de D [arm]. 


13. δὲ ABDN a ἢ p 86 vulg syr copt Chr, Thl-fin: om sah: τε EHLP 18 rel Syr 


eth [arm 1 Thl-sif. om Ist tov D. 


vss Chr. 


for aroor., πεμψον (from ch x. 5) B. 


om avtw ABN p copt: ins DEHLP 18 rel 
rec aft comm, ins avdpas (from 


ch x. 5), with EHLP 18 rel syr Chr: om ABDXN a ἢ p 36 [vulg] Syr coptt eth arm. 


15. aft AaA. ins avrois D wth. 


ἐμοῦ is a fresh detail. 12. οὗτοι] 
They had accompanied him to Jerusa- 
lem, and were there to substantiate the 
facts, as far as they had witnessed them. 

13. τὸν ἄγγελον] The art. almost 
looks as if the history of Cornelius’s 
vision were known to the hearers. ‘The 
difference between the vision of Corne- 
lius and that of Peter is here again strik- 
ingly marked: while the latter is merely 
‘praying in the city of Joppa,’ no place 
nor circumstance being named, the former 


ἐπεσεν Da. 


ex avtots D}(txt D*). ws D. 
sees the angel ‘standing in his house, 

Notice also that Peter never names 
Ccrnelius in his speech—because he, his 
character and person, was absorbed in 
the category to which he belonged,—that 
of men uncircumcised. 14. ἐν ois 
σωθ. «.7.A.| This is implied in the angel’s 
speech: especially if the prayer of Cor- 
nelius had been for such a boon, of which 
there can be little doubt. 15. ἐν δὲ 
τῷ ἄρξασθαι... .] See note on ch. x. 
44, us also for the rest of the verse. 





7---19. 


’ e Ὁ 
8 καὶ ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς " 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΠΘΛΟΝ, 125 


ev ἀρχῇ. 18 ἐμνήσθην δὲ τοῦ ῥηματος b Johni.1. 


a f ae . ᾿Ὶ ] τῆ ἐν" = 
τοῦ xuplov,'@s ἔλεγεν ᾿Ιωάννης μὲν ἐβάπτισεν ὕδατι, ‘5° * 


ὑμεῖς δὲ " βαπτισθήσεσθε " ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ. 
] \ lm v n ὃ \ EO > Lal Ε θ ‘ id \ id Lal 
τὴν ™ionv ἃ δωρεὰν ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς ὡς καὶ ἡμῖν, 


k ch. i. 5 reff. 
1 Cor. xii. 13. 

1 Luke vi. 34 
only. Ley. 
vi. 40 (vii. 
10) 


17 εἰ οὖν 


0 , ees \ , ᾽ A , 3h. JN ἘΣ : 
πιστεύσασιν 5 ἐπὶ τὸν κύριον ᾿Ιησοῦν χριστόν, ἐγὼ [δὲ] mas above (I). 


Matt. xx. 12. 


“Ὁ Ν 7 , / 
Pris ἤμην δυνατὸς YKwAvca, τὸν θεόν; 18 ᾿Ακούσαντες Mark xiv. 56, 
7 59. 


δὲ ταῦτα τ᾿ ἡσύχασαν καὶ " ἐδόξαζον τὸν θεὸν λέγοντες 
ty A t \ a £0 ς θ \ \ u , 
Apa [γε] καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ὁ θεὸς τὴν “ μετάνοιαν 


Ἀ ” 
ζωὴν ἔδωκεν. 


19 Οἱ μὲν οὖν * διασπαρέντες * ἀπὸ τῆς Y θλίψεως τῆς 


Num. xi. 28. 


49 \| Mk. ch. x. 47. 
v.8 s ch. xxi. 20 reff. 


xx. 21. 2 Tim. ii. 25 $. (Prov. xiv. 15.) Wisd. xi. 24. xii. 10, 19. 


vi. 22. x. 1. 2Gor. vit. 10. Jude 21. 
xxVili. 4. Ezek. xxxi. 16. Exod. vi. 9. 


16. ἐμνησθημεν A. 
fin: ins ABDEX p rel Thl-sif. 
17. δεδωκεν N o [ Did, ]. 


John v. 

18. Phil. ii. 
6. Rev. xxi, 
vo 16 only. 

ELS nach. ii. 38 reff. 
o ch. ix. 42 reff. 
p = Rom. xiv. 

4, Exod? iii. 

11 constr., 

see note. 
q Luke ix. 


r Luke xiv. 3. xxiii. 56. ch. xxi. 14. 1 Thess.iv. 11 only. L.P. Neh. 


τ Matt.-vii. 20. xvii. 26. Gen, xxvi. 9, τι, ΞΞ ch, 

Sir. xliv. 16 only. v= Rom. 

w ch. viii. 1,4 only. Ezek. xxii. 15. x = Matt. 
y =ch. xx. 23. 2 Thess.i.4al. 2 Chron. xz. 9. 


rec om Tov (bef κυριου), with HLP bd g [Did,] Chr, Thl- 
aft eAeyev ins or: X83 ae ἢ [Thl-sif]. 
om o Geos D Aug, Rebapt,. 


om δε ABDRNahkop 


13. 36 vulg Syr [copt] eth arm Chr Did,!int,] Thl-fin Rebapt,: ims ΒΗ ΠΡ rel 


syr sah Thl-sif.—om tis p. 


aft Tov θεὸν ins Tov μὴ δουναι avTols πνευμα αγιον 


πιστευσασιν er avtw D, simly 8 syr-w-ast(em κυρ. ino. xp.) Aug). 


18. εδοξασαν BD?N ch p vulg syrr coptt eth Chr, Thl-fin: εδοξαν Ὁ]: txt AEHL[ PJ 


13[e sil] 36 rel [arm] Thl-sif. 


apa (γε omd, its farce not being seen: ef. note) 


A B(sic: see table) D-gr δὲ Κρ 40: forsitan D-lat Syr: utique E-lat: apaye E-gr 


HLP 13[e sil] 36 rel syr-mg-gr Chr. 


om την D. rec εδωκ. bef εἰς ¢, with 


EHLP 18 rel vss Chr, : [om es ¢. arm:] txt ABDX p 40 am demid fuld tol. 


16.] ch. i. 5. This prophecy of the 

Lord was spoken to his assembled followers, 
and promised to them that baptism which 
was the completion and aim of the inferior 
baptism by water administered to them by 
John. Now, God had Himself, by pouring 
out on the Gentiles the Holy Spirit, in- 
cluded them in the number of these ὑμεῖς, 
and pronounced them to be members of the 
church of believers in Christ, and partakers 
of the Holy Ghost, the end of baptism. 
This (in all its blessed consequences, = the 
gift of μετάνοια, eis ζωήν, see on ver. 18) 
was (ver. 17) the ton δωρεά bestowed on 
thein: and, this having been bestowed,— 
to refuse the symbolic and subordinate or- 
dinance,—or to regard them any longer as 
strangers from the covenant of promise, 
would have been, so far as in him lay, 
κωλῦσαι τὸν θεόν. 17.1 πιστεύσασιν 
belongs to both αὐτοῖς and ἡμῖν ; setting 
forth the strict analogy between the cases, 
and the community of the faith to both. 
[δέ (omitted in some mss., the tran- 
scribers perhaps not being aware of the 
construction) brings out the contrast after 
ei οὖν, as frequently after ἐπεί, e.g. Od. é. 
178, τὸν ἐπεὶ θρέψαν θεοί, ἔρνεϊ ἶσον... 
τοῦ δέ τις ἀθανάτων βλάψε φρένας ἔνδον 
ἐΐσας : Herod. iii. 68, εἰ μὴ αὐτὴ Σμέρδιν 
wees es γινώσκεις, σὺ δὲ παρὰ ᾿Ατόσσης 
πύθου. See more examples in Hartung, 
Partikellehre, i. p. 184.] τίς ἥμην 
duv.| A junction of two questions: (1) 


Who was I that I should...., as ref. 
Exod.,—and (2) Was I able to.... We 
have a similar instance in τίς τί ἄρῃ, Mark 
xv. 24, See Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 66.5. 3. 

18.] [ἄρα ye is more than ἄρα. γε has the 
effect of insulating the sentence, q.d. what- 
ever may be the consequences, or however 
mysterious the proceeding to us, this at 
least is plain, that God ὅδ. Compare 
Matt. vii. 20, ‘therefore, whatever they 
profess, from their fruits,’ &e.: and the 
other reff. : and see Hartung’s chap. on γε 
in his Partikellehre, vol.i. p. 344, ff.] 

eis ζωήν] to be taken with τὴν μετάνοιαν 
ἔδωκεν, not with τὴν μετάνοιαν alone, 
which would be more probably τὴν eis 
ζωήν, hath given unto the G. also re- 
pentance,—that they may attain unto 
life. The involved position of the words 
in the present text is quite in St. Luke’s 
manner. 

19—30.] THE GOSPEL PREACHED ALSO 
IN ANTIOCH TO GENTILES. BARNABAS, 
BEING THEREUPON SFNT BY THE APOS- 
TLES FROM. JERUSALEM, FETCHES SAUL 
FroM Tarsus TO ANTIOCH. THEY CON- 
TINUE THERE A YEAR, AND, ON OCCASION 
OF A FAMINE, CARRY UP ALMS TO THE 
BRETHREN AT JEKUSALEM. Our present 
section takes up the narrative at ch. viii. 
2,4. In vv. 19—21 it traversesrapidly the 
time occupied by ch, ix. 1—30, and that 
(undetined) of Saul’s stay at Tarsus, and 
brings it down to the fumine under Clau- 


126 


z= ch. iii. 16. 
viii. 2 al. 


athix. ret. Κύπρου καὶ ᾿Αντιοχείας, μηδενὶ 


Ὁ ch. iv. 29, 31. 
46. xvi. 6, 32. 
Phil. i. 14. 

¢ constr., acc, 
Luke i. 19. 
ch. v. 42. 

Vili. 35. xvii. 
18. Gal. i. 16. 


19. em στεφανου AE 13. 40 vulg D-lat Thl-sif: 
tov Aoy. bef Aad. D. 


txt BHLPR® p 36 [Bas,] Chr, Thl-fin. 
ιουδαιοι (sic) δὲ. 
20. rec εἰςελθ. (perhaps from ver 3), 
a: txt ABDE Lfe sil, Tischdf']} 


TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


Xo p 86 syr coptt [eth] Chr). 


XI. 


aha ΄ a “ ‘ 
yevowevns 5 ἐπὶ Στεφάνῳ 5 διῆλθον "ἕως Φοινίκης καὶ 


a \ ΄ 
υ λαλοῦντες τὸν ὃ λόγον 


απο του στεφανου D-gr[om του D?]: 
μονοις De vulg. 


with HP 13 rel vulg Syr [arm] Thl: συνελθ. 


rec om 2nd και (as 


not being understood, the whole sense having been confused by the reading ελληνιστας 


below), 


for erasure were added, but rubbed out by &*) p [vulg] 


with DEHLP 13(e sil] 36 rel fuld [syrr eth arm] coptt Chr: 


ins ABN(marks 
am demid.—kat συνεζητουν 40. 


rec ελληνιστας (apparently a correction, induced by the difficulty of preaching 
to Greeks as distinguished from Jews, having preceded the conversion of Cornelius : 


see note), with BDSEHLP p 18. 36 rel (vulg 
the distinction) Chr-txt,: evayyeArotas RX}: 


dius. 19. μὲν οὖν] A resumption of 
what had been dropt before, see ch. viii. 4, 
continued from ver. 2: not however with- 
out reference to some narrative about to 
follow which is brought out by a δέ, an- 
swering to the uév,—see ch. viii. 5, also ch. 
ix. 31, 32; xxviii. 5, 6,—and implying, 
whether by way of distinction or exception, 
a contrast to that μέν. ἐπὶ Στ. on 
account of Stephen; seereff. Wolf, Kuin., 
Olsh., &e. render it ‘ after St.:’ the Vulg. 
sub Stephano, reading ἐπὶ Στεφάνου. 
διῆλθον ] so ch. viii. 4, 40; ix. 32. 
Φοινίκης | properly, the strip of coast, about 
120 miles long, extending from the river 
Eleutherus (near Aradus), to a little south 
of Tyre, and belonging at this time to the 
province of Syria: see ch. xv. 35 xxi. 2. 
Its principal cities were Tripolis, Byblos, 
Sidon, Tyre, and Berytos. It is a fertile 
territory, beginning with the uplands at the 
foot of Lebanon, and sloping to the sea, 
and held a distinguished position for com- 
merce from the very earliest times. See 
Winer, Realw. Κύπρου Cyprus was 
intimately connected by commerce with 
Pheenice, and contained many Jews (od 
. μόνον αἱ ἥἤπειροι μεσταὶ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαϊκῶν 
ἀποικιῶν εἰσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ νήσων αἱ δοκιμώτα- 
ται, Εὔβοια, Κύπρος, Κρήτη. Philo, Leg. 
ad Caium, § 36, vol. ii. p. 587. See also 
Jos. Antt. xiii. 10. 4). See on its state 
at this time, note on ch. xiii 7. 
᾿Αντιοχείας A city in the history of 
Christianity only second in importance to 
Jerusalem. It was situated on the river 
Orontes, in a large, fruitful, and well- 
watered plain, 120 stadia from the sea 
and its port Seleucia. It was founded 
by Seleucus Nicator, who called it after 
his father Antiochus. It soon became a 
great and populous city (Αντ. ἧ μεγάλη, 
Philostr. Apoll. i. 16),and was the residence 


and many versions do not seem to observe 
txt AD'X3 ¢ [arm] Eus, Chr-comm, (c- 


of the Seleucid kings of Syria (1 Mace. 
ili. 37; vii.2; χὶ. 18, 44; 2 Mace. v. 21), 
and (as an ‘urbs libera,’ Pliny, v. 18) of 
the Roman proconsuls of Syria. Josephus 
(B. J. iii. 2. 4) calls it μεγέθους τε ἕνεκα 
kal τῆς ἄλλης εὐδαιμονίας τρίτον adnpl- 
τως ἐπὶ τῆς ὑπὸ Ῥωμαίοις οἰκουμένης 
ἔχουσα τόπον. Seleucus the founder had 
settled theremany Jews (Jos. Antt. xii.3.1. 
See also xiv.12.6; Β. Ψ. 11. 18.5; vil. 3.3 
—and contra Apion. ii. 4, αὐτῶν yap ἡμῶν 
of τὴν ᾿Αντιόχειαν κατοικοῦντες, ᾽Αντι- 
οχεῖς ὀνομάζονται" τὴν γὰρ πολιτείαν αὐτοῖς 
ἔδωκεν ὃ κτίστης Σέλευκος), who had their 
own Ethnarch. The intimate connexion 
of Antioch with the history of the church 
will be seen as we proceed. A reference to 
the principal passages will here be enough : 
see vv. 22, 26, 27; ch. xiii. 1; xv. 23, 
35 ff.; xviii. 22. It became afterwards one 
of the five great centres of the Christian 
church, with Jerusalem, Rome, Alexan- 
dria, and Constantinople. Of its present 
state (Antakia, a town not one-third of 
its ancient size) a view is given in C. and 
H., where also, edn. 2, vol. i. pp. 149 ff., is 
a minute and interesting description of the 
city and its history, ancient and modern. 
See also Mr. Lewin’s Life and Epistles of 
St. Paul, vol. i. p. 108 ff. (Principally from 
Winer, Realw.) 20. ἐξ αὐτῶν] not, of 
these, last mentioned Jews: but, of the δια- 
σπαρέντες. This both the sense and the 
form of the sentence (μὲν οὖν. . . . δέ) re- 
quire. Κυρηναῖοι] of whom Lucius 
mentioned ch. xiii. 1, as being in the 
church at Antioch, must have been one. 
Symeon called Niger, also mentioned 
there, may have been a Cyrenean prose- 
lyte. “Βλληνας} The retaining and 
advocacy of the reading Ἑλληνιστάς has 
mainly arisen from a mistaken view that 
the baptism of Cornelius must necessarily 


ABDE 
HLPxa 
bedafg 

hklo 


, ζ > ΄ ? ’ a » 
εἰ μὴ μόνον Ἰουδαίοις. 50 ἦσαν δέ τινες ἐξ αὐτῶν ἄνδρες pis 
΄ wr. “-“ , , > Bi 
Κύπριοι καὶ Κυρηναῖοι, οἵτινες ἐλθόντες εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν 
7 , Ν 
ἐλάλουν καὶ moos τοὺς “Ελληνας ° εὐαγγελιζόμενοι τὸν 





90--- 


Ἰησοῦν. 2 καὶ 


ὁ ἀριθμὸς ὁ 


κύριον 
7 

ὁ πολύς TE 

κύριον. 


᾿ Ὁ ’ ‘I \ h a > “Ὁ \ 

σίας τῆς ἐν ἱἹερουσαλὴμ crept αὐτῶν, καὶ 

Βαρνάβαν ἃ διελθεῖν * ἕως ᾿Αντιοχείας: 35 ὃς | παραγενό- 
2 \ \ A ἴω 

μενος καὶ ἰδὼν τὴν ™ydpw τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ ἐχάρη, καὶ 


14, Mark ii. 1. John i ix. 32. } Cor. το 1: 
ix. 5. OA. περὶ ἡμῶν, Xen. Anab. vi. 6. 13. 
jch. viii. 1. Rom. xvi. 1 al. 
i. 14, &c. 1Cor.i.4. 2 Cor. ix. 8. Ὁ]. 1. 


comm, Thl-fin-ms. 
21. ἣν Se D-gr. 


DEHLP 13 rel ‘Chr, : : Ins ABN p 36. 


22. aft 2nd rns ins ovons BEN ὁ k p 13 Chr,. 
txt ABDN p 36. (13 def.) 
om διελθεῖν (as unnecessary ; to simpl ify the constr : 


2), with EHLP rel [valg] Chr: 
E[-gr] k Chr. 


in Luke’s manner) ABN p vulg Syr copt eth arm: 


eAGew sah. ins tns bef avr. D}. 
23. ins καὶ bef παραγ. D-gr. 


TIPAZEIZ ATIOSTOAON. 


5 d ‘ d / ’ 
ἣν Δ χεὶρ “ κυρίου μετ 
πιστεύσας 
és 5 ΄ ; , ἐς : hee 

22 8 ἠκούσθη δὲ ὁ ἃ λόγος icis τὰ ὦτα τῆς I ἐκκλη- 


2 Chron. xxvi. 15. 


k ch. ‘vii. ne reff, 


327 


αὐτῶν. d Luke i. 66. 


ch . xiii. 11 
only. (ch. iv. 
28, 30. vii. 
50. Heb. i. 
10. x. 31. 
1 Pet. v. 6.} 
Num. xi. 23. 
e here only. 
Job xxxviil. 


ἐπέστρεψεν ἐπὶ τὸν 


- 9 / 
kK ἐξαπέστειλαν 


21. 

f ch. xxvi. 20 
reff. 

g pass., Matt. 
XXViil. 

h Luke v. 15. vii. 17 only. 2Chron. 


i Matt. x. 27. Luke i. 44, ix. 44. Isa. v. 9. 
l absol., ch. xvii. 10 reff. m = John 


aft ino. ins χριστον D 96 eth-pl. 
rec om 6 (as unnecessary, not perceiving its force), with 


rec τεροσολυμοις (corrn: cf ver 
ins ta bef περι avtwy 
διελθ. ews 15 


ins DEHLP 18. 36 rel syr Chr, ; 


rec (aft τὴν xapiv) om τὴν (as unnecessary : no 


reason can be given for its insertion in so unusual @ connexion. It has peculiar force, 


have preceded the conversion of all other 
Gentiles. But that reading gives, in this 
place, no assignable sense whatever : for (1) 
the Hellenists were long ago a recognized 
part of the Christian church »—(2) ameng 
these διασπαρέντες themselves in all pro- 
bability there were many Hellenists,—and 
(3) the term Ἰουδαῖοι includes the Hel- 
lenists,—the distinctive appellation of pure 
Jews being not Ἰουδαῖοι, but Ἑβραῖοι, 
ch. vi. 1. Nothing to my mind can be 
plainer, from what follows respecting Bar- 
nabas, than that these “EAAnves were GEN- 
TILES, uncircumcised ; and that their con- 
version took place before any tidings had 
reached Jerusalem of the divine sanction 
given in the case of Cornelius. See below : 
and Excursus ii. at the end of Prolegg. 
to Acts. 21. ἦν χεὶρ Kup. p. a. | 
By visible manifestations not to be 
doubted, the Lord shewed it to be His 
pleasure that they should go on with such 
preaching; αὐτῶν being, the preachers 
to the Gentiles, whose work the nar- 
rative now follows. 22.] AK. εἰς 
τὰ ὦτα, a Hebraism, see reff. Bap- 
vaBav] himself a Cyprian, ch. iv. 36. 

His mission does not seem exactly to 
have been correspondent to that of Peter 
and John to Samaria (nor can he in any 
distinctive sense, be said to have been an 
Apostle, as they were: see ch. xiv. 4, and 
note): but more probably, from what fol- 
lows, the intention was to ascertain the 
fact, and to deter these persons from the 
admission of the uncircumcised into the 
church : or, at all events, to use his discre- 
tion in a matter on which they were as yet 
doubtful. The choice of such a man, one 
by birth with the agents, and of a liberal 
spirit, shews sufficiently that they wished 


to deal, not harshly, but gently and cau- 
tiously,—whatever their reason was. 

23, 24.] It is on these verses principally 
that I depend as determining the character 
of the whole narrative. It certainly is im- 
plied in them that the effect produced on 
Barnabas was something different from 
what might have been expected: that to 
sympathize with the work was not the 
intent of his mission, but a result brought 
about in the heart of a good man, full of 
the Holy Ghost and of faith, by witnessing 
the effects of Divine grace (τ. χάρ. τὴν τοῦ 
θεοῦ, not merely, ‘the grace of God, 
but the grace which (evidently) was that 
of God [which he recognized as that of 
God]: the expression is deliberately used). 
And this is further confirmed to my mind 
by finding that he immediately went and 
sought Saul. He had been Saul’s friend 
at Jerusalem: he had doubtless heard of 
the commission which had been given to 
him to preach to the Gentiles: but the 
church was waiting the will of God, to 
know how this was to be accomplished. 
Here was an evident door open for the 
ministry of Saul, and, in consequence, as 
soon as Barnabas perceives it, he goes to 
fetch him to begin his work in Antioch. 
And it was here, more properly, and 
not in Cesarea, that the real commence- 
ment of the Gentile church took place, 
—although simultaneously, for the con- 
vineing of the Jewish believers at Jerusa- 
lem, fied of Peter, and for the more solemn 
and authorized standing of the Gentile 
church, the important events at Ceesarea 
and Joppa were brought about. Wordsw.’s 
argumnent, that, as even Ἕλληνας may 
include Jews, we need not suppose this 
to have been a preaching to Gentiles, 


9 


ἕν 


128 


nch. χ. 38. 
xiv. 22 al. fr. 

o-= 2 Tim. iii. 
10. (ch. xxvii. 
13 reff.) 

p = Wisd. iii. 
9. see ch. xiii. 
43. (ch. xviii. 
18 reff.) 

q ch. vii. 55 reff. 

r ch, il. 41 reff. 

s here bis. 
Mark x. 46. 
Luke vii. 12. 
ch. xix. 26. 

(1 Mace. xiii. 


΄ / 
ἁγίου καὶ πίστεως. 


« 


ch. xx. 37. 
xxii. 6. Ὁ John i. 44. Matt. xi. 7. ch. xiv. 20. 
iii. 4. x. 6. 2 Mace. xiii. 21 only. 
y — Rom. vii. 3 only (ch. x. 22 
mss. x. ll. 6. a ch, xxvi. 28. 


see note), with DEHLP 13 rel Chr, : ins ABN. 


[ permanere in domino | coptt. 
24. avnp bef nv &. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AMOSTOAON: 


" παρεκάλει πάντας τῇ ° 


w constr., here only. see ch. xxii. 6, 17. 
reff.) $. χρηματίσας Φιλέλλην, Jos. Antt. xiii. 11. 3 al. 
1 Pet. iv. 16 only. 


XI. 


΄ - / , 
προθέσει τῆς καρδίας Ῥ προςμένειν 


τῷ κυρίῳ, 5: ὅτι ἣν ἀνὴρ ἀγαθὸς καὶ I πλήρης πνεύματος 


καὶ "προςετέθη "ὄχλος * ἱκανὸς 


an / 95 u ᾽ -“ \ u , \ Vv ’ Qn 
τῷ κυρίῳ. R υ ἐξῆλθεν δὲ εἰς Ταρσὸν " ἀναζητῆσαι 

ἴω a e Ν 7 3 , 
Lavrov, καὶ εὑρὼν ἤγαγεν εἰς ᾿Αντιόχειαν. 
δὲ Ww > “ \ > \ ὅλ, wx θῃ 5 an ’ 

é “ αὐτοῖς καὶ ἐνιαυτὸν ὅλον “* συναχθῆναι ἐν TH ἐκ- 

, ae © U , / 

κλησίᾳ καὶ διδάξαι "ὄχλον “ ἱκανόν, ἡ χρηματίσαι τε 
11.) Ζ , ? > f \ \ awv / 
=asabove(s). πρώτως ἐν ᾿Αντιοχείᾳ τοὺς μαθητὰς ἃ Χριστιανούς. 


26 W ἐγένετο 


xvi. 10. 2 Cor. ii. 13. v Luke ii. 44, 45 only. Job 
x ch. iv. 5 reff, 


z here only +. Polyb. 


ins ev bef tw κυρ. B 40 vulg 


om Tw κυριω B(ins B?-marg (see table)). 


25. for ver, ακουσας δε οτι σαυλος εστιν εἰς θαρσονίταρσ. D8) εξηλθεν αναζητων αὐτον" 
καὶ ws(om ws D-corr) συντυχων παρεκαλεσεν (add avtov D®) ελθειν εἰς αντιοχειαν D 


syr-m¢. 


αναζητ., αναστησαι B}. 


ob): om ΑΒΕΝ ach p 86 Chr Chron,. 


rec aft ταρσ. ins ὁ βαρναβας, with EHL{[P] p 13 rel syr Chr,: 
vulg-ed(and am?):] om AB(D)X am! fuld [demid] Syr (syr-mg) coptt arm. 
rec aft evp. ins avroy, with HLP rel vss(most, but syr-w- 


[pref 


for 


rec aft nya. ins avtov (supplementary), 


with EHLP rel [syrr eth] coptt Chr Thl-fin: om ABNadfhk op 36 [vulg] arm 


Chron Thl-sif. 


26. for ver, ores παραγενομενοι eviavToy oAov συνεχυθησαν (συναναχυθηναι TH 
exkAno.a και διδαξαι D5, which conforms the follg to txt) oxAov tkavov* καὶ τότε TpwTOV 


expnuatioev ev αντ. οἱ wad. xp. D: syr-mg has the former part. 
of constr), with HLP Did, Chr,: txt ABEN ¢ p 13. 36. 40. 


rec avtovus (corrn 
rec om Ist καὶ (as 


unnecessary), with EHLP rel 36 vss Chr: ins ABX [13] syr Ath{-int, Did, ]. 


om ολον E sah Chr,. 
with ADJEHLP rel [Did, Cyr-jer, Chr, ]: 
χρηστιανους X'(but corrd) p. 


is best answered by the context, in 
which the μηδενὶ εἰ μὴ μόνον ᾿Ιουδαίοις 
is clearly contrasted with ἦσαν δὲ. ..- 
καὶ πρὸς τοὺς Ἕλληνας, which contrast 
cannot be maintained without excluding 
Jews from this latter term. 

23. παρεκάλει) in accordance with his 
name, which (ch.iv.36) was interpreted vids 
παρακλήσεως. 25.] This therefore 
took place after ch. ix. 30: how long after, 
we have no hint in the narrative, and the 
question will be determined by various 
persons according to the requirements of 
their chronological system. Wieseler and 
Schrader make it not more than from half 
a year to a year: Dr. Burton, who places 
the conversion of Saul in A.D. 31,—nine 
years. Speaking ἃ priori, it seems very 
improbable that any considerable portion of 
time should have been spent by him before 
the great work of his ministry began. Even 
supposing him during this retirement to 
have preached in Syria and Cilicia,—judg- 
ing by the analogy of his subsequent 
journeys, a few months at the most would 
have sufficed for this. For my own view, 
see Prolegg. to Acts, § vi. 26.] The 
unusual word πρώτως seems to imply 
priority not only in time, but also in usage : 


om Istey HLPabedeg 


h 1 Thi-sif. 
txt BD5X 36. 


TeC πρωτον, 
ers avr. A. 


at Antioch first and principally. So we 
have in Aristot. Eth. Nic. viii. 5, πρώτως 
καὶ κυρίως. Χριστιανούς | This name 
is never used by Christians of themselves 
in the N. Τὶ (but of μαθηταί, of πιστοί, 
or οἱ πιστεύοντες, οἱ ἀδελφοί, of ἅγιοι, of 
τῆς ὁδοῦ), only (see reff.) as spoken by, or 
coming from, those without the church. 
And of those, it cannot have arisen with 
the Jews, who would never have given a 
name derived from the Messiah to a hated 
and despised sect. By the Jews they were 
called Ναζωραῖοι, ch. xxiv. 5, and Gali- 
leans: and Julian, who wished to deprive 
them of a name in which they gloried (see 
below), and to favour the Jews, ordered 
that they should not be called Christiani ; 
but Galilei, Greg. Naz. Orat. iv. (in Jul. 
i.) 86, vol. i. p. 114. That it has a Latin 
form is no decided proof of a Latin ori-. 
gin: Latin forms had become naturalized 
among the Greeks, and in this case there 
would be no Greek adjective so ready to 
hand as the Latin possessive, sanctioned 
as it was by such forms as Pompeiani, 
Cesariani, Herodiani (Christus being re- 
garded as a proper name, see Tacit. Ann. 
xv. 44,‘...quos vulgus... Christianos 
appellabat. Auctor ejus nominis Christus, 


24—29. 


IIPARETS ATIOSTOAON. 


129 


ford ΓΑ \ “ὦ a 
27 "Kv ταύταις δὲ ταῖς ἡμέραις " κατῆλθον ἀπὸ Ἵερο- b ch, vil. 5 


σολύμων © προφῆται eis ᾿Αντιόχειαν. 
RC. ΜΡ ΑΝ 6 2 ΄ f Ola g fg 

αὐτῶν ovoyate”AyaBos " ἐσήμανεν ἴ διὰ ὅ τοῦ * πνεύματος 

"λιμὸν μεγάλην ἱ μέλλειν | ἔσεσθαι * ἐφ᾽ 

μένην, ἥτις [καὶ] ἐγένετο ™ ἐπὶ Κλαυδίου. 


1. 16. vi.9 al. Ezra χ. 5. 
ii. 22. constr., here only. 
g abs., ch. x. 19 reff, 


xv. 33 || L. ch. v. 11. vii. 11 only. 
ii. 26. Luke iii. 2. iv. 27. Isa. liv. 9. 


27. avras Be. 


e John xii. 33. xviii. 32. 

fch.i. 2. xxi.4. Rom. v. 5. 

h fem., Luke xv. 14. 
Acts only.) Eccl. i. 9 Symm. Xen. Anab. iii. 1.2. See Winer, edn. 6, 3 44. 7. 
1= Luke ii. 1. xxi. 26. 


6 = ch. xiii. 1, 


28 ἃ ἀναστὰς δὲ εἷς ἐξ 


Eph. ii. 20. 
ill. 5, iv. 11 
¢ a Ξ only. L.P. 
29 TOV δὲ μαθ- d= nies xiv, 
57, 60. ch. 
Rev. i. leat Esth. 
Eph. iii. 16. 2 Thess. ii. 2 al. L.P.H. 
ich. xxiv. 15. xxvii. τὴ (fut., 
Mark 
m= = ME 


X ὅλην τὴν | οἰκου- 


xxi. 19. ch. xxv. 27. 
1 Mace. ix. 24 A. 


Isa. xxiv. 4 al, fr. 


28. for avaor. de eis, ἣν δε TOAAN αγγαλλιασι5᾽ συνεστραμμενων δε nuwy edn εἰς Ὁ 


Aug. 


note), with DIEHLP rel 36 Chr, Chron, : 
rec οστις (see above), with HLP rel 36 Chr : 
om kat ABDX p 18. 40 vss Epiph, Chron, : 

rec aft xAavd.ov ins καισαρος, with EHLP rel 36 syrr Epiph, Chr: 


(13 def.) 
[ Did, ] Chron,. 
Chr,. 


eonuatvev B vulg D-lat Chron, : 
om 6: txt ABD3N p 


rec μεγαν (see 
40 (Epiph, [ Did,]}). 
txt ABDEN p 18. 40 Epiph, 
ins EHLP rel 36 Syr 


σημενων D-gr. 


om ABDN p 18. 40 vulg coptt sth arm Chron [ Did, |. 


Tiberio imperitante, per procuratorem Pon- 
tium Pilatum supplicio affectus erat’). 
The name soon became matter of glorying 
among its bearers: ref.1 Pet., Kus. H. E. v. 
1, in the epistle of the churches of Lyons 
and Vienne, τοῦ ἡγεμόνος. . . - μόνον 
τοῦτο πυθομένου εἰ καὶ αὐτὸς εἴη Χριστια- 
νός, τοῦ δὲ peacoat ay λαμπροτάτῃ φωνῇ 
ὁμολογήσαντος, . . and again, πρὸς πάντα 
τὰ ἐπηρωτημένα ἀπεκρίνατο (Sanctus) τῇ 
᾿ Ῥωμαικῇ φωνῇ, Χριστιανός εἶμι. And in 
the Clementine Liturgy (Humphr Υ. Comm. 
on Acts, p- 84), --εὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι, ὅτι τὸ 
ὄνομα τοῦ χριστοῦ σου ἐπικέκληται ἐφ᾽ 
ἡμᾶς, καὶ σοὶ προσῳκειώμεθα. Before 
this, while the believers had been included 
among Jews, no distinctive name for them 
was needed: but now that a body of men, 
compounded of Jews and Gentiles, arose, 
distinct in belief and habits from both, 
some new appellation was required. 

It may be observed, that the inhabitants 
of Antioch were famous for their propen- 
sity to jeer and call names; see instances 
in C. and H. i. p. 148, note 2. See seve- 
ral interesting particulars respecting the 
name collected in Wordsw.’s note: who 
however maintains that it was given by 
the Church herself. 
It was during this year, ver. 26. 
προφῆται] Inspired teachers in the early 
Christian church, referred to in the Acts, 
and in the Epistles of Paul (see reff. and 
ch. xix. 6; xxi. 9; Rom. xii. 6; 1 Cor. 
xli. 10; xiii. 2,8; xiv. 6; 1 Thess. v. 20). 
They might be of either sex (chy, xxi 
9). The foretelling of future events was 
not the usual form which their inspiration 
took, but that of an exalted and super- 
human teaching, ranked by St. Paul above 
‘speaking with tongues,’ in being the 


utterance of their own conscious intelli- . 


gence informed by the Holy Spirit. This 
Vou. 11. 


27. ἐν τ. τ. Hp. |: 


inspiration was however, occasionally, as 
here, and ch. xxi. 10, made the vehicle of 
prophecy, properly so called. 28. 
”AyaBos | The same who prophesied Paul’s 
imprisonment in Jerusalem, ch. xxi. 10, 
ff. From the form of his announcement 
there, we may infer the manner in which 
he ἐσήμανεν διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος here. It 
was τάδε λέγει TO Tv. TO ἅγιον. 
The fem. usage of λιμός prevailed among 
the Dorians (ef. Aristoph. Acharn. 708) 
and later Greeks: see Meyer, edn. 2, and 
Lobeck on Phryn. p. 188. We find it 
sometimes also in Ionic poets, e. g. in 
Hom. Hymn to Demeter, 311, λιμοῦ ὑπ᾽ 
ἀργαλέης : see other examples in Palm 
and Rost, sub voce. ὅλην τ. οἷ- 
κουμένην) not, ‘all Judea,’ though in 
fact it was so: the expression is a hyper- 
bolical one in ordinary use, and not to be 
pressed as strictly implying that to which 
its literal meaning would extend. That it 
occurs in a prophecy (Meyer) is no objec- 
tion to this: the scope and not the wording 
of the prophecy i is given. But see below. 
ἐπὶ Κλαυδίου) In the fourth year 
of Claudius, A.D. 44, there was a famine 
in Judea and the neighbouring countries 
(Jos. Antt. xx. 2.5). And three others are 
mentioned during his reign : one in Greece 
(Eus. Chron. i. 79), and two in Rome (Dio 
Cassius, lx. 11. Tacitus, Ann. xii. 43), so 
that scarcity ἐπὶ Κλαυδίου did extend 
through the greater part of the ‘ orbis ter. 
rarum, if it be thought necessary to press 
the words of the prophecy. The queen 
Helena of Adiabene and her son Izates 
helped the Jews with subsidies on the occa- 
sion (Jos. ibid., see also xx. 5. 2, where he 
calls it τὸν μέγαν λιμόν), both of corn and 
money. I do not believe that the words 
ἐπὶ KA. imply that the events just related 
were not also in the reign of Claudius: 


K 


130 


n — ch. ii. 4. 
Mark iv. 33. 
Num. xxvi. 54. 

Ὁ here only. 
Ley. xxv. 


ητῶν " καθὼς 


26, 28, 49. 


TIPAZEIS AIOSTOAQN. 


XI. 


> ΒΡ. ? ef e lal 
οεὐπορεῖτο τις, Ῥῶρισαν ἕκαστος αὐτῶν ABDE 
Ἵ / / Lal la n H 
eis 4 διακονίαν " πέμψαι τοῖς " κατοικοῦσιν " ἐν τῇ Ιουδαίᾳ 4. 
10 “ 9᾽0 ἃ Ν 5" / > , \ % 
ἀδελφοῖς, ὁ καὶ εποίησαν ἀποστείλαντες πρὸς TOUS 


Wisd. x. 10 ΄ \ \ , 
aa πρεσβυτέρους " διὰ χειρὸς BapvaBa καὶ Lavrov. 
ΡΣ ον > SL Nr ἣν aN \ 
. 25. Ew v v ἘΞ ΜΈΝ ς , 
p dare as XII. 1’ Kar’ " ἐκεῖνον δὲ τὸν ¥ καιρὸν * ἐπέβαλεν ‘Hpw- 
d str. ς \ \ al a s “ Ν 
hereouly.” ONS ὃ βασιλεὺς τὰς χεῖρας * κακῶσαί τινας τῶν Υ ἀπὸ 
= ch. vi. ἢ 
- reff. δ r = Phil. iv. 16. s ch. i. 20 al. t = here for first time. ch. xiv. 23. xv. 2, 
ἄς. 1 Τίπι. νυν. 17, 19. James y. 14 ἃ]. Acts, past. and cath. epp. only. u ch. ii. 23. vii. 25. xiv. 3. xix. 
11. 2 Chron. xxxiv. vch. xix. 23only. Num. xxii.4. see Rom. ix. 9. w Matt. xxvi. 


14. 
50. Luke xx. 19. ch. iv. 3. v. 18 al. 
xy. 5 (xxvii. 44). 


Gen. xxii. 12. constr., here only. 


x ch, vil. 6 reff. yj =ich. 


29. (ευπορειτο, so AB(D)EHP? (but altered eadem manu) 13abegk1([Kus-ms, ] 


Thi-sif.) οἱ δὲ μαθ. καθως evropovyTo D. 
20. for ο, οἱ L. 


Cuap. XII. 1. ο Bac. bef np. δὲ οἱ p [syr Eus-5-mss, Chr, (txt,) ]. 


np. ο B. Ὁ. 


but they are inserted to particularize the 
famine as being that well-known one, and 
only imply that the author was not writing 
under Claudius. 29.| There is no 
need to suppose that the prophecy of 
Agabus preceded by any long time the 
outbreak of the famine: nor would it be 
any derogation from its prophetic cha- 
racter to suppose it even coincident with 
its first beginnings; it was the greatness 
and eatent of the famine which was par- 
ticularly revealed, and which determined 
the Christians of Antioch to send the relief. 
Baumgarten (vol. ii. p. 5), in tracing the 
gradual transition of the apostolic narra- 
tive from Jewish to Gentile Christianity, 
calls this contribution, sent from Antioch 
to Jerusalem, the first stretching out of 
the hand by the Gentile world across 
the ancient gulf which separated it from 
Israel. τῶν δὲ wad. κ.τ.λ. is a mix- 
ture of two constructions, of δὲ μαθηταὶ 
καθὼς εὐπορεῖτό τις αὐτῶν. The 
church at Jerusalem was poor, probably in 
connexion with the community of goods, 
which would soon have this effect; see 
ch. ii. 44, note. 30. πρεσβυτέρους] 
These were the overseers or presidents 
of the congregation,—an office borrowed 
from the synagogues, and established by 
the Apostles in the churches generally, 
see ch. xiv. 23. They are in the Ν. T. 
identical with ἐπίσκοποι, see ch. xx. 17, 
28; Titus i. 5,7; 1 Pet. τὸ 1, 2. So 
Theodoret on Phil. bh bs ἀν δον ουέ τοὺς 
πρεσβυτέρους καλεῖ: ἀμφότερα γὰρ εἶχον 
κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν τὰ ὀνόματα. The 
title ἐπίσκοπος, as applied to one person 
superior to the πρεσβύτεροι, and answering 
to our ‘bishop,’ appears to have been un- 
known in the apostolic times. | Respect- 
ing the chronology of this journey to 
Jerusalem, see note on ch. xii, 25, and the 
table in the Prolegomena. 


wproev A 95}. 


aft καὶ ins o X(marked for erasure by &-corr'). 


τας x. bef 


Cuap. XII. 1—25.1 ῬΕΒΒΈΕΟΤΤΙΟΝ oF 
THE CHURCH aT JERUSALEM BY Herop 
AGRIPPA. MARTYRDOM OF JAMES THE 
BROTHER OF JOHN. IMPRISONMENT AND 
MIRACULOUS DELIVERANCE OF PETER. | 
DeatH OF HEROD aT CH#SaREA. RETURN 
OF BARNABAS AND SAUL FROM JERU- 
SALEM TO ANTIOCH. 1. Kat’ ἐκ. τ. 
καιρ.] Before the arrival of Barnabas and 
Saul in Jerusalem. The famine in Judzxa 
broke out under Cuspius Fadus, and con- 
tinued under Tiberius Alexander, procu- 
rators of Judza. Now Cuspius Fadus was 
sent to Judea by Claudius on the death of 
Agrippa (i.e. after Aug. 6, A.D. 44). The 
visit of Barnabas and Saul must have taken 
place about the time of, or shortly after, 
Agyippa’s death. Ἡρώδης 6 ὃ βασιλεύς} 
Herop Acrippa I. , grandson of Herod the 
Great,—son of Aristobulus and Berenice 
(Jos. Antt. xvii. 1.2; B.J.i.28.1). Hav- 
ing gone to Rome, to accuse Herod the 
Tetrarch (Antipas), and fallen under the 
displeasure of Tiberius for paying open 
court to Caius Cesar (Caligula), he was im- 
prisoned and cruelly treated; but, on the 
accession of Caligula, released, and at once 
presented with the tetrarchy of Philip (Tra- 
chonitis),—who had lately died,—and the 
title of king. On this, Antipas, by persua- 
sion of his wife Herodias, went to Rome, 
to try to obtain the royal title also, but 
was followed by his enemy Agrippa, who 
managed to gef Antipas banished to Spain, 
and to obtain his tetrarchy (Galilee and 
Perea) for himself. (Jos. Aas xix. 8. 2.) 
Finally, Claudius, in return for services 
rendered to him by Agrippa, at the time of. 
Caligula’s death, presented him with Sa- 
maria and Judea (about 41 A.D., Jos. Antt. 
xix. 5. 1), so that he now ruled (Jos. ibid.) 
all the kingdom of Herod the Great. His 


.character, as given by Josephus, Antt. xix. 


7. 3, is important as illustrating ‘the pre- 





XII. 1---4. 


τῆς ὁ ἐκκλησίας. 52. 5 ἀνεῖλεν δὲ 
᾿Ιωάννου ὃ μαχαίρῃ. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


\ nr 
3 (dav δὲ OTL ὁ ἀρεστόν “ ἐστιν τοῖς 


15] 


Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν zabsol., Matt, 


ΧΥΙΙΙ, 17 al. 
Judg. xxi. 5. 
a= ch. v. 33 


᾿ς a ff. 
Ιουδαίοις, “ προςέθετο ἴ συλλαβεῖν καὶ Tlétpor ἦσαν δὲ υ Matt. xxvi. 


g € f La) gh > / 

[ai] 8 ἡμέραι τῶν & ἀζύμων. 
al. Exod. xv. 9. ce ch. vi. 2 reff. 
12 only. Gen. iv. 2. viii. 12. xviii. 29. 
xx. 6 (Matt. xxvi. 17) only +. 


k= ch. iv. 3. xiii: 29. 


aft εκκλ. add ev τὴ tovdaia D syr-w-ast. 


h as above (5. 
i John vii. 30 417. ch, iii. 7. 2 Cor. xi. 32. Rev. xix. 20 only. 
Jer. xxxix. (xxxii.) 14, see ch. v. 18, 29. 


. 47, &c. ch. 
4, ἃ Sai 7 ἘΣ ἘΣ Xvi. 27. 
ov καὶ ' πιάσας * ἔθετο Kets x7. 
d pres., ch. xvi. 38 reff. e = Luke xix. 11. xx, 11, 
f ch. i. 16 reff. g Mark xiv. 12. Luke xxii. 7. ch. 


Mark xiv. 1'|L. 1 Cor. ν. 7, 8 only. Ley. xxiii. 6. 


Cant. ii. 15. Sir. xxiii. 21 BRF(not A) only. 


Gen. xli. 10. 


2. om δε 96 sah: καὶ ἀνειλεν D Syr eth: aver. δὲ καὶ g 76.1772 [Thl-sif,]. 


(uaxatpn, so AB'D4(?) & p.) 


3. rec και 15. (appy corrn to avoid recurrence of δὲ: or perhaps as agreeing better 
with the continuation of the same line of conduct), with DHLP rel [syrr eth] Chr-txt,: 


txt ABEN p 13. 36 vulg coptt Chr-comm,. 


επιχειρησεις αὐτου επι τους πιστους D syr-mg. 


om εστιν NI. aft covdaois ins ἢ 
ins του bef συλλ. E, 


rec om αἱ, with BHLPX b! cl! o [arm]: ins ADE p rel 36 Chr,[-txt] 


sent chapter: ἐπεφύκει δὲ 6 βασιλεὺς οὗτος 
εὐεργετικὸς εἶναι ἐν δωρεαῖς, καὶ μεγαλο- 
φρονῆσαι ἔθνη φιλότιμος, καὶ πολλοῖς 
ἀθρόως δαπανήμασιν ἀνιστὰς αὑτὸν εἰς ἐπι- 
φάνειαν, ἡδόμενος τῷ χαρίζεσθαι, καὶ τῷ 
βιοῦν ἐν εὐφημίᾳ xaipwy.... (see ver. 8) 
.... πραὺς δὲ ὃ τρόπος ᾿Αγρίππᾳ, καὶ πρὸς 
πάντας τὸ εὐεργετικὸν ὅμοιον. ἡδεῖα γοῦν 
αὐτῷ δίαιτα καὶ συνεχὴς ἐν τοῖς Ἱεροσολύ- 
μοις ἦν, καὶ τὰ πάτρια καθαρῶς ἐτήρει. διὰ 
πάσης γοῦν αὑτὸν ἦγεν ἁγνείας, οὐδὲ ἡμέρα 
τὶς παρώδευεν αὐτῷ τῆς νομίμης χηρεύουσα 
θυσίας. This character will abundantly 
account for his persecuting the Christians, 
who were so odious to the Jews, and for 
his vain-glorious acceptance of the impious 
homage of the people, ver. 23. ἐπέβ. 
τ. χεῖρ.] A pregnant construction. In 
full, it would be ἐπέβ. τὰς x. ἐπί τινας 
τῶν amd τ. ἐκκ., τοῦ κακῶσαι αὐτούς. Some 
expositors (Heinr., Kuin.), not seeing this, 
have endeavoured to give to ἐπέβ. τ. x. 
the unexampled meaning, not justified by 
Deut. xii. 7, xv. 10, of ‘took in hand,’ 
‘attempted. The K. V. ‘ stretched forth 
his hands’ (or, marg. ‘began’) is equally 
inadmissible. It should be, H. the K. laid 
his hands on certain of the church, to vex 
them. τῶν ἀπό) See reff., and com- 
pare ch. vi. 9. 2. Ἰάκωβον] Of him 
we know nothing besides what is related in 
the Gospels. He was the son of Zebedee, 
called (Matt. iv. 21) together with John 
his brother: was one of the favoured Three 
admitted to the death-chamber of Jairus’s 
daughter (Mark v. 37), to the mount of 
transfiguration (Matt. xvii. 1), and to the 
agony in the garden (Matt. xxvi. 37). He, 
together with John his brother (named by 
our Lord ‘ Boanerges,’ ‘sons of thunder’), 
wished to call down fire on the inhospitable 
Samaritans (Lukeix.54),—and prayed that 
his brother and himself might sit, one on 
the right hand and the other on the left, 
in the Lord’s kingdom (Matt. xx. 20—24). 


It was then that He foretold to them their 
drinking of the cup of suffering and being 
baptized with the baptism which He was 
baptized with: a prophecy which James 
was the first to fulfil. This is the only 
Apostle of whose death we have any cer- 
tain record. With regard to all the rest, 
tradition varies, more or less, as to the 
place, or the manner, or the time of their 
deaths. Eusebius, Η. E. ii. 9, relates, 
from the Hypotyposes of Clemens, who had 
received it ἐκ παραδόσεως τῶν πρὸ αὐτοῦ, 
that the accuser of James, struck by his 
confession, became a Christian, and was led 
away with him to martyrdom, συναπήχθη- 
σαν οὖν ἄμφω, φησί, καὶ κατὰ τὴν ὅδὸν 
ἠξίωσεν ἀφεθῆναι αὐτῷ ὑπὸ τοῦ ᾿Ιακώβου. 
6 δὲ ὀλίγον σκεψάμενος, εἰρήνη σοι, εἶπε, 
καὶ κατεφίλησεν αὐτόν. καὶ οὕτως ἀμφότε- 
ροι ὁμοῦ ἐκαρατομήθησαν. μαχαίρῃ] 
Probably according to the Roman method 
of beheading, which became common 
among the later Jews. It was a punish- 
ment accounted extremely disgraceful by 
the Jews: see Lightf. in lec. 3. | 
See the character of Agrippa above. 

προς. ovAX.| A Hebraism: see reff. 

at yp. τ. af.] Wieseler (Chronol. der 
Apost. Zeit. pp. 215—220) regards the 
whole of the following narrative as having 
happened on one and the same day and 
night, viz. that of the 14th of Nisan (April 
1), A.D. 44. He takes τὸ πάσχα in the 
strict meaning, ‘ the passover,’ i.e. the eat- 
ing of the passover on the evening of the 
14th of Nisan, and thinks that Herod was 
intending to bring Peter forth on the next 
morning. He finds support for this in the 
four quaternions of soldiers, the guard for 
one night (see below), and maintains that 
the expression τὸ πάσχα cannot apply to 
the whole festal period, which would have 
been τὴν ἑορτήν, or ταύτας Tas ἡμέρας. But 
Bleek (Beitriige zur Ev.-kritik, p. 144) calls 
this view most arbitrary and even un- 


K 2 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XII. 


1=Matt.v.25. φυλακήν, ᾿παραδοὺς τέσσαρσιν ™ χσετραδίοις στρατιωτῶν ABDE 


xviul. 34. n , ee , ‘ An Ὁ 7 > HLPxRa 
Luke xii. 58, φυλάσσειν αὐτόν, βουλόμενος μετὰ τὸ “πάσχα Pav- veatg 
5 hh. XVI. 4, 

pee ete. ely αὐτὸν τῷ λαῷ. ὃ ὁ μὲν οὖν 11έ a ἐτηρεῖτο ἐν 8 Ὁ 
᾿νε ΝΌΤΟΝ σεν, μ εἐτρος 4 ETNP V 13 


a -“ A Ἂς \ 9S 5» an ’ὔ c x 

Biocs pudd- TH φυλακὴ" "'προςευχὴ δὲ "ἦν ' ἐκτενῶς ἃ γινομένη ὑπὸ 

. . A / Ν A \ ς \ > a Ὁ \ 

cov, Philoin τῆς ἐκκλησίας πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ** ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ. ὁ ὅτε δὲ 
vol. ii. p. 533. lal Ν e € , a 

Bes Linke ἀν ἤμελλεν “ προαγαγεῖν αὐτὸν ὁ “Hpwdns, τῇ νυκτὶ ἐκείνῃ 

29. ch. χχὶϊ!. ‘ t 


35: xxvii 16. 8 Py» ὁ Πέτρος * κοιμώμενος Y μεταξὺ δύο στρατιωτῶν δεδε- 


xxiii. 22. 
p here (Luke 


xxii. 66 v. r.) only. 2 Macc. vi. 10 A compl. 


ἃ = Matt. xxvii. 36. ch. xvi. 23. xxv. 4,21. Prov. xix. 16. 


r Rom. xv. 30. 2 Chron. xxxiii. 18. see Luke vi. 12. s constr., ch. ii. 5 1 eff, t1 Pet. 1. 22 only. Jonah 
iii. 8. (-νέστερον προςηύχετο, Luke xxii. 44 only. -veta, ch. xxvi.7. -νής, 1 Pet. iv. 8.) u Luke 
ix. 7. Xill. 17): xxiii. S.. Eph. y. 12. v — Matt. v.44. περί, Col.i.9. Luke vi. 28. xxii. 32. Col. 
1.8 αἱ. w = ch. (xvi. 30.) xvii. 5. xxv. 26+. 2 Macc. v.18. Jos. Antt. xvi. 11. 6, προαγαγὼν (ὁ 
Ἡρώδης) εἰς ἐκκλησίαν τριακοσίους τῶν ἡγεμόνων. x = Matt. xxviii. 13. Luke χχῖϊ. 45. (1 Cor. 
vii. 39 reff.) Prov. iv. 16. 4 Luke xi. 51 jj. xvi. 26+. (ch. xv. 9 reff.) zhere bis. Mark 
νυ. 3, ἄς. ὃ. ch. xxi. 33. xxviii. 20. Eph. vi. 20. 2 Τίπι. 1. 16. Rev. xx.1lonly+. Wisd. xvii. 17 only. Exod. xxviii. 


22 Aq. Symm. (Theod.?}. see LXX 1b. 


4. for ov και, τουτον D [Lucif, ]. 
vulg E-lat. 


vulg(not am [fuld]). ayayew A e. 


ach, ν. 23. ver. 19 only. 


ev φυλακὴ E-gr. 
om τεσσαρσιν H[}: insd in marg eadem manu]. 


Cant. v. 7. 


mapadidous A, tradens 
om Ist αὐτὸν D 


5. rec exreyns, with A7EHLP p rel 36 [Bas,] Chr, Sev-c,: txt A)(appy) BN 13. 40 


vulg E-lat Lucif,—oAAn δὲ mposevxn ny ev εκτενειὰ περι avTov amo TNS εκκλ. 


mp. τ. 0. περι avt.(sic) D(om 1st περι avtov D-corr). 
* στερὶ A-corr BDN 0 p 18. 40 (probably a corrn, see ch. viii. 15: 


τον θεον B. 


γενομενη Pep. om πρ. 


the two are indifferently used in this connexion, see Lexx and reff: but περι is the 
more usual): ὑπερ (Al ?)EHLP rel 36 [Bas,} Chr Sev-c. 


6. (ημελλ., so BELPR c 1 p 13.) 


ΤῊ] : txt ABDEN ah k 0 p13. 36 Chr. 
μενος D}(txt DS). 


natural; and I own, with all respect for 
Wieseler’s general acumen, I am disposed 
to agree with this criticism. The whole 
cast of the narrative,—the ἦσαν at ἡμέραι, 
not ἦν ἢ ἡμέρα τῶν ἀζ., Luke’s own expres- 
sion in his Gospel, xxii. 7,—the intimation 
of enduring custody in the παραδοὺς .. -. 
φυλάσσειν avt.,—the delay implied in the 
BovAdpuevos,—in the imperfects érnpetro,— 
ἣν γινομένη (not eyévero),—the specifica- 
tion of τῇ νυκτὶ ἐκείνῃ as presupposing 
(notwithstanding what Wieseler says to the 
contrary) more nights preceding,—all this 
would be unaccountable in the precise his- 
torical diction of Luke, unless he had in- 
tended to convey an impression that some 
days elapsed. But still more decisive is 
his own definition of πάσχα, Luke xxii. 1, 
ἡ ἑορτὴ τῶν ἀζύμων, ἣ λεγομένη πάσχα. 
So that μετὰ τὸ πάσχα may well=pera τὴν 
ἑορτὴν τῶν ἀζύμων. The argument from 
the four quaternions of soldiers proves no- 
thing: the same sixteen (see below) may 
have had him in permanent charge, that 
number being appointed as adequate to the 
duties required. 4. τέσσαρσιν τετρα- 
δίοις7 In military arrangements, Herod 
seems to have retained the Roman habits, 
according to which the night was divided 
into four watches, and each committed to 


for τε, δε 1) E-lat copt: om e 1383. 


rec προαγειν (corrn), with DEHLP rel Chr : 
mposayew No: txt Aa p 36, mposayaye B 19. 


rec aut. bef προ., with HLP rel 
om Ist o D lect-12. κοιμου- 
προς TH θυρα A. 


four soldiers (διδόασι φυλάκεια δύο" τὸ δὲ 
φυλάκειόν ἐστιν ἐκ τεσσάρων ἀνδρῶν, Polyb. 
vi. 33. 7), to two of whom the prisoner was 
chained, the other two keeping watch be- 
fore the doors of the prison, forming the 
first and second guards of ver. 10. Τῷ is 
plain that this number being mentioned is 
no sign that the custody was only for one 
night. μετὰ TO πάσχα) (see above) 
after the days of the feast, i. e. after the 
21st of Nisan. Herod, who (ver. 1, note) 
observed rigorously the Jewish customs, 
would not execute a prisoner during the 
feast: ‘Non judicant die festo’ (Moed 
Katon v. 2, Meyer). avay. αὖτ. τῷ 
had | See ref.: to bring him out and sen- 
tence him in sight of the people. 

5.] On the duration implied by this 
verse, see above. 6. ἐκείνῃ} em- 
phatic: that very night, viz. which pre- 
ceded the day of trial. The practice 


of attaching a prisoner to one keeper: 


or more by a chain is alluded to by seve- 
ral ancient authors: e. g. Seneca, de 
Tranquill. 10, ‘Eadem custodia universos 
circumdedit, alligatique sunt etiam qui 
alligaverunt, nisi tu forte leviorem in 
sinistra catenam putas: and Epist. 
5: ‘Quemadmodum eadem catena et 
mnilitem et custodiam copulat.? In the 


5—10. TITPAS EIS AITOZTTOAON. 133 


/ \ \ ΄ < 
τὴν φυλακήν. Ἷ καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου " ἐπέστη, καὶ >=~hiv.1 
ra ” ᾿] “ , , 5 vA \ \ M t. y. 16. 
has “ἀ ἔλαμψεν ἐν τῷ “οἰκήματι: 'πατάξας δὲ THY " σοι ἵν δ 
λ g >» Ν an Tl ΄ Ἡ ,» i TIS ΧΩ "ἃ ΄, only. (Prov. 
λέγων ἔ πλευρὰν τοῦ Ἰ]έτρου "ἤγειρεν αὐτὸν λέγων νάστα 


iv. 18.) see 
avo. ἃ. ch. xxvi. 13. 


j ἡ ,) Le ΄σ τ 
ABDE έν τάχει. καὶ * ἐξέπεσαν αὐτοῦ αἱ 5 ἁλύσεις ἐκ τῶν 2% Adore (6). 
HLPRa a Chee FF Cay. \ ΞΡ Ν ] an . xvii. 2. Luke 
betgh χειρῶν. εἶπέν TE ὁ ἄγγελος πρὸς αὐτὸν ' Φῶσαι καὶ xiv. 
klo , \ , ‘ 2 Cor. iv. 6 
13° ™bmodnoa τὰ " σανδάλιά σου. ἐποίησεν δὲ οὕτως. Kal δεν αν: 


= Wisd. xiii 


λέγει αὐτῷ °TlepiBarod τὸ ἱμάτιόν σου καὶ ἀκολούθει 35. Thueya! 
΄ , iv. 48 init. 
μοι. 9 καὶ ἐξελθὼν ἠκολούθει, καὶ οὐκ ἤδει OTL ἀληθές (Eek. xvi. 
ps , \ A , ο" κ eo sei 
Péotw τὸ γινόμενον ἃ διὰ τοῦ ἀγγέλου, ἐδόκει δὲ ' ὅραμα ᾿ τι ον αν, 
βλέπειν. 10 5 διελθόντες δὲ πρώτην 'ἱ φυλακὴν καὶ δευ- 3 Kinseat 
: ἢ θ 2 ὶ > , ὰ u ὃ ἘΝ \ Vv / 5, ‘. J 
τέραν ἦλθαν ἐπὶ τὴν πύλην THY " σιδηρᾶν τὴν φέρουσαν g John xix. 84. 


3 Kings xix. 
xx. 20, 25, 


Ἢ ΄ τὰ ξ 3 i ) 
εἰς τὴν πόλιν, “ ἥτις * αὐτομάτη ἠνοίγη αὐτοῖς" καὶ ἐξελ- Num xxii 
x es ; ὲ ὝΕΣ as ’ ς« 50. 2 Kings 
θόντες ἡ προῆλθον * ῥύμην μίαν, καὶ εὐθέως ὃ ἀπέστη ὁ ii-16B Ald. 


j compl. 
i ch. ix. 6 reff. j Rom. xvi. 20 reff. 
1 John xxi. 16 bis only. Neh. iv 18. 


h = Mark iv. 27. Luke viii. 24 4]. Gen. xli. 4. 

k ch. xxvii. 32. Jamesi.llal. Isa. xxviii. 1, 4. 

m Mark vi. 9. Eph. vi. 15 only. 2 Chron. xxviii. 15. Ezek. xvi. 10 only. n Mark vi. 6 
only. Isa. χχ. 2. Judith x. 4. xvi. 9 only. o Acts, here only. Luke xii. 27 1. Rev. iii. 5 
al. Esth.v.1. Ezek. xviii. 7,16. p pres., ch. xvi. 38 reff. ° q ch. il. 43. iv. 16 al. 

rch. vil. 3! reff. 5 constr., ch. xiii. 6 reff. t — here only. Xen. Cyr. i. 6. 43. 

u Rev. ii. 27. ix. 9. xii. 5. xix. 15 only. Deut. iii. 11. v= here only. Xen. Cyr. νυ. 4. 41. 

w ch. xi. 28 al. fr. ¢ x Mark iv. 28 only. Lev. xxy. 5,11. 4 Kings xix. 29. Wisd. xvii.6 only. = Jos, 
B. J. vi.5.3,7 πύλη. . . ὥφθη αὐτομάτως ἠνεῳγμένη. y constr., here only. Xen. 
Cyr. ii. 4.18. (Matt. xxvi. 39 |i. Gen. xxxiii, 14.) a= ch. xv. 38 
reff. 1 Kings xvi. 14. 


z ch. ix, 11 reff. 


7. aft ἐπεστὴ ins τω πετρω D syr-w-ast sah eth. εἐπελαμψεν, omg εν follg, Ὁ. 
for παταξας, νυξας Dsyrr, compungens Lucif,. (εξεπεσαν, so ABDEN p.) 
[αι αλ. ex τ. x. bef] αὐτου D-gr vulg [syrr] arm | Lucif; ]. 

8. for τε, δε (alteration, as often, to more usual copula, but re is characteristic 
of the Acts) BDEH a c 86 [vulg syr] sah Thl-sif: txt ALPX® p 13 rel Syr eth [arm] 
Chr, Thl-fin. mp. avt. bef o ay. L Ὁ [Syr eth]. rec περιζωσαι (alteration 
for more precision, and perhaps, as Meyer, to ayree better with υποδησαι, also a com- 
pound), with EHLP rel: txt ABDN a p 18. 36 Bas, Chr-comm,. υποδυσαι BI. 

9. om καὶ εξελθων ἠκολουθει (και to και) P. rec aft nko. ins avtw (supplemen- 
tary, to corresp to μοι above), with EHLN? rel am [syrr coptt eth] Chr,: om ABD 
[ P(see above) ] 8! p 13. 40 tol arm. yevou. Lb ὁ p 180. for δία, vo (corrn, 
not observing the peculiar force of dia here, said of the secondary agent. This is 
much more probable than the converse. Both exprr are used by Luke: cf for δια, 
reff: for uno, Luke ix.7; xiii. 17; xxiii. 8. But this latter he uses always of our 
Lord, the prime Agent in the miracle. See also Eph v.12) AH e 1 syr-mg [arm] 
Chr, Thl-fin: παρα c: txt BDELP® 18. 36 rel [vulg syrr copt] Chr, Thl-sif. for 
δε, yap D ὃ. 15-8. 36. 95. 180 tol Syr sah arm: om δὲ]. 

10. κι δευτ. bef φυλ. D vulg Lucif. (ηλθαν. so ABN 13.) om τὴν 
φερ. εἰς τ. π. 1, Syr: [for εἰς] em p 13. 96. 142. rec nvo:x9n, with EHLP Chr, : 
txt ABDN p 18. 36. (ηνυγη BID: nvorye 13.) aft εξελθ. ins κατεβησαν Tous 
¢’ βαθμους και D. mposnrd. Di Li-éar) |. απηλθεν A. 


account of the imprisonment of Herod 


pearance and the shining of a light around : 
Agrippa himself by Tiberius, Jos. Antt. 


cf. Luke ii. 9; xxiv. 4; ch. x. 30. The 








xvili. 6. 7, we read of the συνδεδεμένος 
αὐτῷ στρατιώτης. And we have an edict 
of Constantius, commanding, for binding 
prisoners, ‘ prolixiores catenas, si criminis 
qualitas etiam catenarum acerbitatem pos- 
tulaverit, ut et cruciatio desit, et perma- 
neat sub fida custodia.’ (Wieseler, p. 414.) 
See note on ch. xxiv. 23; see also ch. 
xxvill.. 16, 20. ἐτήρουν τὴν φυλ.] 
not, kept the watch (Raphel, Wolf, al.),— 
but guarded the prison. 7. |] οἰκήματι, 
the chamber. It is in St. Luke’s manner 
to relate simultaneously the angelic ap- 


light accompanied, or perhaps, as suggested. 
here in syr-marg, shone from, the angel. 

9.| ἐξελθών, viz. from the οἴκημα. 

10.| The first and second watch or 
guard cannot mean the two soldiers to 
whom he was chained, on account of 
ἐξελθών above: but are probably the other 
two, one at the door of the chamber, the 
other at the outer door of the building. 
Then ‘the iron gate leading into the city * 
was that outside the prison buildings, 
forming the exit from the premises. The 
situation of the prison is uncertain, but 


134 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATLOSTOAON. ATK 
e - A , 
phere only. ἄγγελος ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ. 11 καὶ 6 ἸΠέτρος ὃ ἐν ἑαυτῷ > γενόμενος ABDE 
(see Luke xv. «Ὁ δε ὃ eis 6 7 e ἃ Σ , 7 ΡΝ a 
1) Χορ. εἶπεν Νῦν οἶδα “ ἀληθῶς ὅτι ἐξωπέστειλεν κύριος τὸν beftgh 
»~ leo. = , \ [ ο Ρ 
ον, ἄγγελον αὐτοῦ καὶ " ἐξείλατό με ἐκ ἴ χειρὸς Ηρώδου καὶ 13 
26. xvii. 8 PY, A 7 a na a ’ ! 12h 
only. Exod. πάσης τῆς 8 προςδοκίας τοῦ λαοῦ τῶν Ἰουδαίων. συν- 
xxxiii. 16. Σ i ᾿ ον _ 5 
dchvil2 ἰδών τε ἦλθεν ᾿ ἐπὶ τὴν οἰκίαν τῆς Μαρίας τῆς μητρὸς 
e ch. vii. 10 


reff. 
f (ch. xxiv. 7.] 
John x. 28, 


iv. 4) only. 
(Lev. v. 1.) 
1 Mace. iv. 

21 al. 

i = Matt. xxi. 
19, Luke 
xxiv. 1 al. 
Gen. xxii. 9, 

k ch. i. 23 reff. 

lch. xiv. 21. xix. 19 al. 1 Macc. xiii. 49. 


Tov “πυλῶνος. 


16. Matt. vii. 7, 8, 

al. Lev. xxi. 21, 
uhere only. 1 Kings xxvi. 17. 

only +. 2 Mace. v. 26 only. 


Luke xi. 9, 10. xii. 36 only. 
s = Matt. xxvi. 69 al. 


ach, vii. 1 reff. Ὁ — Matt. xviii. 10. 


m ch. xix. 25 only. Deut. i. 41. 
o and constr., Luke xiij, 25 (Rev. ili. 20). Judg. xix. 22 A (Cant. v. 2). Judith aie 14 only. 


Gen. xx. 17. 
ν — Matt. xiii. 44. xviii. 7. John xxi.6al. 2 Chron. v. 6. 

x constr., here only (ch. xxvi. 20). 
25. 1 Cor. xiv. 23 only. Jer. xxxvi. (xxix.) 26, Wisd. xiv. 28 only. 


=) / n k 9 / M / e 9 ] ς ς 
Ἰωάννου τοῦ * ἐπικαλουμένου Μάρκου, οὗ ἦσαν "ἱκανοὶ 
™ συνηθροισμένοι καὶ ™ προςευχόμενοι. 18  kpovcavTos δὲ 
αὐτοῦ τὴν “θύραν τοῦ « πυλῶνος * προςῆλθεν " παιδίσκη 

{ ς - > / € 0 14 \ u ’ Ὁ \ u Ἁ 
ὑπακοῦσαι, ὀνόματι ‘Pody 13 καὶ ἃ ἐπιγνοῦσα τὴν ἃ φωνὴν 

an , \ ἴω “Ὁ fo ‘ “-“ 

rod Πέτρου " ἀπὸ τῆς χαρᾶς οὐκ ἤνοιξεν τὸν “πυλῶνα, 
w > ὃ lal δὲ x > / x, x e / \ Πέ Ν 
εἰςδραμοῦσα δὲ * ἀπήγγειλεν * ἑστάναι τὸν Iletpov πρὸ 

15 ς δὲ \ S.cN (0. y ' aie 
of δὲ πρὸς αὐτὴν εἶπαν Υ Mawn. 

ς \ «ς , 
2 διισχυρίζετο " οὕτως " ἔχειν. οἱ δὲ ἔλεγον Ὃ ὃ ἄγγελός 


ἢ δὲ 


n absol., ch. x. 9 reff. 
p as above (0). ver. 

ΤΙ constr., ch. vii. 31 
t= here only. Xen. Symp. i. 11. 
w here 
y John x. 20. ch. xxvi. 24, 
z Luke xxii. 59 only +. 


q ch. x. 17 reff. 


11. rec yevou. bef ev εαυτω, with EHLP re: [syr coptt arm] Chr: txt ABDNac p 


13 vulg Lucif.—avrw B?. 


κυριος Bc 180 [Chr]: o θεος a 27-9. 36. 105-63. 
ins ex bef πασης Εἰ 73 vulg Lucif. 


13. 36.) 


ott bef ἀληθως DE eth Chr, Lucif,. 


ins o bef 
(εξειλατο, so ABDEH[L]& p 
om του Aaov A Syr. 


12. συν. δὲ Aakop 13. 36 [E-lat] coptt: om τε 59!: καὶ συν. D: txt B EL-gr] 


HLPX rel [vulg syrr arm] Chr. 


add o πετρος P f. 


rec om Ist της (as unne- 


cessary 7), with EHLP rel 36(sic) Chr,: ins ABDN p. (18 def.) 


13. Γκρουσαντες D-gr p!.] 


rec for αὐτου, Tov πετρου (explanatory, συνιδὼν 


beginning an ecclesiastical portion), with EH rel 36 syr Chr [ Thl-sif] : txt ABD[L]PX 


p 13 vulg Syr coptt [seth] arm Thi-fin. 


reading which occupied more space having been obliterated: foris D-lat. 
B2(Mai: “ B3 et fortasse jam B?,” Tischdf) & 3 [processit vulg]. 

ov. pod. bef vax. D. 

14. aft nvotev ins avtw E Ο Syr syr-w-ast. 


N'(txt N-corr?). 
ins καὶ bef e:sdp. δε D1(and lat). 


πυλωνος is written by D%(?), the former 
προηλθε 
υπακουουσα 


for τὸν πυλωνα, τὴν θυραν E. 
om 2nd τον D!(ins 195). 


15. o(sic) δε ε(λε)γον αὐτὴ D?: οἱ δε προς αὐτὴν (without ext.) D3.— εἰπ. bef mp. avr. 


13. (ειπαν, so ABN [p].) 


seems to have been én the city. The addi- 
tional clause in D (see var. readd.) is 
remarkable, and can hardly be other than 
genuine. 11.] ἐν ἑαυτῷ y., as KE. V. 
coming to himself: having recovered his 
self-consciousness. He was before in the 
half consciousness of one who is dreaming 
and knows that it is a dream: except that 
in his case the dream was the truth, and his 
supposition the unreality. 12. συν- 
ιδών] Not, considerans (as Vulg., Beza, 
Grot.): nor, ‘ being aware of the place of 
meeting,’ with reference to what follows 
(Meyer), against which the aorist is de- 
cisive, importing some single act and not a 
state: but, as reff., referring to what went 
before (οἶδα ἀληθῶς x.7.A.), having be- 
come aware of it. ᾿Ιωάννον] It is 
uncertain whether this John Mark was the 
game as the Evangelist Mark: but they 


for ελεγον, εἰπαν B lect-12 [ Chr, j. 


aft eAeyov 


have been generally believed to be the 
same. For a full account of him, see Prole- 
gomena to Mark (Vol. I. § i.). His mother 
Mary was not sister, but aunt of Barnabas: 
see Col. iv. 10, note. 15. ἄγγελός ἐστ. 
αὐτοῦ] No other rendering but his angel 
will suit the sense: and with a few excep- 
tions (Camero, Basnage, Hammond, and 
one or two more) all Commentators, ancient 
and modern, have recognized this mean- 
ing. Our Lord plainly asserts the doctrine . 
of guardian angels in ref. Matt. (see note 
there): and from this we further learn in 
what sense His words were understood by 
the early church. From His words taken 
with the context (μὴ καταφρονήσητε ἑνὸς 
τῶν μικρῶν τούτων) we infer that each one 
has his guardian angel: from this passage 
we find not only that such was believed 
to be the case, but that it was supposed 


11---10, 


ἐστιν αὐτοῦ. 


ΠΝ = > \ X f 9 f 
Eavtes δὲ εἶδαν αὐτὸν καὶ ἴ ἐξέστησαν. 


an aA ‘\ 
αὐτοῖς τῇ χειρὶ 


αὐτὸν * ἐξήγαγεν * ἐκ τῆς | φυλακῆς. 


Ἰακώβῳ καὶ τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς ταῦτα. 
εἰς ® ἕτερον τόπον. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


᾿ συγᾷν, ' διηγήσατο αὐτοῖς ' πῶς 


18 ὁ γενομένης ες 9 ἡμέρας ἣν Ὁ τάραχος 


135 


e 
16 ὁ δὲ Πέτρος ° ἐπέμενεν ἃ κρούων' “ ἀνοΐ- ¢(constr., John 


Wilke fi] 


17 8 κατασείσας ee las 


Ἐπί κένεῶ 
hilo d 
ὁ κύριος Agricul 
$ 15, vol. i. 
εἶπέν τε ᾿Απαγγείλατε ae . Bi. 
er 


™ ἐξελθὼν ἐπορεύθη "- e plo oat 


Dos xili. 25. 
ch, y. 23 al. 
Isa. xxii. 22. 


«οὐκ «ὀλίγος τέν τοῖς στρατιώταις Sti ἄρα ὁ Πέτρος 17 See eo 2 


5 ἐγένετο. 
͵ \ 
“avaxplwas τοὺς 


19 “Hpwdns δὲ t ἐπιζητήσας αὐτὸν καὶ μὴ εὑρών, 
‘ φύλακας ἐκέλευσεν ἣ ἀπαχθῆναι καὶ 
Σ κατελθὼν ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας εἰς Καισάρειαν Y διέτριβεν. 


ἐπι we ch. 
xiii. 16. xxi. 
40 only. 
met Antt. 
viii. 11. 2. 
w. acc., ch. 
xix. 33 +. 
(1 Mace. vi. 


38 only.) h Luke ix..36. xviii, 39. xx. 26. ch. xv. 12,13. Rom. xvi.25. 1 Cor. xiv. 28, 30, 
34 only. L.P. Eccl. ili. 7. Sir. xiii. 23. i ch. ix. 27 reff. k ch. vii. 40. xiii. 17. Heb. 
vili. 9. Exod. xx. 2. 1 = ver. 5 al. m absol., vv. 9,10. ch. xvi. 36. Exod. xvi. 4. . 
n = ch. xvii. 7 reff. o = Luke iv. 42. vi. 13. ch. xvi. 35 al. L. p ch. xia. 23 only. 1 Kings 
vy. 9. Wisd. xiv. 25 ABCN Ald. compl. ( χή, Ed- ee δ) only. [-χή, Mark xiii. 8.1 q ch. xiv. 28 


al6. Actsonly. Isa. x. 7. 
t Luke iv. 42. 1 Kings xx. 1. 
only. (see Gen. xlii. 16.) Matt. xxvii. 31 jj). 
y ch. xy. 35 al6, 


r= 


add προς αὑτὴν τυχον Ὁ Syr. 


Mark vi. 
u ch. iv. 9 Εἰ 
Ep. Jer. 18, constr., ch. xxi. 33. 
Acts only, exc. John iii. 22. Jer. xlii. (xxxv.) 7. 


om ὁ δὲ! [Chr-comm, ]. 


ames i. 66. 
w = absol., here 
x ch, viii. 5 refi. 


5 here only. see John xxi. 21. 
v ver. 6. 


ree αὐτου bef εστ., with 


DEHLPR? 13 rel Orig, [Eus, Chr,]: txt ABN}. 


16. om πετρ. D. 
17. κατασισαντος δε avtou ory. A. 
εἰιδηλθεν καὶ bef διηγ. D Syr syr-w-ast. 
lect-12 vulg arm: 
avrov p 18. 40. 78 [Thl-fin, ]. 
syr copt Chr, : 

18. om ove ολιγ. D 76 Lucif, : 

19. for δε, re A ἃ eth. 
gives also syr zth-pl) ]. 
HLP rel Chr: om ABDE®N ae p 18. 40. 


that such angel occasionally appeared 
an the semblance (seeing that he spoke 
with the voice) of the person himself. We 
do not, it is true, know who the speakers 
were: nor is the peculiar form in which 
they viewed the doctrine binding upon us : 
it may have been erroneous, and savouring 
of superstition. But of the doctrine itself 
this may not be said, as the Lord Him- 
self has asserted it. See Wordsw.’s in- 
teresting note here. For what pur- 
pose they supposed this angel to have 
come, does not appear in the narrative. 
17. κατασείσας | see reff. His mo- 
tive was haste: he tells briefly the par- 
ticulars of his deliverance, and, while it 
was yet night, hastily departs. 
᾿Ιακώβῳ] James, the brother of the Lord, 
whom we find presiding over the church 
at Jerusalem, ch. xv. 13; xxi. 18; Gal. ii. 
12. See Gal. i. 19; ii. 9. He appears 
also to be mentioned in 1 Cor, xv. 7. I 
believe him to have been one of those 
ἀδελφοὶ τοῦ κυρίου mentioned Matt. xiii. 
55; John vii. 5; ch. i. 14; 1 Cor. ix. 5, of 
whom I have in the note on the first of 
these passages maintained, that they were 
His real maternal brethren, sons of Joseph 
and Mary :—to have been an Apostle, as 


εξανοιξ. δε και ἰδοντες av. Ka ef. D1, 


ins BDEHLP rel 36 Chr. 
rec for τε, δε (see above, ver 3), with DHLP rel 36 
txt ABEN p vulg Syr sah eth. 
peyas 15-8. 36. 180 Syr sah arm. 

αποκτανθηναι D!-gr(txt D-corr!-2) Syr copt [arm. (Tischdf 
rec ins τὴν bef καισ. (insertion to answer to της ιουδ.), with 


(ειδαν, so AB.) 
for ovyay, wa cerya.. ow 1, ins 
om 2nd avros AN a p 19. 33. 69. 100-5 
autov bef o κυρ. A: εξηγαγεν bef 


διετριψεν A [copt]. 


Paul and Barnabas, but not of the number 
of the twelve (see note on ch. xiv. 4) :— 
and to have been therefore of course dis- 
tinct from James the son of Alpheus, 
enumerated (Matt. x. 3 ||) among the 
twelve. The reasons for this belief I re- 
serve for the Prolegomena to the Epistle 
of James. εἰς ἕτερον τόπον] I see 
in these words a minute mark of truth in 
our narrative. Under the circumstances, 
the place of Peter’s retreat would very 
naturally at the time be kept secret. It 
probably was unknown to the person from 
whom the narrative came, or designedly 
left indefinite. And so it has remained, the 
narrative not following Peter’s history any 
longer. We find him again at Jerusalem 
in ch. xv. Whether he left it or not on 
this occasion is uncertain. It is not asserted 
in e&eA@dv,—which only implies that he 
left the house. 18. γενομένης ἡμέρας] 
Wieseler argues from this, and I think 
rightly, that the deliverance of Peter must 
have taken place in the last watch of the 
night (3—6 A.M. in April), for otherwise 
his escape would have been perceived before 
the break of day, viz. at the next change 
of the watch. τί . ἐγένετο] So 
Theoer. Id. xiv. 51, able Γοργοῖ, τί 


136 TIPABETS ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XII. 


rhere only. 20 ἣν δὲ Σ θυμομαχῶν Τυρίοις καὶ Σιδωνίοις: * ὁμοθυμαδὸν 


Polyb. ix. 40. qy b A b \ Pe, Ah te , ΄ » 
4. μέχρι τῆς δὲ ἢ παρῆσαν ὃ πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ “ πείσαντες Βλάστον τὸν 
€TXATYS ap ee κι ¢ a fa) / f.2 a δ ΝΣ ὃ \ 
ἀναπνοῆς “ ἐπὶ τοῦ © κοιτῶνος τοῦ βασιλέως 1 ἡτοῦντο εἰρήνην, διὰ 
θυμομα- 5 , θ Sik re X , he Pina ἢ A 
χοῦντεν, τὸ & τρέφεσθαι αὐτῶν τὴν χώραν "amd τῆς | βασιλικῆς, 
ἀνῇ asend. 21K τακτῇ δὲ ἡμέρᾳ ὁ Ἡρώδης | ἐνδυσάμενο m ἐσθῆτα ' βα- 
a ch. i. 14 reff 7 HEPA pwon μενος n 
b 2 Cor. xi. 8. \ \ r SN nm / , \ 
(αν το, σιλικὴν καὶ ™ καθίσας ἐπὶ τοῦ 5 βήματος Ρ ἐδημηγόρει πρὸς 
20 only. 


c = Matt. xxviii 44. Gal. i. 10. 2 Mace. iv. 45. d ch. viii. 27 reff. ehere only. Exod. viii. 3. 


f= ch. xvi. 29 reff. g = Matt. vi. 26al. 3 Kings xviii. 13. h = Jude 23 al. i here 
bis. John iv. 46,49. James ii. 8 only. Num. xx. 17. k here only. Job xii. 5 only. 1 constr., 
Matt. vi. 25 al. Gen. xxxviii. 19. m ch. x. 30 reff. n constr., ch. xxv. 6 reff. o = Matt. 


xxvii. 19 || J. ch. (vii. 5.) xviii. 12, 16,17. xxv. 6, 10, 17. 
xiii. 26. 
Jos. Antt. ix. 13. 1. 


Rom. xiv. 10. 2 Cor. v.10 only. Neh. viii. 4. 2 Mace. 
p here only. Prov. xxx. (see xxiv.) 31. (Neh. viii. 4 [6] Ald.) only. ἐδημηγόρει ἐν αὐτοῖς, 


20. for δε, yap D eth. rec aft δε ins ο npwdns (as being the commencement 
of a new history,—that of the death of Herod), with HLP rel 36 syr [arm] Chr,, 
npwdns Ea b! ko Thi-sif: om ABDN p 18. 40 vulg Syr coptt eth Lucif. D reads 
οἱ δε ομοθ. εξ αμφοτερων των πόλεων παρησαν mpos τον βασίιλεα | simly syr-w-ast ]. 
for του βασ.; αὐτου D-gr(om D-lat) ο. ἡτήσαντο A sah. Tas xwpas αυὐτων Ὁ 
vulg Lucif: αὐτους ἃ : aut. τὴν πολιν H-gr[and lat! ] 13. 33-4: ezvitates E-lat?. 


for απο, ex Ὁ 40. 105. 
21. om o Ba. 


γενοίμεθα; 19. κατ... .. εἰς Kato. | 
These words are to be taken together, and 
ἐκεῖ or ἐν K. to be supplied with διέτριβεν. 
Kuin. takes eis K. as = ἐν K. with 8:é7p., 
and κατελθών alone, which is not so 
natural on account of the position of the 
words. 20. Ovpopaxav} It is im- 
possible that Herod should have been at 
war with the Tyrians and Sidonians, be- 
longing as they did to a Roman province, 
and he himself being in high favour at 
Rome :—nor is this implied in our text. 
The quarrel, however it originated, appears 
to have been carried out on Herod’s part 
by some commercial regulation opposed to 
their interest, dependent as they were on 
supplies from his territory. ἦν θυμ. is 
therefore best rendered as in E. V., was 
highly displeased. 6p. παρῆσ. viz. by 
a deputation. Blastus is a Roman name 
(Wetst. from an inscription), and, from 
Herod’s frequent visits to Rome, it is likely 
that he would have Romans as his con- 
fidential servants. Blastus was his eubicu- 
larius, or prefectus cubiculo (Suet. Dom. 
16) ; see ch. viii. 27. εἰρήνην not 
(see above) peace, in its strict sense, but 
reconciliation. διὰ τὸ τρέφεσθαι} 
We learn from 1 Kings v. 11 that Solomon 
made presents of wheat and oil to Hiram 
in return for the cedar and fir-trees for the 
Lord’s house; and from Ezek. xxvii. 17, 
that Judah and Israel exported wheat, 
honey, oil, and balm (or resin) to Tyre. In 
Ezra iii. 7 also, we find Zerubbabel giving 
meat, drink, and oil to them of Sidon and 
Tyre, to bring cedar-trees to Joppa. Mr. 
Humphry quotes from Bede, ‘ Tyrii neces- 
sariam habebant vicini regis amicitiam, eo 
guod eorum regio valde angusta et Galilee 


om καὶ BX p 40 [ Bas-3-mss, ]. 


Damascique pressa finibus esset.’ An 
additional reason for their request at this 
particular time may have been, the preva- 
lence of famine. 21.] The account in 
Josephus is remarkably illustrative of the 
sacred text: τρίτον δὲ ἔτος αὐτῷ βασι- 
λεύοντι τῆς ὕλης ᾿Ιουδαίας πεπλήρωτο, καὶ 
παρῆν εἰς πόλιν Καισάρειαν .. . . συνετέλει 
δὲ ἐνταῦθα θεωρίας εἰς τὴν Καίσαρος τιμήν, 
ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐκείνον σωτηρίας ἑορτήν τινα 
ταύτην ἐπιστάμενος (probably the ‘ quin- 
quennalia,’ B. J. i. 21. 8.° Wieseler, p. 
133). καὶ παρ᾽ αὐτὴν ἤθροιστο τῶν κατὰ 
τὴν ἐπαρχίαν ἐν τέλει καὶ προβεβηκότων 
εἰς ἀξίαν πλῆθος. δευτέρᾳ δὲ τῶν θεωριῶν 
ἡμέρᾳ στολὴν ἐνδυσάμενος ἐξ ἀργύρου 
πεποιημένην πᾶσαν, ws θαυμάσιον ὕφὴν 
εἶναι, παρῆλθεν εἰς τὸ θέατρον ἀρχομένης 
ἡμέρας. ἔνθα ταῖς πρώταις τῶν ἡλιακῶν 
ἀκτίνων ἐπιβολαῖς ὃ ἄργυρος καταυγασθεὶς 
θαυμασίως ἀπέστιλβε, μαρμαίρων τι φοβερὸν 
καὶ τοῖς εἰς αὐτὸν ἀτενίζουσι φρικῶδες. 
εὐθὺς δὲ of κόλακες τὰς οὐδὲ ἐκείνῳ πρὸς 
ἀγαθοῦ ἄλλος ἄλλοθεν φωνὰς ἀνεβόων θεὸν 
προξαγορεύοντες, Εὐμενής τε εἴης, ἐπιλέ- 
γοντες, εἰ καὶ μέχρι νῦν ὧς ἄνθρωπον ἐφοβή- 
θημεν, ἀλλὰ τοὐντεῦθεν κρείττονά σε θνητῆ5 
φύσεως ὁμολογοῦμεν. οὐκ ἐπέπληξε τούτοις 
6 βασιλεὺς οὐδὲ τὴν κολακείαν ἀσεβοῦσαν 
ἀπετρίψατο. ἀνακύψας δ᾽ οὖν μετ᾽ ὀλίγον 


ABDE 
HLPNa 
befgh 

Eklop 

13 


τὸν βουβῶνα τῆς ἑαυτοῦ κεφαλῆς ὕπερκαθε- - 


ζόμενον εἶδεν ἐπὶ σχοινίου τινός" ἄγγελον 
δὲ τοῦτον εὐθὺς ἐνόησεν κακῶν εἶναι, .... 
καὶ διακάρδιον ἔσχεν ὀδύνην. (This owl, 
Eusebius, Η. E. ii. 10, professing to quote 
Josephus, makes into an angel. Having 
prefaced his quotation, αὐτοῖς γράμμασιν 
ὧδέ πως τὸ θαῦμα διηγεῖται, he cites thus: 
. +. ἀνακύψας δὲ μετ᾽ ὀλίγον, τῆς ἑαυτοῦ 
κεφαλῆς ὑπερκαθεζόμενον εἶδεν ἄγγελον. 


Ee 


20—25. 


ς 


αὐτούς. 33 ὁ δὲ «δῆμος 


ἀνθρώπου. 


κυρίου ἃ ἀνθ᾽ ὧν οὐκ " ἔδωκεν τὴν " δόξαν τῷ θεῷ, 
x ἐξέψυξεν. 
τοῦ θεοῦ ἡ ηὔξανεν καὶ ¥ ἐπληθύνετο. 

Σαῦλος 5 ὑπέστρεψαν 5 ἐξ “Ἱερουσαλὴμ * 
τς πο βασι δὰ ποτε χων ἐν 


where only+. σκώληξ, Mark ix. 44, &c. (from Isa. Ixvi. 24) only. 
z €k, here only. Ruth i. 6 Ald. 


γενόμενος “ σκωληκόβρωτος 


Vili. 21. 2 Macc. ix. 5. 


7 veff. 


15. ch. xiii. 25. xiv. 26 al. Ps. xix.4. 


TIPASEIS AMOSTOAON. 


23 παραχρῆμα δὲ tématakev αὐτὸν ἄγγελος 


137 


᾿ἐπεφώνει Θεοῦ φωνὴ καὶ οὐκ 4 λοὶ οπὶν. 


χα ντῖ, 
τς. 80, ste 
Num. i. 20 

al. fr. 
καὶ r ane xxiii. 
το; XXL 

© XS 3A. xxii. 

24 6 δὲ J λογὸς 24 only +. 
2 Macc. i. 28. 


Q5 Βαρνάβας δὲ καὶ ae ix. 47 
7 reff. 
πληρώ ὠσᾶντες τὴν | eee x6. 


xix. 15. Gen. 


only. Josh. vii. 19. 
x ch, v. 5 reff, y ch. vi. 

ἀπό, Luke iv. 1. xxiv. 9. a -- Matt. iii. 
b Col. iy. 17. 


22. at beg, ins καταλλαγεντος δε αὐτου τοις τυριοις D: reconciliatus est iis autem 


syr-w-ast. 
latt]: φωνη κυριου c: 
[Syr]. 

23. aut. bef exar. Ὁ c 180 Thl-fin. 


DEHLP rel: ins ABN ἃ hk p 13. 36 [ Bas, ]. 
σκωλ. D?) ers (wy και ουτως εξεψυξεν D 
nuéaveto A: 

for εξ, απο B'(appy, Tischdf) D(E) b ¢ o 36 


KwAnkoBpwros(sic D!; 
24, for θεου, kupiov B vulg. 
25. ameotpevey D!(txt 198), 

vulg Chr-ms: 


εἰς B!-corr HLPX k 1 p syr-mg [eth-rom] Chr-mss ΤῊ] : 


φωνὴ bef θεου HLP2(P! has ἐπεφωνὴ Av και (sic)) be f g 1 0 vss; not 
φωναι D'{and lat ](txt DS) vulg Syr Lucif,. 


ανθρωπων X! 


om τὴν (alteration to more usual expr) 
και kKaTaBas απὸ Tov Bnuatos yevou. 


evéave Di(txt D$): néaver (sic) P. 
txt A 13(sic) 


rel coptt [syrr eth-pl(Tischdf) arm] Chr,.—aft cep. add εἰς αντιοχείαν Εἰ a be o Syr 


sah. 


(The variations have apparently arisen from a confusion of marginal glosses. 


es avt. may have been an explanatory gloss, afterwards substituted for εξ tep.; then 
avt. may have again been corrected to tep., leaving the es standing.) 


τοῦτον εὐθὺς ἐνόησε κακῶν εἶναι αἴτιον 
κιτιλ. On the impossibility of acquitting 
the ecclesiastical historian of the charge 
of wilful fraud, see Heinichen’s second 
Excursus in his edition of Eusebius. It 
may be a caution to us as to how much 
we may believe of his quotations of authors 
which do not remain to us.) ἀθρόον δὲ 
αὐτῷ τῆς κοιλίας προΞξέφυσεν ἄλγημα μετὰ 
σφοδρότητος ἀρξάμενον. ,ἀναθεωρῶν οὖν 
πρὸς τοὺς φίλους Ὁ θεὸς ὑμῖν ἐγώ, φησίν, 
ἤδη καταστρέφειν ἐπιτάττομαι τὸν βίον, 
παραχρῆμα τῆς εἱμαρμένης τὰς ἄρτι μου 
κατεψευσμένας φωνὰς ἐλεγχούσης᾽ καὶ 6 
κληθεὶς ἀθάνατος tp ὑμῶν ἤδη θανὼν 
ἀπάγομαι. .. .. συνεχῶς δὲ ἐφ᾽ ἡμέρας 
πέντε τῷ τῆς γαστρὸς ἀλγήματι διεργασ- 
θεὶς τὸν βίον κατέστρεψεν. Antt. xix. 8. 2. 

The circumstance related in our 
text, of the answer to the Sidonian em- 
bassy, of which Josephus seems not to 
have been aware, having been one object of 
Herod on the occasion, shews an accuracy 
of detail which well accords with the view 
of the material of this part of the Acts 
having been collected at Czesarea, where 
the event happened (see Prolegg. to Acts, 
§ u. 11). 23.] The fact may be cor- 
rectly related by Josephus (see above) : 
but our narrative alleges the cause of what 
happened to have been the displeasure 
of God, and the stroke to have been in- 
flicted dy His angel. Compare 2 Kings 
xix. 65; 2 Chron. xxi. 15, 16. But no 
appearance of an angel is implied: nor 
was I aware that such had ever been in- 


ferred; but I see in Valesius’s note on 
Euseb. ii. 10, “ Quasi vero non utrumque 
fieri potuerit, ut et bubo supra caput 
Agrippee, et ex alia parte angelus eidem 
appareret.” σκωληκόβρωτος) An- 
other additional particular: and one to be 
expected from a physician. In several 
cases of deaths by divine judgment we 
have accounts of this loathsome termina- 
tion of the disease. So Herodotus, iv. 
205, ἡ Φερετίμη .... ζῶσα εὐλέων ἐξέζεσε: 
which he alleges as an instance that 
excessive indulgence of revenge, such as 
Pheretima had shewn against the Bar- 
ceeans, is looked on with anger by the gods. 
See too the very similar account of the 
death of Antiochus Epiphanes, 2 Mace. ix. 
5—9. So also Jos. Antt: xvii. 6. 5, de- 
scribing the disease of which Herod the 
Great died, mentions σῆψις σκώληκας 
ἐμποιοῦσα. So also Euseb. (viii. 16) of 
the death of Galerius. So also Tertullian, 
ad Scapulam, c. 3, vol. i. p. 702, Migne, 
“Claudius Lucius Herminianus in Cap- 
padocia, cum indigne ferens uxorem suam 
ad hance sectam transiisse, solusque in 
preetorio suo vastatus peste vivus vermi- 
bus ebullisset, Nemo sciat, aiebat, ne guu- 
deant Christiani. Postea cognito errore 
suo, quod tormentis quosdam a proposito 
suo excidere fecisset, pene Christianus 
decessit.” 24. Similarly, ch. v. 12 ff.; 
vi. 7; ix. 31, a general statement of the 
progress and prosperity of the church of 
God forms the transition from ane portion 
of the history to another. 29.| The 


138 HPAZEIS AITOSTOAON. XITI. 

e-chvii Ρὸ διακονίαν, ἃ συμπαραλαβόντες [καὶ] ᾿Ιωάννην τον " ἐπι- 
ΤΟΙ, 

dch. αν ὅτ, κληθέντα Μάρκον. 
χα, Jo ΧΙΠ Ἦσαν δὲ ἐν ᾿Αντιοχείᾳ ἱ κατὰ τὴν ὃ οὖσαν 
i. 4 only - - +). ε 

ever. 5. ἐκκλησίαν "ὶ προφῆται καὶ * διδάσκαλοι, ὅ τε Βαρνάβας 
sllips. of exet δ , \ ¢ a 

gains ofS καὶ Συμεὼν ὁ καλούμενος Νίγερ καὶ Λούκιος ὁ Kupnvatos, 
ch, xxii. 12. 7 ς , cel ἢ 7 m ΄ \ 

nehixi27 Mavany τε Ἡρώδου tov !tetpapyou ™auvtpopos καὶ 
ren. 

11 Cor. xii. 28,29. Eph.iy. 11. k Rom. ii. 20. 1 Tim.ii.7. 2 Tim.i.11+. 2 Macc.i. 10 on}y. 1 Luke 

ili. 19. ix.7 ἢ Mt. only. (τ-χειν, Luke iii. 1.) m here only t+. = 2 Mace. ix. 29 only. Thuc. ii. 50 (of 


diseases). Xen. Mem. ii. 3,4. 


for 2nd και, τον D!: om ABN 36 vulg Syr [sah]: txt DSEHLP p rel syr copt [eth] 


Chr. (13 def.) 


επικαλουμενον AN k p 13. 36 Thl-fin. 


Cuap. XIII. 1, recaft σαν δὲ ins τινες (see note), with EHLP 13. 36 rel syr [arm] 


Chr, : 
int, 1: add qv καὶ D3-gr [ Ath-int, ]. 
kupnvatos) D. 
[copt sah-2-mss], tpapx. B?. 


journey (ch. xi. 30) took place after the 
death, or about the time of the death, of 
Herod; see on ver. 1. The purpose of the 
mission would be very soon accomplished : 
Saul would naturally not remain longer 
in Jerusalem than was unavoidable, and 
would court no publicity: and hence there 
seems an additional reason for placing the 
visit after Herod’s death: for, of all the 
persons whose execution would be pleasing 
to the Jews, Saul would hold the foremost 
place. Our verse is probably inserted as 
a note of passage from the last recorded 
fact of Barnabas and Saul (ch. xi. 30), 
to their being found at Antioch (xiii. 1). 
Ἰωάνν.] See above on ver. 12. 
Cuap. XIII. 1—XIV. 28.] First Μ18- 
SIONARY JOURNEY OF PaUL AND BaRNa- 
BAS. Henceforward the history follows 
Saul (or Paul, as he is now (ver. 9) and 
from this time denominated), his ministry, 
and the events of his life, to the exclusion 
(with the sole exception of the council in 
ch. xv.) of all the other Apostles. 
XIII. 1.1 The τινες of the rec. has been 
interpolated, to make it appear that the 
persons mentioned were not the only pro- 
phets and teachers at Antioch. The enu- 
meration is probably inserted on account of 
the solemnity of the incident about to be 
related, that it might be known who they 
were, to whom the Holy Spirit entrusted so 
weighty a commission. ‘That those enu- 
merated were all then present, is implied 
by the τε. . . καί : see ch. i. 18, ™po- 
φῆται] See on ch, xi. 27. διδάσκ.] 
Those who had the χάρισμα διδασκαλίας, 
see 1 Cor. xii. 28; Eph.iv.11. They were 
probably less immediately the organs of 
the Holy Spirit than the προφῆται, but 
under His continual guidance in the 
gradual and progressive work of teaching 


the Word (see Neander, Pfl. u. L. υ. 58). 


om ABDN a p 40 vulg Syr [copt] sah eth. 
επικαλουμ. D ο 180 lect-12. 
np. και τετρ. D!(and lat: txt D‘). 


for o τε, ev os D! vulg [ Ath- 
om o (bef 
TeTpaapx. N(but a erased) 


Συμεὼν ὃ Kat. Νίγερ] Nothing is 
known of him. From his appellation of 
Niger, he may have been an African pros- 
elyte. Λούκιος] A Lucius, probably 
the same person, is mentioned Rom. xvi. 
21 as a συγγενής of Paul. ‘There is no 
reason to suppose him the same with Λουκᾶς 
(Lucanus),—but the contrary; for why 
should Paul in this case use two different 
names? See Col. iv. 14; 2 Tim. iv. 11; 
Philem. 24. Wetstein, believing them to 
be the same, quotes Herodotus, ili. 131, πρῶ- 
τοι μὲν Κροτωνιῆται ἰητροὶ ἐλέγοντο ava 
τὴν Ἑλλάδα εἶναι, δεύτεροι δὲ Κυρηναῖοι, 
which certainly is curious enough. 
Mavayv] The same name with Menahem 
(Mavanu or -ην LXX) the king of Israel, 
2 Kings xv. 14. A certain Essene, of this 
name, foretold to Herod the Great, when a 
boy going to school, that he should be king 
of the Jews (Jos, Antt.xv.10.5). And in 
consequence, when he came to the throne,he 
honoured Manaen, and πάντας am ἐκείνου 
τοὺς Ἑσσηνοὺς τιμῶν διετέλει. Itis then 
not improbable that this Manaen may 
have been a son of that one: but see below. 
The Herod here meant was Antipas, who 
with his brother Archelaus (both sons of 
Herod the Great by Malthace a Samaritan 
woman, see Matt. xiv. 1, note) παρά τινι 
ἰδιώτῃ τροφὰς εἶχον ἐπὶ Ῥώμης, Antt. xvii. 
1. 8. Both were at this time exiles, 
Antipas at Lyons, Archelaus at Vienne. 

σύντροφος Probably ‘ collactaneus’ 


(Vulg.), foster-brother; not, ‘brought up 


with, for, if he had been brought up 
with Antipas, he would also have been 
with Archelaus: see above. In 
this case, his mother may have called 
her infant by the name of the person 
who had brought the Essenes into favour 
with Herod, and no relationship with that 
person need have existed. LavdAos | 


I1—35. 


Σαῦλος. 3 πλειτουργούντων δὲ 


oO , 3 χ A \ “ ? / 
VHOTEVOVT@V ELTTEV TO πνευμὰ TO ἅγιον P Adopicate 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON. 


199 


3 “ A la % 
QUTWVY TW κυριῳ KQt n=here only t, 
C < (Heb. x. 11. 
Rom. xv. 27 
only. Num. 
xvili. 2 al. fr.) 


/ \ ΄ na 
“δή μοι τὸν BapvaBav καὶ Σαῦλον εἰς τὸ ἔργον * ὃ οὔτ 3 valk 


8 / > ,ὔ 
προςκέκλημαι αὑτούς. 


, 7 
3 τότε °vnotevaartes καὶ * mpos- 


-= ch. xv. 36. 


΄ \ u 3 θέ \ n 3 “ Vv 5 / q 
εὐξάμενοι Kat ἃ ἐπιθέντες τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῖς " ἀπέλυσαν. “τῶν ἅτ 


20. Gen. xviii. 4. 


10. Joel ii. 32. so ch. xxv. 12. 
u ch. viii. 17 reff. 


2. aft em. ins avros Εἰ vulg[-ed(with demid, not am fuld] syrr sah[?] eth. 


Υ = Matt. xiv. 15. xv. 23, 32. ch. xv. 30, 33 al. 


1 Cor. vi. 


20. ( 3 τ constr., ver. 39 (Luke i. 25?) only. παρὰ πόλεσιν, ats (i.e. map’ αἷς) 
ἀμφότεροι ξυμβῶσιν, Thue. i. 28. see Matthie, 595. 4. 
(John ix. 22.1 1Pet.iv.3. 4 Kings v. 25 al. 


s=ch. ii. 89. perf. pass., ch. xvi. 
t absol., ch. x. 9 reff. 


1 Maec. x. 43. (Gen. xv. 2.) 


rec 


aft roy ins τε, with a k o p 13: om ABCDEHLPN rel vss[appy] Ath, Cyr-jer; 


Bas, Chr, [Thdrt, }. 


rec ins tov bef σαυλ., with HLPN? rel [Bas,] Thdrt, ΤῊ] : 


om ABCDE 8-corr! p 13 Epiph, Cyr-jer, Chr, [Damasc, ]. 


8. aft mposevé. ins maytes D. 


aut. bef τας χειρ. EK Ὁ k 0 88 [(vulg Syr Lucif,) ]. 


om ἀπελυσαν D: add avrous E vulg syr-w-ob [Syr coptt] Lucif,. 


mentioned last, perhaps because the pro- 
phets are placed first, and he was not one, 
but a teacher: or it may be, that he him- 
self furnished the account. This circum- 
stance, which has been objected to by some 
as invalidating the accuracy of the account, 
is in fact an interesting confirmation of it, 
as being eminently characteristic of him 
who spoke as in 1 Cor. xv. 9; 2 Cor. xii. 6; 
Eph. iii. 8. See Baumgarten’s striking 
remarks on this, vol. ii. p. 7 ff. From the 
arrangement of the copule, it would seem 
as if Barnabas, Symeon, and Lucius were 
prophets,—Manaen and Saul, teachers. 
2. λειτουργούντων | The general word 

for the priestly service among the Jews, to 
which now had succeeded that of προφῆται 
and διδάσκαλοι in the Christian church: 
ministering is therefore the only word ade- 
quate to render it, as E.V. after the Vulg. 
‘ ministrantibus Domino: —more closely to 
define it is not only impracticable, but is 
narrowing an expression purposely left ge- 
neral. Chrys. explains it by κηρυττόντων, 
—alii aliter: and the Romanist expositors 
understand the sacrifice of the mass to be 
meant; but in early times the word had no 
such reference {see reff., and Suicer sub 
voce). - εἶπεν τὸ Tv. TO Gy.] viz. by 
one of the prophets present, probably Sy- 
meon or Lucius: see abeye. The announce- 
ment being ¢o the church, and several 
persons being mentioned, we can hardly, 
with Meyer, suppose it to have been an inner 
command merely to some one person, as 
in the case of Philip, ch. viii. 29. ή 
gives precision and force to the command, 
implying that it was for a special purpose, 
and to be obeyed at the time: see reff. 
τὸ ἔργον] Certainly, by ver. 4, we 

may infer that there had been, or was 
simultaneously withthis command, a divine 
intimation made to Barnabas and Saul of 
the nature and direction of this work. 
In general, it had already been pointed 


out in the case of Saul, ch. ix. 15; xxii. 21; 
xxvi. 17. It consisted in preaching tothe 
Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 
Eph. iii. 8. In virtue of the foundation of 
the Gentile churches being entrusted to 
them, Saul and Barnabas become after 
this Apostles, not vice versa; nor is there 
the least ground for the inference that this 
was a formal extension of the apostolic 
office, the pledge of its continuance through 
the episcopacy to the end of time. The 
apostolic office terminated with the apos- 
tolic times, and by its very nature, ad- 
mitted not of continuance: the episcopal 
office, in its ordinary sense, sprung up 
after the apostolic times (see the remark- 
able testimonies cited by Gieseler, I. i. 
p. 115 f. note, from Jerome on Tit. i. 5, 
vol. vii. p. 694f., and Aug. Epist. Ixxxii. ad 
Hieron. 33, vol. ii. p. 290): and the two 
are entirely distinct. The confusion of the 
two belongs to that unsafe and slippery 
ground in church matters, the only logical 
refuge from which is in the traditional 
system of Rome. See the curious and 
characteristic note in Wordsw., in which 
he attempts to prove the identity of 
the two offices: and compare with it the 
words of Jerome, on Tit. i. 5, p. 695 f., 
““ Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine 
quam dispositionis dominice veritate pres- 
byteris esse majores, et in commune debere 
ecclesiam regere.” 3. νηστ. K. προςευξ.] 
not, ‘jejunio et precibus (viz. of ver. 2) 
peractis, Kuin.: this was a new fasting 
and spectal prayer for Barnabas and Saul. 
Fasting and prayer have ever been con- 
nected with the solemn times of ordina- 
tion by the Christian church; but the 
‘jejunia quatuor temporum,’ or ‘ember 
days at the four seasons,’ for the special 
purpose of ordinations, were probably 
not introduced till the fourth or even 
fifth century. See Bingham, iv. 6. 6. 

ἔπιθ. τ. x. αὖτ.) See on ch. 


140 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. ΧΙ 
, \ κ / ’ 
w ch, xvii 1 4 αὐτοὶ μὲν οὖν ἡ ἐκπεμφθέντες ὑπὸ TOD ἁγίου πνεύματος ABCDE 
only. Gen. = δὰ ᾽, 9 Nai 
xxiv.54,95, *xaTHOov is Σελεύκειαν, ἐκεῖθέν τε Υ ἀπέπλευσαν εἰς beats 
at al , \ ΚΊΟΡ 
xc Κύπρον, > κωὶ γενόμενοι ἐν Σαλαμῖνι 35 κατήγγελλον τὸν 13 
y ch. xiv. 36. ͵ a n a “- a ) , 
ἀχ. 16. xxvii, 2° λόγον τοῦ Ὀθεοῦ ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων" 
Yet aes , \ oo 
eon ἐν δε i εἶχον δὲ καὶ ᾿Ιωάννην “ ὑπηρέτην. ὅ 4 διελθόντες δὲ ὅλην 
1. xi. 26. \ A e » Tl ΄ ᾿ ” 5 \ f ΄ 
Phil-i.17,18 τὴν νῆσον © ἄχρι άφου εὗρον ἄνδρα τινὰ ἴ μάγον 


(-λεύς, ch. xvii. 13.) a ch. xv. 36, xvii. 13. 
16. 1Cor.iv.1. (Prov. xiv. 35.) 
1 Cor. xvi. 5. Heb. iv. 14. Deut. ii. 7. 


b ch. xi. 1 reff. ec = Luke i. 2. ch. xxvi. 


ἃ constr., Luke ii. 35. ch. xii. 10. xiv. 24. xv. 3,41 al. L. only, exc. 
e ch. xi. 5 reff. 


f bere bis. Matt. ii. 1,&c.,only. Dan. ii. 2 


4. ree ovto (6077) to more usual exprn), with E-gr HLP copt(appy) Chr, [Did, 


Lucif, 
Ambr,. (C illegible.) 
Beh.) 
Na p 13 [Ps- ]Ath,. (ΟἹ illegible.) 


7: οἱ D-gr lect-12 Ath[-int, Ps-Ath,]: txt ABN a p 36 vulg D-lat E-lat syrr 
(B(Mai Tischdf expr) has ἐκπεμφθεντες not ἐκπεμψαντες as 
rec tov mv. Tov ay., With EHLP rel [ Did, ]: τ. rv. ay. D!: txt ABC? D-corr 
απηλθ. A: καταβαντες δε D-gr. rec ins τὴν 


bef σελ. and béf κυπρ., with EHLP rel: ins 1st but om 2nd τὴν 13 ΤῊ]: om ABC?DN 


ao p Chron. 
5. γεν. δε Ὁ. 


for τε, δε HLP bdf g op D-lat syr-mg sah ΤῊ] : om D-gr 64. 
ev τὴ σαλαμεινι D-gr: ev σαλαμινὴ A E-gr LN? p: 


els σαλαμινη 


N1: Salaminam vulg{-edj Lucif, : Salamina am fuld D-lat E-lat : txt BC [Η, e sil] P 


rel. 
D-gr Syr Lucif. 


κατηγγελον 1, 6 6 gi Κρ: κατηγγειλαν D 73. 96. 142. 


for θεου, κυριου 


υπηρετουντα avtos D syr-mg: ὃ) ministerio vulg: ἐχοντες μεθ 


εαυτων και ww. εἰς διακονίαν E. (16 corrections have appy been made for perspicuity.) 


8. και (πε)ριελθ. (δέελθοντων, omg Kat, DS) de avtwy D. 


rec om oAnv (oAnv 


and axpt maou being supposed to be inconsistent ?), with HLP rel [sah-woide} Th): 


ins ABCDER® k p 36 vss Lucif;. (13 def.) 
fo eth-pl( Tischdf) arm Thl-fin J. 


vi. 6. 4. ἐκπεμφ.} Under the guid- 
ance of the Spirit, who directed their 
course. Σελεύκειαν A very strong forti- 
fied city (supposed impregnable, Strabo, xvi. 
p- 751), fifteen miles from Antioch,—on 
the Oroutes, and five miles from its mouth. 
It was founded and fortified by Seleucus 
Nicator (Strabo, xvi. 749), who was buried 
there (Appian, Syr. 63). It was called 
Seleucia ad mare,—and Pieria, or ἡ ἐν 
Πιερίᾳ, from Mount Pierius, on which 
it was built, to distinguish it from other 
Syriantowns of the same name. Thismoun- 
tain is called Cory phzeus, Polyb. v.59, where 
is a minute description of the town and 
its site. Among other particulars he men- 
tions, mpdsBaow δὲ μίαν ἔχει κατὰ τὴν ἀπὸ 
θαλάττης πλευρὰν κλιμακωτὴν καὶ χειρο- 
ποίητον, ἐγκλίμασι καὶ σκαλώμασι πυκνοῖς 
καὶ συνεχέσι διειλημμένην. This excavated 
way is to this day conspicuous amongst 
the ruins of the city. It was under 
the Seleucid kings the capital of a dis- 
trict Seleucis,—and, since Pompey’s time, 
a free city. Strabo, xvi. 751. Plin. v. 21 
(Winer, Realw.; and Mr. Lewin, Life of 
St. Paul, from an art. by Col. Chesney in 
the Geogr. Society’s Transactions. ) 

eis Κύπρον] The lofty outline of Cyprus 
is visible from the mouth of the Orontes 
(C. and H., edn. 2, i. p. 164). See below, 
ver. 7. It was the native country of Bar- 
nabas,—and, as John Mark was his kins- 
man, they were likely to find more accept- 
ance there than in other parts. 5. ] 


mupov Ἐὶ : evpay A. add exe: C 


rec om avdpa (as superfluous), with HLP rel: ins 


Salamis was the nearest port to Seleucia on 
the eastern side of the island. It had a 
good harbour (λιμένα ἔχουσα κλαυστὸν 
χειμερινόν, Scylax, Peripl. p. 41). It was 
the residence of a king anciently (Herod. 
iv. 162), and always one of the chief cities 
of the island. There were very many Jews 
there, as appears by there being more than 
one synagogue. Their numbers may have 
been increased by the farming of the 
copper-mines by Augustus to Herod. On 
the insurrection of the Jews in the reign of 
Trajan, Salamis was nearly destroyed, and 
they were expelled from the island. Its 
demolition was completed by an earthquake 
in the reign of Constantine, who (or his 
immediate successors) rebuilt it and gave it 
the name of Constantia. The ruins of this 
latter place are visible near the modern Fa- 
magosta, the Venetian capital of the island 
(Winer, Realw., and C. and H. pp. 171, f.). 

ὑπηρέτην Probably for the admi- 
nistration of baptism: see also 1 Cor. i. 
14—17. 6.1 Paphos is on the west- 
ern shore, with the length of the island 
between it and Salamis. It is Nea Paphos 
which is meant, about eight miles north of 
the Paphos more celebrated in classic poets 
for the temple and worship of Venus. It 
was destroyed by an earthquake in Augus- 
tus’s reign, but rebuilt by him, Dio Cass. liv. 
23. It is now called Baffa, and contains 
some important ruins. (Winer, Realw.) 

τινὰ μάγον, x.7.A.| On the preva- 
lence of such persons at this time, see ch. 


4—9. 


ὃ ψευδοπροφήτην ᾿Ιουδαῖον, ᾧ ὃ 
\ / 


A h > , 
σὺν τῷ " ἀνθυπάτῳ Σεργίῳ 


TIIPABEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


141 


ὄνομα Βαριησοῦς, 7 ὃς ἣν « Matt. τι 15, 
Παύλῳ, ἀνδρὶ ᾿ συνετῷ. Ἰκονι τὸς 


Zech. xiii. 2. 


td rn 
οὗτος "προςκαλεσάμενος BapvaBav καὶ Σαῦλον } ἐπ- where ke. ice: 


Ὁ“ \ , Ὁ“ lal 
εζήτησεν ἀκοῦσαι τὸν ὃ λόγον τοῦ ὃ θεοῦ. 


ἀπὸ τῆς "πίστεως. 


ch. xviii. 12. 
xix. 38 only 
(see notes). 


8 πὶ ἀνθίστατο 


Se Jie "EX OF ΄, με τ, \ 0 θ / i Matt. xi. 25. 
€ αὑτοῖς ὕμας 0! μάγος (" οὕτως yap ° μεθερμηνεύεται Luke x. 21. 
\ oo» ᾽ a Ρ a q δ , \ ἢ 2 θ 7 Πὰς a 
TO ὄνομα αὐτοῦ), » ζητῶν «διαστρέψαι τὸν ἢ ἀνθύπατον (fom τα. 
a ξ A 

9 Davros δὲ ὁ καὶ ἸΙαῦλος, "πλη- Sin" 
k = ch. ν. 40 

1 Rom. xi. 7 reff. constr., here only. m mid., 2 Tim. iii. 8 


al. Gen. xxviii. 1. 

only. Ps. Ιχχν. 7. (ch. vi. 10 reff.) 
p = Luke vi. 19. ix. 9. xix. 47 al. fr. Exod. ii. 15. 

2. Phil. ii. 15 only. Exod. v. 4. 


n := Matt. vi. 9. Mark ii. 12 al. 


F=-h, Vi. 7. XiVo2e, χυῖ. ΟΣ 


k o ch. iv. 36 reff. 
q here bis. ch. xx. 30. Luke ix. 41 |j Mt. xxiii. 
5 s ch. ii. 4 reff. 


ABCDNk 0 p [am] syrr [arm] Chr, ΤῊ] ; so, but aft τινα, Εἰ 36 vulg[ -ed fuld demid] sah 


Lucif [and, omg τινα, coptt eth(Tischdf)]. 


ονοματι καλουμενον LD. Bapinoova(y 


or -μ) D!: Barjesuban Lucif,: Barsuma Syr: βαρίησουν ADSHLP p rel syr-mg-gr 
Thl-sif: Bapinoov & 40. 96. 105 vulg copt arm: txt BCE 13 sah Chr, Thl-fin. 
add o μεθερμηνευεται ελυμας EK; so, but paratus, i.e. eroumas, see on ver 8, demid Lucif. 


7. συνκαλεσαμενὸς D. 


E, μερμην.(510) p. ]} 
ndews avtwy ἠκουεν ΕἸ syr-w-ast. 


viii. 9, note. The Roman aristocracy were 
peculiarly under the influence of astrologers 
and magicians, some of whom were Jews. 
We read of such in connexion with Marius, 
Pompey, Crassus, Cesar,—and later with 
Tiberius: and the complaints of Horace 
and Juvenal shew how completely, and for 
how long a time, Rome was inundated with 
Oriental impostors of every description. 
See Hor. Sat.i. 2.1; Juv. Sat. iii. 13—16; 
vi. 542—546; x. 93, and C. and H. pp. 
1717 ff. Βαριησοῦς) He had given 
himself the Arabic title of Elymas, ‘the 
wise man’ (from the same root as the 
Turkish ‘Ulemah’), interpreted 6 μάγος 
in our text. 7. τῷ ἀνθυπάτῳ] The 
Greek term for the Latin ‘ proconsul,’ the 
title of the governor of those provinces 
which were (semblably) left by the empe- 
rors to the government of the senate and 
people. The proconsul was appointed by 
lot, as in the times of the republic; carried 
with him the lictors and fasces asa consul: 
but had no military power, and held office 
only for a year (Dio Cass. liii. 13). This 
last restriction was soon relaxed under the 
emperors, and they were retained five or 
even more years. The imperial provinces, on 
the other hand, were governed by a mili- 
tary officer, a Propretor (ἀντιστράτηγοΞ) 
or Legatus (πρεσβευτής) of the Emperor 
who was girded with the sword, and not 
revocable unless by the pleasure of the Em- 
peror. The minor districts of the imperial 
provinces were governed by Procurators 
(ἐπίτροποι). (C. and H. pp. 173 ff.: Dio 
Cassius, lili. 18, 15: Merivale, Hist. of the 
Romans under the Empire, ch. xxxii.) The 
title ἡγεμών, used in the N. T. of the pro- 
curator of Judea, of the legatus of Syria, 


και εζητησεν (και is marked for erasure by D-corr). 
8. for ελυμ.; ετίο or α)ιμας D1, etoemas D-lat: ελυιμας D4. 


[for μεθ., ερμηνευεται 


aft πιστεως ins επειδῃ ἡδιστα ἤκουεν avrwy D}(and lat): οτι 


and of the emperor himself, is a general 
term for any governor. But we never find 
the more definite title of ἀνθύπατος as- 
signed in the N. T. toa legatus. Cyprus, 
as Dio Cassius informs us, liii. 12, was ori- 
ginally an imperial province, and conse- 
quently was governed by a propretor or 
legatus (so also Strabo, xiv. 685, yéyove 
στρατηγικὴ ἐπαρχία Kal αὑτὴν ..... 
ἐγένετο ἐπαρχία ἣ νῆσος, καθάπερ καὶ 
νῦν ἐστι, στρατηγική) : but immediately 
after he relates that Augustus ὕστερον τὴν 
Κύπρον x. τὴν Γαλατίαν τὴν περὶ Νάρ- 
βωνα τῷ δήμῳ ἀπέδωκεν, αὐτὸς δὲ τὴν 
Δαλματίαν ἀντέλαβε. And in liv. 4, re- 
peating the same, he adds, καὶ οὕτως avé- 
ὕπατοι καὶ ἐς ἐκεῖνα τὰ ἔθνη πέμπεσθαι 
ἤρξαντο. The title of Proconsul is found 
on Cyprian coins, both in Greek and Latin. 
(See C. and H. p. 187, who give an in- 
scription (Boeckh, No. 2632) of the reign 
of Claudius, a.D. 52, mentioning the ἀνθ- 
ύπατοι, a former and a present one, Julius 
Cordus and L. Annius Bassus.) No- 
thing more is known of this Sergius Paulus. 
Another person of the same name is men- 
tioned by Galen, more than a century after 
this, as a great proficient in philosophy. 
He was of consular rank, and is probably 
the Sergius Paulus who was consul with 
L. Venuleius Apronianus, A.D. 168, in the 
reign of M. Aurelius. Another S. P. was 
one of the consules suffecti in a.D. 94: but 
this could hardly have been the same, 
8. ᾿Ελύμας] See above on ver. 6. 

Stactpepar .... ἀπό) A pregnant con- 
struction, as ἀπέστησεν ὀπίσω, ch. v. 37. 

9. ὁ καὶ Παῦλος) This notice 
marks the transition from the former part 
of his history, where he is unifurmly called 


142 TIPAS EIS ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XIII. 


: \ U . 3 9 
tchilorer. σθεὶς πνεύματος ἁγίου, tatevicas eis αὐτὸν 10 εἶπεν °O azcnE 


u ch. xix. 28 


7 Ν , 7] « 
τῆς ΟΥ̓ πλήρης παντὸς Ὗ᾽ δόλου καὶ πάσης * ῥᾳδιουργίας, Y υἱὲ bed tg 
Sir. xix. 36. w Matt. xxvi.4, Rom.i.29. 1 Thess. ii. 3. Job xiii. 7, x here only+. Xen. Rep. Lac, ἢ ak op 


xiv. 4. (-γημα, ch. xviii. 14.) 


9. πληθεις DP. rec ins καὶ bef arev., with DEHP rel [syrr seth arm] ΤῊ] : om - 2 


ABCLN ὁ f p 13. 36. 40 [vulg sah] Chr, Lucif,. 


10. om 1st macys D}(ins D*) arm Orig-int, Lucif,. 


Saul, to the latter and larger portion, where 
he is without exception known as Paul. I 
do not regard it as indicative of any change 
of name at the time of this incident, or 
from that time: the evidence which I 
deduce from it is of a different kind, and 
not without interest to enquirers into the 
character and authorship of our history. 
Hitherto, our Evangelist has been describ- 
ing events, the truth of which he had ascer- 
tained by research and from the narratives 
of others. But henceforward there is reason 
to think that the joint memoirs of himself 
and the great Apostle furnish the material 
of the book. In those memoirs the Apostle 
is universally known by the name Pavt, 
which superseded the other. If this was 
the first incident at which Luke was pre- 
sent, or the first memoir derived from Paul 
himself, or, which is plain, however doubt- 
ful may be the other alternatives, the com- 
mencement of that part of the history which 
is to narrate the teaching and travels of the 
Apostle Paul,—it would be natural that a 
note should be made, identifying the two 
names as belonging to the same person. 

The καί must not be understood as 
having any reference to Sergius Paulus, 
‘who also (as well as Sergius) was called 
Paul.’ Galen (see above) uses the same ex- 
pression in speaking of his Sergius Paulus : 
Sépyids τε, ὁ καὶ Παῦλος .. - -. and then, 
a few lines down, calls him 6 Παῦλος. It 
signifies that Paulus was a second name 
borne by Saul, in conformity with a Jewish 
practice as old as the captivity (or even as 
Joseph, see Gen. xli.45), of adopting a Gen- 
tile name. Mr. Howson traces it through 
the Persian period (see Dan. i. 7; Esth. 
ii. 7), the Greek (1 Mace. xii. 16; xvi. 11; 
2 Mace. iv. 29), and the Roman (ver. 1; 
ch. i. 28; xviii. 8, &c.), and the middle ages, 
down to modern times. Jerome has conjec- 
tured that the name was adopted by Saul zm 
memory of this event: “ Diligenter attende, 
quod hic primum Pauli nomen inceperit. 
Ut enim Scipio, subjecta Africa, Africani 
sibi nomen assumpsit, et Metellus, Creta in- 
sula subjugata, insigne Cretici suze familie 
reportavit ;—et imperatores nunc usque 
Romani ex subjectis gentibus Adiabenici, 
Parthici, Sarmatici nuncupantur: ita et 
Saulus ad preedicationem gentium missus, 
a primo ecclesiz spolio Proconsule Sergio 
Paulo victoriz sue φορῶ retulit, erexit- 


viot D'[-gr ](txt D?*). 


que vexillum ut Paulus dicereture Saulo.’ 
(In Ep. ad Philem. 1, vol. vii. pp. 746 f.) 
It is strange that any one could be found 
capable of so utterly mistaking the charac- 
ter of St. Paul, or of producing so unfor- 
tunate an analogy to justify the mistake. 
(I may observe that Wordsw.’s apo- 
logy, that Jerome does not say that the 
Apostle gave himself this name on this 
account, is distinctly precluded by Jerome’s 
language, “erexitque vexillum ut Paulus 
diceretur e Saulo.” This Wordsw., trans- 
lating the final words “and instead of 
Saul was called Paul,” has missed seeing. 
Notice too Augustine’s “ amavit,” below.) 
It is yet stranger that Augustine should, 
in his Confessions (viii. 4, vol. i. p. 753), 
adopt the same view: ‘Ipse minimus 
Apostolorum tuorum .... ex priore Saulo 
Paulus vocari amayit, ob tam magne 
insigne victoria.’ (Elsewhere Augustine — 
gives another, but not much better reason : 
‘Paulus Apostolus, cum Saulus prius vo- 
caretur, non ob aliud, quantum mihi 
videtur, hoe nomen elegit, nisi ut se osten- 
deret parvum, tanquam minimum Aposto- 
lorum.” De Spir. et Lit. ο. 7, vol. x. p. 207.) 
So also Olshausen. A more probable way 
of accounting for the additional name is 
pointed out by observing that such names 
were often alliterative of or allusive to the 
original Jewish name :—as Grotius in his 
note: ‘ Saulus qui et Paulus: id est, qui, 
ex quo cum Romanis conversari ccepit, hoe 
nomine, a suo non abludente, ccepit a 
Romanis appellari. Sic qui Jesus Judzis, 
Grecis Jason (or Justus, Col. iv. 11): 
Hillel, Pollio: Onias, Menelaus (Jos. Antt. 
xii. 5. 1): Jakim (= Eliakim), Aletmus. 
Apud Romanos, Silas, Silvanus, ut notavit 
Hieronymus: Pasides, Pansa, ut Suetonius 
in Crassitio: Diocles, Diocletianus: Bigli- 
nitza, soror Justiniani, Romane Vigilan- 
tia,’ ἀτενίσας εἰς αὐτόν] It seems 
probable that Paul never entirely recovered 
his sight as before, after the δόξα τοῦ φωτὸς 
ἐκείνου. We have several apparent allu- 
sions to weakness in his sight, or to some- 
thing which rendered his bodily presence 
contemptible. Inch. xxiii. 1, the same ex- 
pression, ἀτενίσας τῷ συνεδρίῳ, occurs, and 
may have some bearing (see note there) 
on his not recognizing the high priest. See 
also Gal. iv. 18,15; vi. 11, and 2 Cor. xii. 
7, 9, and notes. The traditional notices of 





10—13. 


ΤΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ AIOSTOAON. 


143 


ἡ) διαβόλου, 2 ἐχθρὲ πάσης 5 δικαιοσύνης, ov Ὁ παύσῃ y see Matt. xiii 


« διαστρέφων τὰς “ ὁδοὺς κυρίου τὰς Ἁ εὐθείας ; 11 καὶ νῦν 


38. John viii. 
44, Eph. ii. 
2. 1 John iii. 
10 al. 


᾿ A \ Ie \ / 
© dod f χεὶρ fxupiou % ἐπὶ σέ, Kai ἔσῃ τυφλὸς put)” βλέπων ow. gen. of 


\ j 4 ἰξᾷ la) 
τὸν " ἥλιον * ἄχρι * καιροῦ. 


4 χειραγωγούς. 


8 ΕῚ fe tu 2 , Jie a ty ὃ ὃ a a / 
€TT LO TEVO EV EKTANTTOMEVOS ΕἼΤ TH l ax) TOU κυριου. 


] n δὲ m 5 7 
παραχρῆμα δὲ ™ ἐπέπεσεν 
Sinise Ped yo Yi \ \ ΠῚ “ x p ΄ 5.7 
ἐπ᾿ αὐτὸν "ἀχλὺς καὶ “ σκότος, καὶ περιάγων ἐζήτει 
4 ς > Me \ \ 
12 tore ἰδὼν ὁ 1 ἀνθύπατος τὸ γεγονὸς 


thing, Phil. 
ili. 18 only. 
κοινὸν 
ἐχθρὸν τῆς 
φύσεως 
ὅλης τῆς 
ἀνθρωπίνης, 
Demosth. 
κατ. Στεφα. 


13 ν᾽᾿Αναχθέντες δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς Πάφου * οἱ περὶ Ἰ]αῦλον, 2 yatt. v.6 


cxi. 9. 
XXXVlil. 20. c = Rom. xi. 33. 
8 ch. ii. 7 reff. f ch. xi. 21 reff. Ezek. xl. 1. 
18. ii. 2,9. 2 Kings i. 16. h Eccl. xi. 7. 
lch. 111. 7 reff. m ch. viii. 16 reff. 


Ὁ = here only. Deut. xxviii. 29. σκότον δεδορκώς, Eur. Phen. 377. 
w. acc., Matt. ix. 35. xxiii. 15. Mark vi. 6. w. ἐν, Matt. iv. 23. trans., 1 Cor. ix. 5 only. 

) r ver. 7. 
vii. 28. xxii. 33. Mark i. 22. xi. 18, Luke iv. 82. 
v= ch. ii. 42 reff. ν 
x = here (John xi. 19 ν. r.) only. see Mark iv. 10, Luke xxii, 49. 


only+. (-νεῖν, ch. ix. 8. 


4. 2 Mace. vii. 12 only. 
11 alll. L.$. 2 Macc. v. 9. 


ins του bef κυριου BX}1(X3 disapproving). 


11. ins 7 bef χεὶρ (but marked for erasure) D!. 
aft τυφλος ins καὶ P o (syr). 


ABCDEHLPN rel. 


1X FPS 


al. Ps. 
Ὁ constr., Luke v. 4. ch. v. 42. vi. 18. xx. 31. xxi. 32. Eph.i.16. Heb. x.2. Isa. 
i Heb. iii. 10. Rev. xv. 3. 


Ps. xvii. 21. ἃ ch, viii. 21 reff. 
g - Matt. xxvil. 25. ch. xvili.6. Rom. i. 
ich. xx. 6 reff. k Luke iv. 13 only. 


nhere only +. Job iii.5Symm. Hom Il. νυ. 321. 


p absol., here only. intrans. 
q here 
s absol., John iv. 53. ch. iv. 4 ἃ]. fr. t Matt. 


u Mark vi. 2 al. Eccl. vii. 17. Wisd. xiii, 
w = Luke viii. 22. ch. xvi. 


ins ovoas bef evderas Ὠ)}. 
rec ins τοῦ bef xvp.: om 
for axpt, ews D, 


for δε, re CX p vulg Syr copt eth Lucif, Jer,: for tapaxpnua Se, καὶ evOews D (corrns, 


the copulative conj seeming more appropriate). 


ἐπεσεν (carrn to more simple 


exprn than ewemecev em) A B(sic: see table) DX [p] Thl-sif: txt CEHLP 18. 36 rel 


Chr Thl-fin. 
12. ιἰδων Se D-gr [(Syr eth) | Lucif,. 
εκπλ. bef emo. A [501] 
εκπλήττομ. Ba b? g hk 19, 
αποστολων 4, 
13. avexOevtes(sic) B!. 


his personal appearance (see C. and H. 
p- 181, note) represent him as having con- 
tracted and overhanging eyebrows. 
Whatever the word may imply, it appears 
like the graphic description of an eye-wit- 
ness, who was not Paul himself. So also 
περιάγων ἐζήτει χειραγωγούς, below. 

10. υἱὲ Saf. | Meyer supposes an indignant 
allusion to the name Bar-jesus. This is 
possible, though hardly probable (see be- 
low). διαβ., which usually has the article, 
is elsewhere found without it only in 
(1 Pet. v. 8) Rev. xii. 9, 22. See Moulton’s 
Winer, p. 155, note 1. πάσ. du«., of all 
that is right. διαστρ. «.7.A.] The οὐ 
παύσῃ evidently makes this apply, not to 
Elymas’s conduct on this occasion merely, 
but to his whole life of imposture and per- 
version of others. The especial sin was, 
that of laying hold of the nascent enquiry 
after God in the minds of men, and wrest- 
ing it to a wrong direction. κυρίου, 
here and ver. 11, is Jehovah. If, as some 
suppose, the reading of the name Bar-jesus 
is Bar-jehu, the repetition may be allusive: 
as in the other case might the ἐχθρὲ mac. 
δικαιοσύνης to the name Jesus. But Meyer 
supposes the various readings in the forms 
of the name (Barsuma, Barjesuban) to have 
arisen from a desire to reverence the Name 
Jesus. τυφλὸς μὴ βλέπων so μνήσ- 


om em avrov B [om em A(appy) ]. 

ins εθαυμασεν και bef emor. DE eth Lucif, : 
: aft emor.ins tw θεω D; τω κυρ., omitting the rest, eth. 

for τ. κυρ., τ. θεου C Vig,: του χριστου 63: των 


rec ins τὸν bef παυλον, with ΗΤΡ rel { Dion-6-mss] ΤῊ] : 


θητι μὴ ἐπιλάθῃ, Deut. ix. 7. 11. 
ἄχρι καιροῦ] The punishment was only 
temporary, being accompanied with a 
gracious purpose to the man himself, to 
awaken repentance in him. The sense 
given to ἄχρι x. by Tittmann and Meyer 
here and at ref. Luke, of ἕως τέλους, is 
one of which it seems to me incapable. 

ἀχλὺς K. σκότος In the same pre- 
cise and gradual manner is the healing of 
the lame man, ch. 111. 8, described: ἔστη 
(first), x. περιεπάτει. So here, first a dim- 
ness came on him,—then ‘total darkness. 
And we may conceive this to have been 
evinced by his gestures and manner under 
the infliction. 12. ἐπὶ τῇ 88. τ. 
κυρ. Hesitating as he had been before 
between the teaching of the sorcerer and 
that of the Apostle, he is amazed at the 
divine power accompanying the latter, and 
gives himself up to it. It is not said that 
he was baptized : but the supposition is not 
thereby excluded: see ver. 48; ch. xvii. 
12, 34; xviii. 8, first part. 13. οἱ 
περὶ II.] Is there not a trace of the nar- 
rator being among them, in this expres- 
sion ἢ Henceforward Paul is the princi- 
pal person, and Barnabas is thrown into 
the background. Πέργην τ. apo. | 
Perga lies on the Cestrus, which flows into 
the bay of Attaleia. It is sixty stadia from 


144 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


ἦλθον εἰς Πέργην τῆς Παμφυλίας" 


ΧΠΙ. 


y Matt. vii. 23. 
Luke ix. 39 ; ’ 2 Se ᾿Ξ ͵ sa le 14 
only. Jer χωρήσας aT αὑτῶν ὑπέστρεψεν εἰς ᾿Ἱεροσόλυμα. αὐτοὶ 
9 La Ἂς a 
i.azonly, δὲ * διελθόντες ἀπὸ τῆς Πέργης ὃ παρεγένοντο ὃ εἰς ᾿Αν- 
Ζ ch. viii. 25 , Ἀ TI ὃ 7 \ > , ΟῚ \ 
reff. TLOYELAVY τὴν toloiav, καὶ εἰςελθόντες εἰς τὴν συν- 
a absol., ch 2 
ee στ \ A δ a ΄ , \ 
binis ss  aywynv TH “ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν ° σαββάτων ἃ ἐκάθισαν. 15 Μετὰ 
reff. Exod. δὲ A eee ap LS \ A f a g ’ 
χε. 85.  O€ τὴν “ἀνώγνωσιν τοῦ “νομου καὶ τῶν προφητῶν 8 ἀπ- 
5 ἀρ ἐξ πότῳ! , ς > s , 
ch αν ἃ. ἐστείλαν οἱ " ἀρχισυνάγωγοι ὃ πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὃ λέγοντες 
. 8. see / y : ΄ a 
Take xii u, Ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί, εἴ τις ἔστιν ἱ λόγος * ἐν ὑμῖν | παρακλή- 
. Ch. XX. 
7 reff. d abs., ch. xvi. 13 reff. e 2 Cor. iii. 14. 1 Tim. iv. 13 only. Neh. viii. 8. 
f Matt. v.17. Luke xvi. 16. ch. xxvi. 14. xxviii. 23. Rom. iii. 21. g Matt. xxvii. 19. Mark 


iii. 31 al. 


2 Kings ae il. 
i Heb. xiii. 22 only. 


1 Mace. x. 24. 


om ABCDEN ον 13 Dion,{ -in-]Eus Chr. 


14. for avro: de, παυλος δε και βαρναβας E. 


h = Mark v. 22, &c. 
k =2 Cor. xi. 10. 


Luke viii. 49. xiii. 14. ch. xviii. 8,17 only +. 
1 Cor. viii. 7 al. 


υπεστρεψαν N!. 


avaxwp. E 180. 
rec τῆς πισιδιας, 


εγενοντο A. 


with DEHLP p 13 rel [vulg syrr arm]: que est Pisidie tol: txt ΑΒΟΝ. for 


erseA8., ελθοντες BCR! p copt. 


p 13. 36 vulg Syr copt. 


ABC(H)X ac p 13 vulg [syrr sah arm]: txt (D)E 
sermo et intellectus in vobis exhortationis D-lat.—vuuw is written 


aft Aoy. ins σοφιας D: 
above the line appy by P?. 


the mouth (εἶθ᾽ 6 Kéorpos ποταμός, ὃν ἄνα- 
πλεύσαντι σταδίους ἑξήκοντα Πέργη πόλις, 
Strabo, xiv. p. 667), “between and upon 
the sides of two hills, with an extensive 
valley in front, watered by the river Ces- 
trus, and backed by the mountains of the 
Taurus.” (C. and H. vol. i. p. 195, from 
Sir C. Fellows’s Asia Minor.) The remains 
are almost entirely Greek, with few traces 
of later inhabitants (p. 194 and note). 
The inhabitants of Pamphylia were 
nearly allied in character to those of Cilicia 
(of Πάμφυλοι, πολὺ τοῦ Κιλικίου φίλου 
μετέχοντες, Strabo, xii. § 7): and it may 
have been Paul’s design, having already 
preached in his own province, to extend 
the Gospel of Christ to this neighbouring 
people. John probably took the oppor- 
tunity of some ship sailing from Perga. 
His reason for returning does not appear, 
but may be presumed from ch. xv. 38 to 
have been, unsteadiness of character, and 
unwillingness to face the dangers abound- 
ing in this rough district (see below). He 
afterwards, having been the subject of dis- 
sension between Paul and Barnabas, ch. 
xv. 37—40, accompanied the latter again to 
Cyprus; and we find him at a much later 
period spoken of by Paul, together with 
Aristarchus and Jesus called Justus, as 
having been a comfort to him (Col. iv. 10, 
11): and again in 2 Tim. iv. 11, as pro- 
fitable to him Sor the ministry. 14. 
διελθόντες It is not improbable that 
during this journey Paul may have en- 
countered some of the " perils by robbers ’ 
of which he speaks, 2 Cor. xi. 26. The 
tribes inhabiting the mountains which se- 
parate the table-land of Asia Minor from 


tnv(sic D!: 
15. rec om τις, with D-corr EHLP rel [syr sah eth arm] Chr, ΤῊ] : 
ev uuu bef Aoyos (alteration to connect Aoyos with παρακλ.) 


τὴ D-corr) nuetepa τω σαββατω D. 
ins ABCD!8 a 


L(P) rel [(copt)] Thl.—om εν H.— 


the coast, were notorious for their lawless 
and marauding habits. Strabo says of Is- 
auria, λῃστῶν ἅπασαι κατοικίαι (xii.6), and 
of the Pisidians, καθάπερ oi Κίλικες, Ano- 
τρικῶς ἤσκηνται, χὶϊ. 7. He gives a similar 
character of the Pamphylians. > Av- 
τιόχεια ἣ Πισιδία or πρὸς Πισιδίᾳ, Strabo, 
xii. 8, was founded originally (Str abo, ib.) 
by the Magnetes on the Meander, and 
subsequently by Seleucus Nicator, and be- 
came, under Augustus, a Roman colony 
(ἔχουσα ἐποικίαν Ῥωμαίων, Strabo, ib.:— 
‘Pisidarum colonia Czesarea, eadem An- 
tiocheia.’  Plin. v. 24. ‘In Pisidia juris 
Italici est colonia Antiochensium,’ Paulus, 
Digest.i.15). Its position is described by 
Strabo as being on a hill, and was unknown 
or wrongly placed till Mr. Arundell found 
its ruins at a place now called Yalobatch, 
answering to Strabo’s description: where 
since. an inscription has been found with 
the letters ANTIOCHEAE CAESARE (C. and 
H. pp. 205, 207 note). 15.] The divi- 
sions of the law and prophets at present 
in use among the Jews were probably not 
yet arranged. Before the time of An- 
tiochus Epiphanes, the Law only was read 
in the synagogues: but, this having been 
forbidden by him, the Prophets were sub- 
stituted :—and, when the Maccabees re- © 
stored the reading of the Law, that of the 
prophets continued as well. ἀπ- 
έστειλαν | Then they were not sitting in the 
πρωτοκαθεδρίαι, Matt. xxiii. 6, but some- 
where among the congregation. The mes- 
sage was probably sent to them as having 
previously to this taught in the city, and 
thus being known to have come for: that 
purpose. See, as illustrating our narrative, 


Ἰωάννης δὲ Y ἀπο- aBcpe 





ον .ν 


~ 


14—19. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 145 


\ \ , ¢ 
σεως πρὸς τὸν λαόν, λέγετε. 16 1 ἀναστὰς δὲ Ἰ]αῦλος καὶ 1= ον. vi.9 
ren. 
al \ 3 2 A ze 
τ κατασείσας τῇ χειρὶ εἶπεν Ανδρες ᾿Ισραηλῖται καὶ οἱ moh. αἰ τ 


A , 
ἢ φοβούμενοι tov " Θεόν, ἀκούσατε. 


ς = a —eh. x. 2 
17 ὁ θεὸς τοῦ λαοῦ τοῦ 


«ὃ John vi. 70. 


΄ Ἃ , A see 
τούτου ᾿Ισραὴλ 9 ἐξελέξατο τοὺς Ὁ πατέρας P ἡμῶν, καὶ Xi 18.αν.Ψ 


16,19. 
Deut. iv. 37. 


\ \ Ὁ 3 A ! > a peas \ 
Tov λαὸν “ὕψωσεν ἐν TH " παροικίᾳ ἐν γῇ Αὐγύπτῳ, καὶ Nenix.7. 


p ch. v. 30 reff, 


5 μετὰ ἃ βραχίονος “ ὑψηλοῦ ἡ ἐξήγαγεν αὐτοὺς ἐξ αὐτῆς. a= 14. i.2. 


Luke i. 52. 
2 Cor. ΧΙ, ἦς 


\ e an ΄ ᾿ 
18 καὶ ὡς * τεσσερακονταετῆ χρόνον Y ἐτροφοφόρησεν αὐτοὺς Boe αν 


> i FS , a 
εν ΤΊ) €P7) Ma) 
1 Pet. i. 17 only. Ezra viii. 35. 


16 al.) w ch. xii. 17 reff. 


(Tpo7m. compl. Orig. in Caten.). 2 Mace. vii. 27 only. 
i. 31. i 


PY OE ν 20. & 4b ey UA 
w. ἐν). u Luke i. 51. ΤΌΔΕ xii. 38 (from 158. liii. 1) only. 


19. 1 Chron. 


\ \ e A 
19 καὶ ἃ καθελὼν ἔθνη ἑπτὰ ἐν γῇ Καναὰν «νι. 
I 


r. 1. 22. 
_ there only. Exod. vi. 1,6 al. (but 
v == here only. (Rom, xii. 
y here only. Deut. i. 31 bis 
z = Matt. iv. 1 ||. ch. vii. 30, ἄς. Deut. 


x ch, vii. 23 only. 


a= ch. xix. 27. 2Cor.x.5: Ps. li. 5 (7). 


16. ins o bef παυλος Ὁ. 
17. for τουτου, του B: om 40 vulg eth. 


aft ot ins ἐν υμιν Ἡ lect-11 Chr,[-txt(om comm) ]. 


om topana (as unnecessary) EHLP rel 


syrr Chr, Thl: ins ABCDN a g p 18 vulg copt sah(omg Aaov tour.) [eth arm]. 


for 1st και, δια D'(txt D*[-gr]). 
p 13 vulg: txt CDEHLP rel 36 Chr ΤῊ]. 
18. om ws DE vulg Syr [coptt]. 


ins τη bef yn D!. 


eT μ (omg xpovor) D. 


ayurtov ABRabc? d 


rec etTpottopopnaev 


(alteration to what seemed a more appropriate word; see notes), with BC? DHLPR p 
rel 36 vulg(mores eorum sustinuit) syr-mg-gr Orig Chr ec Thl-fin (etpoporop. Thl- 
sif): txt AC'E [l}(appy) ] 18 syrr coptt «th arm Constt(see Tischdf) Cyr Hesych. 


19. om και B p sah. 


Luke iv. 17 ff. and notes. 16. κατα- 
σείσας τ. χειρί] As was his practice; see 
ch. xxi. 40. Seealso ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα, ch. 
SAVE: On the character, &c. of Paul’s 
speeches reported in the Acts, see Prolegg. 
Si. ide τἰ- 17. The contents of this 
speech (vv. 16—41) may be thus arranged : 
I. Reeapitulation of God’s ancient deliver- 
ances of His people and mercies towards 
them, ending with His crowning mercy, 
the sending of the Deliverer and promised 
Son of David (vv. 16—25). 11. The his- 
tory of the rejection of Jesus by the Jews, 
and of God’s fulfilment of His promise by 
raising Him from the dead (vv. 26—37). 
III. The personal application of this to 
all present,—the announcement to them 
of justification by faith in Jesus, and 
solemn warning against the rejection of 
Him (vv. 38—41). It is in the last de- 
gree unsafe to argue, as Wordsworth has 
done, that, because Strabo asserts the 
language of the Pisidians to have been 
neither Greek nor Lydian, St. Paul must 
have spoken to them by virtue of his 
miraculous gift of tongues. ‘To the ques- 
tion put by Wordsw., “ In what language 
did St. Paul preach in Pisidia? ”? we may 
reply, seeing that he preached in the syna- 
gogue after the reading of the law and 
prophets, “In the same language as that 
in which the law and prophets had just 
been read.” ot of. τ. 6.] The (un- 
circumcised) proselytes of the gate; not 
excluding even such pious Gentiles, not 
proselytes in any sense, who might be 
present. The speech, from the beginning 
Vor. 11, 


ev yn xavaav bef επτα E: om ev y. x. 19. 


and throughout, is wnversal in its applica- 
tion, embracing Jews and Gentiles. 

17. τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου] ‘ Hoc dicit Pisidis, 
Judzos digito monstrans’ (Grot.). Or 
rather, perhaps by the τούτου indicating, 
without gesture, the people in whose syn- 
agogue they were assembled. τ. War. 
ἡμῶν It is evident that the doctrine so 
much insisted on afterwards by Paul, that 
all believers in Christ were the true chil- 
dren of Abraham, was fully matured al- 
ready: by the τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου he alludes. 
to the time when God was the God of the 
Jews only: by this ἡμῶν he unites all 
present in the now extended inheritance of 
the promises made to the fathers. 
ὕψωσεν Evidently an allusion to Isa. i. 2, 
where the word is also used in the sense 
of ‘ bringing up,’ nourishing, to manhood. 
This was done by increasing them in Egypt 
so that they became a great nation : see ref. 
Gen. There is no reference to any exralta- 
tion of the people during their stay in 
Egypt: whether by their deliverance 
(Calv., Heinr., Elsner), or by the miracles 
of Moses (Meyer), or by Joseph’s prefer- 
ment to honour (Beza, Grot.). 18. ἐτρο- 
φοφόρησεν] That this is the right read- 
ing, is rendered highly probable by manu- 
script authority here and still more in the 
LXX.of ref. Deut., and, I conceive, de- 
cided by the Heb. of that passage, and by 
the expansion of the same image in Num. 
xi. 12. The compound verb (from 4, not 
n, τροφός, as the similitude is that of a 
man (tx) bearing his son) implies carry - 
ing and caring for, as a nurse: see ref. 


1, 


146 


b here only. 
trans., DEvUT. 


xxi. 16 


1 Macc. iii. 36 A.) c constr., Eph. iv. 11. 


IIPAZ EIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


> κατεκληρονόμησεν [αὐτοῖς] τὴν γῆν αὐτῶν. 


iii. 28. (i. 38 τ : cof / \ , oz HLPRa 
sia = » TAVUTA WS ετέσιν τετρακοσίοις Και TTEVTNKOVTA ἔδωκεν vedfg 
3 Kings ii. 35. 


XII. 


rec κατεκληροδοτησεν (corrn to fix the active sense on the verb: as also in LXX, see 


reff), with aho: txt ABCDEHLPNX rel 36 Chr, ΤῊ]. 
40 coptt: ins ACD°EHLP rel [vulg syrr arm Chr]. 


D!: avtwy αλλοφ. D® syr-w-ast. 


om avtas BD p 13. 
for avtwy, των αλλοφυλων 


20. ws er. TeT. kK. πεντ. bef καὶ μετα ταυτα (see notes) ΑΒΟΝ p 13. 36.40 vulg (coptt) 
arm: om μ.τ. D' syrr: txt D‘EHLP rel xth.—for ws, ews D!-gr: om AC [Syr copt]: 


et quast annis D-lat: quasi post aunos vulg: et post annos xth-rom. 


ins avtos Εἰ [syrr arm] sah Chr,. 


Mace, 19. ἑπτά] See Deut. vii. 1; 
Josh. ili. 10; xxiv. 11. The unusual 
transitive sense of κατεκληρονόμησεν, justi- 
fied by reff. LX X, has not been understood 
by the copyists, and has led to the rec. 
reading. From the occurrence of mani- 
fest references, in these opening verses of 
the speech, to Deut. i. and Isa. i., combined 
with the fact that these two chapters form 
the present lessons in the synagogues on 
one and the same sabbath, Bengel and 
Stier conclude that they had been then 
read. It may have been so: but see on 
ver. 15. 20.] Treating the reading 
of ΑΒΟΝ (see var. readd.) as an attempt 
at correcting the difficult chronology of 
our verse, and taking the words as they 
stand, xo other sense can be given to them, 
than that the time of the judges lasted 
450 years. The dative ἔτεσιν (see ch. viii. 
11) implies the duration of the period be- 
tween ταῦτα (the division of the land), 
and Samuel the prophet, inclusive. And 
we have exactly the same chronological 
arrangement in Josephus; who reckons 
(Antt. viii. 3. 1) 592 years from the Exodus 
to the building of Solomon’s temple,— 
arranging the period thus: (1) forty years 
in the wilderness: (2) twenty-five years 
under Joshua (στρατηγὸς δὲ μετὰ τὴν 
Μωυσέως τελευτὴν πέντε κ. εἴκοσι, Antt. 
ν. 1. 29): (3) Judges (below) : (4) forty 
years under Saul, see on ver. 21: (5) forty 
years under David, 1 Kingsii. 11: (6) four 
years of Solomon’s own reign. This gives 
592 — 149 = 443 years (about, ὡς, 450) for 
the Judges, including Samuel. That this 
chronology differs widely from 1 Kings 
vi. 1, is most evident,—where we read 
that Solomon began his temple in the 
four hundred and eightieth (LXX, four 
hundred and fortieth) year after the 
Exodus, All attempts to reconcile the 
two are arbitrary and forced. I sub- 
join the principal. (1) Perizonius and 
others assume that the years during 
which the Israelites were subject to 
foreign tyrants in the time of the Judges 
are not reckoned in 1 Kings vi. 1, and 
attempt, by adding them, to make out 
the period—in direct contradiction to 


aft cdwk. 


the account there, which is, not that the 
Judges lasted a certain number of years, 
but that Solomon began to build his temple 
in the four hundred and eightieth year 
after the Exodus. (2) Calovius, Mill, &e. 
supply γενόμενα after πεντήκοντα, and con- 
strue, these things ‘which happened in 
the space of 450 years,’ viz. from the birth 
of Isaac to the division of the land. But 
why the birth of Isaac? The words too 
will not bear this construction. (3) Ols- 
hausen conceives the 450 years may in- 
clude all from the Exodus, as far as the 
building of the temple. But to this the 
objection which he himself mentions is 
fatal, viz. that wera ταῦτα and ἐκεῖθεν 
must beyond dispute give the termini @ 
quo and ad quemof the period. (4) Others 
suppose various corruptions, here or at 
1 Kings vi. 1, and by arbitrary conjecture 
emend so as to produce accordance. 
It seems then that Paul followed a chrono- 
logy current among the Jews, and agree- 
ing with the book of Judges itself (the 
spaces of time in which, added together = 
exactly 450), and that adopted by Jose- 
phus, but not with that of our present 
Hebrew text of 1 Kings vi.1. The objec- 
tion to this view, that Josephus is not con- 
sistent with himself (Olsh.),—but in Antt. 
xx. 10. 1, contra Apion. ii. 2 gives another 
chronology, has arisen from not observing 
that in the latter places, where he states 
612 years to have elapsed from the Exodus 
to Solomon’s temple, he reckons im the 
twenty years occupied in building the tem- 
ple and the king’s house, 1 Kings vi. 98 ; 
vii. 1. His words are, Antt. xx. 10. i, 
ἀφ᾽ ἧς ἡμέρας of πατέρες ἡμῶν ἐξέλιπον 
Αἴγυπτον Μωυσέως ἄγοντος, μέχρι τῆς 
τοῦ ναυῦ κατασκευῆς, ὃν Σολομῶν 6 
βασιλεὺς ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις ἀνήγειρεν, ἔτη 
δυοκαίδεκα πρὸς τοῖς ἑξακοσίοις. Toreckon 
in the thirteen years during which he was 
building his own house may be an in- 
accuracy, but there is no ¢nconsistency. 
Wordsworth, contrary to his usual 
practice, takes refuge in the amended text 
of ABC, and then characterizes in the 
severest language those who have had the 
moral courage to abide by the more diffi- 


90 \ \ 
καὶ μετὰ ABCDE 


20—+24. 


ἃ κριτὰς ἕως Σαμουὴλ [Tod] προφήτου" 21 κἀκεῖθεν ἴ ἠτή- 
cavto βασιλέα, καὶ 8 ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς τὸν Σαοὺλ “ 
υἱὸν Keis, ἄνδρα ἐκ φυλῆς Βενιαμείν, ἔτη τεσσεράκοντα" 
22 καὶ Ἀμεταστήσας αὐτὸν ifyeypev τὸν Δαυεὶδ αὐτοῖς εἰμὶ 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


147 


d = here only. 

June. ii. 16. 

of time, here 

only. 

f ch. xvi. 29 
reff. 1KinGs 

ii. 17. 

e vil. 15 

1 Kincs 


, Ὁ 5 ΄ ᾿ ii. 13. 
Κ εἰς βασιλέα, ᾧ καὶ εἶπεν | μαρτυρήσας Kipov Δαυεὶδ τὸν κα ='Luke xvi. 


an? / 5 \ ἃ 
τοῦ ᾿Ιεσσαί, ἄνδρα ™ κατὰ τὴν ™ καρδίαν μου, ὃς " ποιήσει 
93 p , e 6 \ 5 \ A 
τούτου ὁ θεὸς ἀπὸ τοῦ 


πάντα τὰ © θελήματά μου. 


(ch. xix. 
26. 1 Cor. 
xiii. 2. Col. 
i. 13) only. 
3 Kings xv. 
13; Dan. 11. 
9 


q , r 3 rs 2 “ t A ? Ἁ 5]. 
σπερματος * Κατ ἐπαγγελίαν ἤγαγεν τᾷ Ilopanr 3ι. νι, oo 


τι n Ἦ a 
TWTNPa 1OOU)D, 


24 Y προκηρύξαντος 


Judg. ii. 18. 
-- Luke ii. 


ἣν 
po i; 
34. ch. vii. 


P , 
Ἰωάννου 


21. τοὺ. 47. 1 Kings xv. 1]. = ch. x. 43 reff. Τὴ — here only. 1 KINGs xiii. 14. 
n Isa. xliv. 28 (of Cyrus). Matt. vii. 21. xii. 50. John vii. 17 al. 0 plur., Eph. ii. 3 only. Jer. 
Xxiii. 26. p ch. ix. 20 reff. q Rom. i. 3 reff. r Gal. iii. 29, 2 Tim. i. 1 only. 
5 ch. i. 4 reff. t = ZecH. iii.9 (8). Isa. £lviii. 15. uch.v. 31. Isa. xv. 15. v here 
only +t. w Matt. xi. 10, from MAL. iii. 1. 


om tov A(appy) BN p. 
21. (kes, so ABCDN.) 


(Beviapew, so ABCR: -μεὶμ p.) 


22. rec avrous bef τον ὃ. (alteration of arrangement, to connect avrots with the verb), 
with CEHLP 13. 36 rel [vulg syrr eth arm] Chr,: txt ABDN coptt.—om τον D. 


nupoy KH. for tov, υἱὸν D 34. 
κατ. τ. K. μου os Εἰ. 


28. οθ. ουν απο τ. σπ. ἄυτου D: om απο τ. σπερματος ὃδξ!. 


om ανδρα BE [Ath-3-mss Hil-mss,]: om also 


rec for ηγαγ.; ἤγειρεν 


(explanatory alteration, see ver 22), with CD 13. 36 rel tol syrr sah [arm] Thdrt, Thl- 


fin: txt ABEHLPR® Ὁ g1 p vulg copt eth Ath, Chr-comm, Thl-sif. 


for σωτ. 


ιησ., σωτηριαν (see note), Ἡ(σρι av) Lb af g ] 18 ath Chr, Thi-sif: o. tov την. D: 


om ina. 0 42, 141-6. 23. 37. 46. 56. 66. 76: 


cult reading, charging them with “arbi- 
trary caprice,” “ gratifying a sceptical ap- 
petite,” ἄς. I cite this as an example of 
that elastic criticism, which by any means 
within reach, and at any price, smooths 
away every difficulty from the sacred text. 
Σαμουήλ | mentioned as the terminus 
of the period of the Judges, also as having 
been so nearly concerned in the setting 
up over them of Saul and David. 
21. Σαοὺλ ἄνδρα ἐκ φ. B.] It may 
be not altogether irrelevant to notice that 
a Saul, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, 
was speaking; and to trace in this minute 
specification something characteristic and 
natural, ἔτη τεσσεράκοντα] So also 
Josephus: ἐβασίλευσε Σαοὺλ Σαμουήλου 
ζῶντος ἔτη ὀκτὼ πρὸς τοῖς δέκα τελευ- 
τήσαντος δὲ δύο καὶ εἴκοσι, Antt. vi. 14. 9. 
In the Ο. T. the length of Saul’s reign is 
not specified ; 1 Sam. vii. 2 gives no reason, 
as Bengel thinks, why Saul’s reign should 
have been less than twenty years, as the 
twenty years there mentioned do not ex- 
tend to the bringing up of the ark by 
David, but only to the circumstances men- 
tioned in the following verses. Biscoe has 
well shewn (p. 399), that as Saul was a 
young man when anointed king, and Ish- 
bosheth his youngest son (1 Chron. viii. 33) 
was forty years old at his death (2 Sam. 
ii. 10), his reign cannot have been much 
short of that period. It is clearly against 
the construction to suppose Saimuel’s time 
L 


txt ABCE[P]N rel 36 vulg syrr copt arm. 


as well as Saul’s included in the forty years, 
following as they do upon the ἔδωκεν. 
Yet this has been done by the majority of 
Commentators. 22. μεταστήσας] 
having deposed him (reff.): in this case, 
by his death, for David was not made king 
till then. Or perhaps petaor. may refer 
to the sentence pronounced against Saul, 
1 Sam. xiii. 14, or xv. 23, 28, and ἤγειρεν 
to the whole process of the exaltation of 
David to beking. But I prefer the former. 
ᾧ k. εἶπεν p.| The two passages, 
Ps. Ixxxix. (Ixxxviii. LX X) 20, and 1 Sam. 
xiii. 14, are interwoven together: both were 
spoken of David, and both by prophetic 
inspiration. They are cited from memory, 
neither τὸν τοῦ Ἰεσσαί nor ὃς .... μου 
being found in them. These latter words 
are spoken of Cyrus, see reff, That such 
citations are left in their present shape in. 
our text, forms a strong presumption that 
we have the speeches of Paul verbatim as 
delivered by him, and no subsequent general 
statement of what he said, in which case 
the citations would have been corrected by 
the sacred text. 23. κατ᾽ ἔπαγγ. 
ἤγαγεν] viz. the promise in ref. Zech. 
(LXX), where the very word &yw is used ; 
not however excludiug the many other pro- 
mises to the same effect. The reading 
σωτηρίαν has probably arisen from the 
contracted way of writing Ἰησοῦν, thus: 
σωτηραῖν ; and then from ver. 26 σωτηρίαν 
was adopted. 24. εἰςόδου ) referring 
2 


148 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ.᾿ XIII. 
x1Thess.i.9. ΠΤροςωπου τῆς " εἰςόδου αὐτοῦ Υ βάπτισμα Y μετανοίας aBcnE 
ἐπ 1. “eg 5 A ee 7 95 ,“ δὲ ἘΠΕ ͵ ᾽ ΄ ιν HLPNa 
ον τ᾿ παντὶ τῷ AAW Ἰσραὴλ. ὡς δὲ 5 ἐπλήρου ᾿Ιωάννης τὸν deat g 
MAL. iii. 2 a , Yj ya aN ah ie n s > ὲ. Δ 2 2 eae 
yManxis. ὃ δρόμον, ἔλεγεν Τί ἐμὲ ἢ ὑπονοεῖτε elvar; οὐκ ° εἰμὶ ἔγω, 13 
ice αν 3. et *So \ ” d ’ 5. ON G ᾿ 22K BY \ 
τ ον ς ἰδοὺ ἔρχεται ἁμετ᾽ ἐμὲ οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἄξιος τὸ 
a“? εὑὐὑπόδημα τῶν ποδῶν " λῦσαι. %”Avdpes ἀδελφοί, υἱοὶ 
a Paul (ch. xx. ἘΞ ᾽ \ \ elas € Pa ΝΒ οὶ ΄, \ 6 ΄ 
a. 2tim. fryévous Αβραὰμ καὶ οἱ ἐν ὑμῖν © φοβούμενοι τὸν θεόν, 


iv. 7) only. 


b ch. xxv. 18. 


fans, ἡμῖν ὁ " λόγος τῆς ᾿' σωτηρίας ' ταύτης * ἐξαπεστάλη. 


XXvli. 27 
only. L.P. 
Tobit viii. 16. 
Judith xiv. 
14. Sir. xxiii. 
21 only. Dan. 
vii. 25 Theod. 
(-νοια, 1Tim. 
vi. 4. 

c ellips., Matt. 
xiv.27. John 
iv. 26. viii. 
24. xviii. 5. 

d = w. person, Acts only. ch. xix. 4 (Paul). v. 37. vii. 5. 

g =ch. x. 2 re 


i. 18. Phil. ii. 16 al2. (Paul). Heb. v.13. Jamesi. 18. 
xi. 29 reff. m = ch. iii. 17. iv. 5, &e. 
(Paul). Rom. x. 3, xi. 25. 1'Cor. xiv. 38. 2 Cor. ii. 11. 
31 (Steph.). p ch. xv. 21, 36. xviii. 4 al. 

viii. 8. r— 1 Cor. x1: 3). 1 Pet. ἔν. 6. 


xviii. 38. xix. 4,6. ch. xxviii. 18. Prov. xxviii. 17. 


h constr., ch. xiv. 3 (of Paul). xx. 32(Paul). 1 Cor. xii.8. 2 Cor. v. 19. vi. 7. 
1 Cor. ii. 6,8. Josh. ix. 15 al. fr. 


27 of yap ' κατοικοῦντες | ἐν ᾿Ιερουσαλὴμ καὶ οἱ ™ ἄρχοντες 
αὐτῶν τοῦτον " ἀγνοήσαντες καὶ τὰς 5 φωνὰς τῶν προφη- 
τῶν τὰς Ῥ κατὰ Ῥπᾶν σάββατον 4 ἀναγινωσκομένας  κρί- 
ναντες "ἐπλήρωσαν, “8 καὶ μηδεμίαν ᾿ἣ αἰτίαν θανάτου 
εὑρόντες ἃ ἠτήσαντο ΠΠιλάτον Y ἀναιρεθῆναι αὐτόν. 


29 ὡς 


e ch. vii. 33 reff. f = ch. iv. 6 reff. 


i here only. k ch. vii. 12 reff. 4 
n ch. xvii. 23 
1 Kings xxvi. 21. o = ch. xxiv. 21 (Paul). vii. 
q = Luke iv.16. ch. xv. 21. 2 Cor. iii. 15 al. Neh. 
s = ch. iii. 18 reff. and passim. t = John 

u constr., ch. 1}. 14 reff. v ch. v. 33 reff. 


24. om παντι HL Thi, παντι and Aaw Pd ef g ἢ 10 Chr-comm: om Aaw only A: 
om ip. 68. 104 sah: txt BCDEN p 18. 36 vss. (The variations have perhaps been 


occasioned by those in ver 17 above.)—X! began to write ena. bef Aaw, but marked 


the letters for erasure. 
25. ἐπληρουν 9}. 
om ΑΒΟΘΕῊΗΝ al p Thl-sif. 


syrr copt arm] Chr: txt ABN sah [eth], τι μαι (= τι με) p. 
αλλα, and μεθ D!(uer D5). 


ἘΣ 68 lect-12 tol Thl-fin. 
26. om και B. 


ev μιν AD p. 


rec ins o bef ιωαννης, with LP 13[e sil] rel Chr Thl-fin : 
rec (for τι ewe) τινα με, with CDEHLP 13 rel [vulg 


aft eyw ins o χριστος 


aft @eov ins ακουσατε E. rec 


(for nui) υμιν, with CEHLP rel [vulg syrr copt eth arm]: txt A B(sic: see table) DX 


c p13 syr-mg sah. 
C 133-80 Syr zxth(hic sermo vite) arm]. 
ABCDX ah p 138. 36. 40 Chr,. 

27. om ev CE Ὁ ἃ hk p 18 vulg Chr,. 


τ. ayvourtes D6), 


for K. T. POvaS, . «= + - 
ypapas Ὁ) D'(txt D8): ayy. τ. yp. E [simly Syr]. 
28. aft evpovtes ins ev avtw D vulg syr-w-ast coptt eth. 


aft ὁ Aoyos ins outos C d 6. 36. 65. 133-80 arm [om ταυτης 


rec απεσταλη, with EHLP rel Thi: txt 


for aut. tout. αγν.» avt . s Ὀ'(αυτον 

TUS τας yp - - as (un συνιεντες τ. 
ins καὶ bef κριν. Ὁ. 

for ἡτησ. ἄο, κρειναντες 


αὑτὸν παρεδωκαν πιλατω wa εἰς αναιρεσιν D'(ut interficeretur lat): 108 reads ἡτησαντο 
π. aveped., without erasing any portion of D!: for ἡτησαντο, ἡτησαν Tovr(sic) XN}. 


to ἤγαγεν above—his coming forward 
publicly. 25.| As John was ful- 
filling his course (the expression is pecu- 
liar to Paul, see reff.) he said (not once 
but habitually). τί ἐμὲ ὑπ. εἶν. Not, 
‘I am not that which ye suppose me to be,’ 
as Vulg. (reading tiva,—quem me arbitra- 
mini esse, non sum ego); Luth., Grot., 
Kuin.,—making τί (or τίνα) relative, which 
it will not bear (see note on 1 Cor. xv. 2) ; 
but What suppose ye me to be? I am not 
He. See Luke iii. 15 ff. 26. ['The 
same two classes (see on ver. 16), Jews aud 
God-fearing gentiles, are here again ad- 
dressed. | τ. σωτηρίας ταύτης | viz. the 
salvation implied in Jesus being a σωτήρ -- 
salvation by Him. 21.) The position 
of ἡμῖν at the commencement of its clause 
in the last verse shews the emphasis to be 
on it, and now the reason is given—/for 


the Jews in Jerusalem have rejected it. 
See ch. xxii. 18—21. τὰς φωνάς is 
not governed by ἀγνοήσαντες, which makes 
the sentence an unusually harsh one in 
construction, requiring αὐτόν to be supplied 
after xpw., and αὐτάς after ἐπλήρωσαν. 
The καί, as often, merely introduces, with- 
out the emphasis implied by our ‘even,’ 
a new element into the sentence. It is 
perhaps hardly possible to find in our 
language or the Latin any one word which 
may give exactly this slight shade of mean- ἡ 
ing, and no more: paraphrased, the sense 
might be (but imperfectly and clumsily) 
thus represented: in their ignorance of 
Him (not only rejected His salvation, but) 
by judging Him, fulfilled the voices of 
the prophets, «c. 28. | Not, ‘though,’ 
but rather because they found no cause: 
when they found no cause of death in 


25—33. 


TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


149 


δὲ τὰ ἐτέλεσαν πάντα τὰ περὶ αὐτοῦ * γεγραμμένα, ¥ καθ- w - Lute ii 


εἐλόντες ἀπὸ τοῦ 5 ξύλου ὃ ἔθηκαν ὃ εἰς μνημεῖον. 
θεὸς ἢ ἤγειρεν αὐτὸν ἐκ ὃ" νεκρῶν, 31 ὃς ° ὥφθη 4 ἐπὶ ἡμέρας 


© πλείους τοῖς ἴ 


Ἵ > , g “, A > h / Ε] lal \ 
ἐερουσαλὴμ, δοίτινες νυν εἰσιν “μάρτυρες αὐτοῦ πρὸς 4. 
32 καὶ ἡμεῖς ὑμᾶς ἰ εὐαγγελιζόμεθα τὴν πρὸς >1Cor x12 


τὸν λαόν. 


39. Ezrai.1. 
ξ \ x = Luke xviii. 
30 ο δὲ 31. xxii. 37. 
= Luke xxiii; 
53 ij Mk. 
Josh. viii. 29. 


A ᾽ A \ nw ’ = 
συναναβᾶσιν αὐτῷ ἀπὸ τῆς Τ᾽αλιλαίας εἰς "τῶ Ὁ 


a ch. iv. 3. xii. 
Ruth iv. 


reff. L.P. 
principally. 


ey a eee 12 τ ἃ ͵ ΠΡ τὸς ἐπε 
τοὺς “ πατέρας | ἐπαγγελίαν " γενομένην, ὅτι " ταύτην - ἔξοτ, χν. ὃ, 
f A -“ a Cc. 
ὁ θεὸς 5 ἐκπεπλήρωκεν τοῖς τέκνοις Ἑαὐτῶν ἡμῖν Ρ ava- ἃ constr, ch. 


στήσας ᾿Ιησοῦν, 33 ὡς καὶ ἐν τῷ Ψψαλμῷ γέγραπται τῷ 


xvi. 18. xvii. 
2. xix. 8, &c. 
xxvii. 20. 
Heb. xi. 


30. (see Rom. vii. 1 al.) e ch. ii. 40 reff. f Mark xv. 41 only. 2 Chron. xviii. 2. 
g = ch. x. 41 reff. h ch. i. 8 reff. i double acc., here only. acc., ch. viii. 25 reff. 
k absol., ch. vii. 19 reff. lch. i. 4 reff. m = ch. vii. 31 reff. n ch. ix. 20 reff. 


Ὁ here only. Exod. xxxii. 29 Ald. 2 Macc. viii. 10 only, but not =. 
p = ch. ii. 24 reff. 


67.1. (-pwots, ch. xxi. 26.) 


29. ereAnoay A[ Woide]: ereAouv D'(-eoev D-corr!). 
alteration for more completeness ?) [with 13]: txt ABCDEHLPX rel. 


aft γεγραμμενα add εἰσιν ἡτουντο Tov πειλατον τουτον μεν 


περι αὐτου B [Syr eth]. 


Tas ἐπαγγελίας ἐκπληροῦν, Polyb i. 


rec αἀπαντα (error? or 
γεγρ. bef 


oTavpwoal, Kat επιτυχοντες παλιν και D!, syr-mg has postquam crucifixus esset ntovyto 
τον πιλατον ut de ligno detraherent eum: avvetuxov et detrahentes eum posuerunt in 


sepulchro. for ξυλου, σταυρου E Syr. 


ins καὶ bef εθηκαν D?(and lat). 


30. for ver, ov o θεος (add vero D-lat) ἡγειοεν D: add tertia die vulg(not tol). 


avtov bef ἡγειρεν Εἰ Chr,. 


31. ovros ὠφθη τοις συναναβαινουσιῦ αὐτῶ απ. τ. y. εἰς Lep. EP NuEp. πλείονας Ὁ 


(-avaBaow D-corr, πλείους D8). 


rec om νὺν (as unnecessary ? hardly for Meyer’s 


reason, that they had been now for some time His witnesses), with BEH LP rel xth-pl 
Chr,: εἰσι bef νυν N[eth-rom]: txt ACak p 13.36 Syr coptt [arm ].—axpi νυν D ὁ 187 
vulg syr. om αὑτου H. : 
32. τὴν mpos Tous is written over an erasure by δὲ! or X-corr!. ᾿ _aft πατερα5 ins 
nuwv DE [vulg Syr eth]. γενομ. bef ἐπαγγ. D Hilg. * ἡμῶν (to avoid the 
difficulty of οἱ φοβουμενοι Tov θεον being present, ver 16, besides the avipes ιἰσραηλιται) 
ABC'DN vulg(vewy tol) eth Ambr,: om ἡμῖν sah Bede-gr: αὑτων nuw C3EHLP p 
13. 36 rel syrr Chr, Thl-fin. for incovy, Tov κυριον ino. xp. D sah Ambr, ; 80, 
insg nuwy aft κυρ. 1387 Hil, ; tov κυρ. nuwy [bef ino. syr-w-ast: αὑτὸν εκ νεκρων A?. 
33. for ws και, ουτως yap Ὦ. ree TO Ψ. τῷ δευτ. γέγραπται, 
with ELP rel vulg [syr] Chr, [Cosm,] Ambr, [simly Syr coptt eth]: 7. πρωτω Ψ. yey. 


him, they besought, &c.: see Luke xxiii. 
22, 23. 29.] The two verbs ἐτέλεσαν 
and ἔϑηκαν have still the same subject, viz. 
οἱ κατοικοῦντες K.T.A. De Wette rightly 
remarks, that Paul, in this compendious nar- 
rative, makes no distinction between friend 
and foe in what was done to our Lord, but 
regards both as fulfilling God’s purpose 
regarding him. I may add, that there is 
also a contrast between what men did to 
Him, and 6 δὲ θεὸς ἤγειρεν αὐτόν. Jo- 
seph and Nicodemus, be it observed, were 
both ἄρχοντες. Paul touches but lightly 
on the cross of Christ, and hastens on to 
the great point, the Resurrection, as the 
fulfilment of prophecy and seal of the Mes- 
siahship of Jesus. 31.] The νῦν gives 
peculiar force to the sentence. Who are 
at this moment witnesses,—living wit- 
nesses; 4. ἃ. “1 am not telling you a mat- 
ter of the past merely, but one made pre- 
sent to the people of the Jews (τῷ λαῷ) 
by living and autoptic testimony.’ 


32. ἡμεῖς ὑμᾶς] He and Barnabas were 
not of the number of the συναναβάντες, 
ver. 31, nor was their mission to the Jewish 
people. ‘ They are at this moment witness- 
ing to the people, we, preaching to you.’ 
Stier observes (Red. d. Apost. p. 367) how 
entirely Paul sinks himself, his history and 
commission from Christ, in the great object 
of his preaching. ἀναστήσας) The 
meaning having raised Him from the 
dead is absolutely required by the con- 
text: both because the word is repeated 
with ἐκ νεκρῶν (ver. 34), and beeause the 
Apostle’s emphasis throughout the passage 
is on the Resurrection (ver. 30) as the final 
fulfilment (ἐκπεπλήρωκεν) of God’s pro- 
mises regarding Jesus. This is maintained 
by Luther, Hammond, Le Clere, Meyer, 
&c.: the other meaning, ‘having raised up,’ 
as in ch. vii. 37, προφήτην ὑμῖν ἀναστήσει 
6 κύριος,---ὈΥ Calvin, Beza, Calov., Wolf, 
Michaelis, Rosenm., Heinrichs, Kuinoel, 
Olsh., and by Mr. Humphry. Meyer well 


150 


TIPASEIS ATOSTOAON. 


XIII. 


a Hebi. 5. ν, δευτέρῳ αὙϊός μου εἶ σύ, ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε. 


SA. li. 7. 

r oe ch. 
xvii. 31 only. 

s— ch. xxiij. 3. t 
ExVi- ae, 23 
al. 2 Macc. 
iii. 18. 

t of a state, 
here only. 
see ch. viii. 
25 reff. 

u = ch. il. 27 


9. Tit. i iii. 8. 


xxii.6. Ps. 
lxxxviii. 28. 
x = ch. xvii. 7 reff. 
ach. xx. 34. xxiv. 23 only t. Wisd. xyi, 24 al. 
vii. 39 reff. 3 KinGs il. 10. 
40 reff. f ch. i. 19 reff. 


34 ὅτι δὲ PF ἀνέστησεν αὐτὸν 


ὑμῖν τὰ ἡ ὅσια Δαυεὶδ τὰ * πιστά. 
μ 

/ \ δ / a , 
λέγειν Οὐ "δώσεις τὸν "ὅσιόν σου Y ἰδεῖν ” διαφθοράν. 
86 Δαυεὶδ μὲν γὰρ ἰδίᾳ 5 γενεᾷ * ὑπηρετήσας τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ. 
ΠΝ Ἢ b βουλῇ " ἐκοιμήθη καὶ ἡ προφετέθη πρὸς τοὺς πατέρας LP 
αὐτοῦ καὶ Y εἶδεν Y διαφθοράν' 
> 3 , 
οὐκ Υ εἶδεν Υ διαφθοράν. 


v Psa. xv. 10. see ch. ii. 27 reff. 
Gen. xlix. 15 Aq, Symm. [3] 
ἃ (ch. ii. 41.) = Gen. xlix. 29. Judg. ii. 10. 
g ch. ii. 14. iy. 10. xxviii. 22, 28. 


Tex ἀν μηκέτι "μέλλοντα 


ὑποστρέφειν εἰς " διαφθοράν, οὕτως εἴρηκεν, ὅτι δώσω 


35 διότι καὶ ἐν * ἑτέρῳ 


37 ὃν δὲ ὁ θεὸς “ 
38 15 γνωστὸν οὖν ὅ ἔστω ὑμῖν, 


z=ch.xiv.16. Eph. 111.6. Judg. ii. 10. 

b ch. ii. 23 reff. c= Gor 
e ver. 30. ch, x. 
Ezra iv. 12, 13. 


D (no vss) Orig-scholexpr Cypr-mss, Hiljexpr: Tw δευτ. ψ. yeyp. H ο 4. 66. 76. 100: txt 


ABCN ac p 13. 40 arm. 


at end, D syr-mg add (from Ps ii. 8) αἰτησαι παρ euov 


και Swow σοι εθνη THY κληρανομιαν σου Kal THY κατασχεσιν σου TA περατὰ THS NS. 


34. ore D 137 Hil,. 
ins avrov E k 82. 66 Chr,. 


aft αὐτὸν add o @eos E 68 Syr Thl-fin. 


aft μελλ. 


85. rec (for διοτι) 510, with CEHLP p? 18. 36 rel Chr,: propter nos E-lat: txt 


ABN p!: om D[-gr] Syr eth. 
36. om μεν D 26 vulg. 
97. for ον, o D!-gr(txt D-corr!), 


remarks, that this meaning would hardly 
in our passage have been thought of or 
defended, had it not been that the sub- 
joined citation from Ps. ii. has been thought 
necessarily to apply to our Lord’s mission 
upon earth. 33.] The reading ἐν τῷ 
πρώτῳ ψαλμῷ is explained thus; “hic 
psalmus qui nobis secundus est olim pri- 
mus fuit, quod is qui pracedit, tanquam 
procemium, numeratus non esset.’? Rosenm. 
Arg. Ps. ii. St. Paul refers the prophecy 
in its full completion to the Resurrection 
of our Lord; similarly i in Rom. i, 4, CHS 
θέντος υἱοῦ θεοῦ ἐν δυνάμει . . .. - ἐξ 
ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν. 94, μηκέτι 
peAX. | Compare Rom. vi. 9, χριστὸς ἔγερ- 
θεὶς ἐκ νεκρῶν οὐκέτι ἀποθνήσκει' θάνα- 
τος αὐτοῦ οὐκέτι κυριεύει. It is interesting 
to trace the same shades of thought in the 
speeches and epistles of Paul; and abun- 
dant opportunity of doing so will occur as 
we proceed. But here the ὕποστρ. εἰς 
διαφθ. does not merely imply death, so that 
Jesus should have once undergone it, and no 
more hereafter, as the E. V. seems to imply : 
but we must supply ‘to die, and in conse- 
quence to’ before the words, understanding 
them as the result of death, if it had do- 
minion over him: thus the clause answers 
even more remarkably to Rom. vi. 9. 

τὰ ὅσια is the LXX rendering of *1on, ref. 
Isa., which in 2 Chron. yi. 42, they have 
translated τὰ ἐλέη. The word ‘holy ’should 
have been preserved in the E, V., as an- 
swering to Thy ὅσιόν cov below; the mer- 
cies of David, holy and sure: or my holy 
promises whieh I made sure unto David. 


etepws D[-gr]: alias yulg: alia D-lat: ev τω et. 18, 
[om τους C?(mpous, for 7. τ. C}), ] 


35. διότι kat] wherefore also, —cor- 
respondent to which purpose, of His Christ 
nat seeing corruption. ἑτέρῳ] viz. 
ψαλμῷ, referring to ver. 33. λέγει) 
viz. 6 θεός, not David : the subject is con- 
tinued from vv. 32 and 34, and fixed by 
εἴρηκεν and δώσω just preceding. δώσεις 
and ὅσιον accurately correspond to δώσω 
and ὅσια before. See on ch. ii. 27. 

36.] The psalm, though spoken by David, 
cannot have its fulfilment in David. 

ἰδίᾳ γενεᾷ] The dative commodi, not ‘sua 
generatione,’ which is flat in the extreme. 
David ministered only to the generation in 
which he lived: but διὰ τούτου, remission 


of sins is preached ὑμῖν, and to all who. 


believe on Him. τῇ τοῦ 8. βουλῇ is 
best taken with ὑπηρετήσας, not with 
ἐκοιμήθη :—as KE. V., after he had served 
his own generation by the will (i. e. 
according to the appointment) of God. 
His whole course was marked out and 
fixed by God—he fulfilled it, and fell asleep. 
I prefer this, because joining τῇ τοῦ θ. B. 
with ἐκοιμήθη seems to diminish the im- 
portance of that verb in the sentence. 
(See, on the whole, 2 Sam. vii. 12; 1 Kings 
ii. 10.) προςετ. «.T.A. | An expres- 


sion arising from the practice of burying ἡ 


families together: see reff. and passim in 
a νΝ 38.] Paul speaks here of jus- 
tification only in its lowest sense, as nega- 
tive, and synonymous with remission of 
sins; he does not unfold here that higher 
sense of δικαιόω, the accounting righteous, 
which those who have from God are δίκαιοι 
ἐκ πίστεως. It is the first office of the 


cedfg 
ἤγειρεν klop 


eae 
BCDE 
Nab 
h 


ILPS a πιστεύων ™ δικαιοῦται. 


94..- 41, 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


151 


ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί, ὅτι διὰ ἃ τούτου ὑμῖν + ἄφεσις * ἁμαρτιῶν heh. ix. 2reft 
1ch. Vv. ren. 
« καταγγέλλεται, 39 [καὶ] 1 ἀπὸ πάντων ™ ὧν οὐκ ἠδυνή- KY duet 


θητε " ἐν νόμῳ Μωυσέως ™ δικαιωθῆναι, " ἐν " τούτῳ πᾶς ὁ 
40 ο βλέπετε οὖν μὴ Ῥ ἐπέλθῃ [ἐφ᾽ 
ὍΣ ὑμᾶς] τὸ 4 εἰρημένον ἐν τοῖς προφήταις “1 ἤϊδετε οἱ * κατα- 


1 Rom. vi. 7 
only. Sir. 
xxvi. 29. 

m constr., ver, 
2 reff. 


Ν 
φρονηταί, καὶ θαυμάσατε καὶ δ ἀφανίσθητε, ὅτι " ἔργον ii. v4. 


᾿ ΄ gs. ΤᾺΝ > an e f ς “ "ἷ A > \ 
ἐργάζομαι ἐγὼ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ὑμῶν, ἔργον Ὁ οὐ μὴ 


4 ||. 1 Cor. viii. 9. x. 12. 

jii. 11. 
r here only. 

in Heb. 


38. υμ. bef ec. AN. 


Gal. v. 15 al.£ 


Has. i. 5. ii. 5 


q pass., Luke ii, 24. iv. 12. ch. ii. 16. Rom. iv. 18. (act., ver. 34. 
ioe s = James iv. 14 (Matt. vi. 16,19, 20) only. Jobiv.9. Hab. 1. c. (not 
t Matt. xxvi. 10 || Mk. Johniii. 21. vi. 28. ix. 4. 


more usually 
ν΄. ἐκ. 
o = Matt. xxiv. 
p ch. viii. 24. Luke xxi. 26. Jamesv.1. Micah 
Heb. i. 13. iv. 3,4, 7.) 


1 Cor. xvi.10. Ps. xliii.1. Hab.l.c. 


δι avrov Ed 65-7. 133 wth: δια τουτο B! 15-8. 34. 73. 101-80. 


39. om καὶ ACIX am(with fuld demid) eth-pl: ins BC27DELP rel [vulg-ed tol syrr 


coptt eth-rom arm] Chr. 
38). 


εδυνηθητε A: ηδυνηθημεν D-corr}-gr. 


aft καὶ add μετανοια D (syr-w-ast has it aft awaptiwy ver 


rec ins Tw bef vou. (corrn: but the 


art is not needed aft a preposition), with ELP rel Thl: om A B(sic: see table) CDN 


h p 13. 40 Chr,. 


40. απελθη XN}. 


aft ev TovTw ins ουὐν 1) syr-mg. 
for δικαιουται, δικαιωθηναι (but corrd) δὲ}, 
om εφ vuas (as unnecessary? or because a difficulty was 


[aft mor. ins er avtw I sah. | 
at end ins παρα θεω D 137 syr-mg. 


found in identifying vues with the καταφρονηται of the citation 2) BD® 18. 36 am tol: 
ins ACEILP rel [vulg-ed fuld demid syrr coptt #th arm]. 


41. for 15., axovoate E. 


καταφρονησατε XN. 


ins καὶ επιβλεψατε (from 


LXX) bef καὶ θαυμασατε I o syr Chr,; aft x. 6. E(but om καὶ) a 27-9. 57. 69. 105-6. 


θαυμασετε ὃὲ 1: -ζετε Cc. 


aft 1st εργον ins ο RX}. 


rec eyw bef epyat. 


(corrn to LXx), with CEILP rel 36 demid [th] Chr,: ey εργαζομε εγω N: txt 


ABD k p 18 vulg [syrr] sah arm. 


om 2nd εργον DELP be df g hk lo tol syrr 


zeth-pl Chr, Thl-sif: ins ABC I[from the space] δὲ p rel vulg coptt #th-rom [arm | Thl- 


fin. 


Spirit by which he spoke, ἐλέγχειν περὶ 
ἁμαρτίας, before He ἐλέγχει περὶ δικαιο- 
σύνης : therefore he dwells on the ἄφεσις 


ἁμαρτιῶν, merely just giving a glimpse of 


the great doctrine of justification, of which 
he had such wonderful things to write and 
to say. 99.1 [And] from all things, 
from which ye could not in (under) the 
law of Moses be justified, in Him (as ἐν 
χριστῷ, ἐν κυρίῳ passim) every believer 
is (habitual pres.) justified. ἀπὸ πάντων 
(ἀφ) ὧν, from all things (sins), from 
which .... but not implying that in the 
law of Moses there might be justitication 
from some sins;—under the law there is 
no justification (ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται 
παρὰ τῷ θεῷ, Gal. iii. 11) :—but = Christ 
shall do for you all that the law could 
not do: leaving it tor inference, or for fur- 
ther teaching, that this was absolutely 
ALL: that the law could do nothing. The 
same thought is expanded Rom. viii. 3, 4, 
τὸ γὰρ ἀδύνατον Tod νόμου, ἐν ᾧ ἠσθένει 
διὰ τῆς σαρκός, ὃ θεὸς κιτ.λ. .... ἵνα τὸ 
δικαίωμα τ. νόμου πληρωθῇ ἐν ἡμῖν. This 
interpretation will be the more clearly 
established, when we remember that 6:- 
καιοῦν ἀπὸ ἁμαρτίας was not in any sense, 
and could not be, the office of the law, by 
which came the knowledge of sin. The 
expression δικαιοῦν ἀπὸ is only once used 
again by Paul (ref.), and that where he is 


rec 6, with e dh 136: txt ABCDEILPR rel Chr Thl. 


arguing against the eontinuing in sin. 
ὁ πιστεύων is not to be joined with ἐν 
τούτῳ, which (see above) is contrasted with 
ἐν νόμῳ M. It is quite in Paul’s manner 
to use πᾶς 6 πιστεύων thus absolutely : 
see Rom.i.16; 111. 22; x. 4 (Gal. iii. 22). 
Still less, with Luther, can we take as far 
as δικαιωθῆναι with ver. 38, and make ev 
ToUTw.... δικαιοῦται a separate sentence. 
40.] The object of preaching the 
Gospel to the Jews first was for a testimony 
to them : its reception was almost uniformly 
unfavourable: and against such anticipated 
rejection he now warns them. τοῖς 
προφ.] The book of the prophets: see 
ch. iii. 18, note. 41. καταφρονηταί] 
So the LXX for mi32, ‘ among the heathen,’ 
for which they seem to have read 0°77)3. So 
the Arabic, ‘ videte arrogantes:’ and the 
Syriac, ‘ videte transgressores.’ (Kuinoel.) 
The prophecy was spoken of the 
judgment to be inflicted by means of the 
Chaldeans: but neither this nor any other 
prophecy is confined in its application to 
the occasion of which it was once spoken, 
but gathers up under it all analogous pro- 
cedures of God’s providence : such repeated 
fulfilments increasing in weight, and ap- 
proaching nearer and nearer to that last 
and great fulfilment of all the promises of 
grace and all the threats of wrath, by which 
every prophetic word shall be e hausted. 


152 ἸΠΡΛΈΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, ΧΙ, 


’ > lel r ¢ 
nace.,Johnxi. ἢ πιστεύσητε ἐάν τις " ἐκδιηγῆται ὑμῖν. 45 * Ἑξιόντων 
1C 


26. Jor. 


xii-7.1John δὲ αὐτῶν " παρεκάλουν Yelig τὸ “μεταξὺ σάββατον 
van αν θη. ἢ λαληθῆναι αὐτοῖς τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα. 45 δ λυθείσης δὲ 
w che avi 15. τῆς συναγωγῆς ἠκολούθησαν πολλοὶ τῶν “lovdaiwy καὶ 
Faad, navi τῶν " σεβομένων e προφηλύτων τῷ “Παύλῳ καὶ τῷ Βαρ- 
zeonstr., νάώβᾳ, ἃ οἵτινες © προςλαλοῦντες αὐτοῖς ἔπειθον αὐτοὺς 


al. see note. 
y — Luke i. 20. 
z = here only. 


f arposuévery TH δ χάριτι τοῦ θεοῦ. Ta τε " ἐχομένῳ 


; . \ Ver ’ VA “ 
(ch.xv.oret) σαββάτῳ ἱ σχεδὸν πᾶσα ἡ πόλις “| συνήχθη | ἀκοῦσαι 
καὶ Σολο τὸν Τ' λόγον τοῦ " θεοῦ. 45 ἰδόντες δὲ οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι τοὺ 
αὶ ode γον τοῦ ™ θεοῦ. ἰδόντες δὲ οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι τοὺς 
μῶνος, ἔτι ες Ἶ 
δὲ καὶ ὄχλους ™ ἐπλήσθησαν “Ὁ ζήλου, καὶ “ ἀντέλεγον τοῖς ὑπὸ 
μεταξὺ 


τούτων βασιλέων, Jos. Β. J. v. 4. 2, also ΑΡίοπ, i. 21. @iAurmov... καὶ μεταξὺ δ᾽ ᾿Αλέξανδρον τὸν υἱὸν... 
Plutarch. Inst. Lac. 42. 
λύειν τ. συνουσίαν. 


” ‘ » ΄ 4 
a = here only}. Diod. Sic. xix. 25, ἐλυσε τὴν ἐκκλησίαν. Polyb. v. 15. 3, 
Ὁ Acts (ver. 50. ch. xvi. 14. xvii. 4,17. xviii. 7, 13. xix. 27) only, exc. Matt. xv. 


9|| Mk. (from Isa. xxix. 13.) Josh. iv. 24. ο ch. ii. 10 reff. d ch. x. 41 reff. e ch, xxviii. 
20 only. Exod. iv. 16 AB2 Ald. Wisd. xiii. 17 only. ἢ = 1 Tim. v. 5 only. see ch. xi. 23 reff. g ch, 
xiv. 3. xv. 11. xviii. 27. xx. 24, 32. h = ch. xx. 15 reff. ich. xix. 26. Heb. ix. 22 only+. 2 Macc. 
v. 2 only. k — ch. iv. 5 reff. lconstr., ch. xv. 6. xx. 7. see 2 Kings iii. 34. ᾿ mch. 
xi. 1 reff. n ch. iii. 10 reff. och. v. 17. p = Rom. xiii. 18. 1 Cor. iii. 3. James 
iii, 14,16. 1 Mace. viii. 16. q Luke xx. 27. L.P., exc. John xix. 12. Hos. iv. 4. ᾿ 


εἐκδιηγειται AL: -γησεται 9}. αὖ end ins καὶ ἐσειγησαν D, k. ἐσίγησεν syr-w-ast. 

42. rec om autwy, addg instead Se ex της cuvaywyns των tovdaiwy (supplementary, at 
beginning of an ecclesiastical portion: 98 has των αποστολων εκ THS συν. K.T.A.), With 
P rel: avtwy ex τ. συν. τ. ιουδ. 1, Thi-fin: txt ABCDEIN a p 18. 36 vulg syrr coptt 
arm Chr,. om παρεκαλουν E; so Β 81, insg ἠξίουν bef λαληθηναι. rec aft 
παρεκ. ins ta €9vn (added because it was considered necessary that this request should 
be ascribed to the Gentiles, on acct of the hostility of the Jews, ver 45), with LP rel: 
om ABCDEIN ack o p18. 36 vulg syrr coptt eth arm Chr ΤῺ] Cassiod. for 
petatv, εξης D. om ta D!(ins D5). om tavta "ἢ 6] [H 36 Thl-sif]. 

43. aft de ins autos N!(N3 disapproving). aft σεβ. ins τον θεον E (syrr ?) [copt]. 

om τω (bef Bapy.) DL [Ὁ]. om αὐτοῖς (as unnecessary ?) ELP rel vulg 
(Ec Thi-sif : ins ABCD I[from the space} δὲ ak p 36 (vss) Chr, Thl-fin. (13 def.) 
εἐπιθοντ. (επιθοντε or -θοντο Ὁ) D. [for avrous, αυτον A}, αυτοις p. | rec emiueverv 
(perhaps corrn to avoid mposdadovytes . . mposuevery), with LP 13 rel Thl-sif: txt 
ABCDER® cd k o p36 Chr Thl-fin. (1 ?) [for 00, cv B3('Tischdf). ] at end ins 
evyevero δε καθ oAns της πολεως διελθεῖν τον λοΎον Tov θεου D,so syr-mg, omg τ. θ. and 
putting an asterisk αὖ διελθειν ; ey. δε κατα πασαν πολιν φημισθηναι Tov Aoy. Εἰ. 

44. rec for τε, δε, with ACDN a bo p18: om eth-rom: txt BE(L)P rel 36 syrr 
eth-pl Chr, Thl: tore for tw τε L 59. (1?) rec epxouerw (alteration (so D (which 
every where alters exoua: in this sense) AX 69 in Lw xiii. 38), the sense of exouevw not 
being perceived), with BC!DE?2ILPN p rel 36 Chr: ἐπερχομενω 3. 95: txt ACE! 13. 
40 Syr. for πασα, oAn D. for θεου, κυριυν AB? a p 13. 36. 40 am fuld 
tol sah: txt B'CELP rel [vulg-ed] demid copt [syrr arm] Chr. (I def.)—D has 
akovoat παυλου πολυν TE λογον ποιησαμενοὺυ περι TOU κυριου. 

45. for ἰδοντες δε, Και ἰδοντες D. for Tous oxA., τὸ πληθος D (sah) [arm]: om 
eth-rom. aft τοις ins λογοις D}(and lat): Aoyors τοις D§ E Syr: om Ist τοις D'°. 


42.] The insertions in the rec. have 
been made (see var. readd.) partly perhaps 
to remove the ambiguity in αὐτῶν, and to 
supply a subject to παρεκάλουν. But they 
confuse the sense. ἐξιόντων αὐτ., As 
they (the congregation) were going out, 
they (the same) besought. On the 
N.T. construction, παρεκάλουν λαληθῆναι, 
i.e. the passive inf. after verbs of command- 
ing, exhorting, &., see Buttmann, Gram- 
matik des N. T.-lichen Sprachgebrauchs, 
§ 141. 5, p. 236. He traces it to the in- 
fluence of the Latin jubere and the like. 
See, among his many examples, Mark v. 
43; vi. 27; ch. v. 21; xxii, 24; xxv. 21. 

τὸ μεταξὺ σάβ. appears, by the usage 


of Luke, to mean the next sabbath-day, not 
‘the following week. This last rendering 
would hardly suit eis, which fixes a definite 
occasion,—nor ver. 44, which gives the 
result. The ref. to Josephus abundantly 
justifies this use of μεταξύ. 43. λυθ. 


δὲ τ, o.] After the breaking up of the. 


synagogue. οἵτινες] Paul and Barna- 
bas; and αὐτοῖς, to the Jews and prose- 
lytes : not vice versd, as Calvin inclines to 
believe: see a similar expression ch. xi. 23. 
There too, we have 7 χάρις τοῦ θεοῦ simi- 
larly used of the work of the Gospel begun 
in the hearts of the converts. See also 
reif. 44.) Whether épx. or éx. be 
read, the sense will be on the following 


ABCDE 
ILPNa 
bedfg 
hklop 
13 


43. 48͵ TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 153 
[τοῦ] Παύλου λεγομένοις [4 ἀντιλέγοντες καὶ] "βδλα- τοῦτοι. ον, 
σφημοῦντες. 40" παῤῥησιασάμενοί τε ὁ Παῦλος καὶ ὁ z Mace. x. 34, 
, 3 ς » > t 2 a A a s ch. 1x. 27, 28 
.a Βαρνάβας εἶπαν Ὕ μῖν ἣν "ἀναγκαῖον πρῶτον λαληθῆναι ret 


Phil. i. 


‘ , a -“ A x ad \ \ 
LPx ab τὸν πὶ λόγον τοῦ ™ θεοῦ" ἃ ἐπειδὴ δὲ " ἀπωθεῖσθε αὐτὸν καὶ 3, Phi 





4 Ε a a Heb. viii. 3 
οὐκ ἀξίους “ κρίνετε ἑαυτοὺς * τῆς * αἰωνίου * ζωῆς, ἡ ἰδοὺ (nx 2. 
, > ΝΥ » , x a Cor. xii. 22 
2 στρεφόμεθα 3 εἰς τὰ ἔθνη. “7 οὕτως γὰρ 5 ἐντέταλται Tit 1.) 
d 2 Mace. ix. 


a ς ͵ , A lal lal 
ἡμῖν ὁ κύριος " Τέθεικά σε “eis “ φῶς “ ἐθνῶν, ἃ τοῦ εἶναί 21. 
h. xv. 24 
e.? , {΄ ΕΣ ΄ a a 48 2 ΄ τς fF. 
σε " εἰς σωτηρίαν ‘ews “éoxaroy τῆς γῆς. ἀκούοντα τῆ. 
ἊΨ 2 \ ’ ΄ A / 2 x 
δὲ τὰ ἔθνη ἔχαιρον καὶ 8 ἐδόξαζον τὸν ὅ λόγον τοῦ κυρίου, w "ch. xvi. 
\ A - Ρ 15. xxvi. 8. 
καὶ ἐπίστευσαν ὅσοι ἦσαν ὃ" τεταγμένοι ἷ εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον" 


Rom. xiv. 5. 
Prov. xvii. 15. 


x John xvii. 3. 1 Tim. vi. 12 only. (see 1 Johni. 2. ii. 25.) y ch. ii. 7 reff. z= here 
only. see ch. vii. 39. ach.i.2. John xiv. 31. perf., here only. = 1 Kings xxi. 2. b Isa. 
xlix.6 AN compl. 1 Thess. ν. 9. 1 Tim.i. 12. 1 Pet. ii. 8. ce Luke ii. 32. d 1 Cor. 
x. 13 reff. e = ver. 22 reff. f ch. i. 8 reff. g 2 Thess. iii. 1 only. 

h=ch.xy.2. Rom. xiii.1. 1 Cor. xvi.15. (w. πρός and a dat., 2 Mace. vi. 21.) i = Rev. xiii. 10. 


om Tov (as unnecessary: but it has force here) ABN c: ins CDEILP 13. 36 
rel Chr,. λαλουμενοις ABEN p 18: εἰρημένοις 64. 97 (the varr have perhaps 
been introduced from other similar exprr, such as ch xvi. 14, and ver 40): txt CDILP 
rel 36 Chr. - om ayTiA. καὶ ABCLN a de p 13. 36 [vulg] Syr coptt «th arm: 
ins DIP rel syr Chr ΤῊ] : evavtiouevor καὶ Εἰ (both the omission and the clumsy attempt 
in Εἰ seem to be emendations of the apparent tautology avtedeyov . . avTiAeyorTes). 

46. παρρησιασαμενος ὨΓ-σιαμ- D'] 105. rec δε (as bringing out the contrast), 
with EILP [syrr copt] Chr,: om sah [arm]: tune vulg: txt ABCDR o p 36. 40 eth. 
om 2nd ο Dc 68 Thl-sif. (ειπαν, so ABDX p.) aft εἰπ. ins πρὸς avtous 
D. om ην 0177: it is aft mpwr. in D. on avaryk. D-gr. for επειδη, επει 
C p Orig, (Chr, ].—om δὲ (from the two syll., -δηδε, occurring together) ΒΤ) δ] syr 
coptt Thi-sif: ins ACD2ELPR? p 18 rel [vulg(sed quoniam) Syr eth arm] Orig, 
Thdrt, Chr, [ Bas, Cyr, ] Thl,{-fin]. κρινατε D!: κρινεται D?: judicastis D-lat. 
eavtois B!(Tischdf- txt B-corr!-?). eauvt. bef κριν, E vulg Thdrt,.  [8{0] 
᾿στρεφ. [ins] ques Εἰ. 
47. ἐντεταλκεν D! e 47-marg Cyr, Thdrt,: evreAdAerat p. om ἡμιν D}-gr(txt 
D*) 57}[appy]: nu. bef evr. [6] 76. 95-7. 137. om 6X}, aft o κυρ. ins ( from 
, LXX) δου DE Cypr,. φως (omg eis) τεθ. σε D! Cypr. tos εθνεσιν D am 
demid [fuld tol Jer, ] Aug. 
48. και axovoyt. ta D Syr eth. exzipev (sic) Pefghlo. for εδοξαζ., 
εδεξαντο (corrn: see ch xi. 1) Ὁ Aug,: εδοξαζεν P(appy) e g 97. 1772. for κυριου, 
θεου B D-gr E-gr copt [arm] Aug,: om 105 Chr,: [6] 68 syrr «th have τὸν θεὸν for 
τον λ. του κυ. [bute syr ins τ. A. τ. x. aft emo. ], and 34, Tov θεον και Tov A. Tov κυ. (all 
corrns, or misunderstanding of corrns, from ch xi. 1): txt ACLPN p vulg D-lat 
E-lat [sah Chr, ]. αιωνιαν B. . 





sabbath-day: not, as Heinrichs, ‘on the 
following week-day.’ συνήχθη | ‘ In 
the synagogue ;? it was the sight of the 
Gentile crowds in their house of prayer 
which stirred up the jealousy of the Jews. 

45. ἀντιλ. καί] These words (see var. 
readd.) form a graphic repetition, passing 
from the particular thing which they did, 
viz. contradict the words spoken by Paul, 
to the spirit in which they did it, viz. a 
contradictious and blaspheming one. It is 
no Hebraism. 46. πρῶτον | See ch. iii. 
26; Rom. i. 16. 47.| Agreeing with 
JLXX-AX, B reading δέδωκα for τέθεικα. 
They refer the oe not to themselves 
as teachers (as Meyer seems to think), 
but to Christ. 48. τεταγμένοι) The 
meaning of this word must be determined 
by the context. The Jews had judged 
themselves unworthy of eternal life : the 


Gentiles, as many as were disposed to eter- 
nal life, believed. By whom so disposed, is 
not here declared: nor need the word be 
in this place further particularized. We 
know, that it is GoD who worketh in us 
the will to believe, and that the prepara- 
tion of the heart is of Him: but to find in 
this text pre-ordination to life asserted, is 
to force both the word and the context to 
a meaning which they do not contain. 
The key to the word here is the com- 
parison of ref. 1 Cor. εἰς διακονίαν τοῖς 
ἁγίοις ἔταξαν ἑαυτούς, with ref. Rom. 
ai οὖσαι (ἐξουσίαι) ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ τεταγ- 
μέναι εἰσίν : in both of which places the 
agents are expressed, whereas here the 
word is absolute. See also ch. xx. 138. The 
principal interpretations are: (1) Calvin, 
&c., who find here predestination in the 
strongest sense: ‘ordinatio ista nonnisi ad 


΄- 


x here only. 


Le δῦ οἱ δὲ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ἡ παρώτρυναν τὰς * σεβομένας γυναῖκας eaten 
ΕἸΣῚ τὰς ὃ εὐσχήμονας καὶ τοὺς “πρώτους τῆς πόλεως, καὶ < ΕἸ 
Εν ΠΩ ἃ ἐπήγειραν © διωγμὸν " ἐπὶ τὸν Παῦλον καὶ Βαρνάβαν, 
δ Mark x καὶ 8 ἐξέβαλον αὐτοὺς ἕ ἀπὸ τῶν " ὁρίων αὐτῶν. 51 οἱ δὲ 
12 Cor. vii. I ἐκτιναξάμενοι τὸν * κονιορτὸν τῶν ποδῶν ᾿ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς 
αἰ ἦλθον εἰς ᾿Ικόνιον. 5 οἵ τε μαθηταὶ ™ ἐπληροῦντο χαρᾶς 


(- -μόνως, 
1 Cor. xiv. 40. -μοσύνη; ch. xii. 23.) 
2. xxviii. 7, 17. ἃ ch. xiv. 2 only. 


g Matt. vii. 4. *Mark xvi. Qonly. 2 Chron. x1. 16. 


only. Exod. viii. 2. 
11. ch. xxii. 23 only. Exod. ix. 9. 
xv.2l). 


49. και διεφ. Da [Syr] eth. 


ABCDR? p 13. 36 [syrr coptt] arm. 
OA. x. Ε. _ om toy D. 


with DELP [Syr coptt «th] Chr: 
es Εἰ. 


vulg Syr eth. 


zternum Dei consilium potest referri’... 
‘ridiculum autem cavillum est referre hoc 
ad credentium affectum, quasi Evangelium 
receperint qui animis rite dispositi erant.’ 
So the Vulgate, ‘ preordinati ? and Aug. 
“ destinati.’ (2) ‘Qui juxta ordinem a Deo 
institutum dispositi erant ’ (Franz, Calov.: 
but not Bengel (as De W.), who explains 
it as I have done above) : (3) ‘Quibus, dum 
fidem doctrine habebant, certa erat vita 
beata’ (Morus, Kuinoel) : (4) «Qui ad vitam 
zeternam se ordinarant ’ (Grot., Limborch, 
Wolf, al.): (5) ‘ Quotquot erant dispositi, 
applicati, i.e. apti facti oratione Pauli ad 
vitam et. adipiscendam’ (Bretschneider) : 

(6) taking rer. militari sensu, ‘ Qui de ag- 
mine et classe erant sperantium vel conten- 
dentium ad v. x.’ (Mede, and similarly 
Schottg.) There are several other ren- 
derings, but so forced as to be mere cari- 
catures of exegesis: see Meyer. It may 
be worth while to protest against all at- 
tempts to join ἐπίστευσαν with εἰς ζωὴν 
αἰώνιον, which usage will not bear. Words- 
worth well observes that it would be in- 
teresting to enquire what influence such 
renderings as this of preordinati in the 
Vulgate version had on the minds of men 
like St. Augustine and his followers in the 
Western Church in treating the great 
questions of free will, election, reproba- 
tion, and final perseverance: and on some 
writers in the reformed churches who, 
though rejecting the authority of that 
version, were yet swayed by it away from 
the sense of the original here and in 
ch. ii, 47. The tendency of the Eastern 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


6. = and constr., 
1 Kings iii. 12 al. 


i Matt. x. 14 || Mk. ch. xviii. ear Neh. v. 
Luke ix. 
Rom. xy. 13,14. 2Tim.i.4.L.P. Ps. lxxxii. 16. 


for ηλθ., κατηνησαν D-gr: ηλθεν 133. 
52. rec for τε, δε (corrn), with CDELPX p rel syr coptt [arm] Chr: 


XIII. 49—b2. 


49 x διεφέρετο δὲ ὁ ἡ λόγος τοῦ Y κυρίου Ov ὅλης τῆς χώρας. ABCDE 


Mark vi. 31. Luke xix. 47. ch. (xvii. 1): χχν. 
e 2 Οον.. xii. 10 reff. Του, a. 
h-elsw. g Matt (ii. 16 415.) aud Mark (v. i al4.) 
k Luke ix. 5/| Mt. x. 

ΠΣ Luke ii. 40. ch. i, 28 (from Ps. 


καθ ολης AN ak 18. 73. 
50. παρωτρυνον D}-gr(txt D®): παρωξυναν p Kc. 
(attempt at corrn, from misunderstanding), with ELPN? rel [vulg zth] Chr, : 


rec ins καὶ bef Tas evox. 
om 
ins θλειψειν μεγαλην καὶ bef diwy. VD; 


rec ins tov bef Bapy. (for uniformity), with Ρ 

rel Thl-sif: om ABCDELX® ac k p 13 Chr Thl-fin. 
51. ins aro bef των 70d. Ec ἃ g 133-7 syr Thl-fin. 

om ABCN ak p 13. 36 vulg syr arm. 


om αυὐτων B. 

rec aft mod. ins αὐτων, 
for ez, 
ins To bef ix. E. 
txt AB 13. 36 


Fathers, who read the original Greek, was, 
he remarks, in a different direction from 
that of the Western School. 50. τὰς 
σεβ. γυν.] Women had a strong religious 
influence both for and against Christianity : 
see for the former ch. xvi. 14; xvii. 4; Phil: 
iv. 3; 1 Cor. vil. 16: for the latter, com- 
pare Josephus’s statement (B. J. ii. 20. 2), 
that the majority of the wives of the Damas- 
cenes were proses with ch. ix. 22—25. 
Strabo (vii. 3 C. and H, i. p. 219) says, 
ἅπαντες τῆς δεισιδαιμονίας ἀρχηγοὺς οἵον - 
ται τὰς γυναῖκα" αὗται δὲ καὶ τοὺς ἄνδρας 
προκαλοῦνται πρὸς τὰς ἐπὶ πλέον θεραπείας 
τῶν θεῶν καὶ ἑορτὰς καὶ ποτνιασμούς. 
These were proselytes of the gate, or at 
least inclined to Judaism. ἐξέβαλον 
Though the πρῶτοι τῆς πόλεως. at the 
instigation, probably, of their wives, were 
concerned, this seems to have been no legal 
expulsion: for we find them revisiting An- 
tioch on their return, ch. xiv.21;—but only 
a compulsory retirement for peace, and 
their own safety’s sake. 51.] As com- 
manded by our Lord, Matt. x. 14, where 
see note. Ἰκόνιον) A populous city, 
east of Antioch in Pisidia, lying ina fertile 
plain at the foot of, and almost surrounded 
by, Mount Taurus. It is reckoned by 
Xenophon (Anab. i. 2. 19) as belonging 
to Phrygia,—by Strabo (xii. 568) and 
Cicero (ad Famil. xv. 4) to Lycaonia, 
of which it was practically the capital, 
—by Ammianus Marcellinus (xiv. 2) to 
Pisidia. At this time, it was the capital 
of a distinct territory, ruled by a tetrarch 
(Plin. N. H. v. 27), and probably on that 





XIV. 1—5. TIPAZEIS ATIOTTOAQN. “155 


\ / ς 4 
καὶ πνεύματος ἁγίου. XIV. 15 γένετο δὲ ἐν ᾿Ικονίῳ »constr.,cn. 
Ν > -“ ‘ ea lv.ore 
οκατὰ TO αὐτὸ εἰςελθεῖν αὐτοὺς εἰς THY συναγωγὴν τῶν ° kere only. 


Exod. xxvi. 
9 ͵ \ a “ “- 24. 3 King 
Ιουδαίων Kai λαλῆσαι Ῥ οὕτως Ῥ ὥςτε πιστεῦσαι ᾿Ιουδαίων iis. 
τ Ζ \ = p John iii. 16 
τε καὶ “Ελλήνων πολὺ πλῆθος. 2 οἱ δὲ I ἀπειθήσαντες , my... 4. 
ΜΠ ᾿ na re / NDB eae’ x \ a 29 a te rea 
ουδαῖοι ' ἐπήγειραν καὶ " ἐκάκωσαν τὰς ψυχὰς τῶν ἐθνῶν Rom. xv. 31 
κατὰ τῶν ἀδελφῶν. 5." ἱκανὸν μὲ ὃν yoo ἃ δι- xxiii, 21, 
᾿ς πὰ xiii. 21. 
Bey, SOS ἌΡ ΟΒΘΗ bo ΘΝ ain: 


, x ¢ r A A Ais ἡ 
έτριψαν " παῤῥησιαζόμενοι ἣ ἐπὶ τῷ κυρίῳ τῷ * μαρτυ- toh wit 


A A YZ}, , A za ΄ὔ ’ “a ἢ 545 rn reff. — 
ροῦντι τῷ ὄγῳ τῆς 35 χάριτος αὐτοῦ, ὃ δίδοντι σημεῖα uch. xii.19 
J a a a y 
καὶ © τέρατα γίνεσθαι ἃ διὰ τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν. * © ἐσχίσθη " b= 
\ \ “ A , > 
26€ TO πλῆθος τῆς πόλεως, Kal οἱ μὲν Hoar ! 


\ n_ w— Luke xviii. 
συν τοις 9. 2Cor.i. 
2 / e \ a 
Ἰουδαίοις, of δὲ fav τοῖς 8 ἀποστόλοις. 


9, va, 13 ale 
5 Ὡς δὲ X= ch. x. 43 


reff, 


y ch. xx. 32. z constr., ch. xiii. 26 reff. a= ch. xiii. 43 reff. b ch. ii. 4 reff. 
ο ch. vii. 36 reff. ἃ ch. v. 12. xix. 11,26. Mark vi.2al. 2 Chron. xxxiv. 14. e = ch. 
xxiii. 7. 1 Macc. vi. 45. f 1 Cor. xv. 10. see 2 Kings ii. 10. g = ver. 14. see note. 





Cuap. XIV. 1. for avtovs, αὑτὸν (see xiii. 46) D-gr: om a. om τῶν ιουδαιων XR}. 
aft ovrws ins προς avtous D: pref ΕἸ, simly Syr. for πιστευσαι, πιστεύειν 

D: θαυμασαι EK, addg at end και πιστευσαι. [transp 2nd ιουδ. and ελλην. L. | 
2. rec απειθουντες (appy a corrn to the simpler and more usual pres part. Meyer 
believes that the pres has been altered to the aor to give the plup sense, but this is 
hardly likely), with ELP rel Chr [ΤῊ] 581]: txt ΑΒΟΝ ao p 13. 36. 40 Thl-fin.—for 
οἱ de to emnyetpay, ot Se αρχισυναγωγοι τῶν ιουδ. καὶ οἱ apXOVTES THS TUVAYwYNS ἐπηγαγον 
αὐτοῖς διωγμον κατα των δικαίων D, simly syr-mg [E also aft ern. ins διωγμον |. at 
end ins 0 δὲ κυριος ἐδωκεν ταχὺ εἰρηνὴν D demid syr-mg; o de κυρ. εἰρηνὴν eroinoey E. 
3. διετριβον A. aft διετρ. ins exes Εἰ Syr syr-w-ob [coptt]. διατρειψαντες 
παρησιασαμενοι Ὠΐ-σιαμ- 0)}]. ins emt bef τω Aoyw A X(N disapproving). rec 
ins καὶ bef 5:5., with CL a Ὁ p eth [arm] Thl: om ABDEP(X) 18. 36 rel vulg Syr 

coptt Chr.—é:dovTos δὲ [p]- for avtwy, αὐτου D!(but corrd). 

4. nv δε ἐεσχισμενον D. for ot δε, αλλοι δε Ὦ. at end ins κολλωμενοι δια 





Tov λογον Tov θεου D syr-mg ; KoAAwmevoi(alone) Syr. 


account is not reckoned to any of the above- 
mentioned districts. It became famous in 
the middle ages as the capital of the Sel- 
jukian Sultans, and had a great part in 
the growth of the Ottoman empire. It is 
now Konia, a town of 30,000 inhabitants. 
(Winer, Realw.; C. and H. i. pp. 220, ἢ) 
52.] See, for similar “joyful per- 
orations,” as Wordsworth well designates 
them, Luke xxiv. 52; ch. v. 41; xii. 24. 
Cuap. XIV. 1.] κατὰ τὸ αὐτό, toge- 
ther (reff.): duod, Hesych.: not, ‘in the 
same manner, as Wolf and others. 
οὕτως ὥςτε, as in Εἰ. V.; not éyévero.... 
éste..., as Vater. Ἑλλήνων] Pro- 
bably here these are the σεβόμενοι τὸν 
θεόν [see ch. xiii. 43, 50; xvi, 14; Xvil. 4, 
17; xviii. 7 and ch. x. 2 reff.], those of the 
uncircumcised who were more or less at- 
tached to the Jewish religion. 2.| The 
past part. indicates who believed not, 
viz. when Paul preached. ἐκάκωσαν, 
‘male «θδοογαηί,᾽--- κακούργως διέθηκαν, 
Chrys. So Jos. Antt, xvi. 1. 2, κακοῦν, 
.... kal τῆς εὐνοίας hs εἶχεν εἰς τοὺς 
παῖδας ἀφαιρεῖν. Ver. 3 gives the se- 
quel of ver. 1,—ver. 4, of ver. 2. The μὲν 
οὖν, as usual (see ch, xi. 19), takes up the 
narrative which had been interrupted. 


3. Tapp. ἐπὶ τ. kup.] A pregnant 
construction :—‘ speaking with boldness, 
which boldness was grounded on confidence 
in the Lord,’ τῷ κυρίῳ is GOD: see 
ch. iv. 29, 30, and ch. xx. 382, τῷ θεῷ x. τῷ 
λόγῳ THs χάριτος αὐτοῦ. διδόντι, 
without καί, defines μαρτυροῦντι : viz. by 
giving, &c. 4.] So Virg, νη. ii. 39, 
‘Scinditur incertum studia in contraria 
vulgus.’? Such a split into two factions was 
a common occurrence, on far less important 
occasions, in these cities of Oriental Greeks. 
(C. and H. i. p. 223.) τοῖς ἀποστό- 
λοις This is the first place where Paul 
and Barnabas are so called. St. Paul 
constantly vindicates the title in his 
Epistles: cf. Rom. 1. 1; 1 Cor. i. 1; ix. 1; 
xv. 9; 2 Cor. i. 1; Gal. i. 1; Col. i. 1; 
1 Tim.i.1; 2 Tim.i.1; Tit.i.1. Itseems 
to have been borne in this higher sense 
also by James the Lord’s brother: see 
Gal. i. 19, and note, and the prolegg. to 
the Epistle of James: and by Barnabas, 
here and in 1 Cor. ix. 5,6: see also Gal. 
ii. 9. So that there were, widening the 
word beyond the Twelve, fifteen Apostles, 
usually so called. The word was also used 
in a still wider sense: see Rom. xvi. 7; 
2 Cor. viii. 23; 1 Thess. ii. 6: in which 


150 


h James iii. 4 
only. Prov. 
lil. 25. 
{-μαν, ch. 
vil. 57.) 

i Matt. xxii. 6. 
Luke xi. 45. 
xviii. 32. 

1 Thess. ii. 2 
only. 2 Kings 
xix. 43. 

k ch. vii. 58 reff. 

l ch. xii. 12 reff. 

m Heb. vi. 18 
only. Gen. 
xix. 20. 

n Matt. iii. 5 al. , 


γελιζόμενοι Ῥ ἧσαν. 


xv. 20 reff. 
p constr., ch. 
xxii. 29 reff. 


q = Rom. (viii. 3?) xv. lonly. (Luke xviii. 27 al.) Joel iii. 10. 

i Luke i. 15. ch. iii. 2. 
v Matt. xxi. 21. 

w constr., Luke xxii. 6. ch. xx. 3. Rom. xv. 23. 


v.17. John ix. 8. s Matt. xix. 12. 
ch. iii. 12 reff. Ὁ pres., ch. xvi, 38 reff. 
viii. 2. 1 Tim. i. 19. James ii. 1, ἄς. 

10. 1 Pet.iv.17. Winer, ἢ 44. 4. a. 


5. om te D 133 [vulg] Chr.. 

6. ins kat bef cared. D?. 
Avxawvias D!, simly ver 11. 
DE: pref vulg. 


7. rec σαν bef evay., with CEHLP rel Chr: txt AB D-gr 8 13. 36 ¢ p. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATMOSTOAON. 


ins των bef ιουδ. D. 
aft κατεφ. ins οἱ αποστολοι C3 40 Thi -sif-ms ]. 
ins εἰς bef Avot. C1D: και ἃ. 


XIV. 


ἐγένετο "ὁρμὴ τῶν ἐθνῶν τε καὶ ᾿Ιουδαίων σὺν τοῖς ἐκρϑε 
ἄρχουσιν αὐτῶν, ᾿ὑβρίσαι καὶ " λιθοβολῆσαι αὐτούς, ΤῊΝ 
61 συνιδόντες “ κατέφυγον εἰς τὰς πόλεις τῆς Λυκαονίας 
A , \ A / \ Ἁ n / 7 > a ο Ε] 
ύστραν καὶ Δέρβην καὶ τὴν " περίχωρον, | κἀκεῖ ° εὐαγ- 


8 Καί τις ἀνὴρ ἐν Λύστροις “ἀδύνατος τοῖς ποσὶν 


Gal.i.15. Ps. xxi. 10. lxx. 6. 
Mark iv. 40. xi. 22. 


constr., 
Rom. xiv. 22. 1 Cor. 
1 Cor. ix. [6,} 


avtous bef «. λιθ. E. 
aft περιχ. ins oAn 


at end 


ins kat εκεινήθη oAov To πληθος em TH διδαχη" ο δε π. και B. διετριβον ev λυστροις 
1); τον λογον του θεου᾽ και εξεπλήσσετο Taga ἡ πολυπλήθια eT TH διδ. αυὐτων" ο δε π. 


k. B. διετρ. ev A. E[, simly] vulg-sixt. 


8. αδυν. bef ev A. BR': εκαθ. bef αδυν. D137: om ev A. DE. 
rec aft αὐτου ins ὑπαρχων (interpolated from ch iii. 2), 


ins τῆς bef μητρ. D}. 


om xwa. D. 


with HLP rel [copt] Chr,: om ABCDEX c p 13. 36 [vulg syrr eth arm]. elz 
περιεπεπατηκει (see note), with 57. 73-6-8. 80. 95-6: Steph περιπεπατηκει, with 
DEHLP rel Chr: πεπατηκει 137: txt ABCN a p 18. 36. 


9. [at beg ins και Εἰ (c) syr xth. ] 


aft ovros ins οὐκ NX. 


ἡκουσεν (alteration 


to suit the other aorists, the force of the imperf being overlooked : see note) ADEHLN 


bce p13. 36 [vulg Syr copt eth arm Chr,]: txt BCP rel [syr] sah. 
aft Aad. ins ὑπαρχων ev φοβω D. 
rec mot. bef ex., with EHLP rel [vulg-clem arm] Chr: 


λεγοντος ὃδὲϊ. 
προς ον at.o π. E. 


for AaA., 
arevioas δε αυὐτω ο π. 1): 


txt ABCDN ak p 19 am demid fuld (tol syrr eth] sah. 


lutter place Silvanus and Timotheus seem 
to be included in it. 5.] ὁρμή is 
not a rush (‘impetus,’ Vulg.: ‘assault,’ 
E. V.), but as Hesych. βουλή, ἐπιθυμία, --- 
as is manifest from συνιδόντες, rightly 
rendered in E. V. they were ware of it; 
which it would be strange if they were not, 
if an assault had been made on them. 

6. Λύστραν] τὰ A. also, ver. 8. 
This, as well as Derbe (of both which very 
little further is known), was probably a 
small town at the foot of the singular 
mountain-mass known as the Kara-dagh, 
or black mountain, Lystra being S8., and 
Derbe 8.E. from Iconium. The sites are 
very uncertain. There are the ruins of 
about forty Christian churches on the 
north side of the Kara-dagh, at a place 
called by the Turks Bin-bir-Kilisseh (the 
1001 churches), which the most recent 
travellers believe may be Lystra (C. and 
H. i. pp. 225 ff.). In one of these places 
(probably at Lystra, see note, ch. xvi. 1) 
Paul found and took up Timothy on his 
second journey ; and from τέκνον, 1 Cor. 
iv. 17, compared with πατήρ, as defined 


ib. ver. 15, we are justified in concluding 
that he had been converted by the Apostle; 
and, if so, during this visit. There 
appear to have been few Jews in the dis- 
trict : we hear of no synagogue. 

Λυκαονίας | Strabo describes Lycaonia (xii. 
6) as a hilly plain among the mountain- 
spurs of Taurus, very ill watered, cold and 
bare, but exceedingly adapted for sheep- 
pasture and the growth of wool. ; 
8. ἐκάθητο] Not ‘dwelt, as Kuin., but 
sat, probably in the forum or some place 
of resort. περιεπάτησεν is the his- 
toric past: who never walked. The plu- 
perfect seeming more apt, it has been 
altered in the later Mss. accordingly. 
Meyer supposes the alteration to have been 
the other way, from “the constant pre- 
ference which the Greeks gave in narration 


to the aorist over the plusq. perf.:” but 


qu. ἢ 9.1 The imperfect ἥκονεν is 
important. He was listening to Paul’s 
preaching, and, while listening, his coun- 
tenance, read by the Apostle’s gift of spi- 
ritual discernment, gave token of faith to 
be healed ἄτεν. αὐτ.] See note on 


hklo 
1 Ρ' 





ΕΞ 





rabsol., Matt. xxvii. 36. Mark v.15. Luke k] op 
6 t | 


13 


6—13. 


TIPAER EIS ATIOSTOAQN. 


157 


a 3 “ A a 
* σωθῆναι, 10 εἶπεν " μεγάλῃ Υ THY φωνῇ ᾿Δνάστηθι ἐπὶ τοὺς x = ἐν. ν.9.ι. 


πόδας σου * ὀρθός. 


Ὁ Ὁ \ ΄ 
καὶ “ἥλατο καὶ περιεπάτει. 


y ch. xxvi. 24 
only. Proy. 
XXVi. 25. 
== here (Heb. 


11 of τε 


x” > ΄ a ’ / lal “ 
ὄχλοι ἰδόντες ὃ ἐποίησεν Ἰ]αῦλος " ἐπῆραν τὴν ὃ φωνὴν ἦ xiii, hoe 


> lal \ , ᾿ς , 
αὐτῶν Λυκαονιστὶ λέγοντες Οἱ θεοὶ “ ὁμοιωθέντες ἀν- 


θρώποις “ κατέβησαν πρὸς ἡμᾶς. 


Proy. iv. 26) 

only. Mark 

v. 28. 

3 Kings xxi. 

Ὁ ΡΠ ἢ 
ach. 111. 8 


12 ἐκάλουν τε τὸν Βαρ- 


νάβαν Δία, τὸν δὲ Παῦλον “Ἑρμῆν, “ ἐπειδὴ αὐτὸς ἣν © Jonniv. 11 
ο 


΄ 


f ς ΄ A , 
Oo ᾿ηγούμενος Tou λογου. 


4 h Ν a ΄ ΄ \ i / TS 
OVTOS 7 po TS TONEWS TQAUPOUS Kal OTE“LMATA ETL 


d Matt. xxviii. 2. ech. xv. 24 reff. 
Iamblich. de Myster. init. 


14. ἄνασσ᾽ Ογκα πρὸ πόλεως, Asch. Theb. 162 (Dind.). 


f = here only. 
g of false gods, here only, 4 Kings xi. 18. 


nly. Isa. 


Φ e \ “ \ a 
13 6 τε «δ (EPEUS tov Διὸς τοῦ b ch. ii. 14 reff, 


c = Rom. ix. 
29 (from Isa. 
ae i. 9). 
Dan. xi. 22 Theod. 0 τῶν λόγων ἡγεμών, 
: h ch. xii. 6, 
ihereonly+. Zech. vi. 11 alii(Tromm.). 


10. om τη (as unnecessary, its force being overlooked) BCD'& Κρ: ins ADSEHLP 


rel. 


aft φωνὴ ins σοὶ Acyw εν Tw ονοματι του κυριου ino. xp. (interpolation from 


ch iii. 6) CDE a [6] 0 13 (Syr syr-mg sah arm] Thl-fin (om τω, and aft κυρ. ins nuwy 


E [om τ. κυρ. 6 19): om ABHLPN p rel vulg syr-txt copt eth Chr, Thi-sif. 
[op@pos A:] op@ws K-gr HP [syr-mg] Thi-sif: add καὶ περιπατεῖ D syr-mg. 
Ist καὶ ins mapaxpnua E [tol]; evlews mapaxpnua D syr-mg. 


aft 
rec ἤλλετο 


(alteration to suit the imperf περιεπατει), with LP 13 rel syrr [arm] ΤῊ], yAero H: 
avndato D1, avnAdato D3: εξηλλατο E: txt ABCN [p] vulg(ewilivit et ambulabat) 


[coptt] Chr,. 


om 2nd και ΒΙ(1η5 B!-corr, see table) [copt]. 


11. rec δὲ (alteration from the characteristic te), with CDKHLP p rel 13 [vulg syr 


sah arm] Chr: txt ABN 36. 40 Syr eth. 


with HLP p rel: om ABCDEN ς 18 Chr,. 


τοις bef ανθρ. D1. av@pwrot(sic) δὲ]. 


12. for τε, δε Da Ὁ g 40 [ E-lat Cyr-c,] Chr,. 


[ἰδοτες C. | 
om τὴν D. 


rec ins o bef παυλος, 
om αυτων δὲ]. ins 


rec aft 1st τὸν ins μὲν (to answer 


to the follg δε), with B(sic: see table) C3EHLP 13 rel syr copt Cyr-c, Chr: om 


AC1(D)X p 36 vulg [sah arm ].—om τὸν also D. 


for επειδη, emer δὲ} ky om ὁ C!D [6]. 


διαν DEHL P-corr o p 40. 


13. rec for τε, δε, with DEHLP rel syr coptt Thi: txt ABCN [a c] 36. 40 vulg 


[Syr] ath Chr—rote o p lect-12; tore ΟἹ, but τ is erased.—or δε tepers . . 
tov ovtos ὃ. D ὁ 137. 
rec aft πολ. ins avtwy, with C3EHLP rel syr Chr: om 


. - ηθελον D 96. 
om της D!: ins 98, 


ABC'DN a p 18. 36 vulg coptt [Syr (th) arm]. 


ch. xiii. 9. 10. pey. τῇ .'] Raising 
his voice above the tone in which he was 
before speaking. The article is important. 

11. Avkaovicti | The nature of this 
dialect is uncertain: its existence is further 
mentioned by Steph. Byzant., cf. τῇ τῶν 
Λυκαόνων φωνῇ, in note on ver. 20. The 
notice is inserted to shew that the Apostles 
had no knowledge of the inference drawn 
by the crowd, till they saw the bulls being 
brought to their doors, ver.13. So Chry- 
sostom: οὐκ ἦν τοῦτο οὐδέπω δῆλον' TH 
γὰρ οἰκείᾳ φωνῇ ἐφθέγγοντο, λέγοντες 
K.T.A. διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲν αὐτοῖς ἔλεγον 
(meaning, “for this reason they, the Ly- 
caonians, spoke unintelligibly to the Apos- 
tles:” ἔλεγον taking up the λέγοντες. 
Wordsw. has, in his ardour to vindicate 
Chrysostom from heterodoxy, fallen into 
the mistake of rendering, ‘‘ therefore the 
Apostles said nothing to them”): ἐπειδὴ δὲ 
εἶδον τὰ στέμματα, τότε ἐξελθόντες K.T.A. 
Hom. xxx., p. 235 f. See, on the real na- 
ture of the gift of tongues, and the bearing 
of notices of this kind on its consideration, 
the note on ch. ii. 4. These ἐπιφάνειαι 
of the gods are frequent subjects of 


ενεγκαντες 
[προς Cl: πρωτων πυλων p.]| 


aft ταυρ. ins avtos D: aft στεμ., 


heathen poetry and mythology. Hom. Od. 
p. 484, says, καί τε θεοὶ ξείνοισιν ἐοικότες 
ἀλλοδαποῖσι Παντοῖοι τελέθοντες ἐπιστρω- 
φῶσι πόληας. It was in the neighbouring 
country of Phrygia that Jupiter and Mer- 
cury were said to have wandered, and to 
have been entertained by Baucis and Phile- 
mon: ‘Jupiter hue, specie mortali, cum- 
que parente Venit Atlantiades positis ca- 
ducifer 4115. (Ov. Met. viii. 626, f.) Dio 
Chrysostom (Orat. xxxiii. p. 408) says, 
φασὶ τοὺς οἰκιστὰς ἥρωας ἢ θεοὺς πυλ- 
λάκις ἐπιστρέφεσθαι τὰς αὑτῶν πόλεις. 
(From Mr. Humphry’s note.) 12. | 
This distinction is (besides the reason 
given) in accordance with what Paul him- 
self cites (as the saying of his adversaries, 
it is true, but not therefore without some 
physical foundation), 7 παρουσία τοῦ σώ- 
ματος ἀσθενής. So Chrysostom, ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ 
καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς Opews ἀξιοπρεπὴς εἶναι 6 
Βαρνάβας, Hom. xxx., p. 297. 

ἡγούμενος τοῦ λόγου) So Iamblichus, 
ot Hermes, in reff.: ‘ vocis et sermonis 
potens,’ Macrob. Saturn. i. 8: λόγου mpo- 
φήτης, Orph. H. xxvii. 4: λαλίστατος κ. 
λογιώτατος θεῶν ἁπάντων, Lucian, Gal- 


158 ΠΡΑΈΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XIV. 
- 7 \ a / ,ὔ 
k-chx.ar τοὺς Ἐπυλῶνας ἐνέγκας σὺν τοῖς ὄχλοις ' ἤθελεν ™ θύειν. 
reff. ς ͵ , \ a 
1 andeonstr. 14. ᾽Α κούσαντες δὲ οἱ " ἀπόστολοι Βαρνάβας καὶ Iaddos 
Ὁ xvi. 19. ΄ a > 
Luis sae ΟΡ διαῤῥήξαντες τὰ “ ἱμάτια αὐτῶν “' ἐξεπήδησαν εἰς τὸν 
ch, xvii. 18. » Ἂ ; = 
m—Mark xiv. ὄχλον τὸ κράζοντες 15 καὶ " λέγοντες “Avopes, τί ταῦτα 
ΜᾺ 9 wn a ς A id a v 
vi κῶς ποιεῖτε; Kal ἡμεῖς ἃ ὁμοιοπαθεῖς ἐσμεν ὑμῖν ἄνθρωποι, 
13 reff.) , n . a , 
Frod. xxii, Υ εὐαγγελιζόμενοι ὑμᾶς “ ἀπὸ τούτων τῶν * ματαίων YY ἐπι- 
δ ε \ -“ \ 
ners. στρέφειν Yérl “ θεὸν * ζῶντα, ὃς *érroinoey τὸν * οὐρανὸν 
65. Josh. \ Ni Ὑ 0. \ \ a / \ , ee > a 
vii. 6. ’ 
SMe ig, Καὶ τὴν δ γῆν καὶ τὴν θάλασσαν καὶ πάντα τὰ ἐν αὐτοῖς 
Mark xiv. 63. s 3 wa Ὁ f c a " t \ 
Mark xiv.63. 16 ὃς ἐν ταῖς ἢ παρῳχημέναις “ γενεαῖς εἴασεν πάντα τὰ 
viii. 29 only. 


ἔθνη ἃ πορεύεσθαι ταῖς " ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν, 17! καίτουγε οὐκ 
> , c XN h > n i > θ lal k » 10 is n 
& ἀμάρτυρον ἑαυτὸν © ἀφῆκεν | ἀγαθουργῶν, * οὐρανόθεν ὑμῖν 
} ς \ ὃ ὃ \ ἣν m \ n ΄ ο > %, lal 
ὑετοὺς διδοὺς καὶ ™ καιροὺς " καρποφόρους, ° ἐμπιπλῶν 


4 here only. 
Deut. xxxili. 
22. 

r Judith xiv. 
17 B. 

8. Matt. viii. 29. 
ch. xvi. 17. 


Σ : “ \ q 3 / Ν ὃ ΄ id -“ 18 Κ \ 

a τ Ρ τροφῆς κα εὐφροσύνης τας καρ tas υμων. at 
=xod. v. 8. 

u nae v.17 only+. Wisd. vii. ὃ only. v constr., ch. xvi. 10. Gal. i. 9. 1 Pet. i. 12. w ch, xxvi. 

18. 1 Thess. i. 9. x = here only. (1 Cor. iii. 20 reff.) Levit. xvii. 7. Isa. 11, 20 ak. y ch. xxvi. 

20 reff. zsee note. 1 Kings xvii. 36 (16). ach. iv. 24 reff. b here only +. Xen. 

Anab. ii. 4. 1, end. c == ch. xiii. 36 reff. ἃ constr., ch. ix. 31 reff. e = Luke 

i. 79. ch. ii. 28. Prov. i. 31. f John iv. 2 (ch. xvii. 27 v. r.) only. Xen. Mem. i. 2. ὃ. g here 


only +. οὐκ ἔστιν δὲ ἀμάρτυρον τὸ μέγεθος τ. προειρημένων χρημάτων, Jos. Antt. xiv.7. 2. h— Matt. 


iii. 15. Heb. ii. 8. Ezek. xvi. 39. 11 Tim. vi. 18 only +. k ch. xxvi. 13 only +. schin. 
p. 73. 5, from Hesiod. Ich. xxviii. 2. Heb. vi.7. James v.18. Rev. xi.6 only. Deut. xi. 14. Job 
v.10. Ep. Jer. 53. m — here only. τοῖς καιροῖς ELKWY, Polyb. iii. 9. 7. n here only. Ps. 


o here only. Ps. cii. 5. exliv. 16. see Rom. 


evi. 34. exlviii. 9. Jer. ii. 21 only. (-petv, Rom. vii. 4, δ.) c 
q ch. ii. 28 only. Isa. xxix. 19. 


xv. 24. p ch. ix. 19 al. fr. 5 


Ps. CXxxv. 25. 
E [c] 137. ἤθελον H 1 p tol Thi-sif, so also D (see above). εἐπιθυειν Ὁ. 
14. axovoas δε omg (so Syr) οἱ aw. D. (In & theas of βαρναβας is supplied perhaps by 
cort!.) eautwy ABN? 13. 36: txt CDKHLPR' p rel Chr,. aft avr. ins καὶ D?. 
rec εἰςξεπηδησαν (corrn to suit εἰς τ. oxAov), with C3HLP rel Thl-fin: txt ABC'DEN 
ac p 18. 86 vulg syrr sah [copt eth] arm Chr Thl-sif-comm. for εἰς, em ΟἹ, 
15. for λέγοντες, φωνουντες D!, ins εἰ (ers ?) bef τι Al. om 2nd xa D. 
vu bef ecu. C [f h ο] 38. 93. 113 Chr, [Thdrt, Thl-fin] ; om υμ. H ¢ 137: aft 
ανθρ. 13. for vuas, υμιν Tov θεον D flor [spec] Iren-int. επιστρεψητε, ins 
omws bef απο, D flor [spec] Iren-int: επιστρεφητε, insg iva bef απο, ΕἸ. rec Tov 0. 
τον ¢. (alteration for more precision: see note), with HLP rel Chr,: tov θ. ¢. DI 
[Vhdrt,]: θ. τὸν ¢. δὲξ : txt ABC D-corr EX? a k p13. 40 Ath). tov ποιήσαντα 1), 
16. for os, ο D. for παντα, kata D!. [for 2nd rats, tors L(Treg). | 
17. καιτοι ΑΒΟΝ8 a p? 13 Ath,: καιγε DE (probably corrections: the γε or the τοι 
being deemed unnecessary): txt C3HLPR! p? rel 36 [Ath(ed Bened)] Chr, Thdrt,. 
for eavt., avrov ABER! ο: txt CDHLPN? 13 rel Ath Chr Thdrt.—agnk. bef 
εαυτ. Ὦ. rec αγαθοπϑιων (altern to more usual word), with DELP rel Chr Thdrt: 
ἀαγαθοπων H: txt ABC [a p 13] Ath,. rec ἡμῖν, with a: om AN? p 13 vulg eth 
Iren{-int, ]-2-mss: αὐτοῖς Syr sah : txt BODEHLP®? rel flor spee syr [arm] Ath Thdrt 
ΤῊ] Iren{ -int, 1. 5:5. bef ver. AN [a k] p 18. 73 lect-12 vulg [copt]. εμπιμπλων 
DE[P}. om tas D}(ins aft καρδιας D°). rec μων (corrn, the assertion seeming 
to be of general application to the speaker as well as his hearers), with AHLPR3 13 
rel [vulg-ed] copt «th Chr,: avrwy Syr sah [Ath-3-mss]: txt BCDER! be fklop 
am(and demid flor fuld tol) spec syr [arm] Ath Thdrt Thl-sif Iren[-int]. 


lus, 2. 13.] πρὸ τ. π΄. (see reff.) ; i.e. στολουῦ] See note on ver. 4. The Apos- 


of Ζεὺς πρόπυλος : no ellipsis of ἱεροῦ or 
any thing else. ταύρους K. OTEL- 
ματα] Not for ταύρους ἐστεμμένους : the 
garlands may have been to hang on the 
doors of the house where the Apostles 
were: or for manifold purposes connected 
with the sacrifice. ‘Ipse denique fores, 
ipse hostia, ipsz are, ipsi ministri et sacer- 
dotes eorum coronantur.’ Wetst. TOUS 
πυλῶνας are not the gates of the city, 
bnt the doors of the outer court of the 
house: see ch. xii. 13. 14. οἱ ἀπό- 


tles were within: on being told, they 
efen7dnoay—rushed forth, into the crowd. 
15. ματαίων viz. θεῶν [ contrasted 

with δϑεὸν ζῶντα! : the words of ref. 
1 Thess. ἐπεστρέψατε mpds τὸν θεὸν amd. 
τῶν εἰδώλων, are remarkably like these. 
θεὸν ζῶντα, without the articles, 

is characteristic of Pauls see Rom. ix. 
26; 2 Cor. iii. 3; vi. 16; 1 Thess. i. 9; 
1 Tim. iii. 15; iv. 10 al. It also occurs 
Heb. iii. 12; ix. 14; x. 31; xii. 22; Rev.° 
vii, 2. 16.} Compare Rom. iii. 25, 26, 





14—20. TIPAZEIS ATIOSTOAQON. 159 
a , r , 9 , \ ” t “-“ ΜΕΝ 
ταῦτα λέγοντες * μόλις " κατέπαυσαν τοὺς ὄχλους ‘TOU rch. axvii.7, 
. 16. Rom. 

μὴ “θύειν αὐτοῖς. 19" Ὡπῆλθαν δὲ ἀπὸ ᾿Αντιοχείας καὶ iis hd 
an \ \ - xi. 31 

Ἰκονίου ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, καὶ πείσαντες τοὺς ὄχλους καὶ “AL- only. ᾿ 


n 


= here only. 


θάσαντες τὸν Παῦλον “ ἔσυρον Y ἔξω τῆς πόλεως, νομί- tans. Heb. 


Sm , , fal 1 ii 3 
fovtes αὐτὸν τεθνηκέναι. 29 :κυκλωσάντων δὲ τῶν μα- intrans., 
a a > νι XA » \ , , Βερ.ϊν 
θητῶν αὐτὸν “ἀναστὰς εἰςῆλθεν εἰς τὴν πόλιν, καὶ (ΟΣ ΠΟ ῊΣ 
iol 5 7 Seen \ “~ / > , t es a. 2 
"σῇ ἐπαύριον “ ἐξῆλθεν σὺν τῷ BapvaBa " εἰς Δέρβην. * Gan s’z. 
dat., 1 Cor. 
x. 20 only. Gen. xlvi. 1 al. fr. v absol., Luke xi. 22. Eph. ii. 7. James v. 1. Show! ἵν. 15. Jouh. 
xxiy. 20. w ch. v. 26 reff. x ch. viii. 3 reff. y Luke xiii. 33. ch. xxi. 5, 
30. Neh. xiii. 20. 2 = John x. 24 (Luke xxi. 20. Heb. xi. 30. Kev. χχ. 9) only. 2 Chron. 
xxiii. 7. a = ch. ix. 6 reff. bch. x. 9 reff. c ch, xi. 25 reff. 


18. μογις D coptt. κατεπαυσαντο Cl}, at end ins aAAa πορευεσθαι εκαστον 
evs Ta ιδια C Καὶ m p 13. 36 syr-mg arm. 

19. at beg ins διατριβοντων δε (so D? : om δε D!) autwy και διδασκοντων, omg de follg, 
DE abf k mop 13. 36. 40 syr-mg; so, but om και, C; and, but om διδασκοντων, 
arm Cassiod. (επηλθαν, so ABN p.) τινες ιουδ. απ. tov. κι αντ. D, τιν. 
απ. a, kK. t. ιουδ. E vulg: οἱ απ. avr. Κ- uk. Kat ιουδαιοι 15-8. 180. for πείσαντες, 
επισεισαντες D Syr: om 2nd καὶ D-corr. και διαλεγομενων avTwy παρρησια 
εἐπεισαν [ανεπεισαν τὴ p| τ. οχλ. αποστηναι απίοτη al) avtwy AeyovTes οτι ουδεν αληθες 
λεγουσιν adAa παντα ψευδονται Ca Καὶ m p syr-mg(adding καὶ ἐπισεισαντες τοὺς οχλου5) 


arm. λιθοβολησαντες A 15-8. 36. 180. [εσυραν DEL Chr,. | 
om εξω δὲ] rec νομίσαντες, with CEHLP rel 36 Chr (Εο Thi: txt ABDX p 13. 
40 rec TeOvava (corrn: the contracted form was the more common: so Meyer), 


with DEHLP rel Chr: txt ABCN a Κρ 13. 36.—re6v. bef avr. Ὁ. 
20. κυκλωσαντες D'(txt D?). rec aut. bef τ. μαθ., with EHLP: τ. wad. avtov 
(see ch ix. 25) Dl(and lat): txt ABCD8N ὁ ἢ Καὶ m? p 13 Chr.—avtwv L [m!).—E adds 


αὐτου. ins λυστραν bef πολιν D. 
for τη; τὴν D}. [εἰςηλθ. Η.] 


and ch. xvii. 30. 17. Compare Rom. 
i. 19, 20. The words οὐρανόθεν ὑετοὺς δι- 
δούς had a remarkable applicability in a 
country where we have seen from Strabo 
(on ver. 6) that there was great scarcity of 
water. He relates that in one city of 
Lycaonia, where water was reached by 
digging the wells very deep, it was sold for 
money. The idea of Mr. Humphry, that 
the conclusion of this speech is a citation 
JSrom some lyric poet, seems improbable on 
other accounts, and is rendered more so by 
the above-noticed propriety. 19. πεί- 
σαντες τοὺς OXA. | ἄπιστοι γὰρ Λυκάονες, 


ὡς καὶ ᾿Αριστοτέλης μαρτυρεῖ. Schol. on 
Homer, Il. δ. 88, 92. They stoned him, 


not in the Jewish method, but tumultuous- 
ly and in the streets, dragging him out of 
the city afterwards. He refers to this 
stoning, 2 Cor. xi. 25, ἅπαξ ἐλιθάσθην. 

20.] κυκλ., not to bury him, but, as would 
naturally be the case, in mournful anxiety 
and regret. ἀναστάς) The prima 
facie, and I think the right impression is, 
that this recovery was supernatural. It is 
not indeed so strongly implied, as to leave 
no doubt: especially as a blow from a stone 
would be likely to stun and occasion the 
appearance of death. Δέρβην] See 
above, on ver. 6. Strabo, xii. 6, says of it, 
τῆς δ᾽ Ἰσαυρικῆς ἐστιν, ἐν πλευραῖς 7 
AepBn, μάλιστα τῇ Καππαδοκίᾳ ἐπιπε- 


om πολιν to πολιν next ver (homeotel) X}. 
συν is written by D8, D! has perished. 


φυκός, τὸ τοῦ ᾿Αντιπάτρου τυραννεῖον τοῦ 
Δερβήτου (ef. Cicero, Epp. xiii. 79, ‘Cum 
Antipatro Derbete mihi non solum hospi- 
tium verum etiam summa familiaritas 
intercedit’) .. . ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν δὲ Kal τὰ Ἴσαυρα 
Kk. τὴν Δέρβην ᾿Αμύντας εἶχεν, ἐπιθέμενος 
τῷ Δερβήτῃ, κ- ἀνελὼν αὐτόν. And Ste- 
phanus Byzantinus, Δέρβη φρούριον Ἴσαυ- 
ρίας καὶ λιμήν (for this, evidently an error, 
the French translators of Strabo propose 
to read λίμνη. There is a large lake, now 
called Ak Gol, near the presumed site of 
Derbe, see C. and H. i. 239)... . τινὲς δὲ 
Δέλβειαν, 6 ἐστι TH τῶν Λυκαόνων φωνῇ 
ἄρκευθος. (Wetst.) From this variety of 
the name, AéABea, Mr. Hamilton thought 
the modern Divlé might be Derbe. Mr. 
Lewin (i. 167) objects, that there is no lake 
near Divlé: but this objection only affects 
the conjectural emendation mentioned 
above. From Derbe not being enumerated, 
2 Tim. iii. 11, with Antioch, Iconium, and 
Lystra, as the scene of any of Paul’s suffer- 
ings, we may perhaps infer that none befell 
him there. They may have fled to 
Derbe, as being in a different jurisdiction 
from Lystra; the latter being comprised 
in the Roman province of Galatia, whereas: 
Derbe seems to have belonged at this time 
to Antiochus, king of Commagene. See 
Lewin, i. p. 168; Strabo, xiv. 5; Die, 
lix. 8; lx. 8; Jos. Antt. xix. 5. 1. 


100 


ἃ constr., ch. 
Viii. 25 reff. 

e trans., Matt. 
xiii. 52. 
(xxvii. 57 
intr.) xxviii. 
19 only t. 

f -— ch, xi 12 
reff. 
ch. viii. 25 

z reff. 


σαντες 


ψυχὰς τῶν μαθητῶν, 


2 Kings 1. 6.) 
i = ch. xi, 23, 
k constr., here 
only. 
(xliv.) 25. 
Sir. xxviii. 6. 
τοῖς νόμοις 
ἐμμένων, 
Xen. Mem. 
iv. 4. 4. : a 2 
“(but with ἃ κατέβησαν 


ἐν) Gal. iii. 


X πεπιστεύκεισαν. 


10, from Deut. xxvii. 26. Heb. viii. 9 (ch. xxviii. 30) only. 
i Heb. ix. 12 only. Jer. xvii. 25. 


Luke xviii. 25. John x.2,9. Rom. v. 12. 
Mark x. 23. Johniii.5al. Paul, never. 
s = ch. xi. 30 reff. 
w Luke xxiii. 46. ch. xx. 32. 
zch. xi. 19 reff. 


13 Il. 
o Matt. v. 20. 
τ = ch. xv. 21 reff. 
ν 2 Cor. vi. 5 reff. 

6 reff. Josh. xviii. 4. 


Fes xxx..0: 


TIPASEIZ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XIV. 21—28, 


i » lal k b] / 1 “~ 
παρακαλουντες “ EpEevely “τῇ 


πίστει, καὶ ὅτι ™ διὰ πολλῶν θλίψεων " δεῖ ἡμᾶς τὸ εἰς- 
ελθεῖν εἰς τὴν P βασιλείαν τοῦ Ῥθεοῦ. 38 «Χειροτονήσαντες 
. δὲ αὐτοῖς ἴ κατ᾽ ἐκκλησίαν " πρεσβυτέρους, * προςευξάμενοι 
Jer li ἃ μετὰ ᾿ νηστειῶν “ παρέθεντο αὐτοὺς τῷ κυρίῳ " εἰς ὃν 
24 καὶ Y διελθόντες τὴν Πισιδίαν ἦλθον 
εἰς Παμφυλίαν, > καὶ “ λαλήσαντες ἐν Ἰ]Πέργῃ τὸν 5 λόγον 
ἃ εἰς ᾿Αττάλιαν, 36 κἀκεῖθεν » ἀπέπλευσαν εἰς 


m Matt. vii. 

n ch. iv. 12 reff. 

q 2 Cor. viii. 19 only τ. 

tabsol., ch. x. 9 reff. u = } Tim. iv. 14 al. 

3 x ch. x. 43 reff. y ch, xiii. 
Ὁ ch. xiii. 4 reff. 


1 ch. xiii. 8 reff. 
p ch. xix. 8 reff. 


a ch. xvi, 11, 22 reff. 


21. ευαγγελιζομενοι (corrn aft ver 7: see also ch xi. 20) ADEHP a: txt BCLNS 


p rel 36 vulg [ Bas, } Chr,. 
Tn wore D-gr. 


D[-gr]. 


for τε, δε D 40. 96 coptt. 
μαθητευσαν B}(Tischd:). 
om τὴν (bef Avorp.) Ὁ [h] 93. 113 Chr, Thl-fin. 


for τὴν πολ. €x., τους εν 
for ik. ὑπεστρ., πολλους ὑπεστρεφον 
rec om εἰς (bef tx. 


and bef αντ.} (as unnecessary: the circumstantial repetition of ets ts original), with 
DHLP (vulg) E-lat [Bas,] Chr: ins bef tx. but om bef avr. B: om bef tx. but ins bef 


αντ. τὴ : txt AC E-gr Na p 13. 36. 40. 


22. ins καὶ bef παρακ. C a ὁ 69. 100-5-37 syrr [eth] arm Thl-fin: παρακ. re D-gr R* 


vulg(not fuld tol). 


(for ἐμμενεῖν, € evueverr(sic) δ.) 


ελθειν D!-gr. 


23. rec πρεσβ. bef κατ εκκλ., with EHLP rel [syr coptt eth] Chr: txt ABCDN ak 


m p 13 vulg Syr arm. κατα D. 


avrows L. 
24, διελθ. δε D copt. 


mposevé. δε D: και mp. ὁ f vss [simly ]. 
πεπιστευκασιν D ὁ 6 78. 137. 
aft διελθ. ins εἰς δὲ. 


ἥλθαν Ὦ. ins τὴν bef 


παμφ. (to correspond with την mo.) BCEN p 13. 40: om ADHLP rel Chr. 


25. εἰς περγην A am demid: εἰς τὴν περγην N!(and 3 ?) [p). 
του κυριου ACN (k) p 13. 40 vulg Syr syr-w-ast arm; tov θεου E. 
at end, D 137 syr-w-ast add ευαγγελιζόμενοι αὐτου. 
26. om απεπλευσαν B!-txt (insd in marg). 


AB'CDER.) 


21. iméorp.| They were not far from the 
famous pass, called the ‘Cilician gates,’ 
which leads direct into that province: but, 
notwithstanding all that had befallen him, 
Paul prefers returning by the churches 
which he had founded, to a short and easy 
journey to the coast by his own home. 

22. ἡμᾶς Is not this a token of the pre- 
sence of the narrator again? My own 
conjecture would be, that he remained in 
Antioch during the journey to Iconium, 
&e., and back. The events between those 
two limits are much more summarily re- 
lated than those before or after. In an art. 
in the Journal of classical and sacred philo- 
logy, Camb., March, 1856, where the justice 
of the above conjecture is called in ques- 
tion, the writer says, ‘here δεῖ ἡμᾶς εἰξελθ. 
&e. is the language of the preachers them- 
selves, as the word ὅτι shews:’ and proceeds 
to remark justly on the transition from the 
oblique to the direct narrative, as especi- 
ally characteristic of St. Luke’s style, and 
corroborative of the unity of authorship 


aft τ. Aoyoy ins 
(atTaAtav, 80 


between different parts of the Acts, and 
between the Acts and the Gospel. But 
if so, should we not rather look for ὑμᾶς 
than ἡμᾶς ἢ The writer, I am glad to see, 
joins with me in rejecting the ‘ common ἢ 
explanation (see Prolegg. ὃ i. 13) that ἡμᾶς 
is used by the writer ‘as a Christian, and 
of all Christians :’ to what then would he 


* have it referred? I would rather, regard- 


ing the ὅτι as marking a transition to the 
direet narrative, take ἡμᾶς as an insensible 
translation into the first person on the 
part of the narrator, speaking of an exbor- 
tation which he heard and felt. 23. 
χειροτ. | ‘cum suffragiis creassent,’ Erasm. : 
not necessarily as the meaning of the word 
conventionally,—which had passed to any 
kind of appointment, see ch. x. 41: but 
by the analogy of ch. vi. 2—6. See ref. 
2 Cor. The word will not bear Jerome’s 
and Chrys.’s sense of ‘laying on of hands,’ 
adopted by Roman Catholic expositors. 
Nor is there any reason here tor departing 
from the usual meaning of electing by show 


9) d > , / Ν , ᾽ , λιν θ ΄ 

21 ἃ εὐαγγελισάμενοί τε τὴν πόλιν ἐκείνην καὶ © μαθητεύ- ABCDE 
En; HLPR a 

‘ixavous ὃ ὑπέστρεψαν εἰς τὴν Avotpav καὶ εἰςυ 


Ἴ ΄ \ ? ᾿ς , 99 h2 t \ klm 
KOVLOV καὶ εις VTLOVELAV, “ ἐπιστηρίζοντες Tas pls 


εἴσῃ 
ο 








d μετ 
αὐυτω.. 
ABCDE 
HLPRa 
bedfg 
hklim 
opls3 


AV eles 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


101 


᾿Αντιόγειαν, ὅθεν ἦσαν “ παραδεδομένοι τῇ γάριτι τοῦ c=ch.xv.40 
ΧΈΡΙ) ] ρ fe ἢ xap = ch. xv. 40, 


g fa > ὟΝ d ” ἃ ap: / 
εοῦ εἰς TO “Epyov Ὁ * ἐπλήρωσαν. 


Pet. ii. 23. 
John xix. 


Q7 1 ) 
7 Τπαραγενόμενοι so. 


\ , \ ¢ . 8.) 
δὲ καὶ &ovvayayovtes τὴν ἐκκλησίαν © ἀνήγγελλον ὅσα a = ch. xv. 38 
. - \ ΠΗ > lal ea - -“ , rei. ee 
i ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς ‘eT αὐτῶν, καὶ ὅτι ἤνοιξεν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν & = ον. xi. 25 
reff, 


Κ θύραν πίστεως. “8 1 διέτριβον δὲ χρόνον ™ ovK τὴν ὀλίγον 


σὺν τοῖς μαθηταῖς. 


\ a 
XV. 1 Καί τινες °xateXOovtes ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας ἐδί- 
\ > Ἃ e SUN \ ol n 
δασκον τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς ὅτε ἐὰν μὴ περιτμηθῆτε τῷ 
4ᾳ ἔθει τῷ Μωυσέως, οὐ δύνασθε σωθῆναι. 
τ στάσεως καὶ ὃ ζητήσεως ™ovK τὰ ὀλίγης τῷ Παύλῳ καὶ 
1 ch. xii. 19 reff. 


p 1 Cor. vii. 18 reff. 
r= ch. xxi. 7,10. (xxiv. 5 al. 


k = 2 Cor. ii. 12 reff. 
o ch. viii. ὃ reff. 


Wiel. 
i. 4. vi. 4. 2 Tim. ii. 23. Tit. iii. 9 only t. 


27. συναξαντες D: συναγοντεξς p. 


Prov. xvii. 14.) 


f absol., ch. 
xvii. 10 reff. 
g = Matt. ii. 4. 
ch. xv. 30. 


2 Cor. vii. 7. 
Deut. xxvi. 3, 
i Luke i. 72. 
X: 37. Ch. Ἀγ, 
4. Luke 
only. Gen. 
xxiv. 12 
m ch. xii. 18 reff. n — Rev. xii. 12. 
q = ch. vi. 14 reff. constr., Tobit iii. 3. 2 Macc. 
s John iii. 25. ch. xxv. 20. 1 Tim. 


9 5 
γενομένης οὖν 


rec ανηγγειλαν (corrn to aorist as more 


usual), with HLP rel vulg [syr eth arm]: avnyyeAov p: avnyyeAay m: απηγγειλαν 


Ek Bas, Chr, : 
DX [a] ¢ 96. 133-80 sah [Bas, ]. 


peta των ψυχων avtwy DD. 


ανηγγειλον 1): txt A Β[ανηγελ. B'] CR 18 copt. 
for μετ᾽ avtwy, avtois(partly erased by D-corr) 


o Geos bef εποι. 


28. rec aft διετρ. δε ins exes, with EHLP rel [syrr coptt] Chr: om ABCDX p 19. 


36. 40 vulg eth arm. 


Cap. XV. 1. aft ιουδαιας ins των πεπιστευκότων απὸ TNS αἱρεσεως τῶν φαρισαιων 


8. 187 syr-mg (see note). 


[for εαν, av A}. | 
the aor, in the sense of the futurum exactum, may be an emendation. 


rec περιτεμνησθε (Meyer thinks 
I shd rather 


think the present to have been the corrn, as being the simpler, and not therefore ‘ the 
more genuine, as Bloomf.), with EHLP rel [Amm-c] Chr, : txt ABCDN p 18. 36. 40 


Constt, Epiph, (περιθμητε B': but corrd eadem manu: see table). 


rec om 


2nd τω, with C20r3 DEHLP rel Constt [Amm-c] Chr: ins ABC!X p: τοὺ 170. 


καὶ Tw εθει ww. περιπατητε D syr-mg [simly sah]. 


δυνησησθαι C: -σεσθε 36. 180. 


εθνι (but v erased) δὲ, 


2. for ουν, δε BC D-gr L[N] abhk p 86 Syr coptt: txt AEHP rel vulg D-lat syr 


[arm Constt,] Chr. [18 def. | 


extacews D-gr: evoracews |. 


rec συζητησεως-, 


with Thl-fin: om καὶ (yr. Εἰ 68 vulg copt: txt ABCDHLPX p rel 36 Constt Chr Thl- 


of hands. The Apostles may have admitted 
by ordination those presbyters whom the 
churches elected. arposevé. μ.. νηστ. 
belongs to παρέθ.. not to χειροτον. 
25. ᾿Αττάλειαν͵ A maritime town at the 
mouth of the river Catarrhactes, in Pam- 
phylia, not far from the border of Lycia, 
built by Attalus Philadelphus, king of Per- 
gamus, in a convenient position to com- 
mand the trade of Syria or Egypt. It is 
still an important place, called Satalia. 
(Winer, Realw. C. and Η. 1. p. 242.) To 
reach it they had to cross the plain from 
Perga. 26. ] ὅθεν, as being the centre 
whence their apostolic commission had 
spread. 27.) μετ᾽ αὐτῶν, with (i. 6. 
in dealing with) them, see reff.: not to 
them, as usually: nor per ipsos, as Beza, 
&e. θύραν mior. | The same meta- 
phor is used in the reff. by Paul, and 
shews, perhaps, his hand in the narrative. 

; On χρόν. οὐκ ὀλίγ., see chronol. 
table in Prolegg. 

Cuapr. XV. 1—35.] DIFFERENCES RE- 
SPECTING THE NECESSITY OF CIRCUM- 


Vor. II. 


CISION FOR THE GENTILE CONVERTS. 
COUNCIL OF THE APOSTLES AND ELDERS 
AT JERUSALEM. 1. tives] Called in 
Gal. ii. 4, παρείξακτοι ψευδάδελφοι, οἵτινες 
mapesnAGov κατασκοπῆσαι THY ἐλευθερίαν 
ἡμῶν ἣν ἔχομεν ἐν χριστῷ “Inoov. See 
the addition in var. readd. probably from 
ver. 5. Doubtless it represents the fact. 
In spite of the special revelations which 
had accompanied the reception of the first 
Gentiles into the church, the strong 
Judaizing party adhered to their old pre- 
judices respecting the necessity of con- 
formity to the law of Moses. With this 
party Paul was in conflict all his life; and 
even long after, we find it raising its head 
again in the sects of the Ebionites and the 
Nazarenes. Neander (ΒΡΗ͂. u. L. p. 185, 
note) notices the account in Josephus 
(Antt. xx. 2. 4), where Izates, king of Adia- 


bene, is converted to Judaism by a certain 


Ananias, who, for fear of a commotion 
among his people, allows him to remain un- 
circumcised—when a certain Eleazar, πάνυ 
περὶ τὰ πάτρια δοκῶν ἀκριβὴς εἶναι, pre 


M 


102 ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, ΧΥ. 


tact. abso, τῷ Βαρνάβᾳ πρὸς αὐτούς, | ἔταξαν " ἀναβαίνειν Παῦλον agcpr 


here (1 Cor. 
xvi. 15) only. 
1 Chron, xvi. 
7 


καὶ BapvaBav καί τινας ἄλλους ἐξ αὐτῶν πρὸς τοὺς 
ἀποστόλους καὶ πρεσβυτέρους εἰς Ἱερουσαλὴμ περὶ τοῦ 
‘ ζητήματος τούτου. % οἱ μὲν οὖν ἡ προπεμφθέντες ὑπὸ 
τῆς ἐκκλησίας * διήρχοντο τήν τε Φοινίκην καὶ Σαμάρειαν, 
ΣΌΝ ἐκδιηγούμενοι τὴν * ἐπιστροφὴν τῶν ἐθνῶν" καὶ ὃ ἐποίουν 
νοι αν τς, χαρὰν μεγάλην πᾶσιν τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς. 4 Ὁ παραγενόμενοι 


Ὁ ch. xi. 2 reff. 
Ezra vii. 6, 7. 
y ch. xviii. 15. 


< 


xxvi. 3 only. 
Ezek. xxxvi. 
37 A(not F.) 


᾿ς, 24 al. ς , δὺς a > , Χ 
LP., exe, δὲ " εἰς Ἱερουσαλὴμ “ παρεδέχθησαν ὑπὸ τῆς ἐκκλησίας Kat 
3 John 6+. a 9 , \ rn / re ΄ 
1 Mace. xii. d 
4 Sa ey τῶν ATOCTOAWY Kal τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, ἀνηγγείλαν TE 
Antt. xx. 2. 5. x ch. xiii. 6 reff. y ch. xiii. 41 (from Hab. i. 5) only. f arnt here 

only. Cant. vii. 10. Ezek. xivii. 11. a = Lukei. 68. Job xl. 15 (20). φόβον ποιοῦντες Tots ἵπποις, 


Xen. Anab. i. 8. 18. 
xii. 6 (from Prov. iii. 12) only. 


sif. [13 def.] om Tw (bef Bap.) DE. for προς avt., συν avtos D-gr: avtos 97. 

for εταξαν to προς D syr-mg have ἐλεγεν yap [autem D-lat] ο παυλος μένειν ovTws 
καθως επιστευσαν διισχυριζομενος (om D-lat) σε δε εληλυθοτες απὸ ἱερουσαλὴμ παρηΎ 
γειλαν autos (for αὐτ., ovy syr-mg) Tw παύυλὼω κ. Tw βαρν. και τισιν αλλοις αναβαινειν 


b ch. ix. 26 reff. 
Exod. xxiii. 1. 


c Mark iv. 20. ch. xvi. 21. xxii. 18. 1 Tim. ν. 19. 
d ch, xiv. 27 (reff.). 


Heb. 


προς .. 
bef αλλους &. 


. om προς D-lat, and in conseq has alios ascendere apostolos &c. 
ins tous bef πρεσβ. C 180. 


εξ αυτων 


for εἰς, εν E: om bi 6. ins o7ws 
> 


κριθωσιν em autos (er avtwy D3 137) bef περι D 137, syr-w-ast at end of ver. 


3. ἐκπεμφθ. Εἰ. 
36. 


rec om Te (as unnecessary), with AEHLP rel Chr: ins BCDX p 
ins τὴν bef σαμ. DH bdf mo Thi{-sif]. 
4. ιεροσολυμα AB k p [vulg]: txt CDEHLPR® rel 36 Chr. (13 def.) 


διηγουμενοι N1(txt N-corr!). 
rec 


απεδεχθησαν (appy a corrn, as being the usual word, cf Luke viii. 40, ch xviii. 27, 


xxvill. 30,—and see reff), with CEHLP Chr: παρεδοθησαν D! ; 


k: txt ABD°N p. 
Ambr,. 


και N}(ins N-corr!*), 


vails on him to perform the rite, for that 
without it he could not be a Jew. On 
the idea that Cerinthus and Ebion were 
the τινές here spoken of, see the patristic 
reff. in Wordsw.’s note. 2. | Compare 
Gal. ii. 5. ἔταξαν ava. | I assume 
here what seems to me to be almost. be- 
yond the possibility of question (see note 
to chronological table in Prolegg., where I 
have given the reasons), that this journey 
was the same as that mentioned Gal. ii. 
1—10. In that case, Paul there (ver. 2) 
says that he went up κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν. In 
this expression I cannot see it necessarily 
implied that the revelation was made to 
himself, but that there was some intima- 
tion of the Holy Ghost, similar perhaps to 
that in ch. xiii. 2, in accordance with which 
the church at Antioch sent him and Barna- 
bas ;—there being προφῆται there, by whom 
the Spirit spoke His will. τινας 
ἄλλους} Titus was one, Gal. ii. 1, 8, and 
that, in all probability, in order to give an 
example of a Gentile convert of the uncir- 
cumcision endowed with gifts of the Holy 
Spirit. Titus is not mentioned in the Acts: 
but only in 2 Cor., Gal., 2 Tim., and the 
epistle addressed to him. 3. προ- 
mend. | This seems to have been some- 
thing of an official escorting of them on 


ued. 36. 180 ; posed. 


add μεγαλως CD? (μεγως D!, mire D-lat) 137 syr-w-ast sah 
for ὑπο, amo (perhaps originally, as in C, a corrn to suit amedex@., 
and thence adopted even in copies which read xaped.) BC 36. 180. 
απηγγειλαντες D1: απηγγειλαν te D-corr Ὁ. 


om Ist 
om τε &?. 


the way, and perhaps parting from thera 
with solemn commendation to God: not, 
as Morus and Heinrichs, ‘rebus ad iter 
suscipiendum instructis,’ which would 
hardly be thus specified, being a matter of 
course. At all events, it shews that the 
mind of the church was with them, not 
with the Judaizers. This was also the case 
in Phenicia and Samaria, as is shewn by 
πᾶσιν below. 4.] On their arrival at 
Jerusalem, there seems to have taken place 
an official reception of them and their mes- 
sage, in public. There they related—as 
a most important datum for the determi- 
nation of the question—Ged’s dealings 
with them (see on ch. xiv. 27), and re- 
counted the places where churches of be- 
lieving Gentiles had been founded. This 
having taken place, a protest was entered 
on the part of the Pharisee believers,—in 
no way doubting the truth of these 
conversions, nor in any way disparaging 
the ministry of Paul and Barnabas,— 
that it was necessary to circumcise αὐτούς, 
those of whom they had spoken, and to com- 
mand them to keep the law of Moses. 

It may be objected, that this view would 
not be consistent with Paul’s statement, 
Gal. ii. 2, ἀνεθέμην αὐτοῖς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ 
κηρύσσω ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, κατ᾽ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς 


ΗΕΡΝ a 
bedfg 
hkIim 
ΟΡ 18 


Ὁ --ἰὖῇ. 


« τ \ a 3 ? > ae. 
ὅσα ὁ θεὸς ἃ ἐποιησεν μετ᾽ αὐτῶν. 


la) “Ὁ e , ἴω 
τῶν amo τῆς ὃ αἱρέσεως τῶν Φαρισαιων ™ πεπιστεύκοτες, 


ΠΡΑΞΕῚΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, 


108 


3 , , 
5 ὁ ἐξανέστησαν δέ τινὲς « Mark xii. 19 | 
L.only. Gen, 
xviii. 16. 
xix. 32, 34. 
ch. xii. 1 reff. 


ἔχ n ; / f 
λέγοντες ὅτι δεῖ 'ἱ περιτέμνειν αὐτους, " παραγγέλλειν TE geh-v. i τοῦ, 


τηρεῖν τὸν νόμον Μωυσέως. 


h absol., ch. 
xvii. 12, 34. 
xviii. 8, 27. 
xxi. 20, 25 al. 


6™ συνήχθησάν τε οἱ 


f εν e ’ nw 
ἀπόστολοι καὶ οἱ πρεσβυτεροι " ἰδεῖν περὶ τοῦ © Aoyou ise 


/ 
TOUTOU. 


k ch. i. 4 reff. 


γι πολλῆς δὲ Ρ συνζητήσεως γενομένης q ἀναστὰς 1 = Matt. xix. 


17. χα ὦ 


Πέτρος εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτοὺς Ανδρες ἀδελφοί, ὑμεῖς ἐπί- 1b 


θ [γέ ts 2 2 5 ,£ a st 2 , u2 A 
στασθε ott “ad “ ἡμερῶν ὃ ἀρχαίων ἃ ἐν ὑμῖν 
fe Wisd. ii. 17. 
xxviii. 29 ν᾿ τ. only +. (-Tetv, ch. vi. 9. -τητής, 1 Cor. i. 20.) 
Ezek. xxxviii. 8. 
Luke ix. 8,19. ver. 21. ch. xxi. 16. 2 Cor. v. 17. 2 Pet. ii. 5. Rev. xii. 9. xx.2 only. Ps, 
u = Mark vi. 4 al. constr., 3 Kings viii. 16 compared with 2 Chron. vi. 5, not as 
v with inf., ch, i. 24 (Pet.). 


ch. xiii. 44 reff. n = here only. 
ΣΧ. 5. r = ch. x. 30 reff. (2), 
ὟΣ ΣΙ, Gots 

xliii. 1. 

1 Chron. xxviii. 4, 5. 


εποι. bef o θ. D 38. 96. 137-42 [Thl-fin: em. μ. avr. bef o 6. p]. 


᾿ , 21. 
V ἐξελέξατο m = ch. iv.5 
reff. constr., 
o = ch. viii. 21 reff. p ch. 
4 =ch.i.15. ν. 34 δὶ. 2 Chron. 
5 see Isa, xxxvii. 26. t Matt, 


2 Chron. vi. 6. 


at end ins 


(from ch xiv. 27) και ott nvoitev τοις εθνεσι θυραν πιστεως C3HL a Ὁ ἃ f g Thi-fin. 
5. for εξαν. to απο, D syr-mg have οἱ de παραγγειλαντες αὐτοῖς αναβαιμειν προς 
Tous πρεσβυτερους εξανεστησαν AeyovTes TivEs απὸ (εξ. κατα «των αποῦστ. ovTeEs [πιστευ- 


ovtes] απὸ syr-mg: D om λεγ. follg). 
L bl? 0 27-9. 99 Jer. for ott, ws E. 


aft τινες ins avdpes A. 


πεπιστευκότων 


for τε, δὲ D![-gr](txt D3(?)). 


6. rec’ for re, δε (alteration of the characteristic re to more usual copula), with 


ADEHEPR® rel 36 coptt [syrr arm] Chr,: txt BC d p 13 vulg eth. 


om 2nd a D. 


for Aoyou, ζητηματος KE [6] 137 syr: ρηματος 65. 
7. rec ov(nt., with HLP rel [Chr,]: ζητησ. ABN acc p 13. 36. 40: txt CDE. 


ανεστησεν εν πνι πετρ. Kat εἰπεν D'(avaoctas 108 ; om ev πνι and καὶ D-corr): aft avrovs 


ins ev πν. ayww 187 : aft πετρος syr-mg. 


δοκοῦσιν, μήπως“ εἰς κενὸν Tpexw ἢ ἔδραμον. 
But I cannot see any inconsistency, if the 
words used in both cases be accurately 
weighed. To the ἐκκλησία, ἀπόστολοι, 
and πρεσβύτεροι Paul and Barnabas gave 
a simple recital of how God had dealt with 
them among the Gentiles: but Paul did 
not lay before the whole assembly the 
Gospel which he preached among the Gen- 
tiles, viz. the indifference of the Mosaic 
law to their salvation (Gal. i. 7—9), for 
fear of its being hastily disparaged or re- 
pudiated, and so his work being hindered 
(μήπως x.7.A.). But, in private inter- 
views with the chief Apostles, James, 
Peter, and John (Gal. ii. 9), he did unfold 
the whole freeness of this Gospel, and so 
effectually, as to prepare the way for their 
full and public accordance with him at the 
council. 6.1 The Apostles and elders 
only are mentioned as having assembled : 
in which case πᾶν τὸ πλῆθος (ver. 12) 
must mean τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, and the 
decision of ver, 22 must have been arrived 
at in a larger assembly. But most pro- 
bably the deliberation of the Apostles and 
elders implied the presence of the brethren 
also, who are intended by πᾶν τὸ mA.,— 
and there was but one assembly. The ob- 
jection, that no one place could have held 
them, is nugatory: the officeal presence 
of all is assumed continually in such cases, 
where the assembly is open to all. 

λόγου matter (in this case) of dispute : 


om om, NI, rec o 0. ev nu εξελ. 
see reff. 7.7 A promiscuous debate, 
not perhaps without some angry feeling, 
ensued on their first coming together,—and 
among the multitude, as is implied in ver. 
12,—man disputing withman. πΠέτρος] 
Partly on account of the universal defer- 
ence paid to him, but principally because 
of his peculiar fitness to open the apostolic 
decisions on the subject, from having been 
made the instrument of the first public and 
approved reception of the Gentiles. 

ὑμεῖς ἐπίστ.] In Peter’s speeches in ch. x., 
this phrase occurs at the beginning of a 
sentence, ver. 28, and ὑμεῖς οἴδατε, ver. 37: 
and we have traces of the same way of 
expressing the personal pronoun in his 
speeches, ch. ii. 15; 11. 14, 25. Such 
notices are important, as shewing that 
these reports are not only according to the 
sense of what was said, but the words 
spoken, verbatim. ad np. apx.| In 
regard to the whole time of the Gospel up 
to that day (about 20 years), the date of 
the conversion of Cornelius, at least fifteen 
years before this (cf. Gal. ii. 1, and notes 
to chron, table in Prolegg.), would very 
properly be so specified. The length of 
time elapsed is placed by Peter en the 
strongest light, to shew that the question 
had in fact been settled by divine inter- 
ference long since. Notice (in reff.) the 
idioms, &c., peculiar to Peter :---ἐξελέξ. 
with inf.,—dia τ. στόμ.,--- καρδιογν. (most 
probably) ;—or characteristic of him, wet 


M 2 


164 ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΔΩΝ. XV 


> : e d x τ ὃ Ν A w 4 , > “ 4 EQ Ν 
Ww enti. 16 (Pet. O εος ta@ του OTOMATOS μου ακουσᾶν TA εὐνὴ τον 
= ΠΣ only. 
see Col. 1. 5. 


χ λόγον τοῦ * εὐαγγελίου καὶ πιστεῦσαι. § καὶ ὁ Υ καρδιο- 


his: t. 4 ΄ > A \ \ an \ 
rhe PO) γνώστης θεὸς 7 ἐμαρτύρησεν αὐτοῖς, δοὺς τὸ πνεῦμα TO 
Herm. Past. \ \ a \ 52" , 

ἢ 4.8. ἅγιον καθὼς καὶ ἡμῖν: 9 καὶ οὐθὲν ὃ διέκρινεν ὃ μεταξὺ 
= 7 _? Say a \ a ral / A 7 
Ries, 39. ἡμῶν τε καὶ αὐτῶν, " τῇ πίστει ἃ καθαρίσας Tas καρδίας 
James ii. 4. 


- “ Ss / i. / a 
αὐτῶν. 10% phy " οὗν τί f πειράζετε τὸν θεόν, © ἐπιθεῖναι 
zie ae wees . \ s1- / rr -_ a 
b— Matt. svili hi ζυγὸν ἐπὶ τὸν ™ τράχηλον τῶν μαθητῶν, ὃν οὔτε οἱ 


Ezek. xxxiv. 


15. Rom. ii. 
to. wi Ἱπγατέρες ἡμῶν οὔτε ἡμεῖς “icyvoapev "βαστάσαι; 11} ἀλλὰ 
aia! CMe rene PRS ΙΝ XO ; 


only. 
c ch, xiii. 8 reff. 
d = Eph. v. 26. 
Tit. 11. 14. 
James iv. 8. 
Sir. xxxviii. 10. 


a la / 3 “ ’ al 
διὰ τῆς ο χάριτος τοῦ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ Ὁ πιστεύομεν ἃ σωθῆναι 
, nr ‘ fal \ an 
t καθ᾽ τὸν τ τρόπον κἀκεῖνοι. 15 " ἐσίγησεν δὲ πᾶν τὸ ᾿ πλῆθος, 
e ch. x. 33 reff. f 2 Cor. x. 9 reff. g ver. 28. Matt. xxiii.4. Luke 


xv. 5. xxiii. 26. 4 Kings xviii. 14. h = Gal.v.1. Matt. xi. 29,30. 1 Tim. vi. 1 (Rev. vi. 5) only. 
i Jer. xxxiv. (xxvii.) 8, 11. xxxv. (xxviii.) 14. k ch. xx. 37. Mark ix. 42 || Mt. Luke xv. 20. xvii. 2. Rom. 
xvi. 4 only. 1 ch. v. 30 reff. τὴ = ch, vi. 10 reff. n Matt. xx. 12. Luke 


xiv. 27. John xix.17. Gal. vi.2,5. 4 Kings xviii. 14. o ch. xiii. 43 reff. p with inf. (absol.), 

Rom. xiv.2 only. Job xv. 22. πιστεύω τὸν χρόνον διδάξειν oe, Xen. Anab. vii. 7. 47. with ὅτι, Rom. vi. 8 al. 
q inf. pass.,absol., Matt. xviii. 25. Mark y. 43. rch. xxvii. 25 only. see ch. i. 11 reff. Rom. iii. 2. 
sch. xii. 17 reff. L.P. Exod. xiv. 14. = ch. ii. 6 reff. 


(corrn of order :—and nu. corrn for vp. as it seemed more according to ecclesiastical 
propriety for Peter to describe the selection as made “from us apostles,” than “ from 
you the whole church ἢ), with EHLP rel (h o vu.) [vulg-ed syr: in nobis elegit deus ‘am 
fuld demid]: nuew o θ. εξ. D! (ev qu. o θ. εξ. D-corr! ¢ [Rebapt,]) 187: om ev vz. m 
99 Syr sah eth: txt ABC a(nuw) k p 18 [(copt Iren-int,) ] Constt. om του (bef 
στομ.) Di(ins D3)E [m!] 96. 

8. ο δε καρδ. οθ. D. διεμαρτυρησεν C. om avros EK vulg sah Ambr, 
Rebapt.—rec aft Sous ins αὑτοῖς (supplementary addn), with CKHLP 36 [vulg syrr 


coptt «th arm] Constt Chr Iren-int, [Rebapt,}: ex avtovs D: txt ABN p 13 Did. 


9. om και Al. 
om τε D. 
10. at beg ins καὶ E eth. 


om ovy(appy) ΟἹ. 
11. rec om tov (with ¢?): ins ABCDEHLPX rel Chr, Thdrt,. 


rec ovdev, with ACDE® rel 36 Chr,: txt BHLP bg k1m. 


om ζυγον X}(ins corr! ?). 
rec aft ino. 


ins χριστου, with CD a m 13. 36 [vulg-ed] Syr copt[-ed arm] zth-pl Thi-fin [ Tren-int, 1: 
om ABEHLPX prel am demid fuld [tol] syr [copt-ms] sah eth-rom Chr Thdrt Tert,. 


πιστευσομεν D!-or δὲ, 


12. συνκατατεθεμενων Se των πρεσβυτερων τοις ὑπὸ του TETPOV ειρημενοις εσξιγησεν 


παν κιτ.λ. D syr-w-ast. 


pac. τ. θεόν,---(καθ)ὼς καὶ ἡμῖν (ch. x. 47: 
so ὥςπερ καί, ch. iii. 17; xi. 15),---ἀρ- 
xalwy now, compared with ἐν ἀρχῇ ch. xi. 
15. Compare also with πειράς τ. θεόν..-- 
κωλῦσαι τ. θεόν, ch. xi. 17. ἐν ὑμῖν] 
among you. If ἡμῖν be read, then 
‘among us (Apostles) τ see var. read. 
There is no ellipsis of ‘me’ after ἐξελ. : the 
E. V. expresses the construction rightly. 
8, 9.] The allusion is throughout to 
spiritual eircumeision, as the purification 
of the heart. God, who saw deeper than 
the mere fleshly distinction between Jew 
and Gentile, who knows that the hearts of 
all are unclean, and that the same all- 
sufficient sacrifice can cleanse them a1, if 
applied by faith (compare the remarkable 
parallel, 1 Pet. i. 18—22 incl.), put no 
difference between us and them, but has 
been pleased to render them spiritually 
clean. ἢ πίστει, not simply ‘dy 
faith ? but by their faith, or by the faith 
in Christ. 10. πειρ. (as κωλῦσαι, ch. 
αἰ. 17), tempt, by putting obstacles in the 


ἐσίγησαν Cc. 


απαν E a! f m 13 Thil-fin. 


way of His evidently determined course. 

ἐπιθεῖναι, infin., marking the in- 
tended result of πειράζετε: cf. βῆ δὲ θέειν, 
βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι, μάστιξεν δ᾽ ἐλάαν, ἄς. See 
Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 365. ζυγόν] 
See ref. Gal. Peter could not be so much 
referring to the mere outward observance 
of ceremonies, which he himself and the 
Jewish converts thought it expedient to 
retain,—but to the imposition of the law, 
as a condition of salvation, on the con- 
sciences of the disciples. So Neander (ΒΗ. 
u. L. p. 214). This being so, οὔτε .. . 
βαστάσαι will refer, not to the durden- 
someness of ceremonies, but to the far 
more grievous burden of legal death, of 
which Paul cries out so bitterly in Rom. 
vii. 24,—and says, Gal. v. 3, μαρτύρομαι 


. παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ, ὅτι. 


ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι. 

11. Seeing that we all in common 
believe that the grace of Christ is the suf- 
ficient, and oniy cause of our salvation, it 
can neither be reasonable nor according to 


ABCDE 
HLPR 2 
bedfg 
hkilm 
opl3 





8-- 16. 


MPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


165 


καὶ ἤκουον BapvaBa καὶ Παύλου ὃ ἐξηγουμένων ὅσα utero dis. 


ΕῚ s ¢ Q \ 4 a \ iy / ᾽ A ” , 
ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς σημεῖα Kai “ τέρατα ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν δὲ 
13 \ δὲ \ 5 -“ ; \ 5 / 5 / 

3 μετὰ 0€ TOS ovyioat αὐτοὺς ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιάκωβος 


αὐτῶν. 


λέγων "Avdpes ἀδελφοί, ἀκούσατέ μου. 
* ἐπεσκέψατο. λαβεῖν ἐξ. Fare iss, 


, Ww Aa a e θ \ 
ηγήσατο ἣ καθὼς πρῶτον ὁ θεὸς 
ἐθνῶν λαὸν Υ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ. 


lal e a λό “ a A θὰ ἐξ 
νοῦσιν οἱ όγοι τῶν ὃ᾽᾿ προφητῶν, καθὼς γέγραπται 
a / 
16 Μετὰ ταῦτα ὃ ἀναστρέψω καὶ “ ἀνοικοδομήσω τὴν ἃ σκη- 


xxv. 1. z ch, v. ¥reff, 
c here bis only. Amos ix. 1]. 


Luke xxiv 
35. Johni. 
18. ch. x. 8, 
xxi. 19 only. 
Judg vii. 13: 

veh vii. 36 
reff. 

w- 3John3 
only. ~ 


14 Συμεὼν ἃ ἐξ. 


78. vii, 16. 
constr. ellipt., 
here only. 
Jer. ΧΧΧΙΧ. 
(xxxu.) 41 
v.r. see 
Luke 1. 25. 

y Ps. vii. 17. Isa. 

Ὁ ch. v. 23 reff- 


" \ / 
1S καὶ τούτῳ ὅ συμφω- 


a Luke iii. 4, Deut, xiii. 3, 


d= here only, and Amos l. c. 


BapvaBav και παυλον εξηγουμενοι D1(txt 1)8), 


18. αναστας ιακ. exrev 1) Syr. 


14. for ἐπεσκ., εἐπελεξατο E: εξελεξ. οἱ 1571 : εξελεξ. καὶ 18. 


εξ εθνων bef AaB. C. 


rec ins em bef +w-ovou., with HLP rel copt: om ABCDERX p 13. 36. 40 vulg 
syrr sah [arm] Constt, Chr, Procop, Iren-int, Jer Rebapt,.[—om Tw ov. av. also eth. ] 


15. for τουτω, rovro HL ο 18 : ovtws D'(and lat: txt D3) sah Iren-int,. 


συν- 


φωνήσουσιν D1{-grj(txt 1)5 Leonsonat D-lat}). 


16. μετα δε. D!(and lat).. 


God’s will, to fetterthat grace with super- 
fluous and vexatious conditions. See nearly 
the same argument retorted on Peter him- 
self, Gal. ii. 14 ff. κἀκεῖνοι are the 
Gentile Christians; not our fathers ;— 
ther ground of trust is the same: as ours : 
ours, no more-than theirs. 12.] The 
multitude (see: above) then,;—and_ not be- 
fore, on account of their mutual disputes, 
—being tranquillized: by Peter’s speech, 
quietly received from Paul and Barnabas 
an account of the seals of signs and 
wonders by which God had stamped the 
approval of their ministry among the 
Gentiles. The miracles at Paphos and 
Lystra would be among the principal of 
these. 18.1 αὐτούς, viz. Paul and 
Barnabas. Both had spoken: doubtless 
wonders, unrecorded, had been wrought 
by the hand of Barnabas, which he had 
recounted. Ἰάκωβος] See note, ch. 
xit. 17, and the prolegg. to the epistle of 
James. I assume here, that this is James 
the Just, the brother of the: Lord, the 
author of the Epistle: and though an 
απόστολος (Gal. i. 19: see also note on 
ch. xiv. 4), not one of the twelve. If 
we may presume to judge from the cha- 
racter of his Epistle, to say nothing of the 
particulars which tradition has handed 
down concerning him, his decision would 
come with remarkable weight on this oc- 
casion. For he is, among all the sacred’ 
writers of the N. T., the representative of 
the strictest adherence to and loftiest ap- 
preciation of the pure standard of legal 
morality. ΑἸ] that the law was, from its 
intrinsic holiness, justice, and goodness 
(Rom. vii. 12), capable of being to Chris- 
tians, he would be sure to attribute to it. 


[αναστρεψει A}, but corrd eadenn manu :] ἐπιστρέψω D. 


And therefore when his judgment, as well 
as that of Peter, is given in favour of the 
freedom of the Gentiles, the disputers, ey en 
of the Pharisaic party, are silenced. There 
does not seem to be in the following speech 
any decision ex cathedra, either in the 
ἀκούσατέ μου, or in the ἐγὼ κρίνω (ver. 
19): the decision lay in the weightiness, 
partly no doubt of the person speaking, but 
principally of the matter spoken by him. 
14. Συμεών] James-characteristically 
uses this Jewish form of the name: so also 
Peter himself, 2 Pet.i. L.. he name occurs 
Gen. xxix.33, LX X; Luke ii. 25; iii. 30; ch 
xiii. 1; Rev. vii. 7: the name Simon, else- 
where used in the Ν. T. tor Peter, is found 
in 1 Chron..iv. 20 (Heb. Σεμών, LXX-ed.- 
vat., but Σεμιών B( Mai), Σεμειών, A). 
τῷ év.| for His name: dat. commodi [for 
the service, or the making known, of His 
name]. On ἐπεσκ. λαβ., see reff.: the 
infin., as ἐπιθεῖναι, ver. 10, note. λαόν, 
answering to. the λαός, so-well known as 
His by covenant before. 15. τούτῳ] 
Neuter, to, this: not, ‘to Him, in which 
ease we should expect not of λόγοι τῶν Tp., 
but of προφῆται (Meyer). 16—18. ] 
The citation from Amos is made freely 
from the LXX: differing widely in the 
latter part from our present Hebrew text, 
which see in loc. Εἰ. V. In all probability. 
the L.XX had another reading before them, 
substituting perhaps ‘nk wr? for “ny wy 
and oq for ony. The existing Hebrew; 
Mss. contain several minor variations, for 
which see Kennicott and De Rossi in loc. 
Of this we may at least be sure, that James, 
even if (as I believe) he spoke in Greek, 
and quoted as here given, would not him- 
self (nor would the Pharisees present have 


166 ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ATIOZTOAON. XV. 


4 A to \ a \ A e 9. AP 
vnv Δαυειὸ THY πεπτωκυϊαν, καὶ τὰ © κατεσκαμμένα αὑτῆς ABCDE 
Η 


e Rom. xi. 3 


only, from ξς ’ , 8 LPR a 
3Kings ὃ Gyorxodounow, Kat ᾿ ἀνορθώσω αὐτήν' 17 ὃ ὅπως ὅ ἂν ἢ ἐκ- υεὰτε 
Ι, ke iii. 13. δ. δὺ ΄ a , hklim 
(Web 9, ζητήσωσιν οἱ ἱκατάλοιποι τῶν ἀνθρώπων τὸν κύριον, opis 
ma ΚΕ; \ / τὰ “0 jk ἐφ᾽ ἃ j ᾽ , x. \ ky ΄, 
8 ag καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, 'δ ἐφ᾽ οὺς 1 ἐπικέκληται τὸ * ὄνομά 


ἢ = Rom. iii. 11, 
from Ps, xiii. 


j eee ’ ΄ 7 ͵ὔ c -“ ral 18 ] 4 
μου -Ε͵᾽ αυτοὺῦὺς, λέγει κυρίος O ποιῶν Ταῦυτα γνωστα 


tiuke χ, 80, τὰ ἀπ᾿ αἰῶνος. 19 διὸ ἐγὼ πκρίνω μὴ 5 παρενοχλεῖν τοῖ 

51. Heb. xii. ᾿ 7 ρ μὴ ρ x S 
8 > \ “ ’ lal » / > = / 

ot Ρ ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν “ ἐπιστρέφουσιν “ ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν, 29 ἀλλὰ 

i here only. r2 a > as Ὁ te eee a a u.? 

Exits. ' ἐπιστεῖλαι αὐτοῖς " τοῦ " ἀπέχεσθαι [ἀπὸ] τῶν " ἀλισγη- 


jconstr., Mark . 
vil. 25. Rev. νἱῖ. 2. Levit. xv. 4. 
Gen. vi. 4. 


k James ii. 7 only. 1 ch. i. 19 reff. m ch. iii. 21. Luke 

n w. inf., ch. iii. 13. xx. 16. xxv. 25 (xxvii. 1). 1 Cor. ii. 2. v. 3 (vii. 37). Tit. iii. 

12. 2 Mace. xi. 25. o here only. w. dat., Job xvi. 3. 1 Macc. xii. 14. Diod. Sic. xiv. 27. ν΄. acc., Jer. 

xxvi. (xlvi.) 27. 1 Macc. x. 35. Demosth. p. 242. 16. p ch. xii. 1. (xxvii. 44). q ch. xxvi. 20 reff. 

tech. xxi. 25. Heb. xiii. 22 only. 3 Kings ν. 8 A(not F.) only. s constr., ch. iii, 12 reff. t = with 

amo, 1 Thess. iv. 3. vy. 22 only. (Luke vii. 6 al.) Jobi. lal. without, ver. 29 reff. uhere only+. (-γεῖν, 
Mal. i. 7,12. Dan.i.8. Sir. xl. 29.) : 


i. 70. 


κατεστρεμμενα B: -στραμμενα (so LXX-A) 813 Procop,: ἀνεσκαμμενα E [σκαμμενα 
(the o above the line) H]. otkodounow (2nd time) C!(appy) 68. 

17. om αν Eak Chr,. for κυρ., θεον D eth. for ο ποιων, ποιησει D'[-gr | 
(txt D8): om ο ΒΝ). rec aft tav. ins παντα, with H 36 Syr [arm] Chr: pref., 
ELP e fg 1 syr Thl-sif: om ABCDN m p 18 vulg copt xth Constt Iren-int Rebapt. 

18. rec at end adds ἐστι Tw θεω Tavta Ta epya αὐτου, with EHLP rel syr Constt, 
Chr,: γνωστον am a. (add ἐστιν 1) vulg syr-mg Iren) tw kupiw (om syr-mg) To epyov 
αὐτου AD vulg syr-mg [arm-usc] Iren-int,: txt BCX a p 18. 29. 36. 63-5. 100-5-33-80 
coptt arm[-zoh eth]. (Zn the presence of so many apocryphal insertions as we find 
in the Acts, taking into account also the great variety, and seeing in it (cf many more 
variations in Scholz ad loc) an argument against the genuineness of the words,—seeing 
also that no possible reason can be given for their omission, if originally genuine, I 
have followed the authority of BCX, as also have Scholz and Tischdf (ed 7 [and 8). 
Lachmann has adopted the reading of AD al (see above), which, as Meyer observes, is 


evidently an emendation of still later date than the rec.) 


20. [αλλ BCH cdme p.] 


om Ist του [E]H. 


om απὸ (as unnecessary 7) 


B D-gr δὲ p 180 E-lat Ec, : ins AC E-gr HLP 18 rel vulg [D-lat] Constt Chr Iren-int. 


allowed it) have quoted any rendering, espe- 
cially where the stress of his argument lay 
in it, at variance with the original Hebrew. 
The prophecy regards that glorious 
restitution of the kingdom to (the Son 
of) David, which should be begun by the 
incarnation of the Lord, and perfected by 
His reign over all nations. During the 
rocess of this restitution those nations, as 
the effect of the rebuilding, should seek the 
Lord,—to whomsoever the gospel should 
be preached. There is here neither asser- 
tion nor negation of the national restora- 
tion of the Jews. Be this as it may (and I 
firmly believe in the literal accomplishment 
of all the prophecies respecting them as a 
nation), it is obvious, on any deep view of 
prophetic interpretation, that the glorious 
things which shall have ὦ fulfilment in the 
literal Israel, must have their complete and 
more worthy fulfilment in the spiritual 
theocracy, of which the Son of David is the 
Head. 17. ἐφ᾽ ods ἐπικέκλ.} Notice 
the same expression in the Epistle of James 
(τοῦ. 18.] The variation of reading 
here is remarkable. The text which I have 
given 1s in all probability the original, and 
the words inserted in the rec. have been in- 


tended as a help out of their difficulty. Not 
only are they wanting in several ancient 
Mss., but they bear the sure mark of spu- 
riousness,—manifold variations in the Mss. 
where they do occur. The sense, and ac- 
count of the text seem to be this: the 
Apostle paraphrases the 6 ποιῶν (πάντα) 
ταῦτα of the LXX, adding γνωστὰ aw 
αἰῶνος, and intending to express ‘saith 
the Lord, who from the beginning revealed 
these things,’ viz. by the prophet (of old, 
see reff.) just cited. The addition in the 
rec. has been made to fill up the appa- 
rently elliptical γνωστὰ ἀπ᾽ αἰῶνος, which 
not being found in the passage of Amos, 
was regarded as a sentence by itself. These 
last words, kup. ὁ ποι. ταῦ. γν. ἀπ᾽ ai., may 
perhaps be an allusion to the mystery 
of the admission of the Gentiles into the 
church, which was now being revealed prac- 
tically, and had been from of old announced 
by the prophets: ef. Rom. xvi. 25, 26; Eph. 
iii. 5, 6, &c. 19. | ἐπιστρέφουσιν, not 
as E. V. ‘are turned,’ but are turning :— 
the converts daily gathered into the church. 
In παρενοχλ. there is no meaning of 
‘preter, . . . insuper, molestiam creare -ἢ 
but simply ‘molestiam creare: see reff. 





17— 22. 


TIIPASEIS, ATIOSTOAON. 


167 


a Belen a a Lol 
μάτων τῶν " εἰδώλων Kal τῆς “ πορνείας καὶ τοῦ * πνικτοῦ νυ Rom. ii. 22. 


a ij 
καὶ τοῦ αἵματος. 


a \ “a 
aywyais ὃ κατὰ πᾶν σάββατον ὃ 


» “ / \ “ , 7 
¢ ἔδοξεν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις σὺν ἃ ὅλῃ 


li. 4. 


y see ver. 7 reff. 
constr., ch. viii. 5 reff. 


51 Μωυσῆς yap Y ἐκ γενεῶν ¥ ἀρχαίων 
\ “ a 19. 

2 κατὰ πόλιν τοὺς ὃ κηρύσσοντας αὐτὸν ἔχει ἐν ταῖς συν- Wal. 

ἀναγινωσκόμενος. 


z Luke viii. 4. ch. xiv. 23. ΤΙ. i. 5. 
b ch. xiii. 27 (reff.). 


1 Cor. x. 19 
reff. 
w = Matt. xv. 
1 Cor. vi. 
Hos, 


li. 2. 

22 Tore x ver. 29. ch. 
xxi. 25 
only +. see 
1 Kings xvi. 
14,15. Sir. 

a — and 
c = vv. 25,28. Lukei.3. Esth. i. 19. 


dch. ν. 11. Rom. xvi. 23. 1 Cor. xiv. 23. 2 Chron. xxx. 24 Ald. 


om καὶ του πνικτου (appy, as Meyer, because in Levit no such command is 
formally expressed) D Iren-int, Cypr Tert Jer(who says it was in some mss) Ambrst 


(who ascribes it to Greek interpolators) : om tov AB p 13. 


at end ins καὶ οσα 


(add ay al) μη θελουσιν (-wow al) εαυτοις (aut. al) γινεσθαι eTepois μὴ ποιειτε Da beo 
7. 27-9. 60-9. 98-marg 106 sah eth Iren-int Cypr. 
21. tous κηρ. αν. bef κ. πολ.]) Ο m: exe τ. kK. avtov e(xet) D(three letters lost, 


v . 
erased by D-corr).—for αὐτον, αὐτου(ϑ10) δὲ, 


20.] ἐπιστεῖλαι, to send an ἐπι- 
στολή: then τοῦ ἀπ., of the purpose of such 
epistle,—to the end that they may ab- 
stain, &c. ἀἄλισγ. belongs to εἰδώλων 
only. Meyer understands it to refer to the 
four genitives, the pollutions of (1) idols, 
(2) fornication, (3) things strangled, (4) 
blood. This he rests on the non-repetition 
of ἀπό before τῆς πορν. But in this case 
the members do not correspond. The Gen- 
tile converts needed no command to abstain 
from the pollution of idolatry : and the use 
of the Alexandrine verb ἀλισγεῖν in reff. 
shews it to apply most naturally to pollution 
by eating. The aa. τ. eid. are the things 
polluted by being offered to idols, about 
which there was much doubt and conten- 
tion in the early church:—see Exod. xxxiv. 
15, and 1 Cor. viii. and x. 19. τῆς 
πορνείας) It may seem strange that ἃ 
positive sin should be made the subject 
of these enactments which mostly regard 
things in themselves indifferent, but ren- 
dered otherwise by expediency and charity 
to others. In consequence we have the 
following attempts to evade the simple 
rendering of the word: (1) Beza, Selden, 
Schleusner, explain it of spiritual fornica- 
tion in eating things offered to idols: (2) 
Morus and Heinrichs, of the committal of 
actual fornication at the rites in idol tem- 
ples: (3) Salmasius, of the sin of the 
whore-master : (4) Calovius, of coneubin- 
age: (5) Lightfoot, of marriage within the 
forbidden degrees : (6) Teller, of marriage 
with heathens: (7) Bentley would read χοι- 
petas, ‘swine’s flesh : (8) πορκείας has also 
been conjectured (probably not by Bentley, 
as stated in Meyer, De W., and this work, 
edn. 1) :—see other renderings in Meyer 
and De Wette. But the solution will best 
be found in the fact, that πορνεία was 
universally in the Gentile world regarded 
on the same footing with the other things 


mentioned, as an ἀδιάφορον, and is classed 
here as Gentiles would be accustomed to 
hear of it, among those things which they 
allowed themselves, but which the Jews 
regarded as forbidden. The moral abomi- 
nation of the practice is not here in ques- 
tion, but is abundantly set forth by our 
Lord and his Apostles in other places. 

πνικτοῦ} as containing the blood,—see 
Levit. xvii. 13, 14. αἵματος | blood, 
in any shape: see Gen. ix. 4; Levit. xvii. 
13, 14; Deut. xii. 23,24. Cypr., Tertull., 
and others interpret the word of homicide, 
which is refuted by the context. 21.] 
Living as the Gentile converts would be 
in the presence of Jewish Christians, who 
heard these Mosaic prohibitions read, as 
they had been from generations past, in 
their synagogues, it would be well for them 
to avoid all such conduct and habits as 
would give unnecessary offence. Other 
meanings have been proposed : as ‘ that it 
was superfluous to command these things 
to the Jews, for they would hear them 
in the synagogues’ (so an ancient Schol., 
Lyra, and Neander),—whereas no question 
whatever was raised about Jewish con- 
verts :—‘ neque est metuendum, ut Moses 
propterea antiquetur,’ Erasmus, al.: ‘ Pu- 
dori vobis foret et ignominiz, si vos, ho- 
mines Christiani .... hac in re inferiores 
a Judeis deprehenderemini, quod vos com- 
munione cum epulis sacrificialibus poly- 
theismo favere videremini, quum illi Judzi 
....- monotheismo adhereant tenacissime, 
eumque quavis septimana sibi inculeatum 
audiant,’ Heinrichs. ‘Nam quod ad 
Mosen attinet, non possunt, quiex Judzis 
sunt, queri, eum sperni ab alienigenis nostri 
gregis, quando in nostris (?) non minus 
quam in Judaicis conventibus Moses, ita 
ut ab antiquo factum est, legitur, et quidem 
sabbatis,’ Grot., Hammond. On the read- 
ing of the law, &c., in the synagogues, see 


108 
e John vi. 70. 
xv. 16,19. ch 


xix. 10. 

f Luke xxii 26. 
Heb. xiii. 7, 
17, 24. 

3 Kings ix. 5. 
Sir. xxxv. 


TIPAZEIS, AIIOSTOAON. 


XV. 


καλούμενον Βαρσαββᾶν καὶ Σίλαν, ἄνδρας ἴ ἡγουμένους ἘΣ 13 
ἐν τοῖς 8 ἀδελφοῖς, 55 " γράψαντες i διὰ χειρὸς αὐτῶν Οἱ 


ii, a > , , a 
(exsh et, ἀπόστολοι καὶ OL πρεσβύτεροι 8 ἀδελφοὶ τοῖς ‘Kata τὴν 
g 7) 


1 constr., ch. 
xxvi. 3 reff. 
ich. xi. 30 reff. 
k ch. xi. 1 reff. 


22. εδοξασεν D}, 
Chr, : ins ABCEN ac p 13. 


om εξ autwy A. 
ins tw bef βαρν. ac 13. 
(explanatory corrn), with HP rel Chr: txt ABCDELRX p 13. 36 Constt,. 


᾿Αντιόχειαν καὶ Συρίαν καὶ Κιλικίαν ὃ ἀδελφοῖς τοῖς ἐξ 


om Tw (for uniformity) DHLP rel 
rec εἐπικαλουμενον, 
rec 


βαρσαβαν, with a 36 rel [vulg-ed demid arm] Chr: βαραββαν D: βαρναβαν fuld 


zth[-rom]: txt ABCEHLPR® Ὁ 6 m p 13 am coptt Constt. 


nyovuevots XN}, 


23. rec aft avtwy ins tade (addition as the variations shew), with EHLPR? p 13. 
36 syr [arm] Constt, Chr, ; ἐπιστολὴν περιεχουσαν ταδε C D(but emor. bef 5. x. a.) 
eth-pl ; emoroAny και πεμψαντες περιεχουσαν 137 syr-mg ; οὕτως Syr ; emer. ovtws sali: 


‘om ABN! vulg copt zth-rom. 


rel 36 syrr copt eth [arm-zoh] Constt, Chr, : 
Iren-int, Ath{-int,] Pac, [om a6. also 34 sah Orig-int, ]. 


for κιλικίιαν, κιλιαν A, κιλειαν Ὁ. 


ch. xili. 15, note. 22.| ἐκλεξαμένους 
must not (with Kuin., al.) be taken for 
ἐκλεχθέντας ; the 1 aor. middle can never 
have a passive signification: see Lobeck’s 
note on Phrynichus, p. 319: where he 
gives a collection of seeming instances of 
such usage and explains them. Such 
regularities of case in words in apposition 
as we have here (ἀποστόλοις ... ἐκλεξα- 
μένους .... γράψαντες. .. .) will not 
surprise any one versed in Hellenistic Greek. 
See e.g. Lukei.’73,74; ch. xxv. 27 ; Heb. 
1. 10; also ch. xxii. 17, ἐγένετο δέ μοι ὗπο- 
στρέψαντι K. TPOSEVX OMEL OU μου 
oe es γενέσθαι με ἐν ἐκστάσει . . - . and 
ref. (h). Βαρσαββαν] Of this Judas 
nothing further is known than that (ver. 
32) he was a ‘prophet’ (see ch. xiii. 1). 
Wolf and Grotius hold him to have been 
the brother of Joseph Barsabas, ch. i. 23. 

trav | otherwise Silvanus (S:Aova- 
vés): the former name [is found] 1n the 
Acts, the latter in the Epistles of Paul. 
He also was a ‘ prophet’ (ver. 32). He 
accompanied Paul on his second missionary 
journey through Asia Minor and Mace- 
donia (ver. 40—ch. xvii. 10),—remained 
behind in Bercea (xvii. 14), and joimed 
Paul again in Corinth (xviii. 5; 1 ‘Thess. 
i. 1; 2 Thess. i. 1), where he preached 
with Paul and Timotheus (2 Cor. i. 19). 
The Silvanus (1 Pet. v. 12), by whom the 
first Epistle of Peter was carried to the 
churches of Asia Minor, seems to be the 
same person. ‘Tradition however dis- 
tinguishes Silas from Silvanus, making 
the former bishop of Corinth, the latter 
of Thessalonica. On the hypothesis which 
identifies Silas with Luke and makes 
him the author of the Acts, see Prolegg. 


rec ins καὶ οἱ bef αδελφ. (see note), with EHLPRS 


om ABCDR! p 138 vulg arm{-usc | 
om 188 tos C}(appy) 13. 
tos εξ εθ. bef ad. D [om ef H]. 


to Acts, § i. 11. B, y. I may repeat 
here, that in my mind the description of 
Silas here as one of the ἡγούμενοι ἐν τοῖς 
ἀδελφοῖς, of itself, especially when con- 
trasted with the preface to Luke’s gospel, 
would suffice to refute the notion. It has 
been also supposed (by Burmann) that 
Silas (won) [third] is the same name with 
Tertius, who wrote the Epistle to the Ro- 
mans, Rom. xvi. 22: but without reason : 
see Winer, Realw., “ Tertius,” and Mi- 
chaelis, Introd. vol. iv. p. 89, Marsh’s 
transl. 93.) The omission of καὶ 
oi before ἀδελφοί, found (see var. read.) 
w all the first Mss., can (as Neander 
observes against De Wette) hardly have 
been occasioned by hierarchical conside- 
rations, seeing that 1t occurs as early as 
Treneeus, and that it would be equally 
against the strong hierarchical view to 
call the presbyters πρεσβ. ἀδελφοί, writ- 
ing, as they were, to the ἀδελφοῖς. 
It seems very much more probable to 
me that the words καὶ oi were inserted 
to bring the decree into exact harmony 
with the beginning of ver. 22. In this, 
the first official mention of πρεσβύτεροι, it 
is very natural that the import of the term 
should be thus given by attaching ἀδελφοί 
to it. See, on the whole, Bp. Wordsw.’s 
note. Κιλικίαν] This mention of 
churches in Cilicia, coupled with the fact 
of Paul’s stay at Tarsus (ch. ix. 30—xi. 25: 
see also Gal. i. 21), makes it probable that 
Paul preached the gospel there, and to 
Gentiles, in accordance with the vision 
which he had in the temple (ch. xxii. 21). 

χαίρειν] Not a rendering by Luke 
of the Hebrew oybw, as Grotius; for the 
Epistle was certainly written in Greek, 


A 3 / 5 / “ 
τῇ “ ἐκκλησίᾳ ° ἐκλεξαμένους ἄνδρας ἐξ αὐτῶν πέμψαι εἰς aBcDE 
- “"- ῇ a , ΄, ‘ 
vi, [μου ᾿Αγτιόχειαν σὺν τῷ Παύλῳ καὶ BapvaBa, Ἰούδαν τὸν bears 


cdfg 
lm 





25—26. TIPAS ETS ATOSTOAON. 109 


9 7 ΄“΄ J 
24 τὶ ἐπειδὴ ἠκούσαμεν OTL τινὲς " EE ἡμῶν 1 = ον. xxi 


ii. 
26. James i. 


:0 lal ] 2 
εθνῶν ' χαιρειν. 


5 ΄ ’ ΄ lal , 9 
n ἐξελθόντες 5 ἐτάραξαν ὑμᾶς λόγοις ἢ ἀνασκευάζοντες TO i 
\ a ΄, ) ‘ rn xlviii. 22) f. 
ψυχὰς ὑμῶν, οἷς ov 4 διεστειλάμεθα, 25 ἔδοξεν ἡμῖν γενο- Ἐὰν. rit 
acc. 1X. ‘ 


μένοις " ὁμοθυμαδὸν * ἐκλεξαμένους ἄνδρας πέμψαι πρὸς ™YME™.S 


CoA \ A b) a A ΄ iv.12. 1Cors 
ὑμᾶς σὺν τοῖς tayarntois ἡμῶν Βαρνάβᾳ καὶ Ἰ]Παύλῳ, i2i,m%a.” 
. L.P. (Matt. 
%uZ , Vv ω Ἃ w n ἐπι mt Ε i. 4θ νυ. τ. 
ἀνθρώποις ᾿ παραδεδωκόσιν τὰς ψυχὰς αὐτῶν " ὑπὲρ ser) 


xv. 3. n Matt. ii. 6. 1 John ii. 19. Deut. xiii. 13. o = ch. xvii. 8,13. Gal. 
τ. 1. v.10. Prov. xii. 25. ἢ ταράττει oe,... OTL... Xen. Mem. ii. 6. 17. p here onlyt. (see 
ch. xvii. 6.) τὴν Δήκυθον καθελὼν κ. ἀνασκευάσας, Thue. iv. 116. q Mark vii. 36 al. Ezek. 
iii. 19. r ver. 22 (reff.). sch. i. 14 reff. ἐν. gen. (Matt. xii. 18). Rom. 
1.7. xvi. 5,8,9. 1Cor.x.14. Phil. ii.12 only. Ps. exxvi. 2. u = Matt. xiii. 45. Gen. 
ix. 20 al v -- 1 Cor. xiii. 3. Dan. iii. 28 (95). w = Matt. ii. 20. John x. 11. ch. 


xx. 24. ‘Rom, xvi.4. Rev. xii. llal. Exod. xxi. 23. x ch. ix. 16 reff. 


24, for επειδη, em Se N!. for nuwv, vuwy X! [m? Thl-sif]. om εξελθ. BRI 

αἱ [eth-rom] arm Constt, [Chr, Ath-int,]: ελθοντες [Ἢ JL. εξεταραξαν D!} al, 
[ανασκευγαζοντες L. | rec aft vuwy ins λεγοντες περιτεμνεσθαι (add dee 

E) καὶ tnpew tov νομὸν (gloss from vv 1,5), with CEHLP syrr exth-pl [arm Thl] 
Iven{-int ](aft διεστειλ.), περιτεμνειν avtovs τα Texva [K. τ. τ. ν.] Chr-edd,: om 
ABDX p 18 vulg coptt zth-rom Constt, Epiph, Ath[-int, Orig-int, ]. [διαστ. p:] 
διεστειλομεθα D}(txt D4). 

25. εἐκλεξαμενοις (grammatical correction) ABL p 18 rel: txt CDEHPN bf gl 36 
Constt, Chr. for nu., vuwy D-gr [k m}(?)]. 

26. παραδεδωκασιν D. τὴν ψυχὴν D Iren-int;. 


as intended for Gentiles. The only other and vé-MON,—or to square it with ver. 1, 


place where this Greek form of salutation 
occurs in an apostolic document (we have 
it in the letter of the chief captain Lysias, 
ch. xxiii. 26) is in James i. 1, which Bleek 
has remarked as a coincidence serving to 
shew his hand in the drawing up of this 
Epistle. 24.| Neander remarks (Pfl. 
u. L. p. 223, note) that ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξ. is a 
presumption in favour of the reading καὶ ot 
ἀδελφοί above: for that these men could 
hardly have gone out from among the 
Apostles and elders. But such a suppo- 
sition is not necessary: ἡμῶν implies the 
church, the ἀδελφοί of whom they were the 
πρεσβύτεροι, whether καὶ of be inserted or 
not. avack.| See ref. Thucyd., where 
it will be seen that it implies turning up 
the foundations :—for Brasidas cleared the 
ground and consecrated it. Cf. Passow, 
sub voc. The words λέγοντες περι- 
τέμνεσθαι κ. τηρεῖν τὸν νόμον, inserted in 
rec, after ὑμῶν, are manifestly, in my view, 
an interpolation, from the desire to spe- 
cify in what particulars these persons had 
sought to unsettle the souls of the Gentile 
brethren. The defence of the clause set 
up by Meyer and De Wette,—that if in- 
terpolated it must be from ver. 5, not from 
ver. 1, and that this is improbable,—is best 
answered by observing that in K, one of 
the principal authorities for the insertion, 
the Set after περιτέμνεσθαι betrays in very 
fact that the interpolation was from ver. 5, 
as also, but in a less degree, does the λέγον- 
tes. The reasons given by Meyer and De 
W. why the words should have been omit- 
ted,—the similarity of ending in ’-MON 


seem to me nugatory. The former is very 
improbable,—and the latter would have 
required the preservation of λέγ. περι- 
τέμνεσθαι. The variations also in the 
clause are strong presumptions against it. 
The persons to whom the epistle was ad- 
dressed would very well know what it was 
that had disturbed their minds, and the 
omission of formal mention of it would be 
natural, to avoid prominent cause of offence 
to the Jewish converts by an apparent de- 
preciation of circumcision and the observ- 
ance of the law. 25. ] γεν. ὁμοθυμ.. may 
mean either ‘assembled with one accord,’ 
as (perhaps) ch. i. 14; or ‘having agreed 
with one consent’ as Meyer. I prefer the 
former meaning. So we have adverbs as 
predicates after verbs ‘substantive, e. g., 
εἶναι διαφερόντως, Plato Legg. x. p. 892 ©, 
κατύπερθε γίνεσθαι, Herod., &e. See Bern- 
hardy, Syntax, p. 337. Bapv. k. Παύλ.] 
Paul has generally been mentioned first 
since ch. xiii. 43. (The exception, ch. xiv. 
14, appears to arise from the people calling 
Barnabas Jupiter, and thus giving him the 
precedence in ver. 12, after which the next 
mention of them follows the same order.) 
But here, as at ver. 12, we have naturally 
the old order of precedence in the Jeru- 
salem congregation preserved. 26. 
trapad. τ. .] See reff. The sacrifice of 
their lives was made by them: they were 
martyrs in will, though their lives had not 
as yet been laid down in point of fact. 

This is mentioned to shew that Paul and 
Barnabas could have no other motive than 
that of serving the Lord Jesus Christ, 


170 ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. ΧΥ. 

Aa x Dia ¥ le] / e “ 3 - ~ Mf ’ 
y=Matt. τοῦ "ὀνόματος τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ. ἀπ- 
xxvii. 57. , ς 9 , \ ͵ x ; \ * Ν 
_ che xxi εστάλκαμεν οὖν ᾿Ιούδαν καὶ Σίλαν, γ καὶ Y αὐτοὺς 5 διὰ 
2 Thess. ii. 


λόγον “ἀπαγγέλλοντας τὰ αὐτά. 38 τἔδοξεν yap τῷ 


e / 4 \ e ~ δὲ , b ’ ‘0 θ e “ 
AYL@ TTVEVLATL καὶ MLV μὴοεν σλεον ETLTLUETUAL υμιν 


2, 15. 

a ch. xi. 13 reff. 
constr., ch. 
vi. 11 reff. 


ve 3 \ “ ΄ Γ » 
2 “ev iat βάρος, πλὴν τῶν 4 ἐπάναγκες, 59 © ἀπέχεσθαι £ εἰδωλο- 
(Matt. xx. 12. , s 
2cor.iv17. θύτων καὶ αἵματος καὶ § πνικτῶν Kal § πορνείας" ἐξ ὧν 
wal, Vil. ὦ. 
3 ae a . A 5S = / . “5 «ες 
tuys se)" διατηροῦντες ' ἑαυτοὺς εὖ 1 πράξετε. " ἔῤῥωσθε. 80 Οἱ 


xiii. 2 (2 Macc. ix. 10) only. 
p- 706. 22. (ἐπαναγκαστής, Job iii. 18 Symm.) 
vii. 10. [w. ἀπό, ver. 20 reff.} f 1 Cor. viii. 1 reff. 
ii. 51 only. = Ps. xi. 7. i= 2 Cor. vii. 11 reff. 
21. 2 Macc. ix. 19. k here (ch. xxiii. 30 rec.) only. 2 Mace. xi. 33. 


d here only t+. Jos. Antt. xvi. 11.2. Demosth. κατὰ Τιμοκρ. 
e gen., } Tim. iv, 3. 1 Pet. ii. ll only. Jer. 
g ver. 20 (reff.). h Luke 


Isa. lvi. 2. j see note. not as Eph. vi. 


at end ins εἰς παντα πειρασμον DE 137 syr-mg. 

27. aft Aoy. ins πολλου E. amayyedouvtas D-gr [-yeAovres am p]. 
D}(and lat: txt D?) sah eth-pl: καὶ ravra syr: om eth-rom [om τὰ 1]. 

28, τω mv. τω ay. ABN k p 13 Clem,: txt CDEHLP rel 86 Constt, Cyr-jer Chr, 
Bas, [Cyr-p, | (ἔς Thi [lren-int, ] Cypr, Pac. (atter ἡμῖν N! has written «, but 
marked it for erasure.) πλεῖον D [a] 105. for υὑμιν, nuew D[-gr }(txt D8(?)). 

rec aft των emavay. ins τουτων, with ELP rel [arm] Chr: pref ΒΟῊΝ a m p 
13 vulg [syrr coptt] Constt [Did,] Thl Iren-int, [Cypr,]: om A 15-8. 36. 43. 180 
Clem, Epiph, Cyr, Orig-int Pac-mss (τουτων seems to have been a marginal supplemen- 
tary gloss, which some inserted before, some after των ewavaykes).—om των D!(ins 
D?(?)) ΝῚ 13.[—em avayrats (itacism ?) ACN Constt-edd, Cyr-edd,. ] 

29. rec x. πνικτου (alteration for uniformity with ver 21), with AZEHLPN? 18. 36 
valg [syrr (eth) arm(Tischdf)] Constt, Chr, (ic ΤῊ] [Did, Ath-int,]: om D Iren-int, 
Cypr, Tert, Ambrst, Pac, Jer, (see on ver 21): txt A1BCN! p coptt Clem, Orig;. 

[aft mopy.] ins kat οσα μὴ θελετε εαὐυτοις γενεσθαι ετερω [-pors al] μη ποιειτε (cf ver 20) 
D(motew D!: -εἰν ta:(sic) 1)5) a e 25-9. 32. 42. 57. 69. 105-6-37 syr-w-ast eth Iren-int 


TAUTG 


Cypr. for εξ, ap D. 
K. 
(vectante or rectante vos sp. 8.). 


and to awaken trust in the minds of the 
churches. But, although this was so, the 
Apostles and Elders did not think proper. 
to send only Paul and Barnabas, who were 
already so deeply committed by their acts 
to the same side of the question as the 
letter which they bore,—but as direct au- 
thorities from themselves, Judas and Silas 
also, who might by word confirm the con- 
tents of the Epistle. On the present part. 
(ἀπαγγ.) see reff. and Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 45. 
1. One account of it is, that during the 
mission implied in ἀπεστάλκαμεν they 
would be ἀπαγγέλλοντες. Buta far more 
probable one, that the pres. part. here, as 
so often, designates merely, carrying rather 
a logical than a chronological force: “as 
announcers of.” 27.) τὰ αὐτά, as 
above, the contents of the Epistle (and 
any explanation required): not, as Nean- 
der, ‘the same things as P. and B. have 
preached : διὸ λόγου, by word of mouth, 
as opposed to ‘by letter,’ decides against 
this interpretation. 28. τῷ ay. πν. 
καὶ np.|] Not = τῷ ay. mv. ἐν tu. (as 
Olsh.),—but as, in ch. v. 32, the Holy 
Spirit, given to the Apostles and testifying 
by His divine power, is coupled with their 
own human testimony,—so here the de- 
cision of the Holy Spirit, given them as 


πραξατε C D[-gr, agitis D-lat] HL eth-rom: πραξητε 
D adds depouevor ev τω aryiw πνευματι: also Iren(ambulantes in sp. s.) Tert 


leaders of the Church, is laid down as the 
primary and decisive determination on the 
matter,—and their own formal ecclesias- 
tical decision follows, as giving utterance 
and scope to His will and command. The 
other interpretation weakens this accuracy 
of expression, and destroys the propriety of 
the sentence. Neander, in his last edn. of 
the Pfl. u. L. (p. 224, note), has given up 
the rendering of his former ones, ἔδυξεν 
γὰρ (τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι) καὶ ἡμῖν, ‘It seemed 
good (by the Holy Ghost) to us also, i.e. 
as well as to Paul and Barnabas. It was 
plausible, but quite untenable. Such am- 
biguity, in such a document, would surely 
be out of the question. The judginent 
as to what things were ἐπάναγκες is implied 
in ἔδοξεν, &e. ἐπιτίθ. had been used 
by Peter, ver. 10. 29. | On the con- 

struction of ἀπέχεσθαι with ἀπό in ver. 20, 
and with a simple gen. here, Tittm., de 
Syn. N. T. p. 225, says well that the differ- 
ence arises ‘non quoad rem ipsam, sed 
modo cogitandi, ita ut in priori formula 
sejunctionis cogitatio ad rem, in posteriori 
vero ad nos ipsos referatur.’ His following 
remarks are worth reading. ἐξ ὧν, 

from which things; not, as Meyer, ‘ ae- 

cording to which precepts ;? see John xvii. 

15. ev mpat.| Not, ‘ye shall pros- 


ABCDE 
HLPN ἃ 
bedfg 
hklim 
opl3 





27—35. TIPAE EIS, ATIOSTOAON. 171 


A 3 / A r 
μὲν οὖν | ἀπολυθέντες ™ κατῆλθον εἰς ᾿Αντιόχειαν, καὶ ich. xiii.3 ref. 
m ch. viii. 5 reff. 


/ \ fol / ᾽ . 
ἢ συναγαγόντες TO ° πλῆθος PéréSwKav τὴν 4 ἐπιστολήν. 5 οἰ χἰν. 2 
2 Ul \ γι 
31 ἀναγνόντες δὲ τῇ 12 


> 4 δ ΄ 
᾿ ἐχάρησαν * ἐπὶ 5 παρακλήσει. p — Luke iv. 


Dias Χχζ \ /- a 17. xi. 11, 12 
82 Ἰούδας τε καὶ Σίλας, 'xal tavrol ἃ προφῆται ὄντες, ' διὰ i ME a, 
, rn 7, ern : 

λόγου πολλοῦ "παρεκάλεσαν τοὺς ἀδελφσὺς Kal err Thy. Beth. 


, Ὧπ U 
᾿ ἀπελύθησαν q ch. ix. 2 
reff. 


εστήριξαν. 35. ποιήσαντες δὲ * χρόνον 
> / \ lal a \ «σὰς eee 

2 μετ᾽ 5 εἰρήνης ἀπὸ τῶν ἀδελφῶν πρὸς TOUS ἀποστείλαντας "Ger Tif 

A ΄, iv. 6. 

αὐτούς. °° Ἰ]Παῦλος δὲ καὶ Βαρνάβας 5 διέτριβον ἐν 5 Rom. αν. 4,5 

> 7 ΄ \ ᾽ ’ \ ren. Sa. 

Αντιοχείᾳ διδάσκοντες καὶ ὃ εὐαγγελιζόμενοι μετὰ καὶ 

ε 7 “ \ , a 
© ἑτέρων πολλῶν τὸν ἢ λόγον τοῦ κυρίου. 


lvii. 18. 
t ver. 27 (reff.). 
Ὁ ch. xi. 27 reff. 
v ch. xvi. 
40. xx. 2 
w ch. xiv. 22 reff. x ch. xviii. 23. Demosth. p. 392, οὐδ᾽ 
y =ch.xx.3. 2Cor. xi. 25. James ivy. 13. Prov. xiii. 23. 
see ch. xvi. 36 reff. ach. xii. 19 reff. b ch. 
c = ch. xvii. 7 reff. 


al. fr. Deut. xiii. 6. 
ἐποίησαν χρόνον οὐδένα. 

z Heb. xi. 3l only. Gen. xxvi. 29. 
vili.4 only. see 1 Cor. xv. 2. 


30. aft αἀπολυθ. ins ev ἡμέραις oAvyats D'[and lat]. rec (for κατηλθ.) ηλθον, 
with EHLP rel [syrr coptt] Chr, Thl-sif: txt ABCDN a p 18. 36. 40 vulg eth [arm] 
Thl-fin. συναγοντες D}(txt D?). επιδεδωκαν EK, 

$2. elz (for re) δε, with D-gr vulg E-lat syr copt Thl-fin: om sah eth-rom [arm 
(Tischdf)]: txt ABC E-gr HLPR® p 13 rel D-lat (Syr) eth-pl Chr, Thl-sif. for 
ovtes, ὑπάρχοντες E: aft ovres ins πλήρεις mvevuatos αγιου D. om πολλου D 18. 

ἐπεστηρισαν CE 73: txt ABDHLP &-corr! p 13. 36 rel Chr: om και επεστ. Rl. 

33. rec for ἀποστ. avtous, αποστολους (perhaps an explanatory gloss, substituted 
Sor the genuine text ;—but more probably a mistake, owing to ἀποστ. being common to 
the two words), with EHLP rel syrr copt[-wilk] Chr,: txt ABCDN a p 18. 36. 40 
vulg [copt-boett] sah eth-rom Thl-fin.—X had eavrovs, but the e has been marked and 
then erased. 

84. rec εδοξε δε τω σιλα επιμειναι αὐτου (explanatory anticipation of ver 40), with 
ΟἹ) 13 rel [vulg-ed] syr-w-ast sah [copt-wilk wth] arm Gc Thl-fin (σειλεα D: παυλω 
eth: for επιμειναι, sustinere eos D-lat: for αὐτου, avrovs CD!, προς avtous D-corr!: 


om ABEHLPN cdg ἢ] τῷ p am(and demid fuld) Syr copt[-boett }] Chr Thl-sif). 
add further wovos δε sovdas ἐεπορευθη D vulg-ed [tol] arm(not ed-1805).] 


35. ο de π. D. 
in D!, is supplied by D®(?). 


per: but as καλῶς ἐποίησας, ch. x. 333 
3 John 6,—ye shall do well. See 
the curious additions in var. readd. 
ἔῤῥωσθε] The customary ‘valete’ of the 
conclusion of epistles. 31. παρα- 
κλήσει] It does not appear, because 
παρεκάλεσαν follows in the sense of ‘ ex- 
horted,’ that this word need mean ‘ ez- 
hortation. There was (De W.) very little 
exhortation in the letter: and it is much 
more natural to render it consolation here: 
it was the matter of their joy, which surely 
could not be said of the orders to abstain 
given in the letter. It has been observed 
by Mr. Pusey that syr. renders παρεκάλε- 
σαν v. 32, by comforted. 32.] mpod. 
ovr. gives the reason for their superadding 
to the appointed business of their mission 
the work of exhorting and edifying. 

On προφ., see ch. xi. 27; xiii. 1; Eph. ii. 
20, and notes. 33. | ποι. xp., havin 
continued some time: see reff. [84. ] 
-On every account it is probable that the 
words forming this verse in rec. (see var. 
readd.) are an interpolation. For, (1) manu- 
script evidence against them is weighty, 


και μετα eT. D}(txt D5). 


at end «v., which has perished 


especially as D, in the case of insertions in 
the Acts, is of very low authority. (2) The 
αὐτοῦ is αὐτούς in C and D, and αὐτοῖς and 
αὐτόθι in some cursives; and D and the 
Vulg. add μόνος δὲ ᾿Ιούδ. ἐπορεύθη : the 
former shewing the copying of an indistinct 
marginal gloss which was not understood, 
and the latter betraying the secret of the 
whole, viz. that the notice was interpolated 
to account for Silas being found again at 
Antioch in ver. 40. (3) Internally con- 
sidered, the insertion is very improbable : 
coming after ἀπελύθησαν unexplained 
(which from its voice and tense implies 
that the dismissal actually took place and 
they departed) and followed by Παῦλος δέ 
after ἔδοξε δὲ τῷ SiAg. On Silas’s subse- 
quent presence at Antioch, see note, ver. 
40. We learn from Gal. ii. 10, that ὦ 
condition was attached to the cordiality 
with which the Gentile mission of Paul 
and Barnabas was recognized by the chief 
Apostles: that they should remember the 
poor, i.e. the poor at Jerusalem :—that 
the wants of the mother church should 
not be forgotten by those converts, whose 


173 


ἃ ch. x. 48 το 

e see Luke 
xxii. 32 (and 
note). 


TIPAZEIS AITOSTOAON. 


XV. 36-45, 


80 Mera δέ 4% τινας ἃ ἡμέρας εἶπεν πρὸς Βαρνάβαν Ilad- 
Nos ©’ Εἂππιστρέψαντες ἴ δὴ ὅ ἐπισκεψώμεθα τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς 


= Luke ii. 15. , n 2 Stes \ F 
fotuke i 15. Ὁ κατὰ πόλιν πᾶσαν ἐν αἷς ἱ κατηγγείλαμεν Tov | λόγον 


ch. xiii. 2. 
1 Cor. vi. 20. 
Gen. xviii. 4. 
g ch. vii. 23 
reff. 
heh. xiii. 27 
reff. 
ich. xiii. 5 reff. 
k Gen. xliii. 27 
see Matt. iv. 
24. Mark 
xvi. 18. 
lech. xii. 25 reff. 
m = ch. xxviii 


τοῦ κυρίου, * πῶς * ἔχουσιν. 
Ἰ συνπαραλαβεῖν καὶ ᾿Ιωάννην τὸν καλούμενον Μάρκον" 
88 ἸΠαῦλος δὲ πὶ ἠξίου τὸν "ἀποστάντα ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν ἀπὸ 
Παμφυλίας καὶ μὴ 5 συνελθόντα αὐτοῖς εἰς TO” ἔργον, μὴ 
| συνπαραλαμβάνειν “ τοῦτον. 


37 Βαρνάβας δὲ ἐβούλετο 


39 gyévero δὲ * παροξυσ- 


2 Luke vii. μός, ὥςτε ὃ" ἀποχωρισθῆναι αὐτοὺς am ἀλλήλων, TOV 


111. 3. x. 29) 
1 Mace. xi. 28. 


p = ch. xiii. 2. xiv. 26. Phil. i. 22 al. 


xxix. 28. Jer. xxxix. (xxxii.) 37 only. [-ύνεσθαι, ch. xvii. 16.) 
t = Matt. xvii. 1. 


ix. 33.) Ezek. xlii. 21 only, but not =. 
only+. Xen. Anab. νυ. 6. 21, 23. 


n Luke ii. 37. iv..13. ch. xii. 10. xix. 9 al. 


ἢ Tims fa 
He” té Βαρνάβαν ' παραλαβόντα τὸν Μάρκον " ἐκπλεῦσαι εἰς 


Ὁ ΞΞ ΟἿ. 1.9] 
r Heb. x. 24 only. Deut. 
s Rey. vi. 14 only. (διαχ.» Luke 
uch. xvin. 18 xx.6 


Ps. Ixxix. 18. 
q ch, xili. 7 al. 


Num. xxii. 41. 


86. rec παυλ. bef mp. Bapy., with DEHLP rel [syrr coptt eth arm(?) Bas,]: txt 


ΑΒΟΝ τὰ p 18 vulg Thl-fin.—ins o bef tava. Ὁ. 


for 5n, δε N}. rec aft tous 


ad. ins ἡμῶν (not perceiving the sense of τ. αδελφ.), with HLP rel eth [Bas,]}, Thl: τοὺς 


Ὁ c 36. 137-80: om ABCEN a p 


13. 40 vulg [syrr] coptt arm Chr. 
πολ., with DEHLP 13. 36 rel [vulg Bas, ] Chr: txt ABCN Καὶ m. 
Karnyy., εκηρυξαμεν C 15-8. 36. 180 [arm ? ]. 


rec tac. bef 
os ἢ. for 
ins to bef πως Εἰ. 


37. rec εβουλευσατο, with HLP rel Chr, Thl-sif: efovAevero D[-gr]: txt ABCEN 


ace p 13. 36. 40 vulg [D-lat] syrr copt 2th Thl-fin. 


συνπαραλαμβανειν A (13). 


rec (for καὶ) τον, with HLP 18 rel Syr sah eth Thl-sif: om Dac: ka tov BX 


p: txt ACE ἃ k 36 vulg syr copt arm Chr ‘Thl-fin. 


corrd)]¢ dk p 13. 40. 
88. for ἠξίου, ove εβουλετο λεγων Ὁ. 
9), om απὸ παμφ. ΟΣ [C! doubtful]. 


Ὁ. aft epy. add εἰς ο ἐπεμφθησαν D tol. 


ἐπικαλουμενον CD [X%(but 


amnocratnoayta(sic) A: αποστησαντα 
συνελθοτα B}(but corrd). om avTas 
rec συμπαραλαβειν (corrn for con- 


formity to ver 37), with EHLP rel Chr,: txt ABCR ἃ ὁ p 36.—(ouvz., so AB!CEN.) — 


for un συνπ. T., D has τουτον μὴ εἰναι συν avTois. 
39. rec for δε, ουν (corrn to suit the sequence of the παροξ. on the last verse), with 


_CEHLP rel 36 syrr [arm] Chr, : txt ABDN p vulg coptt. 


αποχωρήσαι E. 


rote Bapy. παραλαβων τ. μ. ἐπλευσεν 1) : τον ye(or o ye) syr [om τὸν A]. 


Judaical bond to her was thus cast loose. 
This was an object which Paul was ever 
most anxious to subserve. See Gal. l. ὁ. 
and note.] 35. | διδάσκοντες, to those 
who had received ἰύ,-- εὐαγγελιζόμενοι, to 
those who had not. 

36—Cu. XVIII. 22.] Pavt’s sEconD 
MISSIONARY JOURNEY (unaccompanied by 
Barnabas, on account of a difference be- 
tween them) THROUGH AsIA MINOR TO 
MACEDONIA AND GREECE, AND THENCE 
BY SEA, TOUCHING AT EPHESUS, TO JE- 
RUSALEM AND BACK TO ANTIOCH. 
36. μετὰ δέ τινας Hp.| How long, we 
are not informed: but perhaps (?) during 
this time took place that visit of Peter to 
Antioch mentioned Gal. ii. 11 ff. when he 
sacrificed his Christian consistency and 
better persuasions to please some Ju- 
daizers, and even Barnabas was led away 
with the dissimulation. On this occasion 
Paul boldly rebuked him. See, on the 
whole occurrence, notes to Gal.-1. ¢. 
δή, see above, ch. xiii. 2. ἐν αἷς. be- 
cause πᾶδαν πόλιν involves a_plurality: 


so Xen. Mem. i. 2. 62, ἐάν τις φανερὸς γέ- 
νηται. .. τούτοις θανατός ἐστιν ἡ ζημία: 
cf. Herm. ad Viger. p. 40. 38. ἠξίου] 
Not as Vulg. ‘rogabat:’ but ‘ #quum 
censebat,’ as Beza. 1t gives Paul’s refusal 
in the strongest manner. The position of 
the accusatives also forcibly expresses his 
decided rejection of one who had not dared 
to face the dangers of the untried country 
before. But Paul thought proper (as to) 
one who had fallen off from them from 
Pamphylia, and had not gone with them 
to the work, not to take with them that 
man. We may well believe that Paul’s 
own mouth gave originally the character to 
the sentence. τὸν atoort.| See ch. 
xiii. 138. It hence is evident that his de- 
parture was not by the authority of the 
Apostles (as Benson). 39. | 6 Παῦλος 
ἐζήτει τὸ δίκαιον, ὃ Βαρνάβας τὸ φιλάν- 
θρωπον, Chrysostom: who also remarks 


on their separate journeys,—é€uol δοκεῖ kab. 


κατὰ σύνεσιν γεγενῆσθαι τὸν χωρισμόν, 
καὶ mpds ἀλλήλους εἰπεῖν ὅτι ἐπειδὴ ἐγὼ 
οὐ βούλομαι, σὺ δὲ βούλει, ἵνα μὴ μαχώ- 


ABCDE 
HLPNa 
bedfg 
hklm 
ΟΡ! 








XVI. 1—3. 


sel 40 Tladros δὲ " ἐπιλεξάμενος Σίλαν 
Χ παραδοθεὶς τῇ χάριτι τοῦ κυρίου ὑπὸ τῶν ἀδελφῶν. 2 
41 γΥδιήρχετο δὲ τὴν Συρίαν καὶ Kursxiar, 
XVI. 1υκατήντησεν δὲ εἰς Δέρβην τοὶ xiv. 3 


τὰς δ ἐκκλησίας. 
καὶ Λύστραν. 


7 en bi 3 / 
Τιμόθεος, υἱὸς γυναικὸς ᾿Ιουδαίας 
εὑπὸ τῶν ἐν Λύστροις καὶ 


“EAAnvos, 3 ὃς “ ἐμαρτυρεῖτο 


IIPASEIS ATOSTOAOQN. 


Skat ἰδοὺ μαθητής τις ἦν ἐκεῖ ὀνόματι 


175 
τ ἐξῆλθεν γΞΞ τὰ Si 


lace. μὰ ii. 
Py Kings 


* ἐπιστηρίξζων ν᾿ we ch. xi. 3, 


y ch. xiii. 6 reff. 
Gen. xli. 46. 

z ch. xiv. 22 
reff. 

a plur., Rom. 
XVI. 16 reff. 


ἃ πιστῆς, πατρὸς δὲ 


b w. εἰς, ch, 


? / b) aA A 2 / e “ 9, 24 
Ικονίῳ ἀδελφῶν. ὃ τοῦτον ἠθέλησεν ὁ ἸΤαῦλος σὺν αὐτῷ As I Gor. 
. 
> A \ \ “Ὁ Β \ \ x. ΤΠ, x19, 
PeEeNeiv, καὶ δ λαβὼν " περιέτεμεν αὐτὸν ‘dia τοὺς 16. Bph.is 
iii. ll only. 2 Macc. iv. 44. w. aes ch. xx. 15 only U.P. (w. ἐπί, p Manga iii. 29 only ): ξ c ch 
xi. 11. xii. 7. xxvii. 24 al. d ch. x. 45 reff. e ch. x. 22 re xy. 40 reff. 
of persons, here only. Num. ili. 6. h 1 Cor, vii. 18 reff. i=e 


gred., et xill. 31 al. 
iy. 21, x. 21. 


40. σαυλος E-gr. 


επιδεξαμενος Ὦ. 


om tov D}(ins D5). 


(for κυρ.) θεου, with CEHLP rel 36 [vulg-clem arm] syrr copt Chr, ['Thl-sif] : αἱ 
D. 


ABDX® p 13. 40 am(and demid fuld tol) sah Thl-fin. 


at end ins παραδιδους Tas evToAas των πρεσ- 


41. ins την bef κιλ. BD Thl-fin. 


απο 


βυτερων D [vulg] demid fuld(not am tol) arm(not ed-1805) [¢radebantque iis ad cus- 
todiendum mandata apostolorum presbyterorumque syr-mg |. 


(ΠΑΡ. XVI. 1. διελθων δε ta εθνη ταυτὰα κατηντ. D syr-mg. 

ins evs bef λυστ. ABN ¢ p. 
rec aft γυν. ins Tivos, with HLP rel Syr sah ΤῊ] : 
om ABCDERN a Καὶ p 86. 40 vulg syr copt «th arm Chr. (13 def.) 


δερβ. AB a m 13. 36. 40 syr copt. 
ny D: om exet 32-7. 57 eth. 


2. sxoviov [1 Ἰδξ, 


μεθα, διανειμώμεθα τοὺς τόπους. ὥςτε πάνυ 
᾿ς εἴκοντες ἀλλήλοις τοῦτο ἐποίουν. Hom. 
xxxiv., p. 262. Yet it seems as if there 
were a considerable difference in the cha- 
racter of their setting cut. Barnabas ap- 
pears to have gone with his cousin [see 
Col. iv. 10, note] without any special sym- 
pathy or approval; whereas Paul was com- 
mended to the grace of God by the as- 
sembled church. We find Mark after- 
wards received into favour by Paul, see 
Col. iv. 10; 2 Tim. iv. 11; and in the 
former of those places it would seem as if 
he was dependent for his reception on 
Paul’s special commendation. 

Σίλαν] He may perhaps have come down 
again to Antioch (see ver. 33) in Peter’s 
company. We find (see above on ver. 22) 
a Silvanus in 1 Pet. v. 12, the bearer of 
that epistle to the congregations of Asia 
Minor. 41. Συρίαν κ. Κιλικ.} See 
note, ver. 23. Here we finally lose sight 
of Barnabas in the sacred record. 

Cuap. XVI.1.] We have Derbe first, as 
lying nearest to the’ pass from Cilicia into 
Lycaonia and Cappadocia. Paul probably 
travelled by the ordinary road through the 
‘Cilician gates,’ a rent or fissure in the 
mountain-chain of Taurus, extending from 
north to south through a distance of eighty 
miles. See various interesting particulars 
in C. and H. i. p. 301 ff. and notes. 
ἐκεῖ} At Lystra: which, and not Derbe, 
was in all probability the birth-place of 
Timotheus: see on ch.xx.4. This view is 


ins καὶ bef εἰς 
exe. bef 


om sovdaas Εἰ. 


confirmed by ver. 2. He had probably 
been converted by Paul during his former 
visit, as he calls him his sow in the Lord, 
1 Cor. iv. 17 3 Uelimesi, 2:2. Time 2; 
perhaps at Antioch in Pisidia, see 2 Tim, 
iii. 10, 11. His mother was Eunice, his 
grandmother Lois,—both women of well- 
known piety, 2 Tim. i. 5. Whether his 
father was a proselyte of the gate or not, is 
uncertain : he certainly was uncircumcised. 
He would be, besides his personal aptness 
for the work, singularly fitted to be the 
coadjutor to Paul, by his mixed extraction 
forming a link between Jews and Greeks. 
2.] Some of these testimonies were 
probably intimations of the Spirit respect- 
ing his fitness for the work; for Paul 
speaks, 1 Tim. i. 18, of τὰς προαγούσας ἐπὶ 
σὲ προφητείας (see ch. xiii. 1,3). He was 
set apart for the work by the laying on of 
tle hands of Paul and of the presbytery, 
1 Tim. iv. 14; 2 Tim. i. 6, after he had 
made a good confession before many wit- 
ae 1 Tim. vi. 12. 3. λαβὼν περι- 
τ, As E. V. took and circumcised him. 
ee Israelite might perform the rite; see 
Winer, Realw., art. ‘ Beschneidung.’ 
διὰ τ. ᾿Ιουδ.] That he night not at once, 
wherever he preached, throw a stumbling- 
block before the Jews, by having with him 
one by birth a Jew, but uncircumcised. 
There was here no concession in doctrine 
at all, and no reference whatever to the 
duty of Timotheus himself in the matter. 
In the case of Titus, a Greek, he dealt 


174 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XVI. 





k 


3 ὃ , \ ” = a ’ ΕῚ ] wv 
& plor., Mark lov alovS τοὺς OVTaAS εν τοις TOTTOLS EKELVOLS® ἤδεισαν ABCDE 


i. 45. Luke \ , » a εξ A HLPs a 
xi,24 | xxi. γὰρ ἅπαντες τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ, ὅτι “Ελλην ™ ὑπῆρχεν. deatgs 
ΩΝ i 2 ἢ ς \ 7 Ν , a hk l τη 
aay ῶς δὲ " διεπορεύοντο τὰς πόλεις, 5 παρεδίδοσαν αὐτοῖς opi3 
2 Chron. ΄ \ \ a 
azré Ρ φυλάσσειν τὰ “δόγματα τὰ " κεκριμένα ὑπὸ τῶν ἀπο- 
πὶ °2 4 ’» a“ ς 
xii. 3,4. Job στόλων καὶ πρεσβυτέρων τῶν ἐν ᾿ἱεροσολύμοις. 
xxi. 27. μ 
m ch. ii. 30 reff. ~ \ " ~ “Ἢ 
B acc here 5 Αἱ μὲν οὖν ὃ ἐκκλησίαι ' ἐστερεοῦντο TH " πίστει, Kab 
USS Viste 7 an > tal sp «e / : fol \ 
si 3. ἡ ἐπερίσσευον τῷ ἀριθμῷ * καθ᾽ ἡμέραν" © * διῆλθον δὲ τὴν 
ove \ “ rad 
only, “PS. ᾿ Φρυγίαν καὶ Ταλατικὴν χῶραν, ¥ κωλυθέντες ὑπὸ τοῦ 
1 Mace. iii, 37. o = 1 Cor. xi. 2 reff. (ch. xii. 4.) p -= Luke xi. 28. ch. vii, 
53. xxi. 24. 1 Tim. v.21 al. Eccles. xii. 13. q Luke ii. 1. ch. xvii. 7. Eph. ii. 15. Col. ii. 


14only. Ezek. xx. 26 B Ald. &c. (but appy error) only. Dan. vi. 9 Theod. 


viS.-wi.@t. "Tit. n1.12. 2)Macc. xi..25. 
uch. xiii. 8 reff. v 2.Cor. ix. 12. 
y = Matt. xix. 14. ch. viii. 36 al. 


8. παντες CD m: txt ABEHLPR p 


Phil. i. 9. Eccl. iii. 19. 
1 Kings xxv. 26. pass., Rom. i. 13. Heb. vii. 23 only. Exod. xxxvi. 6. 


rel Chry. 


r= ch, xx. τ, 2agor. 
t ch. iii. 7 reff. 
x ch, xiii. 6 reff. 


s plur., Rom. xvi. 16 reff. 
w ch. ii. 46 reff. 


οτι ελλὴν ο πατὴρ αὐτου (corrn 


for simplicity) ΑΒΟΝ a m 18. 86. 40 [copt] sah Thl-fin: txt DEHLP rel Chr Thi-sif, 
4. for ver, διερχομενοι δὲ Tas models εκηρυσσον Kat παρεδιδοσαν avTols μετα πασὴξ 
παρρησιαξ TOY xv inv χρν ἄμα παραδιδοντες και Tas evTOAGas αποστ. (των απ. D®) x. πρεσβ. 


τ. εν LEp. 
[for διεπ., ἐπορευοντο H Thi-sif.} 


D: aft τας πολ. ins εκηρυσσον μετα Tac. Tap. τ. κυρ. ino. Xp. Syr-mg. 
rec παρεδιδουν, with HLP rel 36 [ Bas, ] Chr: 
παρεδιδουσαν C: txt ABDEN p 13 [Thl-fin]. 
uniformity), with EHLP rel Chr ['Thl-sif]: om ABCDX a p 13 Bas Thl-fin. 


rec ins των bef πρεσβ. (corrn for 
rec 


ιερουσαλημ, With EHLP [rel Bas] Chr [Thl-sif]: txt ABCD a p 13 vulg Thl-fin. 


5. om τη mor. D. 


περιεσσευον K 3. 65. 95! Chr-mss,. 


6. rec διελθοντες, with [H]LP rel vulg(transeuntes . . vetati sunt) Chr, Thi: txt 


ABCDEN acdekm p13. 36. 40 syrr coptt [wth] arm Epiph, Did, [Ces ]. 


rec 


ins τὴν bef yaa. (corrn for uniformity), with EHLP 36 Epiph, Did, [Chr]: om 


ABCDN p 13 Ces). 


otherwise, no such reason existing: Gal. 
ii. 3. 4. tas πόλ.]) Iconium, and 
perhaps Antioch in Pisidia. He might at 
Iconium see the elders of the church of 
Antioch, as he did afterwards those of 
Ephesus at Miletus. If he went to An- 
tioch, he might regain his route into Phry- 
gia and Galatia by crossing the hills east of 
that city. 5.| This general notice, 
with μὲν οὖν, like those at ch. ix. 31, xii. 
24, marks the opening of a new section. 

6—9.] This very cursory notice of 
a journey in which we have reason to think 
so much happened,—the founding of the 
Galatian and Phrygian churches (see ch. 
xviii. 23, where we find him, on his second 
visit, στηρίζων πάντας τοὺς pwabnrds) ; 
the sickness of the Apostle alluded to Gal. 
iv. 13; the working of miracles and im- 
parting of the Spirit mentioned Gal. iii. 5; 
the warmth and kindness of feeling shewn 
to Paul in his weakness, Gal. iv. 13—15,— 
seems to shew that the narrator was not 
with him during this part of the route ; an 
inference which is remarkably confirmed 
by the sudden resumption of circumstantial 
detail with the use of the first person, at 
ver. 10. 6. Φρυγίαν) There were 
two tracts of country called by this name: 
‘Phrygiam utramque (alteram ad Helles- 
pontum, majorem alteram vocant)..... 
Eumeni restituerunt.’? Livy, xxxviii, 39. 


It is with ‘Phrygia Major’ that we are 
here concerned, which was the great central 
space of Asia Minor, yet retaining the name 
of its earliest inhabitants, and on account 
of its being politically subdivided among 
the contiguous provinces, impossible to 
define accurately (see C. and H. i. p. 280, 
note 1). The Apostle’s route must 
remain very uncertain. It is probable that 
he may have followed the great road (ac- 
cording to his usual practice and the natu- 
ral course of a missionary journey) from 
Tconium to Philomelium and perhaps as far 
as Synnada, and thence struck off to the 
N.E. towards Pessinus in Galatia. That 
he visited Colossze, in the extreme S.W. of 
Phrygia, on this journey, as supposed by 
some, and maintained with some ingenuity 
by Mr. Lewin (Life and Epistles of St. Paul 
i. 191 ff.), is very improbable (see Wieseler, 
Chron. ἃ. Apostgsch. pp. 28 #f.). 

Γαλατικὴν x. | The midland district, known 
as Galatia, or Gallo-grecia, was inhabited 
by the descendants of those Gauls who 
invaded Greece and Asia in the third cen- 
tury B.c., and after various incursions and 
wars, settled and became mixed with the 
Greeks in the centre of Asia Minor. They 
were known as a brave and freedom-loving 
people, fond of war, and either on their 
own or others’ account, almost always in 
arms, and generally as cavalry. Jerome (in 


4---, ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 175 


vA 4 , a “Ἅ 
ἁγιου πνεύματος “λαλῆσαι τὸν "λόγον ἐν τῇ ᾿Ασίᾳ, τ. αἱ. 19 rem. 
, \ 4 . a of place, here 
74 ἐλθόντες δὲ δ κατὰ τὴν Μυσίαν ὃ ἐπείραζον εἰς τὴν only, ctper 
/ “Ὁ a = . 
Βιθυνίαν πορευθῆναι, καὶ οὐκ “εἴασεν αὐτοὺς τὸ πνεῦμα υ ~ & constr., 


son, Luke 
ἰηφοῦοτον Ὁ, πρεμθόντος Se “pit Miohiv. *cardl Basho yeaa 
ησοῦ παρελθόντες δὲ τὴν υσίαν * κατέβησαν εἰς , mst να], 


Τρωάδα. 9 καὶ ὅραμα 8 διὰ [τῆς] ννκτὸς τῷ Ιαύλῳ α constr, Mark 
vi. 48 


only. (ch. a Tal.) Deut. ii. 14. e ch. xviii. 22 reff, f ch. vii. 31 reff. g see 


ch. v.19 reff. 


ins μηδενι bef AaAnoa D. aft τὸν Δ. ins toy θεου D vulg-ed spec Syr copt [th-pl]. 
7. for ελθοντες, yevouernv D}(-vo D8). rec om δε, with HLP rel Chr (ἔς Thi: 
ins ABCDEN a b'd k m p13. 36. 40 syr [(Syr)] coptt [(zeth) arm Ps-]Ath, Epiph, Did,. 
for επειρ., ἤθελαν D Syr. rec (for eis) kata ( perhaps merely a mistake, 
occasioned by κατα τ. uve. before: if an intentional alteration, the reason is not clear), 
with HLP ret Thl-sif: txt ABCDEX ck πὶ p 13. 40 Epiph, Chr Cyr, Thl-fin. om 
2nd την D. rec πορευεσθαι (corrn for the less usual inf. aor.), with CDHLP 13 
rel [ Epiph,] Chr Thl-sif: txt ABEX m p 36 Did, Thl-fin. rec om inoov (see note), 
with HLP [p?] rel sah [arm-3-mss] Chr Thi; κυριου ΟἹ demid: txt ABC?DEN m p! 


13. 36. 40 vulg syrr copt zth arm[-3-mss Did, Cyr-p] Orig-int,. 


8. διελθοντες D [syr arm-mss ]. 
9. ev οραματι D-gr K-lat Syr. 


the introduction to book ii. of his comm. 
on Galatians, vol. vii. p. 429) says that 
their speech was like that of the Germans 
in the neighbourhood of Treves: and per- 
haps Λυκαονιστί, ch. xiv. 11, spoken of the 
neighbouring district, may refer to this 
peculiardialect. But Greek was extensively 
spoken. They were conquered by the con- 
-sul Cn. Manlius Vulso, 189 B.c. (Livy 
XXxxviii. 12, see 1 Mace. viii. 2), but retained 
their own governors, called as before te- 
trarchs, and afterwards kings (for one of 
whom, Deiotarus, a protégé of Pompey’s, 
Cicero pleaded before Cesar); their last 
king, Amyntas, passed over from Antony 
to Augustus in the battle of Actium. 
Galatia, after his murder, A.D. 26, became 
a Roman province. ‘The principal cities 
were Ancyra,—which was made the me- 
tropolis of the province by Augustus,— 
Tavium, and Pessinus: in all, or some of 
which, the Apostle certainly preached. He 
was detained here on account of sickness 
(50 ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκός, Gal. iv.13). See 
further in Prolegg. to Gal. § ii. κωλυ- 
θέντες] By some special intimation, like 
that in ch. xiii. 2. ᾿Ασίᾳ] This name, 
applied at first to the district near the 
river Cayster in Lydia (Ασίῳ ἐν λειμῶνι, 
Καὐστρίου ἀμφὶ ῥέεθρα, Hom. 1]. B. 461), 
came to have a meaning more and more 
widely extended, till at last it embraced, 
as at present, the whole vast continent, 
forming one of the quarters of the globe. 
But we never find this meaning in Scrip- 
ture. The Asia of the Acts is not even 
our Asia Minor,—which name is not used 
till Orosius (i. 2, p. 16) in the fourth 
century A.D.,—but only a portion of the 
western coast of that great peninsula. (A 
full account of.the history of the territory 


κατήντησαν D-gr. 
om δια C. 


rec ins tTns, with CEHLPN p 13 


and its changes of extent will be found in 
C. and H., i. pp. 275 ff., and in Wieseler, 
pp. 32—35. I confine myself to its im- 
port in the Acts.) This, which was the 
Roman province of Asia,—Asia Propria, 
Plin. v. 28,—as spoken of in the Acts, 
includes only Mysia, Lydia, and Caria,— 
excluding Phrygia (ch. ii. 9 and here: 
1 Pet. i. 1 it must be zucluded) as in 
Pliny 1. c.,—Galatia, Bithynia, Cilicia, 
Pamphylia, Lycia. See ch. xix. 26, &e. 
7. Βιθυνίαν] At this time a Roman 
province (senatorial: Hadrian, whose fa- 
vourite province it was, took it from the 
senate). When they were come to (i.e. 
to the borders of) Mysia, they attempted 
to go into B. The expression πν. Ἰησοῦ 
is remarkable, as occurring in all the great 
Mss., and from its peculiarity bearing 
almost unquestionable trace of genuine- 
ness,—the idea being quite untenable that 
the word Ἰησοῦ has been inserted here, 
and no where else, on doctrinal grounds. 
If the report of this journey carne from 
an unusual source, an unusual expression 
would be accountable. 8.] παρελ- 
θόντες must from the context mean ‘ having 
passed by,’ i. 6. as regarded their work 
of preaching (cf. ch. xx. 16),—and not 
‘having passed by’ as avozding it; for 
they could not get to the coast without 
entering Mysia. I adhere to this inter- 
pretation, notwithstanding what has been 
said against it by Dr. Bloomfield (Gr. Test. 
edn. 9). For this sense of παρέρχομαι, 
which is not figurative at all, but involved 
in the literal, cf. Hom. Il. 6. 239: Aristoph. 
Vesp. 636, 7: Plato, Phaedr. p. 278 fin. 
Τρωάδα] Troas (Alexandria Troas, in ho- 
nour of Alex. the Great: now Eski Stam- 
boul) was a colony juris Italict (see on ver. 


110 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XVI. 
nen ἢ. 8:5, ἢ ὥφθη, ἀνὴρ Μακεδών τις ἑστὼς ' παρακαλῶν αὐτὸν καὶ 
1 ver. rei. ν i μ Ἢ + a 

k Luke xvi, 26. 1 χέγων * Διαβϑὰς εἰς Μακεδονίαν 1 βοήθησον ἡμῖν. 10 ὡς 
m7 δὲ τὸ ὅραμα εἶδεν, εὐθέως ™ ἐζητήσαμεν " ἐξελθεῖν ” εἰς 


Heb. xi. 29 
] Matt. xv. 25. 


: : 2 \ / Oo , e , en am 
Mark ix.22, τὴν Μακεδονίαν, 5 συμβιβάζοντες ὅτι Ῥ προςκέκληται ἡμᾶς 
28. 2 Cor. vi. 


2, from Isa. xlix.8. Heb.ii.18. Rev. xii. 16 only. τὴ = ch, xiii. 8 reff. n ch. xi. 25 reff 


ΟἹ Cor. ii. 16 reff. p ch. xiii. 2 reff. 


rel Chr: om A?(and appy A!) BD 40. rec ὠφθη bef τω παυλω, with ACD!HLP 
rel 36 syrr [coptt «th arm] Chr,: txt B D-corr EX m p 18. 40 vulg. ins wset bef 
avnp D Syr sah. rec τις bef μακεδων, with HLP rel Chr: [om tis copt eth:] txt 
ABCDERX m p 18 Thl-fin.—rec aft ἀνὴρ tis ins ny, with HUP rel Chr Thi-sif: aft 
μακεδων τις ABCD®X ἃ m p13 Thi-fin (these variations of position shew the word to 
be spurious, inserted to fill up the imagined constr, tt not being observed that avnp ὅς 
is in apposn with opaya): om D'E 8. 47. 961. 103 Syr copt eth arm. - aft εστως 
ins kata To mposwmov αὐτου D syr-w-ast[{: simly | sah. ins καὶ bef παρακαλων 


(supplementary corrn) ABCEN a p13 vulg (syrr) eth: om DHLP rel coptt [arm] 


To. om autor D. 


10. for ws to ort, διεγερθεις ovy Sinynoato To οραμα ημιν και evonoapev ott D, simly 


sah. e€ntnoaper(sic) δὲ [m?]. 


om τὴν (for uniformity with es par. above: 


but that was the first this the second mention) BCELPX ak p18 Thi-sif: ins AH rel 


Thl-fin. om ἡμας XN}. 
12), and a free city, and was not reckoned 
as belonging to either of the provinces 
Asia or Bithynia. Whether it was for this 
reason that Paul and his companions visited 
it, is uncertain. He may have had the 
design of crossing to Europe, if permitted, 
which the subsequent vision confirmed. 
See ch. xx.5; 2 Cor.ii.12; 2 Tim. iv. 13. 
9.7 The vision seems to have ap- 
peared in the same way as that sent to 
Peter in ch. x. It was an unreal appari- 
tion, designed to convey a practical mean- 
ing. The context precludes our under- 
standing it as a dream. Μακεδών] 
known probably by the affecting words 
spoken by him. There would hardly be 
any peculiarity of dress by which a Mace- 
donian could be recognized. 10. 
ἐζητήσαμεν] by immediate enquiry for a 
ship. This word is remarkable as the 
introduction of the first person in the 
narrative: which however is dropped at 
ver. 40, on Paul’s leaving Philippi, and 
resumed again, ch. xx. 5, on occasion of 
sailing from Philippi. Thence it continues 
(in all places where we have reason to 
expect it: see below) to the end of the 
book. On the question, what is implied 
by this, we may remark, (1) That while 
we safely conclude from it that the writer 
was in company with Paul when he thus 
speaks, we cannot with like safety infer 
that he was not, where the third person 
is used. This latter must be determined 
by other features of the history. For it 
is conceivable that a narrative, even where 
it concerns all present, might be, in its 
earlier parts, written as of others in the 
third person, but might, when more inti- 
macy had been established, or even by 


preference only, be at any point changed 
to the first. And again, the episodes where 
the chief person alone, or with his principal 
companion or companions, is concerned, 
would be many, in which the narrator would 
use the third person, not because he was 
not present, but because he was not con- 
cerned. This has not been enough attended 
to. If it be thought fanciful, 1 may refer 
to an undoubted instance in the episode, 
ch. xxi. 17, γενομένων ἡμῶν eis ‘lep., to 
ch. xxvii. 1, ὡς δὲ ἐκρίθη τ. ἀποπλεῖν 
quas,...3 during the whole of which time 
the writer was with or in the neighbour- 
hood of Paul, and drops the we, merely 
because he is speaking of Paul alone. (2) 
One objection raised by De Wette to the 
common view, that Luke accompanied Paul 
from this time (except as above), is, that 
several times Paul’s companions are men- 
tioned, but Luke is never among them. 
On examining however one of the passages 
where this is done, we find that after the 
enumeration of Sopater, Aristarchus, Se- 
cundus, Gaius, Timotheus, Tychicus, and 
Trophimus, we are told, οὗτοι προελθόντες 
ἔμενον ἡμᾶς ἐν Τρωάδι : so that the writer 
evidently regards himself as being closely 
associated with Paul, and does not think 
it requisite to enumerate himself among 
the companions of the Apostle. This may 
serve as a key to his practice on other 
occasions. On the whole, and after careful 
consideration of the subject, Isee no reason 
to doubt the common view, that Luke here 
joined the Apostle (whether, as Wieseler 
suggests, as a physician, on account of his 
broken health, must of course be matter 
of conjecture, but is not improbable), and 
from this time (except from ch. xvii. 1— 





10—12. IIPASEIS, ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 177 


ε 


Ν ΄ 
ὁ θεὸς 4 εὐαγγελίσασθαι αὐτούς. 


11 τ ἀναχθέντες ἐν 
ee ᾿ a Vill. 25 ref, 
ἀπὸ Τρωάδος " εὐθυδρομήσαμεν eis Σαμοθράκην, τῇ Seth eis 


\ 
δὲ q constr., ch. 
bs ff 


2 ΄ > ΄ ¢ a s ch. xxi. 1 
ἱ ἐπιούσῃ εἰς Νεάπολιν, 19 κἀκεῖθεν εἰς Φιλίππους, " ἥτις | only τς 
= ‘ 5 rm ἢ m abs., ch. xx. 
ἐστὶν πρώτη τῆς " μερίδος τῆς Μακεδονίας πόλις, δ κο- BAIS 


11) only. Prov. xxvii. 1. uch. x. 41 reff. vch. viii. 21 reff. Ezek. xlv.7. w here only +" 


rec (for θεο5) κυριος, with DHLP rel syrr sah [arm] Chr, Thl-sif Iren-int, : txt ABCEN 
al p 13. 36 vulg copt eth Thl-fin. avtous A [dk] 13 Thl-sif: τοὺς ev τη waked. D. 

11, rec for δε, ουν (corrn to suit the sequence on the foregoing ver), with BCHL 
P(appy) rel 36 syr-txt sah [arm Iren-int, ] 'Thl-sif: txt A(D)EX m p 13 vulg syr-mg 
copt Chr Thl-fin.—r7 δὲ emavpiov αχθ. (αναχθ. D*) aro D 197 [syr-mg]. rec ins 
της bef tpwados, with HL P(appy) rel Thdrt ΤῊ]: om ABCDEN cm p 13. 40 Chr,. 


rec (for τη δὲ) Tn Te, with H rel vulg eth [arm] Chr Thi: καὶ τη 1): txt A B(6’) 


CELN abck mop 13 syr coptt. (P uncert.) 


πολιν ABD®N. 


aft emiove. ins nuepa 1). veav 


12. rec εκειθεν τε, with HP rel Chr ce Thi-sif[, e¢ ende] vulg Syr copt eth: ex. δὲ 


L [ec] 187 syr sah: txt A B(sic: see table) CDEN a m p 13. 36 Thl-fin. 
om Ist της B: om rns wep. D ο 14. 96. 105-37-42 syrr eth 
om 2nd της (0 make the sense clearer: wakedovias πολ. 


κεφαλὴ 1) Syr. 
Chr, : μερις E-gr [arm]. 


for mper., 


expressing ‘ Macedonian city’ better than τὴς pocedovias πολ.) ACEN a m p 40: ins 


BDHLP Chr. (13 def.) 3 


xx. 5) accompanies him to the end of the 
history. See the question of the author- 
ship of the Acts further discussed in the 
Prolegg. ὃ i. 12—14. 11.] They had 
a fair wind on this occasion: in ch. xx. 6, 
the voyage in the opposite direction took 
jive days. ‘This is also implied by εὐθυδρο- 
μήσαμεν : see ref., where it has the same 
sense, viz., ran before the wind.. The 
coincidence of their going to Samothrace 
also shews it: determining the wind to 
have been from the S. or S.S.E. It is only 
a strong southerly breeze which will over- 
come the current southwards which runs 
from the Dardanelles by 'Tenedos (C. and 
H. i. p. 386) : and this, combined with the 
short passage, is another mark of the vera- 
city of our narrative. They seem to have 
anchored N. of the lofty island of Samo- 
thrace, under its lee. εἰς Νεάπολιν] 
In an Εἰ. by N. direction, past the island 
of Thasos. It was not properly in Mace- 
donia, but in Thrace, and twelve (ten, 
C. and H.i. 339, from the Jerusalem Itine- 
rary) Roman miles from Philippi, which 
was the frontier town of Macedonia strictly 
speaking: see below. It was by Vespa- 
sian, together with the whole of Thrace, 
attached to the province of Macedonia 
(Winer, Realw.). Some Roman ruins and 
inscriptions serve to point out the Turkish 
village of Cavallo as its site. 12. 
Φιλίππους Philippi was built as a mili- 
tary position on the site of the village 
Krenides (also called Datos, Appian, Bell. 
Civ. iv. 105, of δὲ Φίλιπποι πόλις ἐστίν, H 
Δάτος ὠνομάζετο πάλαι, καὶ Κρηνίδες ἔτι 
πρὸ Δάτου" κρῆναι γάρ εἶσι περὶ τῷ λόφῳ 
ναμάτων πολλαί), by Philip the Great of 
Macedon. The plain between the Gangites, 


Vou. II. 


' (or. Philippigi 9). 


on which the town is situate, and the 
Strymon, was the field of the celebrated 
battle of Antony and Octavius against 
Brutus and Cassius (cf. Dio Cassius, xlvii. 
41 ff.: Appian, ubi supra): see more 
below. There is now an_ insignificant 
place on its site retaining the name Filiba 
Winer, Realw. 

πρώτη τῆς μερίδος τῆς Μακεδονίας 
πόλις) The first Macedonian city of the 
district. It was the first Macedonian 
city to which Paul and his companions 
came in that district,—Neapolis properly 
belonging to Thrace. And this epithet of 
πρώτη would belong to it not only as re- 
garded the journey of Paul and Silas, but 
as Wieseler remarks (Chron. d. Apgsch. 
p. 37, note) as lying furthest eastward, for 
which reason also the district was called 
Macedonia prima, though furthest from 
Rome. The other explanations are, (1) 
‘ chief city, as E.V. But this it was not: 
Thessalonica being the chief’ city of the 
whole province, and Amphipolis of the 
division (if it then subsisted) of Macedonia 
prima :—(2) πρώτη is taken as a title of 
honour (Hug, Kuin., De Wette), as we 
find in the coins of Pergamus and Smyrna 
(but not in the case of any city out of 
Asia Minor) : (8) πόλις κολων. are united 
(Grot.),—‘ the first city which was ὦ 
colony.’ But there could be no r-ason for 
stating this : whereas there would be every 
reason to particularize the fact that they 
tarried and preached in the very first city 
to which they came, in the territory to 
which they were sent. μερίδος would 
seem to import that the division into Mace- 
donia prima, secunda, &c., made long before 
this by Amilius Paulus (Livy, xlv. 29), still 

N 


178 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ANOSTOAON: XVI. 


i Αι 2 ΄ -A u < ὃ / y e Ψ 
x ch. xii, 19 ἣμεν δὲ ἐν ταύτῃ TH πόλει * διατρίβοντες ἡ ἡμέρας ABCDE 
7 13 Ξ 2 a “ Ζ BB 7, a2 Ἃθ 8 HLPRa 
τινάς, 3 τῇ τε * ἡμέρᾳ τῶν * σαββάτων " ἐξήλθομεν * ἔξω cat g 
a x hklm 
τῆς "πύλης παρὰ ποταμόν, ov ° ἐνομίζετο ἃ πρροξευχὴ εἶναι, o p13 


Heb. xiii. 13. b Luke vii. 12. Heb. xiii. 12. Ruth 


/ 
λωνία. 


reff. 

y ch. x. 48 reff. y 
z Luke iv. 16. 
ch. xiii. 14 

only. Exod. 

xx. 8. see ’ 

ch, xx. 7 reff. Luke xiv. 5 al. a Matt. xxi. 17. 
i 2 Mace. xiv. 4. 


iv. 1. ς = here only t. 


nunv D'[-gr](txt D8). 
ak p18. 36 Syr.rn bef avtn Ὁ o. 


13. for re, δε D aco 18 vulg E-lat syr coptt Thi. 


d ver. 16 only}. Jos. Antt. xiv. 10. 23 (see note), 


for ταυτη, avtn D-corr HLP rel Chr, Thi: txt ABCDIEN 


rec for muAns, ToAews (per- 


haps a margl expl of της πυλης: perhaps an error), with EHLP rel 36 syr [copt-ms 


arm] wth-rom Chr: txt ABCDN a p 15. 40 vulg coptt. 


Thl-sif. 
Epiph (alterations from misunderstanding : 
txt Al(appy) ΕΗ ΠΡ rel 36 Chr Thi. 


subsisted; this however is not necessary: 
μερίς might be merely a geographical sub- 
division. Wordsworth finds his solu- 
tion of the difficulty in ‘‘the Hellenistic 
sense of the word μερίς, viz. a frontier or 
strip of border land, that by which it (?) is 
divided from some other adjacent territory: 
see Ezek. xlv. 7. But this supposed sense 
may be questioned. Certainly in the place 
cited μερίς has no such meaning. It there 
represents pq, which is merely a part or 
portion. κολωνία] Philippi was made 
a colonia by Augustus, as a memorial 
of his victory over Brutus and Cassius, 
and as a frontier garrison against Thrace. | 
Its full name on the coins of the city 
was Colonia Augusta Julia Philippensis. 
A Roman colony was in fact a portion 
of Rome itself transplanted to the pro- 
vinees (Aulus Gellius, xvi. 13, calls them 
* ex civitate quasi propagatee—populi Ro- 
mani quasi effigies parve simulacraque ἢ). 
The colonists consisted of veteran soldiers 
and freedmen, who went forth, and de- 
termined and marked out their situation, 
with all religious and military ceremo- 
nies. The inhabitants of the colonize 
were Roman citizens, and were still en- 
rolled in one or other of the tribes, and 
possessed the privilege of voting at Rome. 
In them the Roman law was. strictly 
observed, and the Latin language was 
used on their coins and_ inscri;-tions. 
They were governed by their own senate 
and magistrates (Duumviri, as the consuls 
at’ Rome: see on στρατηγοί below, ver. 
20), and not by the governor of the 
province. The land on which they stood 
was tributary, as being provincial, un- 
less liberated from tribute by the special 
favour of the jus Italicum, or Quiritarian 
ownership of the soil. This Philippi 
possessed, in common with many other 
colonie and favoured provincial towns. 
The population of such places came in pro- 
cess of time to be of a mixed character : 
but only the descendants of the original 


ins tov bef ποταμ. D 1142 


ενομιζομεν ABC 13. 40 copt eeth-rom (-auey C): ενομιζεν δὲ : εδοκει D 


see note): putabant arm: videbatur vulg: 
mposevxnv A?CN p 13. 40 copt eth: εὐχὴ 


colonists by Roman wives, or women of a 
people possessing the civitas, were Roman 
citizens. Hence new supplies of colonists 
were often necessary. See article ‘Colonia’ 
in Smith’s Dict. of Antt., and C. and H. 
i. pp. 341, f. ἐν ταύτῃ TH πόλει] 
In this city,—as distinguished from the 
suburban place of prayer to which they 
afterwards, on the Sabbath, ἐξῆλθον ἔξω 
τῆς πύλης. Perhaps ταύτῃ may have been 
changed to αὐτῇ, to make the contrast 
stronger, cv αὐτῇ τῇ πόλει, as distin- 
guished from ἔξω τῆς πύλης, would be too 
strong an expression for the calm simplicity 
of St. Luke’s narrative style. 13. 
motTapov ἃ, (or, the) river; viz. the small 
stream Gangites, or Gangas: Leake, p. 217, 
cited by C. and H. i. 341; not, as Meyer 
and De Wette, the Strymon, the nearest 
point of which was many miles distant. 
The name Krenides, formerly borne by the 
city, was derived from the fountains of this 
stream. From many sources we learn, 
that it was the practice of the Jews to hold 
their assemblies for prayer near water, 
whether of the sea, or of rivers: probably 
on account of the frequent washings cus 
tomary among them. Thus a decree of the 
Halicarnasseans in Joseph. Antt. xiv. 10. 
23, allows the Jews τὰς mposevxas ποιεῖσ- 
θαι πρὸς τῇ θαλάσσῃ κατὰ τὸ πάτριυν ἔθος. 
Thus Juvenal, speaking of the ‘madida 
Capena’ at Rome, adds, ‘ Nune sacri fontis 
nemus, et delubra locantur Judeeis, iii. 13. 
And Tertullian, de Jejuniis, ch. 16, vol. ii. 
p- 976, ‘Judaicum certe jejunium ubique 
celebratur, quum omissis templis per omne 
litus quocumque in aperto aliquando jam 
precem ad ccelum mittunt.2 And ad 
Nationes, i. 18, vol. i. p. 579, he speaks of 
the ‘orationes litorales’ of the Jews. See 
also Philo in Flace. ὃ 14, vol. ii. p. 535. 
οὗ évop. προς. εἶναι Where a 
meeting for prayer was accustomed to be: 
i. e. ‘where prayer was wont to be made,’ 
as E. V. That this is the meaning here, is 
plain from the use of ἐνομίζετο εἶναι. which 








13—15. ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AMOZTOAON. 179 


καὶ © καθίσαντες ἐχλαλοῦμεν ταῖς fovveNOovcas γυναιξίν. 6 abs., Matt. v. 


xiil. 48. 


/ \ >] ΄ , iL. 

14 καί τις γυνὴ ὀνόματι Λυδία, ὃ πορφυρόπωλις πόλεως SHR 14. 
Θ ΄, hi / \ i 6 , 4 2 e ΄ Isa. xxx. 8. 
υατείρων, “'ceBouevn τὸν εον, ἤκουεν, Ὡς O κύριος fch.i.6 τοῦ: 
Ε \ ͵ , a g here only Τ. 

K διήνοιξεν THY καρδίαν ' προςέχειν τοῖς λαλουμένοις ὑπὸ " ch, 8 


ich. xviii. 7, 


A ΄ € \ > \ A 
τοῦ IlavAov. 1ὅ ὡς δὲ ἐβαπτίσθη, Kai ὁ τὰ οἶκος αὐτῆς, ᾿ “3 only. fob 
, Pe i. 9 AVA +8 
"παρεκάλεσεν ἢ λέγουσα Ei ο κεκρίκατέ με πιστὴν τῷ "; Luke xiv. 


45. (ch. vii. 
, 5 > , > \ es, : : 
Ρ κυρίῳ εἶναι, εἰςελθόντες εἰς τὸν οἶκόν μου * 4 μείνατε' 2 Mace ΣΝ, 
= ch. viii. 6 
reff. τὰ — ch. x. 2 reff. n Matt. viil. 5. xviii. 29. Mark v. 12 al. pigs ch. xiii. 


46 reff. p here only. see 1 Cor. iv. 17. q = ch. xxi. 7, 8 reff. 


m 99: txt Al(appy) BEHLP rel 36. συνεληλυθυιαις D. aft συνελθ. add nuw 
CE §N'(N3 disapproving) eth. 

14. ins της bef πολεως Ὁ. [for θεον, κυριον D'(and lat, but -gr corrd eadem 
manu). | ins τις bef nx. Εἰ. ἡκουσεν D!-gr Lack 13 vulg Chr Thl-fin. 
om tov BD. 

15. ins avt7 bef κ. ο ox. EX® ἃ ἢ 36-8. 93-7. 106-marg 1138-77-80 demid fuld [syrr] 
sah arm Chr,. ins was bef ο ax. Da 43. 69 eth. for κυριω, θεω D-gr eth 


* μένετε (corrn to more usual?) ABDEN p13: μείνατε CHLP rel 36 Chr 
[Βα μ Ρ 
as, |. 


could certainly not be said if the rposevxxh famina tinxerit ostro’ (Lewin, i. 242). 

were in this case a building dedicated to Thyatira was a city of the province of 
prayer. Were there nosuch qualification, Asia. Thus, although forbidden to preach 
we should understand the word of a mpos- the word in Asia, their first convert at 
εὐκτήριον or synagogue, as frequently used: . Philippi isan Asiatic. Lydia is a proper 
τινὰς δὲ οἴκους ἑαυτοῖς κατασκευάσαντες name, not ‘ita dicta a solo natali,’ as 
ἢ τόπους πλατεῖς φόρων δίκην, mposevyas Grot.: though its origin may have been 
ταύτας ἐκάλουν: καὶ ἦσαν μὲν τὸ παλαιὸν that. It was a common female name. 


mposevxav τόποι ἔν TE τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις ἔξω See Hor. Od. i. 8; iii. 9. σεβ. τ. 0. ] 
πόλεως, καὶ ἐν τοῖς Σαμαρείταις. Epi- A proselyte; see reff. N.T. ἤκουεν, 
phanius, Her. 80, § 1, Ὁ. 1067: and again, was listening,—when διήνοιξεν, the act 
soon after, ἀλλὰ καὶ mposevx7s τόπος ἐν of God, took place. διήνοιξεν | «cor 
Σικίμοις, ἐν τῇ νυνὶ καλουμένῃ Νεαπόλει, ἔξω  clausum per se: sed Dei est id aperire.’ 
τῆς πόλεως, ἐν TH πεδιάδι, ὡς ἀπὸ σημείων Bengel. τ. Aadoupévots] It appears 


δύο, θεατροειδής, οὕτως ἐν ἀέρι K. αἰθρίῳ rather tohave been a conversation (ἐλαλοῦ- 
τόπῳ ἐστὶ κατασκευασθείς, ὑπὸ τῶν μεν, we spoke—and ποῦ τὸν λόγον) than 
Σαμαρειτῶν πάντα τὰ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων μιμου- a set discourse: the things which Paul 
μένων. Josephus, Vita p. 54, says, συν- Was saying. 15. ἐβαπτ., κ. ὁ οἶκος 
ἄγονται πάντες εἰς τὴν προξευχήν, μέγιστον αὐὖτ.] It may be (as Meyer maintains) that 
οἴκημα πολὺν ὄχλον ἐπιδέξασθαι δυνάμενον. no inference for infant-baptism is hence 
The mposevyh here was probably deducible. The practice, however, does not 

one of the open places spoken of in the rest on inference, but on the continuity 
above extracts from Epiph. The close and identity of the covenant of grace to 
of the verse also agrees best with an open Jew and Christian, the sign only of admis- 
place of resort. There seem to have been _ sion being altered. The Apostles, as Jews, 
few, if any, Jews in Philippi: this assem- would have proposed to administer baptism 
bly consisting merely of women attached to the children, and Jewish or proselyte 
to the Jewish faith. We hear of no oppo- converts would, as matter of course, have 
sition arising from Jews. There appears acceded to the proposal ; and that the prac- 
(ch. xvii. 1) to have been no synagogue. tice thus by universal consent, tacitly (be- 
14. πορφυρόπωλις | The guildofdyers cause at first unquestioned) pervaded the 

(oi βαφεῖς) at Thyatira have left inscrip- universal church, can hardly with any rea- 
tions, still existing, shewing the accuracy son be doubted. See note on 1 Cor. vii. 14. 
of our narrative. The celebrity of the pur- εἰ kexpixate | If ye have judged me; 
ple dyeing of the neighbourhood is as old* modestly alluding to the decision respect+ 
as Homer: ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε tis τ᾽ ἐλέφαντα γυνὴ ing her faithfulness implied by their bap- 
φοίνικι μιήνῃ Mnovis ἠὲ Κάειρα, παρήϊον  tizing her, and assuming that such a judg- 
ἔμμεναι ἵππων, 1). δ. 141. So also Clau- ment had been passed. Similarly εἰ ἡμεῖς 
dian, de Raptu Proserp. i. 270: ‘non sie ἀνακρινόμεθα, ch. iv. 9. 16.| This 
decus ardet eburnum Lydia Sidonio quod liappened on other occasions ; not on the 

N 2 


180 


r Luke xxiv. 
29only. Gen. 4, Α 
xix. 9. 

1 Kings εἰς TV 
XXViLll. 23. 


Ww 10 x ΄ al 
s constr., ch. TUC@Va VUTAVTIGAL 
xxi. 17 reff. ya ἊΣ a b 
t ver. 13. 
u ch. xii. 13 al. TTAPELNEV τοις 
Sen. χχ. 17. 
v - John vii. 

20. viil. 48, 

ἄς. ch. xix. 

13. 

w here only t. 

x uke viil. 27 

| Mt. (Mk. A. 5 , 
vr.) xiv. 31. δὲ ἐποίει 

John iv. 51. 

xi. 20, 30. xii. 18 only t+. Tobit vii. 1 (not δὲ), 
xii. 58, Eph. iv. 19) only. L.P. 
xxix. 7. b = Matt. x. 24. 

ἃ Luke xxiii. 55 only. Jer. xvii. 16. 1 Macc. vi. 23 only. 
i 7 ih vii. 3. Dan. iii. 26 Theod. 4 Kings x. 23. 
Vii. h ch. xiii. 5 reff. 

k ch. ‘iit 31 reff. I ch. iv. 2 (reff.) only. 

vuas NX}. 
16. rec om τὴν, with DHLP rel Chr, : 


οχουσαν R'. 


syr-mg-gr Chr: txt ABC!D!& p vulg Orig. 
υμιν δεῖ, 


Chr: txt ΒΟῈΝ p 13. 36 Orig,. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AMOZTOAON. 


᾿παρεβιάσατο ἡμᾶς. 
t πρροςευχὴν Libera .. τινὰ " ἔχουσαν πνεῦμα 


/ 
κυρίοις αὐτῆς 
“ 7 X £ ad Μ , 

ἃ κατακολουθήσασα τῷ Παύλῳ καὶ ἡμῖν, “ ἔκραζεν “ λέγουσα 
- « Ve lal A A gw ἢ way 
Οὗτοι οἱ ἄνθρωποι ᾿ δοῦλοι τοῦ ὃ θεοῦ τοῦ ὅ ὑψίστου εἰσίν, 
o / e “ ὁ Ὁ Ν 3 / 
οἵτινες " καταγγέλλουσιν ἡμῖν ἱ ὁδὸν 1 σωτηρίας. 

ae \ ς “ 
ἐπὶ πολλᾶς ἡμέρας. 
y ch. xix. 24. 


(Gen. xxix. 27.) Xen. Mem. iii. 10. 1, 
Luke xvi. 5. 


XVI, 


15 ἐγένετο δὲ πορευομενων *7UOV ARCDE 


" ἡμῖν, bind Li ἐργασίαν πολλὴν 


© μαντευομένη. 17 αὕτη 


\ ἃ, δ lal 
! διαπονηθεὶς δὲ ὁ Παῦλος 
z = here bis. ch. xix. 24 (25. a 


a = ch. xvii. 31. xxviii. 2 al 5 

Judg. xix. 11. c here only. Deut. - xviii. 10. 
e ch. xiv. 14 reff. f ch. iv. 29. Tit. i. 

g Mark v.7\|L. Heb. vii. 1. Gen. xiv. 18. see ch. 


ihere only. see Matt. xxi. 32. Luke xx. 21. ch. ἃ. 28 al. 


ins ABCEX p 13. 40 Orig, Thl-fin. 
rec πυθωνος (see note), with D-corr! EHL Ρ(ποιθ.) 13. 36 rel tol 


rec απαντησαι, with ADHLP rel 
maperxeto C. for avrns, 


δία rovrov D![-gr(but mar ked for er asure) ; per hoc D-lat}. 


17. κατακολουθουσα B D- -gr & 36. 180. 
pref. καὶ D!-gr(txt D§). 
Katayy., ευαγγελιζοντε D(-res D?). 


person speaking), with BD E-gr δὲ a Ὁ ο 36 vulg syrr eth-pl [arm] Thdrty : 


om ανθρωποι D'(and lat? : 


om tw B Orig. expacoy and 
ins Ds) Lucif,. for 
elz υμιν (alteration, as better suiting the 
txt 


AC*HLP p(sic) 18 rel E-lat coptt eth-rom Orig Chr Thdrt[-ed-rom,] Eustath Lucif,. 


[C! uncert. a 


18. om Ist δε H sah. om o ABN: 


same day, as Heinrichs and Kuinoel fancy. 
In that case (besides other objections), 
if they had gone back from the house 
of Lydia to the place of prayer, the word 
would certainly have been ἐξελθόντων, and 
not πορευομένων. In ver. 15 is implied 
their taking up their abode with Lydia :— 
in this verse that they habitually resorted 
to this place of prayer to teach, and that 
what follows happened on such occasions. 

It may be remarked that the E. V. of 
πορευομένων eis (τὴν) mposevxhv, ‘as we 
went to prayer, has given rise to a curious 
abuse of the expression ‘ going to prayer,’ 
in the sense of “ beginning to pray, among 
the lower classes in England. ἔχου- 
σαν πνεῦμα πύθωνα] On the whole sub- 
ject of dzemoniacal possession, see note on 
Matt. viii. 32. This was a case in which 
the presence of the spirit was a patent 
fact, recognized by the heathen possessors 
and consulters of this female slave, and 
by them turned to account; and recognized 
alse by the Christian teachers, as an in- 
stance of one of those works of the devil 
which their Lord came, and commissioned 
them, to destroy. All attempt to explain 
away such a narrative as this by the sub- 
terfuges of rationalism (as e. g. in Meyer, 
and even Lewin, i. 243, and appurently 
Hackett, p. 222), is more than ever futile. 
The fact of the spirit leaving the gir), and 
the masters finding the hope of their gains 


ins CDEHLP rel 36 Chr,.—emorp. δεο 7. Tw 


gone, is fatal : and we may see, notwith- 
standing all his attempts to account for it 
psychologically, that Meyer feels it to be 
80. πύθωνα] Plut. de Defectu Oracul. 
Ῥ. 414, says ὥςπερ τοὺς ἐγγαστριμύθους 
Εὐρυκλέας (from a prophet, Eurycles), 
πάλαι, νυνὶ Πύθωνας mposayopevouevous. 
It is difficult to decide internally between 
the probabilities of πύθωνα and πύθωνος : 
I have retained the ancient reading, both 
from its external authority, and because 
I find so many Commentators explaining 
πύθων to be a name of Apollo, or the 
serpent Python, that the alteration into 
the gen. may thus be easily accounted 
for. Bp. Wordsworth has an interesting 
note on the probable reason for this new 
term appearing in the narrative, now that 
St. Panl is brought directly into contact 
with Greek and Roman divination. 

17.) ἔκραζεν, used to cry out: several 
occasions are referred to. The recogni- 
tion of Paul and his company here by the 
spirit is strictly analogous to that of our 
Lord by the daemons, Matt. viii. 29; Luke 
iv. 34: and the same account to be given 
of both: viz. that the evil spirit knew and 
confessed the power of God and His Christ, 
whether in His own Person or that of His 
servants. 18. διαπονηθείς | Not mere 
annoyance is expressed by this word, but 
rather holy indignation and sorrow at what 
he saw and heard; the Christian soldier 


18 rovToa: 


HLPRa 
bedfg 
ΒΚ, 
ΟΡ 13 





! 


16—21. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AMOSTOAON, 


18] 


’ al , Φ : 
καὶ ™ émiotpe was TO πνεύματι εἶπεν " ἸΤαραγγέλλω σοι “ἐν τὰ ~ ch. ix. 40. 


q > A A q ef 
αὐτῷ Τῇ wpa. 


constr., see 


, ’ “Ὁ la) 5 al μι A a 
ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ Ὁ ἐξελθεῖν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς. καὶ ? ἐξῆλθεν wer sor, 
19 ἢ δὲ εὐνῇ ΄ Shin “ ᾽ Mark viii. 6. 
ἰδόντες δὲ οἱ ὃ κύριοι αὐτῆς ὅτι ἐξ- οἱ κ«. 4. 
εὀόγάδάας Αὐτῶν, ἀν Α Αμαν ct 
ἐργασίας αὐτῶν, ὃ ἐπι αβόμενοι τοῦ ΤῈ 


ῆλθεν ἡ " ἐλπὶς τῆς 


ο ch. iv. 7 reff. 


lal \ I ¢/- 2 \ 
Παῦλον καὶ Σίλαν ᾿εἵλκυσαν εἰς τὴν hae ΡΩΝ ἐπὶ τοὺς Ῥ ch, vii 1 


ἄρχοντας, 20 καὶ " mposaryaryov Tes αὐτοὺς τοῖς 
εἶπαν Οὗτοι οἱ ἄνθρωποι * ἐκταράσσουσιν ἡμῶν τὴν πόλιν 
TI ὃ a yi ΄ 27 \ Ζ , 

ουδαῖοι ἡ υπάρχοντες, “+ καὶ 7 καταγγελλουσιν 


vii. 21. x. 21. xii. 12, xiii. 31. xx. 19 only. L. Dan. v. 5 only. 

5 acc..ch. ix. 27 reff. 
Jer. xlv. (xxxviii.) 13 
Luke ix. 41. ch. xxvii. 27. 


1.18. iv.4. Col. i. 23. 
32. xviil. 10. xxi. 6, 11) only. 
xxvii. 12. v Matt. xviii. 24, 
w = here, &c. 5 times only. (ch. iv. 1 reff.) 
z ch. xiii. 5 reff. ach. vi. 14 reff, 


my. Kat διαπον. D. 


παραγγελω C ἃ [syr-mg-gr]: παραγγέλω p. 


Y στρατηγοῖς q Luke ii. 28. 


xxiv. 33. ch. 
xxii. 13 only. 
Dan. iii. 6 (10. 
» A iv. 30 333 
a ἔθη a The od. -) only. 
w. ἐν, Luke 


r constr., Gal. νυ. ὁ. Eph. 

t = here (John vi. 44. xit. 

uch. xvii. 17. Ezek. 

1 Pet. iii. 18 only. 
x here only. Ps. lxxxvii. 16. 


see ch, xxi. 30. 
Gen. xlviti. 9. 
y ch. ii. 30 reff. 


rec ins tw bef 


ov., with DHLP 18 rel Gc ΤῊ] : om ABCEN ς h p Eustath, [Ps-]Ath Chr, [Eucher, }. 


wa εξελθης D: εξελθε 13. 
19. και ἰδοντ. B Syr eth: 


απεστερησθαι THS Epy. aut. ns εἰχαν δι avtTyns D. 


uniformity), with ABEHLPR p 13. 36 rel Eustath Chr: om CD 1. 


εσυραν 


20, mposayayovtas D'{-gr |(txt D-corr!). 
τα εθνη D'(and lat!) 15! : 


21. [καταγγελουσιν H b! mo p. | 


was goaded to the attack, but the mere 
satisfaction of anger was not the object, 
any more than the result, of the stroke. 
It is doubtful here, in mere grammar, 
whether the dat. τῷ πνεύματι is to be 
constructed with ἐπιστρέψας or with εἶπεν. 
But considering 1) that the spirit could 
hardly be the object of a bodily movement 
on the part of the Apostle, except as re- 
presented by the possessed damsel, and 2) 
that ἐπιστρέφω is never elsewhere found 
with a dative, but always with a pre- 
position, εἰς. or πρός or ἐπί, it is much 
the best to take τῷ πνεύματι with εἶπεν, 
and believe it to be thrown forward before 
its verb for the sake of emphasis. 

19.] Her masters (a partnership of per- 
sons, not plur. for sing. They may have 
been the heredes of some one to whom 
she had belonged) perceived that the hope 
of their gain had gone out (with the 
demon). em... . εἴλκ. gives the 
idea of force having been used. So we 
have ‘obtorto collo ad preetorem trahor,’ 
Plaut. Poen. 111. 5. 45. Paul and Silas 
only are apprehended as having been the 
principal persons in the company. When 
De Wette says that, if Luke here were 
the narrator, he must say something of 
Timotheus, as he mentions him ch. xvii. 
14, xviii. 5,—and yet holds (on ver. 10) 
that Timotheus himself is the narrator, he 
forgets that the same reasoning will apply 
to “him also, if it applies at all, which 
I much doubt. When two persons of a 
company are described as being appre- 
hended, we do not need an express asser- 


for εζηλθ. aut. τ. w., Endeus εξηλθ. D xth-rom. 
om δὲ A! D-lat.—ws δε εἰδαν οἱ κυρ. τὴς πεδισκὴς οτι 


rec ins τὸν bef σιλ. (corrn for 
nAkvoay C: 


(ειπαν, so ABE H[e sil] δὲ p.) 
n6n L: sectam tol 


tion to assure us that the rest were not. 
ἐπὶ τ. ἄρχοντας said generally: they 
dragged them to the forum to the au- 
thorities,—afterwards specified as orpar- 
nyot. 20. στρατηγοῖς The Duum- 
viri of the colony, of whom at Capua Ci- 
cero says, ‘cum in ceteris coloniis Duum- 
viri appellentur, hi se Preetores (στρατ- 
nyovs) appellari volebant.’ De Leg. Agr. c. 
34. ‘ Messinenses,’ says Wetstein, ‘etiam 
nunc (cir. 1750) Preetorem sive Preefectum | 
urbis Stradigo appellant.’ The name, as 
a rendering of Pretor, had come from the 
Greek title of similar magistrates : so Aris- 
totle, Politic. vii. 3, ἐν ταῖς μικραῖς πόλεσι 
μία περὶ πάντων (ἀρχή): καλοῦσι δὲ στρατ- 
ηγοὺς καὶ πολεμάρχου“. *Ioud. ὑπάρ- 
χοντες .... Pop. οὖσιν] The distinction 
between ὑπάρχων and ὥν seems to he, 
that the former is used of something which 
the speaker or narrator wishes to put for- 
ward into notice, either as unknown to his 
reader or hearer, or in some way to be 
marked by him for praise or blame: 
whereas the latter refers to facts known 
and recognized, and taken for granted by 
both. Thus, we may notice that, when 
the fact of Paul and Silas being Romans 
is announced to the jailor, it is not ἀνθ. 
Ῥωμαίους ὄντας, but ὑπάρχοντας ; whereas 
here, both parties, the speakers and the 
addressed, being indisputably Romans, we 
have ‘ Ρωμαίοις οὖσιν. The account of this 
may be, that ὑπάρχω is predicated of some- 
thing of which the speaker informs the 
hearer, some prior knowledge which he 
possessed and now imparts,—eiui being 


182 IPAS 


"1 

Ὁ w. pres.,ch;* OUK 
(xxi. 27) 
XXli. 20. 
a att. xiv. 4 
al 

ec h. xv. 4. 
xxii. 18. 
Mark iv. 20. 
1 Tim. v. 19. 
Heb. xii. 6 
(from Prov. 
iii. 12) only. 
Exod. xxiit. 1. 

ἃ her« only +. 
Num. xvi. 3 
compl. 

2 here only t+. 
2 Mace. iv. 38 


pes. 
"ἔξεστιν ἡμῖν 


9S x 
οὖσιν. 2% Kal 


' ἀσφαλῶς 
λαβὼν " 


ΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


d , ς ” ᾿] » a x 
συνεπέστη O OYAOS KAT αὕτων, καὶ οἱ 


m lal 2 / 
τηρεῖν AUTOUS" 
» x; ᾽ \ > \ ο 3 ΄ h Vv \ \ 
ἔβαλεν αὐτοὺς els τὴν 5 ἐσωτέραν ὃ" φυλακὴν Kat 
τοὺς πόδας Ρ ἠσφαλίσατο αὐτῶν εἰς τὸ ξύλον. 


XVI. 


© παραδέχεσθαι οὐδὲ ποιεῖν “Ρωμαίοις 


c 


ἡ στρατηγοὶ “ περιρήξαντες αὐτῶν τὰ ἱμάτια ἐκέλενον 
Γῥαβδίζειν, 35 πολλάς τε ϑἐπιθέντες αὐτοῖς ὅ πληγὰς 
h bad > h / i a k ὃ / 
ἔβαλον εἰς ἢ duAaknv,' παρωγγείλαντες τῷ * δεσμοφύλακι 
) ἐ 


ἃ ΄ 
24 ὃς " παραγγελίαν τοιαύτην 


ζ \ 
25 τ κατὰ δὲ 


only. 
as - 9 < , rn Ἂ “ e/ 
rani dudg. TO © μεσονύκτιον Παῦλος καὶ Σίλας ¢ προςευχόμενοι ἃ ὕμνουν 
vi. 11. \ wile v2 A δὲ >, Kn cw 7 96 x ” 
p Luke x.30. ΤῸΡ θεόν" " ἐπηκροῶντο δὲ αὐτῶν οἱ “ δέσμιοι. “0 X ἄφνω 
ev. xxii. 
bh Matt. v. 25. xviii. 30. Luke xii. 58. xxiii. 19,25. Rev. ii. 10. (see Jer. xliv. [xxxvii.] 21. a i w. inf pres., 
ch. i. 4 reff. k here, ἄς. 366 only t+. ‘see Gen. xxxix. 21, ἄς.) = Mark xiv. ἣν (ch. 13. 36) 
only ¢. (Gen. xxxiv. 25 only.) Tobit vi. 4 (5) (not Nj. m = ch. x:i.5; 6 Ss n ch. v. 28 το τ 
o Heb. vi. 19 only. Levit. xvi. 2 (15). p Matt. xxvii. 64, 65,66 only. Isa. xli. 10. Wisd. xiii. 15. 
q = here only. Job xxxiii. 11 BN F &c. (not A). r= ch. xxvii. 27. Heb. iii. 8, from Ps. xciv. 8. 
s Mark xiii. 35. Luke xi. 5. ch. xX. Zonly. Ps. cxviii. 62. t absol., ch. x. 9 reff. Ὁ w. acc., Heb. 
ii. 12 only. Isa. xii. 4. Dan. iii. 23 Theod. absol., Matt. xxvi. 30!; Mk. only. 1 Mace. xili. 47. v here 
only +. Ὁ -ρόασις, 1 Kings xv. 22.) w Acts, here bis, ch. xxviil. 16 v. r., 17 al3. Matt. xxvii. 15, 


16 |; Mk. Paul, Eph. iii. T ald. 


Lucif,. 


Heb. x. 34. xiii. 3 only. Lam. iii. 34, 


x ch. ii. 2. xxvili. 6only. Josh. x. 9. 


a οὐκ εξ. nuas παραδεξασθαι ove ποι. pw. umapxovow D. 


22. Kat modus οχλ. συνεπεστησαν κατ avT. κραζοντες τοτε (και D8) οἱ Ὁ. 


(περιρηξ., So AB!'CDEH LN p 13.) 
23. for τε, δὲ Β p 40 E-lat copt. 
τηρεισθαι 1). 
24. for os, o δὲ D[-gr, qui D-lat]. 
txt ABCDE® a m p 18. 36. 40. 


ev Tw EvAw D al. 


"9 om το &.—kata δε μεσον της vuxtos D'(txt D3). 
ins kat bef οἱ δεσμ. Ο Orig. 


ins o bef σιλας C. 


predicated of the bare matter of fact. See 
ch. xvii. 27, 29; xxi. 20 (for both); xxii. 3; 
Gal. ii. 14 al, for ὑπάρχων : and for &r, 
John iii. 4; iv. 9 bis; Rom. v. 10 al. 
‘ Versute composita fuit heec criminatio ad 
gravandos Christi servos: nam ab una 
parte obtendunt Romanum nomen, quo 
nihil erat magis favorabile; rursum ex no- 
mine Judaico, quod tunc infame erat (espe- 
cially if the decree of Claudius, expelling 
them from Rome, ch. xviii. 2, had at this 
time been enacted) conflant illis invidiam : 
nam, quantum ad religionem, plus habe- 
bant Romani affinitatis cum aliis quibus- 
libet, quam cum gente Judaica. Calvin. 
21. ἔθη... ‘ Dio Cassius tells us 
that Meecenas gave the following : advice to 
Augustus :—T) μὲν θεῖον πάντη πάντως 
αὐτός τε σέβου κατὰ τὰ πάτρια, καὶ τοὺς 
ἄλλους τιμᾷν ἀνάγκαζε" τοὺς δὲ ξενίζον- 
τάς τι περὶ αὐτὸ καὶ μίσει καὶ κόλαζε" 
and the reason is alleged, viz. that such in- 
novations lead to secret associations, con- 
spiracies, and cabals, ἅπερ ἥκιστα μοναρ- 
xia συμφέρει." (C. and H. i. p. 356.) So 
Julius Paulus, Sentent. v. aL Ὁ, cited by 
Wetst., ‘Qui novas et usu vel ratione 
incognitas religiones inducunt, ex quibus 
animi bominum moveantur, honestiores de- 
portantur, humiliores eapite premuntur.’ 


for παραγγειλαντες, TapayyiAas Te XN}. 


rec (for AaBwv) e:Anpws, with HLP rel Chr: 
for εβαλεν, ελαβεν A. 
aha of order), with ΟΣ ΕΗ ΤΡ rel 36 Chr, : 


rec autwyv bef nod. 

txt ABC!N p 13. ησφαλισαντο 

ins o bef παυλος D Ὁ ο. 
δεσμοι D}(txt D3). 


22. The multitude probably cried 
out tumultuously, as on other occasions 
(see Luke xxiii. 18; ch. xix. 28, 34; xxi. 
30; xxii. 22, 23),—and the duumviri, with- 
out giving them a trial (ἀκατακρίτους, 
ver. 37), rent off their clothes, scil. by the 
lictors (τοῖς ῥαβδούχοις ἐκέλευσαν τὴν 
ἐσθῆτά τε περικαταῤῥῆξαι καὶ ταῖς ῥάβ- 
dos τὸ σῶμα ξαίνειν, Dion. Hal. ix. 39). 
The form was, ‘Summove, lictor, despolia, 
verbera,’ Seneca (C. and H. i. 357). See 
also Livy, ii. 8; Valer. Max. ii. 28, in 
Wetst. Erasmus fancied that the duum- 
viri rent their own clothes from indigna- 
tion: but, to say nothing of the impro- 
bability of such a proceeding on the part of 
a Roman magistrate, a man could not very 
well περιῤῥῆξαι his own garments 
24. τὸ ξύλον) Also called κᾶλον, ποδο- 
κάκη, and ποδοστράβη, and in Latin, 
nervus : so ‘noctu nervo vinctus custodi- 
bitur,’ Plaut. Cap. iii. 5. 71. Eusebius 
(v. 1, vol. ii. p. 16, ed. Heinichen) men- 
tions, speaking of the martyrs in Gaul, 
τὰς ἐν τῷ ξύλῳ διατάσεις τῶν ποδῶν ἐπὶ 
πέμπτον διατεινομένων τρύπημα. 

25. mposevx. ὕμν.) Not as E. V., ‘prayed 
and sang praises, ’—but, praying, sang 
praises, or in their prayers, were singing 
praises. ‘The distinction of modern times 


ABCDE 
HLPNa 
bedfg 
hkilm 
opld 





22 —30. ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATOSTOAON. 183 


\ 2 “ nn , 
δὲ ¥ σείσμος eyeveTo μέγας, ὥςτε ™ σαλευθῆναι τὰ δ᾽ θεμέλια ¥ — Matt. vii 
ΕἸ 5 Ξ: Ξ ps : - XXIv. 7. 
τοῦ “ δεσμωτηρίου' ἠνεώχθησαν δὲ ἃ παραχρῆμα αἱ θύραι Key). 
xxxvili. 19, 


27 8 ἔξυπνος δὲ z ch. 1y. 31 reff. 


a Ps. Ixxxi. 5. 


b ’ € i ΄ \ Ἂ Ν > ΄ \ b t. pl us 
γενόμενος ὁ ἱδεσμοφύλαξ καὶ ἰδὼν ἀνεῳγμένας Tas ὃ nent plu 


here only. 


Tagal, καὶ πάντων ta 5 δεσμὰ faved 
ὃ μὰ * ἀνέθη. 


΄ a A - ͵ ‘ ΄ 3 asc., Heb. 
θύρας τῆς φυλακῆς, *! σπασάμενος τὴν *™ μάχαιραν ἤμελλεν 3-10" Rev. 

- pa ᾿ ; xxi. 14, 19. 
ἑαυτὸν " ἀναιρεῖν, νομίζων ° ἐκπεφευγέναι τοὺς δ᾽ δεσμίους. ¢ Matt x12, 
28 ν ἐφώνησεν δὲ φωνῇ μεγάλῃ ὁ Παῦλος λέγων Μηδὲν Six. Bis. 
xl. 3,5 only. 


πράξῃς σεαυτῷ “κακόν: ἅπαντες yap ἐσμεν ἐνθάδε. ach. shi rel 
99 5 ie OY . t aA ΤΣ ͵ δ τ ὦ ν᾽ eneut. pl.,Luke 
29S αἰτήσας δὲ ‘hata “ εἰςεπήδησεν, καὶ ‘ ἔντρομος γενό- 


vill. 29. ch. 
xx. 23 only 7. 


΄ A , \ / \ δεσμοι, 
μενος “ προςέπεσεν τῷ Παύλῳ καὶ Lira, 59 καὶ  προ- (rani Pou. 
αγαγὼν αὐτοὺς ἔξω ἔφη Κύριοι, τί με δεῖ ποιεῖν ἵνα σωθῶ πος ἘΠ 
i 2 11, £0. 

1 δι Hae ΞῸῚ ae ἡ pe 3 Be eek cave 
40 (Eph. vi. 9. Heb. xui. 5, from Deut. xxxi. 6) only {. (Ezek. 1. 25 [261 A Ald. compl.) g here 
only+. Esdr. il. 3 only. heh. 1. 18 al. i ver. 23. k Mark xiv. 47. Num. xxu. 3l. 
las above (k) only. Josh. v. 13. m ch. x11. 2 reff. n= ch. v. 33 reff. o absol., Heb. 
li. 3. xit. 25 only. Isa. [τοὶ 7. (Rom. 1i.3 reff. Judg. vi. 11.) p Luke xxiii. 46. Rev. xiv. 18. 


= and constr., w. ποιέω, ch, ix. 13. r Luke xxiv. 41. John iv. 15,16. ch. x. 18. xvii. 6. xxv. 17 


24 only t+. s Matt. vu. 10. Luke i. 63. ch, xii. 20. xi. 21. ὃ Kings xix. 4.  - heie 
only. 1 Macc. xu.29. νυκτὸς ἐπιγενομενῆς φῶς ἔχων ὥςπερ νομίζεται. . . , Xen. Hellen. v. 1. 5. 
uhere only. Amosv.19only. Sus 26 Theod v -= ch. vii 32 reff. w το Mark 11. 


11. vii. 25. Luke v. 8. viil. 28, 47 |] Mk. (Matt. vil. 25; only. Ps. xciv. 6. x cn. xii. 6 reff. 


26. rec avewyf., with HLP rel Chr,: ἡνοιχθ. AEN p13 Orig, : txt BCD τὰ Thi-fin. 
rec for 2nd δε, τε (perhaps to avoid the recurrence of 5«,—perhaps because 

the copulative is more natural), with CHLP rel [vulg Syr eth arm] Chr: txt ABDEX 
ac'h km p18 syr coptt Thl-fin. om παραχρημα B Lucif,. ανελυθη D! 
[ velaxata sunt D-lat} δὲ]. 

27. for εξ. δε, kat εξ. Ὁ Syr eth. 
C vulg(not am demid fuld [tol}). 
AKHLP® p? 13. 36 rel Chr: ins BCD pl. 
ανελειν ΟἹ, εκπεφυγεναι A. ; 

28. wey. bef φωνη AB D-lat am [fuld tol] coptt.—avaos bef μεγ. φων. B [vulg 
Syr (copt) Lucif].—om o BC! 13 Thi-sif. toons KE. ins τι bef κακον D-gr. 

29. φωτα δε ετησας D. for yev., urapxwv ΟἹ D-gr c k? 40. aft mposer. 
ins προς τοὺς todas D!{and lat] vulg (syr-w-ob) [copt] sah Lucif). rec ins tw bef 
σιλα (corrn for uniformity), with ACZ7EHLPR p 13[e sil] 36 rel. om BC'D. 

30. «. mponyaryev aut. εξω D: add tous λοιπους ασφαλισαμενος καὶ D(om και D-corr) 
syr-w-ast(adding further appropinquavit).—mpoaywr ὃν. for epy, εἰπεν autos 
D coptt [Syr eth]. 


decuopvaas(sic) &. “r. Oup. bef avewy. 
ins καὶ bef σπασ. D-gr!. rec om την, with 
(ημελλ., so ABCELPR p.) 


between prayer and praise, arising from neither Meyer, De Wette, nor Kuinoel 


our attention being directed to the shape 
rather than to the essence of devotion, was 
unknown in these days: see Col. iv. 2. 

‘Nihil crus sentit in nervo, quum 
animus in ceelo est.’ Tertullian ad Mar- 
tyres, ¢.: 2, vol. 1. p. 623. The 
imperfects shew that they were singing, 
and the prisoners (in the outer prison) 
listening, when the earthquake happened. 

26. πάντων τὰ Seopa ἀνέθη] 1. 6. 
of all the prisoners in the prison: see be- 
low (ver. 28), ἅπαντες γάρ ἐσμεν ἐνθάδε. 
Doubtless there were gracious purposes in 
this for those prisoners, who before were 
listening to the praises of Paul and Silas ; 
and the very form of the narrative, men- 
tioning this listening, shews subsequent 
communication between some one of these 
and the narrator. Their chains were 
loosed, not by the earthquake, but by 
miraculous interference over and above 
it. It is some satisfaction to find, that 


have attempted to rationalize this won- 
derful example of the triumph of prayer. 
See some excellent remarks on Baur’s 
attempt to do so, in Neander, Pfl. u. L. 
p- 302, note 3. 27. ἤμελ. ἑαυτ. 
ἀναιρ.1 The law de Custodia Reorum 
(Wetst.) says, ‘Ad commentariensem 
receptarum personarum custodia obser- 
vatioque pertineat, nec putet, hominem 
abjectum atque vilem objiciendum esse 
judici, si reus modo aliquo fuerit elapsus. 
Nam ipsum volumus hujusmodi pene 
consumi, cui obnoxius docebitur fuisse, qui 
fugerit.’ Dean Howson notices, by the 
examples of Cassius, Brutus, Titinius, and 
many of the proscribed, after the battle,— 
that Philippi is famous in the annals of 
suicide (p. 361). 29. φῶτα] Not as 
F. V., ‘a light,’ but lights, neut. plur. : 

30. rpoay. ait. ἔξω] Into the outer prison : 
not perhaps yet outside the prison, which 
(from ἀναγαγών, ver. 34, when he takes 


184 


Υ ch. ix. 42 


reff. 

zch. x. 2 reff. 

ach. xi. 19 reff. 

b = John xix. 
16. ch. xxi. 
24. xxiii. 18. 

ech. xxiii. 23. 

ἃ ch. ix. 37 reff. 

e = Heb.x. 22. q 
Sir. xxx. 
(xxxiv.) 25. > ᾿Ξ, , 

fch. iii. Treff. αὐτοῦ TWAVTES 

g ch. ix. 39 reff. 


f 


TIPASEIS AHOSTOAON. 


XVL 


. 7 » lal 

31 of δὲ εἶπαν YTlictevoov ¥ ἐπὶ τὸν κύριον ᾿Τησοῦν, καὶ 
/ \ ¢e 3 / 

σωθήσῃ σὺ Kal ὁ ὅ οἶκός σου. 


32 καὶ ὃ ἐλάλησαν αὐτᾷ 


Ν / la) / lad a A / > a 
τὸν ὃ λόγον τοῦ κυρίου, σὺν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἐν TH οἰκίᾳ αὐτοῦ. 
33 Ἂν Ὁ \ ’ \ > 2 / Ac ff a c \ 

καὶ ἢ παραλαβὼν αὐτοὺς ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ “ ὥρᾳ τῆς ° νυκτὸς 

» e 3 \ - ; a“ \ 2 / 0 rd Ν \ ε 
ἔλουσεν “ ἀπὸ τῶν πληγῶν, καὶ ἐβαπτίσθη αὐτὸς καὶ οἱ 
lel / ᾽ \ > 
παραχρῆμα, °*8 ἀναγαγών τε αὐτοὺς εἰς 


=e ark vill \ 3 / - / \ - 9 lal 
De. TOV οἶκον " παρέθηκεν ἱ τράπεζαν καὶ * ἠγαλλιᾶτο | παν- 
Vi. 22. \ om \ a θ A Shae , δὲ n , 
ΞΕ ars OLKEL TTETTLOTEVKWS TW εῳ. NMEPAaS ε YEVOMEVIS 
2 nV Ἂν 
Ps, ae 20. k ch. ii. 26 reff. lhere onlv. Exod. i.1 Bcompl. only. Jos. Antt. iv. 4. 4. 
m dat., = ch. xviii. 8. John vy. 24. viii. 31. Rom. iv. 3, from Gen. xv. 6. Tit. iii. 8. 1 John y. 10. n ch. 
xii. 18 reff. 


31. (ειπαν, so AB C(appy) DE® p.) 


for em, εἰς E lect-12. 


πιστευσαν SN}, 


rec aft imoovy ins xpiotov, with CDEHLP rel 36 [syrr sah eth arm] Thdrt, 


Chr,: om ABN p 18 vulg copt Lucif). 
32. om του D. 


for κυρ., θεου BR}. 


ins tas bef ο οἰκος Ea g 13 eth arm. 
rec (for συν) ka (alteration for 


sinplicity, and to suit ov καὶ o ox. above), with EHL syrr [copt eth arm] Chr: txt 
ABCDPR p 18. 36. 40 vulg Lucif, (cup & p). 


_ 98. ελυσεν D! (and lat: txt D?). 


autos bef εβ. D. 


ins οἰκειοι bef avtov 


A; voc m lect-17: wer Thi-fin.—o oxos αὐτου 40 vulg. (These exx may serve to 


illustrate the practice of insertion to fill up any ellipsis.) 
34. και αναγ. τε D1[-gr]: αν. δε C 13. 36 copt syr. 

ADEHLNX 18 rel vss Chr: om BCP ὁ p 36. 40 [Chr, ] Lucif}. 

[aft παρεθ. ins αὑτοῖς E vulg Syr coptt arm. ] 


D:. 


απαντες BX [Ὁ]. 
rec aft οὐκ. ins αὐτου, with 
ins καὶ bef παρεθηκεν 
ree ηγαλλίιασατο (alteration 


to more usual historic tense), with ABC? E-gr HLN p 13. 36 rel vulg copt [eth arm 


Lucif, 1 ‘thl-fin: txt C'(appy) DP b g h mo E-lat syrr sah Chr Thl-sif. 
mavoixt, with B?HLP rel: συν tw οἰκω avtov D: om E: txt AB!CN 13. 


θεω, ext Tov θεὸν [in domino] 10. 


them to his own house) seems to have been 
underground, or at all events on a lower 
level in the same building. In this same 
space they seem to have been joined Ly 
the jailor’s family,—to have converted and 
baptized them, and to have been taken (to 
the well?) and washed from their stripes ; 
and afterwards to have been led up (by 
stairs ἢ see ref.) to his house, and _ hos- 
pitably entertained. The circumstantiality 
of the account shews that some eye-witness 
related it. His question, connected with 
the ὁδὸν σωτηρίας of the demoniac in 
ver. 17, makes it necessary to infer, as De 
Wette well observes, that he had previously 
become acquainted with the subject of their 
preaching. He wanted no means of escape 
from any danger but that which was spi- 
ritual: the earthquake was past, and his 
prisoners were all safe. Bengel admirably 
remarks: ‘ Non audierat bymnos Pauli, nam 
dormierat, sed tamen vel antea vel postea 
senserat, quis esset Paulus.’ 31. ἐπὶ 
τ. κύριον] Not without allusion to the 
κύριοι, by which name he had just addressed 
them. So Bengel: ‘uon agnoscunt se do- 
minos.’ Considering who the person 
was that asked the question,—a heathen in 
the depths of ignorance and sin,—and how 
indisputably therefore the answer embraces 
all sinners whatever,—there perhaps does 
not stand on record in the whole book a 
more important answer than this of Paul: 


rec 
for Tw 


—or, I may add, one more strikingly cha- 
racteristic of the Apostle himself and his 
teaching. We may remark also, in the 
face of all attempts to establish a develop- 
ment of St. Paul’s doctrine according to 
mere external circumstances,—that this 
reply was given before any one of his 
extant epistles was written. Kal 6 
οἶκός σου does not mean that his faith 
would save his household,—but that the 
sane way was open to them as to him: 
‘ Believe, and thou shalt be saved: and the 
same of thy household.’ 33. ἔλουσεν 
ἀπό] A pregnant construction: ‘ washed 
them, so that they were purified from the 
blood occasioned by their stripes τ᾿ see reff. 
This is much more natural than to take 
ἀπό (as in ἀπὸ τῆς χαρᾶς (ch. xii. 14) 
and the like) as signifying ‘on account of” 
(see Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 225). 
34.| avay., see reff. and note on ver. 30. 
πεπιστευκώς) Winer renders ‘as 
one who has placed his trust’ in God ? bi.', 
as De W. observes, πεπιστευκώς must give 
the ground of his rejoicing (see 1 Cor. 
xiv. 18 (rec.), εὐχαριστῶ... λαλῶν, “1 
give thanks ...that 1 speak’). ‘Thus the 
meaning will be, rejoiced that he with all 
his house had been led to believe (and 
thus as a necessary consequence to believe 
in) God. The expression πεπιστ. τῷ θεῷ 
could only be used of a converted heathen, 
not of a Jew: in ch. xviil. 8, of a Jew, 








———————————— St 


«“εἰρη- 
νη C. 
ABDE 
HLPRa 
bedfg 
hkim 
opls 


31—38. 


TIPASEIS ATIOSTOAON. 


185 


3 , Εν Ὁ \ \ ε ΄, 7 ᾿ 290 
ἀπέστειλαν ol ὃ στρατηγοὶ Tous P ῥαβδούχους, NEYOVTES © vv. 20, 22 


«᾿Απόλυσον τοὺς ἀνθρωπους ἐκείνους. 
ὁ ᾿δεσμοφύλαξ τοὺς λόγους τούτους πρὸς τὸν Παῦλον, 
« 9 > / e 0 \ “ 4 ᾽ a t n 
ὅτι " ἀἁπέσταλκαν οἱ “ στρατηγοὶ ἴα YatroAvOnTe * νῦν 
S 3 f ’ θ 5 u >) id 
οὖν ἐξελθόντες πορεύεσθε ἐν ἃ εἰρήνῃ. 
πρὸς αὐτοὺς " Δείραντες ἡμᾶς ἡ δημοσίᾳ * ἀκατακρίτους, 
¥ ἀνθρώπους ἡ Ρωμαίους * ὑπάρχοντας, * ἔβαλαν εἰς * φυ- 
Lakh, καὶ νῦν ἡ λάθρα ἡμᾶς “ ἐκβάλλουσιν; ἃ οὐ γὰρ 

/ al 5 
ἀλλὰ ἐλθόντες αὐτοὶ ἡμᾶς ° ἐξαγαγέτωσαν. 38 ἀπήγγειλαν 


(-ιος, ch. v. 18.) 
ch. xxii, 25. (Matt. xxvil. 32. ch. xxi. 39. Exod. ii. 11.) 


w ch. xviii. 28. xx. 20 only+. 2 Macc. vi. 10 only. 
ἘΞ. ΟΣ δὲ 


y 
Ὁ Matt. 1. 19. ii. 7, Jolin xi. 28 only. 
i see note. 


xxi. 10, d here only. 


2 > / 2 ver. 38 only t. 
36 ἀπήγγειλεν δὲ δ κεν 
32 reff. 
r ver. 23. 
s constr., Johrm 
Wiel te 
1 John iv. 9. 
t ch. x. 33 reff. 
uw. ἐν, 1 Cor, 
xvi. 11 reff. 
2 Kings iii. 
21. εἷς, 
Mark v. 34. 
Luke vii. 50 


37 ὁ δὲ Παῦλος ἔφη 


ν ch. ν. 40 reff. 

x ch, xxii. 25 only +. 

z ch. ii. 30 reff. a vv. 23, 24. 

c Matt. ix. 25. ch. ix. 40. Gal. iv. 30, from Gen. 
e=ch.y.19. vii. 36. Gen. xl. 14. 


35. nu. δε γεν. συνῆλθον οἱ σστρατηγοι(β10) ert TO αὑτὸ ELS THY αγοραν και αναμνησ- 
Oevtes Tov σεισμον Tov ὙεγΎονοτα ἐφοβηθησαν και απεστειλαν Tovs D syr-mg. 


λεγοντας D 68. 


at end ins ous ex@es παρελαβες D syr. 


36. καὶ εἰδελθων ο δεσμοφυλαξ amnyy. D[, et cum audivisset custos carceris ingressus 


dixit | Syr. for δε, re K-gr sah eth. 


om τουτοὺυς (from similarity of endings) 


BC D-gr a 36(sic) [arm(appy)]: ins AEHLPN p 18 rel vulg D-lat [(Syr) syr coptt | 


Chr,. 


37. om mp. avrous E eth. 


we have ἐπίστευσεν τῷ κυρίῳ. 35. | 
What had influenced the magistrates is 
not recorded. We can hardly suppose 
that the earthquake alone (as sugyested 
by the addition in D: see digest) would 
have done so, as they would not have 
counected it with their prisoners; they 
may have heard what had taken place: 
but that, again, is hardly probable. I 
should rather set it down to calmer 
thought, repudiating the tumultuary pro- 
ceeding of the evening before. ῥαβὸ- 
οὔχους)] The lictors,—‘bearers of the 
rods,’ bacilli ; which, and not fasces, were 
carried before the colonial duumviri: see 


Cicero, de Leg. Agr. ubi supra, on ver. 20.: 


36.] Paul and Silas had returned to 
the prison: whither the jailor goes, accom- 
panied by the lictors (6 δὲ Π. ἔφη mp. 
αὐτούς, ver. 37), to announce the order. 

37.] δημοσίᾳ and λάθρα are op- 
posed: the znjury had been pudlie: the 
reparation, not to Paul and Silas merely, 
but to the Gospel of which they were the 
heralds, must be public also. avOp. 
‘Pop. ὑπάρχ.] By the Lex Valeria, passed 
A.U.C. 254, and the Lex Porcia, a.u.c. 506, 
Roman citizens were exempted from stripes 
and torture: by the former, till an appeal 
to the people was decided,—by the latter, 
absolutely. The following passages of Cicero 
illustrate our text: ‘ Porcia lex virgas ab 
omnium civium Romanorum corpore amo- 
vit.’ Pro Rabirio, c. 3. ‘ Cedebatur virgis 
in medio foro Messane civis Romanus, 
judiees : cum interea nullus gemitus, nulla 


rec απεσταλκασιν (grammatical corrn), with DEHLP rel 36 Chr: απε- 
στειλαν C p [ Thl-fin]: txt ABN. (18 def.) 
ins αναιτειους bef Sep. D. 

aut. nuas bef ελθοντ. E: om qu. HP. 
38. rec avnyy., with HLP rel [Thl-sif] : 


for ev e1p., εἰς ιρηνὴν &: om D. 
( βαλαν, so BDN.) 


txt ABDEX a mo p 36 Thl-fin. (13 def.) 


vox alia istius miseri, inter dolorem crepi- 
tumque virgaram audiebatur, nisi hee: 
Civis Romanus sum.’ In Verrem, lib. v. 
62, 63. ‘ Facinus est vinciri civem Ro- 
manum ; scelus verberari; prope parrici- 
dium, necari.’ Ibid.66. Many others are 
given by Kuinoel, Biscoe, &e. . On the 
question, how Paul came to be born a Ro- 
man citizen, see note on ch. xxii. 28: and 
on ὕπάρχ., note, ver. 20. Another 
irregularity had been committed by the 
duumviri, in scourging them uncondemned : 
‘causa cognita multi possunt absolvi: in- 
cognita quidem condemnari nemo potest.’ 
Cic. in Verr. i. 9.‘ Inauditi et indefensi 
tanquam innocenter perierant,’ Tac. Hist. 
ii. 10. ἐκβάλλ.] are they thrusting 
us out? It does not.follow, because 
ἐκβάλλω has no such sense in ch. ix. 40, 
&c., that therefore it has not here. The 
circumstances must determine ; which here 
seem to require this sense: the ἐκβάλλειν 
λάθρα having a tinge of degradation in it, 
us if said of casting out that of which one 
is ashamed. ov γάρ] An elliptical an- 
swer to a question or position, the negative 
of which is self-evident: see Hartung, 
Partikellehre, ii. p. 48: Kiihner, Gramm. 
§ 741. 6: Hermann on Viger, p. 462. 
When it occurs with ἀλλά, it is best written 
without a stop between : cf. Aristoph. Ran. 
58: μὴ σκῶπτέ Ww, ὦ ᾿᾽δέλφ᾽" οὐ γὰρ GAN 
ἔχω Kakws:—ib. 193: μὰ τὸν A? οὐ γὰρ 
(scil. νεναυμάχηκα) ἀλλ᾽ ἔτυχον ὀφθαλ- 
μιῶν, and 499, φέρε δὴ ταχέως αὔτ᾽" οὐ 
γὰρ ἀλλὰ πειστέον. Mr. Humphry re- 


186 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATMOSTOAON: XVI. 39, 40: 
Γ δε. 85... δὲ τοῖς ᾿στρατηγοῖς οἱ ' ῥαβδοῦχοι τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα: 
Ε pres., Mar 3 , \ > , “ ὯΝ ὧν ᾽ 

v.14) John ἐφοβήθησαν δὲ ἀκούσαντες ὅτι “Ῥωμαῖοί ὅ εἰσιν, 89 καὶ 


ch. iv. 13. ix 


- , ΄ > ΄ \ ᾽ ͵ ; , 
ch Nite ak ἐλθόντες ἢ παρεκάλεσαν αὐτούς, Kat “ἐξαγαγόντες ' ἠρώ- 


Winer,edn. τῶν Κὶ ἀπελθεῖν Κἀπὸ τῆς πόλεως. 40 ἐξελθόντες δὲ 
riham? ἐς τῆς φυλακῆς ἱ᾿εἰςῆλθον πρὸς τὴν Λυδίαν, καὶ 
ἐτοῖν it νι m ἰδόντες " παρεκάλεσαν τοὺς ἀδελφούς, καὶ ° ἐξῆλθον. 
chun. 3... XVIT. 10 Διοδεύσαντες δὲ τὴν ᾿Αμφίπολιν καὶ ᾿Απολ- 


xxini. 18. " ᾿ 

1 Thess. y. 12 only. w. ἵνα, Mark vii. 26. Luke vii. 36. w. ὁπῶὼς, ch. xxiii. 20, 
] w. προς, ch. xi. 3 reff. m = Luke vii. 20. ch xxvii. 20 al. 4 Kings vili. 29. 
o = ch. xy. 40 reff. p Luke vin. 1 only. Isa. hx. 8. 


for Ist δε, re E-gr δὲ Syr eth. for τοις, αὑτοῖς οι D?. aft ravta 
ins Ta pnOevta προς τους στρατηγους 1), simly] Syr. rec kat edoB. (corrn to more 
natural copula), with EHLP rel vulg [syrr sah eth] Chr: txt ABN p 36. 40 copt.—oa 
δε ακουσαντες oT. pw. εἰσ. εφυβηθ. 1), simly Syr]. 

39. for κι ελθοντ., και παραγενόμενοι μετα φιλων πολλῶν εἰς τὴν φυλακὴν D [137 syr 
also add εἰς τ. φυλ.]. npwrovv A Thi-fin: -τησαν E. rec (for ἀπελθεῖν ato) 
efeAOew, with HLP rel Chr: εξελθ. ex (D)E: εξελθ. απὸ a: txt ABN p 18. 36. 40.— 
παρεκαλεσαν avtous εξελθειν εἰποντες ἡγνοήσαμεν Ta Καθ vas, OTL ETT AL avdpes δικαιοι 
(syr thus far w-ast) καὶ εξαγαγοντες5 παρεκαλεσαν avTous AcyovTes EK TNS TOAEWS TAVTHS 
εξελθατε μηποτε παλιν συντραφωσιν ἡμειν επικραζοντες καθ vuwy D, simly 137 [syr]. 

40. for ex, aro BN a h 38 Thil-fin. nadov D E-lat. rec for προς, es 
(see note: and cf Mark v.12, 13): txt ABDEHLPN rel vulg sah arm Chr ΤῊ]. 
rec Wort. τ. adeAd. Tapek. avtovs, With EHLP rel 36 vulg syrr sah zth [arm] Chr: 
txt ABN p 13.40 copt.—1d τ. a8. διηγησαντο οσα εποιῆσεν κυριος QUTOLS παρεκαλεσαντες 
(mapaxadeour(sic) τε D-corr) avrous καὶ Ὁ. εξηλθαν DR. 


Cuap. XVII. 1. διελθοντες E. for αμφιπ.. πολιν N'(txt N-corr’). ins τὴν 
bef απολλ. (for uniformity) ABEX a p13: om (D)HL[P] rel.—rtnv απ. κ. τὴν aug. Εἰ. 


k = Mark νυν. 17. 


n -= ch. xv. 32 reff. 
Gen. xi. 17, 


και κατηλθον (om καὶ D-corr: κατηλθ. και D*) εἰς ἀπολλωνιδα κακειθεν εἰς Dz. 


marks, ‘St. Paul submitted to be scourged 
by his own countrymen (five times, 2 Cor. 
xi. 24): for, though he might have pleaded 
his privilege as a Roman, to the Jews he 
«became as a Jew,” observing their cere- 
monies, and submitting to their law.’ 
38. ébo8.| For the account which they 
might have to give at Rome, as in Verres’ 
case, or even for their popularity with the 
very mob of Roman citizens who had de- 
manded the punishment. 39. παρ- 
exadecav | Not ‘comforted :’ but, as E. V., 
besought them: viz. not to make their 
treatment matter of legal complaint. In 
the request to depart from the city, the 
preetors seem to shew fear of a change in 
the temper of the mob. See the curious 
addition in the var. readd. 40.) They 
do not depart hastily, or as though forced, 
but wait to reassure the brethren. πρός 
has probably been altered to eis, on account 
of the verb, not because Λυδίαν was mis- 
taken (Meyer) forthe country of that name. 
mapex.| exhorted, is better than 
“comforted, E.V. The one in this case 
would imply the other. Cnap. XVII. 
1.] Here (or rather perhaps at ἐξῆλθον, in 
the preceding verse) we have the first per- 
son again dropped,—implying apparently 
that the narrator did not accompany Paul 
and Silas. I should be inclined to think 


that Timotheus went with them from 
Philippi,—not, as is usually supposed, 
jomed them at Bercea: see below on ver. 
10. διοδεύσαντες)] The ddds, on 
which they travelled from Philippi to Thes- 
salonica, was the Via Egnatia, the Mace- 
donian continuation of the Via Appia, and 
so named from Egnatia (‘ Gnatia lymphis 
iratis exstructa,’ Hor. Sat. i. 5), in the 
neighbourhood of which the latter meets 
the Adriatic. It extended from Dyrrha 
chium in Epirus to the Hebrus in Thrace, 
a distance of 500 miles. The stages here 
mentioned are thus particularized in the 
itineraries: Philippi to Amphipolis, 33 
miles: Amphipolis to Apollonia, 30 miles: 
Apollonia to Thessalonica, 37 miles. See 
more particulars in C.and H., i. pp. 368 ff. 

᾿Αμφίπολιν] Anciently called ἐννέα 
ὁδοί, Thucyd. i. 100. Herod. vii. 114, lying 
in a most important position, at the end 
of the lake Cercinitis, formed by the Stry- 
mon, commanding the only easy pass from 
the coast of the Strymonic gulf into Mace- 
donia. (‘ Amphipoleos, quee objecta claudit 
omnes ab oriente sole in Macedoniam adi- 
tus,’ Liv.xlv. 30.) In consequence of this, 
the Athenians colonized the place, calling 
it Amphipolis, ἐπ᾿ ἀμφότερα περιῤῥέοντος 
τοῦ Στρυμόνος, Thue. iv. 102. It was the 
spot where Brasidas was killed, and for 


ABDE 

HLPx a 
bedfg 
hklm 
opl3 


ΧΎΊΤΙ. 1—4. 


’ 5 ’ " e 
λωνίαν ἦλθον εἰς Θεσσαλονίκην, ὅπον ἣν [ἡ] συναγωγὴ 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAQON. 


187 
Luke iy. 16. 
Num. xxiv. 1 


as above (q). 


A , , Ω \ \ \ > \ a ͵ ἘΞ 
τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων. 3 4 κατὰ δὲ τὸ “' εἰωθὸς τῷ Παύλῳ εἰςῆλθεν * shore) 


\ > \ \ » Ν ΄ 4 al 
πρὸς αὐτοὺς καὶ "ἐπὶ σάββατα τρία * διελέγετο αὐτοῖς 
b] \ lal a Ὁ \ 
“ato τῶν ‘ypadov ° διανοίγων καὶ * παρατιθέμενος. "" 


15. Mark 
x. 1 only. 
Sir. xxxvii. 


ch. xiii. 31 


77 \ \ y δ θ ry Nn an 7.5 an reff. 
OTt TOV XK Plo TOV €0€L TAVELY και αναστήναυν ΕΚ νέκρων, t= ver. 17. 


\ fod a = , » < \ Εις lal ἃ » \ b 

καὶ OTL *oUTOS ἐστιν ὁ χριστὸς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ὃν ἐγὼ ἢ καταγ- 
, ς a 4 / 5 ᾿] lal Cc »} / εἶ d 

γέλλω ὑμῖν. Kal τινες ἐξ αὐτῶν © ἐπείσθησαν καὶ προς- 34, 


ch. xviii. 19. 
ΧΕ ial. 
Acts only, 
exc. Mark ix, 
Heb. 


ΟΣ : ἊΝ vil. 5. Jude 
9. Fxod. vi. 27. 2 Mace. xi. 20. u = ch. xxviii. 29. v = plur. absol., John v. 39. ver. 
11. ch. xviii. 24, 28 al. Paul, Rom. xv. 4. 1 Cor. xv. 3, 4 only. w = Luke xxiv. 32. (ch. vii. 56 


x Matt. xiii. 24, 31. 


reff.) 
a ch. ix. 20 reff. 


z= ch. x. 41 reff. 
d here only +. T@.. 


ins τὴν bef θεσσαλ. B 104. 
EHLP rel [arm-ms] Chr ΤῊ]. 
2. και κατα D'(and lat) [Syr] eth. 
[E-lat arm] Syr eth. om και D 


Exod. xix. 7. 


e:owbos(sic) [ D!-gr]. 
[sah ]. 


w. OTL, here only. 


Ly y = ch. iv. 12 reff. 
b ch. xiii. 5 reff. 


ce absol., ch. xxi. 14 reff. 


. πατρὶ THY ὅλων προςκεκληρωμένοι, Philo de Fortit. 3 7, vol. ii. p. 381. 


om 7 (see note) ABDX p 13. 40 [copt]}: ins 


o παυλος D vulg 
διελεξατο (alteration to historic 


aorist) ABX p13 [syrr copt]: διελεχθη 1) E-gr ὁ 36. 40 Chr-comm, : txt HLP rel vulg 


E-lat [sah eth arm] Chry. 


for amo, ex D. 


3. om toy D!(ins D*) [τ. xp. aft εδει m 40 Syr arm(Tischdf) Thl-fin]. 


rec 


o xp. ino., omg 2nd 6, with HLP 13 rel ΤῊ] : xp. no. AD p Chr,: mo. ο yp. Ec fh 
Chr,: ino. xp. &: [ Chr. Jes. am demid tol syr sah eth arm-ed: Jes. Chr. vulg-ed 


Syr copt arm-mss:] txt B. 


previously failing to succour which Thucy- 
dides was exiled: see Thucyd. iv. and 
v.,and Grote’s Hist. of Greece, vol. vi. 
p- 625 ff., where there is a plan of Amphi- 
polis. After this it was a point of conten- 
tion between the Athenians and Philip, and 
subsequently became the capital of Mace- 
donia Prima,—see Livy. xlv. 30, where 
Paulus Amilius proclaims, at Amphipolis, 
the freedom and territorial arrangements 
of Macedonia. It is now called Emboli. 
᾿Απολλωνίαν͵ Its situation is unknown, 
but was evidently (see the distances above 
given) inland, not quite half-way from Am- 
phipolis to Thessalonica, where the road 
crosses from the Strymonic to the Thermaic 
gulf. Leake saw some ruins at about the 
right spot, but did not visit them: and 
Cousinéry mentions seeing, on an opposite 
hill, the village of Polina. Pliny mentions 
it (N. H. iv. 10), ‘regio Mygdonie sub- 
jacens, in qua recedentes a mare Apollonia, 
Arethusa.’ It must not be confounded 
with a better known Apollonia near Dyr- 
rhachium, on the western coast, also on the 
Via Egnatia. See C. and H. i. pp. 376 f. 
Θεοσαλονίκην] At this time the 
capital of the province Macedonia, and the 
residence of the proconsul (Macedonia had 
been an imperial, but was now a senatorial 
province). Its former names were Emathia, 
Halia, and Therma: it received its name 
of Thessalonica from Cassander, on his re- 
building and embellishing it, in honour of 
his wife Thessalonica, sister of Alexander 
the Great. So Strabo, lib. vii. excerpt. 10: 
who, ib. excerpt. 8, calls it Θεσσαλονικεία. 
It was made a free city after the battle of 


Philippi: and every thing in this narrative 
is consistent with the privileges and state 
of an urbs libera. We read of its δῆμος 
ver. 5, and its πολιτάρχαι ver. 6: not, as 
at the Roman colony of Philippi, of ῥαβδ- 
οὔχοι (lictors), and στρατηγοί (duum- 
viri), ch. xvi. 20, 35. It has ever been an 
important and populous city, and still con- 
tinues such (pop. 70,000), being the second 
city in European Turkey, under the slightly 
corrupted name of Saloniki. For a notice 
of the church there, see Prolegg. to first Ep. 
to the Thessalonians, § ii. [ἢ ovvay. | 
The article is in all probability genuine: 
implying that there was no other syna- 
gogue for the towns lately traversed: and 
shewing the same minute acquaintance 
with the peculiarities of this district as our 
narrative has shewn since the arrival at 
Neapolis. 2. κατὰ τ. eiw8.] See marg. 
reff. in E. V Paul was most probably 
suffering still from his ‘shameful treatment’ 
at Philippi, 1 Thess. ii. 2 διελέγ.] 
argued, see reff. ἀπὸ τ. ypad. is best 
taken with διελέγ., not with διανοίγων : see 
reff. 8. ὅτι οὗτος ....] See ex- 
amples of the change of construction. ch. 
1.4; xxili.22; Luke v. 14. The render- 
ing is nearly as E. V., literally, that this is 
the Christ, namely, Jesus. whom I preach 
urto you. SoMeyer. The 6 χριστός takes 
up τὸν χριστόν above, and attaches to 
6 Ἰησοῦς the office concerning which this 
necessity of suffering, &c., was predicated. 

Even the particularity of this παθεῖν. 
(ἀπέθανεν) κ. ἀναστῆναι is reproduced in, 
1 Thess. iv. 14. 4. προςεκληρώθ.] 
were added (as if by lot, that being deter« 


188 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XVII. 
ὁ ch, xiii 48 εκληρώθησαν τῷ Παύλῳ καὶ τῷ Lira, τῶν Te " σεβομένων ABDE 
τ Ξ Matt. xxii. Ra 


, a Le “-“ , 
Ἑλλήνων πλῆθος πολύ, γυναικῶν τε τῶν 'ἱ πρώτων ὅ οὐκ dea fg 
5 h f δὲ of Πουδαὴ Vag , hklm 
ζηλώσαντες δὲ οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖσε καὶ ‘mposdaBo- opis 
x. 13. aA 
gch. χη Ἰ8 τοῦ, wevos TOV * ἀγοραίων ἄνδρας τινὰς πονηροὺς Kat | ὀχλο- 


38. Luke xy. 
22. ch. xiii. 


ΩΣ 
50 reff. Dan. 8 oNlyat. 


h = ch. vii. 9 
\ / \ , A“ 

it svi, ποιήσαντες ™ ἐθορύβουν τὴν πόλιν, Kal " ἐπιστάντες TH 
26. Matt.xvi, Ὁ, oF » ο δ» 3 +. a > \ q δῇ 
zim οἰκίᾳ ᾿Ιάσονος ° ἐζήτουν αὐτοὺς P προαγαγεῖν εἰς τὸν 4 δῆμον" 

corr ἵ , \ > \ # \ ὦ 7 ΄ 
αὐ βου, 9 μὴ εὑρόντες δὲ αὐτοὺς ' ἔσυρον [τὸν] ᾿Ιάσονα καί τινας 
xix. 38) s 2 \ ΛΟ \ t / ἃ a . ς ‘ 
only t. ἀδελφοὺς ἐπὶ τοὺς " πολιτάρχας, “BowvTes OTL οἱ THY 
pte 

141 al. (see 


Yol tyny © ἀναστατώσαντες * ov αἱ Y ἐνθάδε πάρεισ 
Wetstein.)  OLKOUMEVNV “ναστατω ς * οὗτοι Kal ¥ EVO AOE TAPELO LD, 


ma Mate ia. ὦ Mk. ch. xx. 10 only. Judg. iii. 26. Nahum ii. 3. Wisd. xviii. 19. Sir. xl. 6 only. (-βος, ch. xxi. 34. 
n ch. vi. 12. (absol.) Jer. xxi. 2. o=ch, xili. 8 reff. p = ch. xii. 6 reff. q ch. xii. 22 reff. 
rch. viii. 3 reff. s = ch. ix. 30 reff. t here bis only +t. u ch. viii. 7 al. Υ = ch. 

xxiv. 5. : wch, xxi. 38 Gal.v.12L.P. Dan. vii. 23 LXX. Ps. x. 1 Aq. x ch. ix. 20 reff. 
y ch. xvi. 28 reff. 

4. emotevoay Ec 18. 40. om 2nd tw B. aft τω siAata(sic) ins Ty διδαχὴ 
πολλοι, omg Te, D. ins καὶ bef eAAnvwv AD 18, 40 vulg copt. rec πολ. 
bef 7A., with HLP rel Chr, Thl-sif: txt ABDEN a c ἢ k mp 18 vulg arm Chr, 
Thl-fin. for γυν. Te, και γυναικες Ὁ. 

5. rec ins απειθουντες bef τουδαιοι, with Db k 0; ins οἱ απειθ, aft ιουδ, HLPadfghm, 
and aft καὶ mposAa8. ὁ 137: om AB [E(but see below)] δὲ p 18. 36. 40. 142 vulg syrr 
coptt [eth-pl] arm.—om ζγλωσαντες and καὶ, transposing mposAaB. to beg of ver, 
HLPbdfghlo 142: txt ABEN p 18. 36. 40 vulg syrr coptt arm.—o δε απειθ. ιουδ. 
cuvoTpeWavtes, omg K. mposd., D.—CndAwoavtes mposraBouevor, omg all the rest, 66 
zth{-rom |. rec τινας bef avdpas, with ΘΗ ΠΡῸΣ rel ['Thl-sif}: txt ABEahk p 
13 vulg Thl-fin.—(tw. av. bef των ay. D [arm].) aft movnp. ins απειθησαντες E. 

om καὶ oxAor. ἢ). εθορυβουσαν D. rec emiotaytes Te (for kK. επ.), with HLP 
rel Chr, : καὶ emcorevoar(sic) 13: txt ABDEN ak m p 18[ Treg] Thl-fin. - LUT @VOS 
ADE dh Κα πὶ Thl-fin, so (exe A) in vv 6, 9. [αὐτὸν Al(appy). | rec αγαγειν, 
with HP rel Thl: mposayay. E[-gr] ¢ 137: avayay. L 11: εξαγαγ. D-gr 104 coptt 
zeth-pl: txt ABN a bk ὁ p 13. 36. 40, producere vulg D-lat E-lat. 

6. ἐσυραν DE a Ὁ Chr,: evpoy X!: txt ABHLPR? [πὰ] p 36 Thl. om Tov (as 
unnecessary : or from similarity of endings, -pov tov) ABDN p [13]: ins EHLP rel 
36 Chr. ιασωναν 10}. τινες D'(txt D?). aft τινας ins aAAous E. 
Bowvtas A lect-2. aft Bowv. ins kat λεγοντες D. aft ovro: ins εἰσιν Ὠ)}, 


mined by God, who gave them the Holy upon,—beset. *lagovos | With whom 


Spirit of adoption: ὃς Kal ἐνεργεῖται ἐν 
ὑμῖν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν, 1 Thess. ii. 13) to 
the great family of which Paul and Silas 
were members. The sense is passive, 
not middle. The word is not uncommon 
in Philo. ‘oeB. “EAA. ] See reff. 

The aptitude of women for the reception 
of the Gospel several times appears in 
this book,—see above, ch. xvi. 13 ff., and 
below, vv. 12, 34. 5. mposdaB. | 
Having taken to them, as their accom- 
plices, to assist them in the ὀχλοποιῆσαι 
which follows. ἀγοραίων] Such men 
as Aristophanes calls πονηρὸς κἀξ ἀγορᾶς, 
— Demosthenes, epitpiupa ἀγορᾶς, --- 
Xenophon, τὸν ἀγοραῖον bxAov,—Plu- 
tarch, ayopaiovs καὶ δυναμένους ὄχλον 
συναγαγεῖν : see many other instances in 
Wetstein, who mentions the modern ‘ ca- 
naille’ (canalicole). Cicerocallsthem ‘sub- 
rostrani:’? Plautus, ‘ subbasilicani.? These 
may be alluded to in of ἴδιοι συμφυλέται, 
1 Thess. ii. 14. (See note on ἀγοραῖοι, 
ch. xix. 38.) ἐπιστ., having fallen 


(ver. 7) Paul and Silas lodged. He ap- 
pears, perhaps (?), again with Paul at 
Corinth, Rom. xvi. 21, but did not accom- 
pany him into Asia, ch. xx. 4. 6. 
πολιτάρχας) The following inscription, 
found on an arch at Thessalonica, is given 
from Boeckh, No. 1967, in C. and H. i. 395: 
πολειταρχουντων Σωσιπατρου του Κλεο- 
Tatpas Kat Λουκιον Ποντίου Σεκουνδου 
Πουβλιου PAaoviov Σαβεινου Δημητριου 
του Φαυστου Δημητριου του Νικοπολεως 
Ζωιλου του Παρμενιωνος Tov καὶ Μενισκου 
Tacov AyiAAniov Ποτειτου. Here 
we have this very title applied to the Thes- 
salonian magistrates, shewing the exact 
accuracy of our narrative; and, curiously 
enough, we have three of the xames which 
occur here, or in the Epistles, as companions 
of Paul: viz. Sosipater (of Berea, ch. xx. 
4: see Rom. xvi. 21, and note); Secundus 
(of Thessalonica, ch. xx. 4) ; and Gaius (the 
Macedonian, note, ch. xix. 29). τὴν 
οἶκ. ἄναστ.} The words presuppose some 
rumour of Christianity and its spread 





5—10. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AMOSTOAQON. 


189 


7 nN et δέδ ἢ ΄ \ Ὁ , a2 , : 
evs UTTOOEOEKTAL ac@Y’ Kat OUTOL TAVTES ATEVAVTE z Luke x. 88... 


τῶν ἢ δογμάτων Καίσαρος πράσσουσιν, βασιλέα λέγοντες 
\ \ 
8 ἀς ἐτάραξαν δὲ τὸν ἃ ὄχλον καὶ 


c Ὁ S ἢ]: rn 
ETEPOV elvat ησουν. 


x1x. 6. 

James ii. 25 
only+. Tobit 
vii. 8. 

1 Macc. xvi. 
15 only. 


/ 5 7" A \ , 
Tous ᾿πολιτάρχας ἀκούοντας ταῦτα, ὃ καὶ ἶ λαβόντες τὸ 5 =here only. 


ς ν f \ lal 9 ,ὔ \ Qn nw h > , 
8 ἱκανὸν ‘mapa τοῦ Ἰάσονος καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν ὃ" ἀπέλυσαν 


(Rom. 1ii. 18 
reff.) 

2 Kings x. 
17 B Ald. 


αὐτούς. 10 of δὲ ἀδελφοὶ εὐθέως ἱ διὰ νυκτὸς * ἐξέπεμψαν Ὁ ch. xvi. ὁ τοῦτ 


, ἴω 6, 
~ov te ἸΠαῦλον καὶ τὸν Σίλαν εἰς Βέροιαν, οἵτινες 'rapa- 


f ch. ii. 33 reff, 


e ch. xv. 24 reff. 
ich. v. 19 reff. 


xxvi. 32 reff. 


Luke xii. 51. xix. 16. John iii. 23. ch. v. 21, 22. 


7. (πρασσουσιν, so ABDEHLPN abedfghklop 13 Chr, Thi-sif.) 


= ch.i.2v- 
xii. 17. xiii. 


35. xv. 35 al. 
d ver. 13. 
g=hereonly. see Ley. xxv. 26. he clr 
k ch. xiii. 4 only. Gen. xxiv. 54, 56, 59. 1 absol., 
ix. 39. x. [392] 33. 1 Cor. xvi.3 al. fr. Gen. xiv. 13. 
ετερον 


bef λεγοντες εἰναι A B(sic: see table) δὲ ac f h Καὶ [p] 18 vulg syr [arm Chr, 1]: Aey. 


ev. er. E: txt DHLP rel [Syr coptt] Chr,. 


Kat eTapatey TOUS πολ. καὶ TOY OXA. ἀκουσαντες 


8. for Tov oxA., τὴν πολιν KE, 


(τα D2) trav. D.—|Syr also transp oxA. and moar. | 


10. omy ευθ. δια νυκτ. A [om δια v. p]. 


εξεπεμψαν bef δια νυκτος &. rec ins 


Ts bef νυκτος, with ΘΗ ΤΡ rel Chr, Thl-sif: om BDN a m 13. 40 Petr, Thl-fin. 
om τε D ὃ. 32. 42. 57. 95! sah [arm]: δὲ p!. : 


having before reached the inhabitants of 
Thessalonica. 7. οὗτοι πάντες] All 
these people, i.e. Christians, wherever 
found. Awider acquaintance is shewn, or 
at least assumed, with the belief of Chris- 
tians, than extended merely to Jason and 
his friends. amévavtt .. πράσσ.] Not 
‘do this in the face of the decrees, which 
would require τοῦτο with πράσσ., but as 
E.V. The δόγματα in this case would be 
the Julian ‘leges majestatis.’ βασιλέα 
κιτ.λ.}] This false charge seems to have 
been founded on Paul’s preaching much 
at Thessalonica concerning the triumph- 
ant παρουσία of Christ. This appears 
again and again in his two Epistles: see 
1 Thess. 1.19; ii.19; iii. 13; iv. 18—18 ; 
v. 1,2; 2 Thess. i. 5, 7—10; ii. 1—12: 
and particularly 2 Thess. ii. 5, where he 
refers to his having often told them of these 
things, viz. the course, and destruction of 
Antichrist, by whom these Jews might 
perhaps misrepresent Paul as designating 
Ceesar. 9. λαβόντες τὸ ἱκανόν] 
‘Satisdatione accepta :᾿ either by sureties, 
or by a sum of money, or both. They 
bound over Jason and the rest (τινας 
ἀδελφούς, ver. 6) to take care that no more 
trouble was given by these men: in ac- 
cordance with which security they sent 
them away; and by night, to avoid the 
notice of the ὄχλος. 10.1 It does 
not follow, because Timotheus is not 
mentioned here, that therefore he did not 
accompany, or at all events follow, Paul 
and Silas to Bercea. He has never been 
mentioned since he joined Paul’s company 
at Lystra. The very intermitted and 
occasional notices of Paul’s companions 
in this journey should be a caution against 
rash hypotheses. ‘The general character 


of the narrative seems to be, that where 
Paul, or Paul and Silas, are alone or 
principally concerned, all mention of the 
rest is suspended, and sometimes so com- 
pletely as to make it appear as if they were 
absent: then, at some turn of events they 
appear again, having in some cases been 
really present all the time. I believe Timo- 
theus to have been with them at Thessalo- 
nica the first time, because it does not seem 
probable that Paul would have sent to them 
one to contirm and exhort them concerning 
their faith (1 Thess. iii. 2) who had not 
known them before, especially as he then 
had Silas with him. And this is confirmed 
by both the Epistles to the Thessalonians, 
which are from Paul, Silvanus, and Timo- 
theus. From these Epistles we learn that, 
during his residence among them, Paul 
worked with his own hands (1 Thess. ii 9; 
2 Thess, iii. 8) to maintain himself: and 
froin Phil. iv. 15, 16, that the Philippians 
sent supplies more than once towards his 
maintenance. Both these facts, especially 
the last, seeing that the distance from 
Philippi was 100 Roman miles, make it 
very improbable that his stay was so short 
as from three to four weeks: nor is tliis 
implied in the text : much time may have 
elapsed while the πλῆθος πολύ of ver. 4 
were joining Paul and Silas. See further 
in Prolegg. to 1 Thess., Vol. III. § ii. 2 ff. 

Βέροιαν] According to the Anto- 
nine Itinerary 61, according to the Peu- 
tinger Table 57 Roman miles (S.W.) from 
Thessalonica. Bercea was not far from 
Pella, in Macedonia Tertia, Liv. xlv. 30, at 
the foot of Mt. Bermius. It was afterwards 
called Irenopolis, and now Kara Feria, or 
Verria, and is a city of the second rank in 
European Turkey, containing from 15,000 


190 


TIPABEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


XVII. 


mere only. γενόμενοί εἰς τὴν συναγωγὴν τὰ ἀπήεσαν τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων. 
χοῦ ᾿ 


Xxxiil. 8. 
n ch. ix. 20 reff. 
o — here (Luke 


ἰφὶ uA 
p ch. x. 41 reff. ταῦυτα bs, οὕτως. 


q ch. viii. 14 
reff. 

r — Mark iii. 5. 
ch. it. 29. v. 


ἀνδρῶν Your Y ὀλίγοι. 


11 π οὗτοι δὲ ἦσαν °evyevéotepor τῶν ἐν Θεσσαλονίκῃ, 
P οἵτινες ἐδέξαντο τὸν λόγον ᾿ μετὰ πάσης " προθυμίας, 
{ \ ᾽ e r u > / \ ν , > wry 
,. τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν “avaxpivovtes τὰς " γραφάς, εἰ Κ᾽ ἔχοι 
19 πολλοὶ μὲν οὖν ἐξ αὐτῶν ἐπίστευσαν, 

\ a“ ς / “ἢ: Cal 
καὶ τῶν “Ἑλληνίδων γυναικῶν τῶν " εὐσχημόνων καὶ 
18 ὡς δὲ ἔγνωσαν οἱ ὅ ἀπὸ τῆς 


14 εὐθέως δὲ τότε 


26 al. 

pee - Θεσσαλονίκης ᾿Τουδαῖοι ὅτι καὶ ἐν τῇ Βεροίᾳ * κατηγγέλη 
2192 ὑπὸ τοῦ Παύλου ὁ * λόγος τοῦ ὃ θεοῦ, ἦλθον κἀκεῖ ° σαλεύ- 
Cae προ οντες καὶ 4 ταράσσοντες τοὺς ἃ ὄχλους. 

t Tike xi 3. tov Παῦλον " ἐξαπέστειλαν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ πορεύεσθαι *' ὡς 


u=ch. iv. 9 reff. 
y ch. xii. 18 reff. 


see ch. 1i. 46 reff. 
x ch. xiii. 50 reff. 
Ὁ ch. xi. 1 reff. 


d ver. 8 e ch, vii. 12 reff. 


w ch. vii. 1 reff, 
ach. xiii. 5 reff, 


v ver. 2 reff. 
z= ch. ii. 5 reff. 


c = ch. ii. 25 (from Ps. xv. 8). 2 Thess. ii. 2 only. (ch. xvi. 26 al.) 1 Mace. vi. 8. 
fsee note. 4 Kings ii, 11 B Ald. (ἕως, A compl.). 


rec τῶν ιουδαιων bef ἀπηεσαν (correction of order), with ABDR a km p 18. 36 vulg 
Thl-fin : txt EHLP rel Chr, Thl-sif.—ewsneoav Εἰ vulg [Syr sah]. 


11. εὐγενεῖς D-gr. 
for maons προθυμιας, παρρησιας E-gr. 


36 [Chr-3-mss, : ins BHLP rel Chr, ΤῊ]. 
om ovy E a! Thl-sif. 
for ελλην. to oAvyo: D! has eAAnvwy kat των evox nmovwv 


12. τινες μεν ovy avtwy D. 
nmotnoay D 137. 


ins τη bef θεσσ. D. 


aft λογον ins Tov θεου E. 

om To (as unnecessary) ADEX ah p 18 
exe: D)(txt D2 οἵ 8) Ec] Thl-sif. 

aft ἐπιστ. add τινες δὲ 


ανδρες κ- γυναικες tkavot ἐπιστευσαν (Grecorum et non placentium et viri et mulieres 
pleres({sic| crediderunt D-lat: ελληνιδων, and ins καὶ bef avdpes, D?-gr: for Ist καὶ, 
γυναικὼν D5: for avdp. κ. yuv., avdpwy οὐκ ολιγοι D8: tx. extort. are omd by D-corr). 


13. om της DE. 


ott (0) Aoy. (Tov) θεου Karnyy. ets βεροιαν (και) επιστευσαν 


kat ἡλθον (εις αὐτὴν) D(o του are insd by D®, και and εἰς αὐτὴν omd by D-corr). 


rec om καὶ ταρασσοντες, with EHLP rel wth Chr, : 
at end ins ov διελιμπανον D Syr. 


13. 40 vulg syrr coptt arm. 


ins AB Πβῥίτασσοντες D') NRacmp 


14. for ev0. δε tore τον, Tov μεν ουν D Syr: statimque D-lat: om tore ὁ 40. 137 syr 


sah [eth]. οι ad. εξαπ. απελθειν D. 


*€ws (see note) ABEN p 13. 40 [vulg 


Syr copt]: om D b! eo sah [wth]: ws HLP rel 36 [syr arm] Chr, ec ΤῊ]. 


to 20,000 sou!s. (Winer, Realw. C. and H. 
i. 399 f.) Wetstein quotes a remarkable 
illustration from Cicero in Pisonem, ¢. 26 :— 
‘ Thessalonicam omnibus inscientibus noc- 
tuque venisti, qui cum concentum ploran- 
tium et tempestatem querelarum ferre non 
posses, in oppidum devium Berceam pro- 
fugisti.’ 11. εὐγενέστεροι) Theophyl. 
and (Ee, explain it by ἐπιεικέστεροι, but 
this is rather its result, than its mean- 
ing :—more noble is our best word for it; 
—of nobler disposition ;—stirred up, not 
to envy, but to enquiry. ταῦτα] viz. 
the doctrine of ver. 3, which Paul and Silas 
preached here also. 12.] The designa- 
tion conveyed in Ἑλληνίδων is to be sup- 
plied before ἀνδρῶν also. So εἰς πᾶσαν 
πόλιν κ- τόπον, Luke x. 1. See Winer, 
edn. 6, § 59. 5. 13.] ot ἀπὸ T. Θ.. 
as E. V., of Thessalonica. No inference 
that they came from Thess. can be 
drawn from this expression: but it is as- 
serted below. See Heb. xiii. 24. 

ἦλθον κἀκεῖ σαλ.} Not, as E. V., ‘ they 


came thither also, and stirred up...., 


which destroys the force of the sentence : 
but they came, and stirred up there 
also... .: no journey having been related 
of them defore, buta precisely similar act of 
exciting the people. | From the distance, 
some time must have elapsed before this 
could take place: and that some time did 
elapse, we may gather from 1 Thess. ii. 18, 
where Paul relates that he made several 
attempts to revisit the Thessalonians (which 
could be only during his stay at Beroea, as 
he left the neighbourhood altogether when 
he left that town), but was hindered. 

14. ὡς ἐπὶ τ. 0.| The various readings 
seem to have arisen from not understand- 
ing @s,—which cannot, here or any where 
else, be redundant (as De Dieu, Raphel, 
Wolf, Heinrichs, &e.): nor can it well here 
signify that his going, ‘ as if to the sea,’ 
was only a feint, to deceive his enemies 
(as Beza, Piscator, Grot., Oish., Neander, 
&ec.): for, as there is no mention of any: 
land journey, or places passed through on 
his way to Athens, there can be little 
doubt that he did really go by sea. But 


ABDE 
HLPRa 
bedfg 
hkilm 

opl3 





11—16. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATOSTOAQON. 


191 


, e , / -“ \ f 
ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν, ὃ ὑπέμεινέν τε ὅ TE Σίλας καὶ ὁ Τιμό- ε -- Ταὶς νι 4 


θεὸς ἐκεῖ. 


only. Num. 
xxii. 19. 

Jos. Antt. vi. 
5. 2 


- ΄ NS »" : «ie 
1 Οἱ δὲ " καθιστάνοντες τὸν ΙΠαῦλον ἤγαγον ἷ ἕως n(-avew) 


an , - 9 \ \ 
᾿Αθηνῶν, καὶ * λαβόντες * ἐντολὴν πρὸς τὸν Σίλαν καὶ 


here only. 
= 2 Chron. 


“ e 7, Μ \ 3. ΨΥ 0S i. 23. 
Τιμόθεον, ἵνα ὡς τάχιστα ἔλθωσιν πρὸς αὐτόν, | ἐξήεσαν. . "tine ts. 


lal ΄ \ a 
16 ἐν δὲ ταῖς ᾿Αθήναις ™ ἐκδεχομένου αὐτοὺς τοῦ ἸΙαύλου, « 
\ ~ - > Lal ~~ 
ἢ παρωξύνετο TO “ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ €1 αὐτῷ ? θεωροῦντος 


reff. 


xiii. 21. ch. xix. 21 (of Paul). 
principally. 


m 1 Cor. xi. 33, xvi. 11. 
n1Cor. xiii.5 only. Deut. ix. 18. (-vomos, ch. xv. 39, - f Paul.) 
Rom. i. 9. viii. 16 xii. 11. 
Ρ W. particip., = ch. viii. 13. xxviii. 6. 


ch. xxiii. 23. 


John x. 18. 
Col. iv. 10. 
2 John 4 
only. 
1 ch. xiii. 42 
Aeb. x. 13. xi. 10. James νυ. 7 only ¢. Gen. xliii. 9 al. 
o = Lukei.47. John 
1 Cor. ii. 11. v. 3, 4. xiv. 14, ἄς. Paul 


rec ὑπεμενον, with HLP rel 36 Chr, Thi-sif: ὑπεμειναν BR ae p: απεμειναν E 13: 


ἐπεμειναν m Thdrt, Thl-fin (corrections to suit constr): txt AD [6] Syr sah. 


rec 


for te, δε (correction of characteristic τε, and to avoid recurrence), with DHLP rel 


vulg coptt [arm] Chr, Thdrt, [Thl-sif] : txt ABEX ὁ m p 18 syrr eth Thl-fin. 


bef o τε ciAas H. om 2nd re D. 


€KEL 


15. rec καθιστωντες (corrn of unusual form), with DSEHLPN3 13 rel: αποκαθισ- 
τωντες 36 [αποκαθιστανοντες Ὁ]: καταστανο τες D1: kabiomayres(sic) δὲ! : txt AB. 
rec aft ny. ins αυὐτον, with EHLP rel 86 [vulg-ed am syrr coptt arm] Chr: om 


ABD® ¢c m p 13 fuld tol Thl-fin. 


K-gr Syr: 
τιμ. BL ΕἸΝ p 13 [Chr,(om,) }. 


(ins D3 or 4), 


ins των bef ad. E. 
σαλιαν" εκωλυθη ‘yap εἰς avtous κηρυξαι τον Avyov" AaB. δε Ὁ. 
add παρα παυλου D: απ αὐτου E [vulg] Syr arm{ -usc ]. 
for wa ws Tax., oTws ev ταχει ἢ). 
16. for avrovs, αὐτου D}(txt D*) &! 96 Syr.com tov παυλου RI. 
rec θεωρουντι (corrn to agree with αυτω. 


παρηλθεν de την θεσ- 
for evToA., ἐπιστολὴν 
ins tov bef 


om το D! 
This is much more prob 


than that, as Meyer suspects, avtw should have been altered to the gen to svit the 
gen absol before), with DHLP rel Chr, Thl-sif: txt ABEN ἃ k p 19. 40 Thl-fin. 


ὡς ἐπὶ τ. θ. I believe simply to indicate the 
direction in which the Bercean brethren 
sent him forth [implying probably that all 
that was known at Bercea of his intended 
route was, that it was in the direction of 
the sea]. ὡς is used thus before par- 
ticiples and prepositions, without any as- 
signable reference to its (more usual) sub- 
jective reference in such a connexion, Thus 
Hermann on Soph. Philoct. 58, says ‘ cogi- 
tationem significat particula ὧς. Sed multo 
usu factum est, ut aliquandoetiam ibi usur- 
paretur, ubi non opus esset respici id, quod 
quis in mente haberet.’? We have the same 
expression in Pausan. ii. 25, καταβάντων 
δὲ (the walls of Tyrius) ὡς ἐπὶ θάλασσαν, 
ἐνταῦθα of θάλαμοι τῶν Προίτου θυγατέ- 
ρων εἰσίν,-- ἀπᾷ Diod. Sie. xiv. 49, κελεύσας 
κατὰ τάχος λάθρα πλεῖν ὡς ἐπὶ Συρακο- 
civuvs,—and Polyb. passim in Wetst.,—e. g. 
καθήκουσαν (τὴν Σελουκείαν) ws ἐπὶ θά- 
λασσαν, ν. 59,—and with the same signifi- 
cation. Where he embarked for Athens, is 
not said: probably (C. and H. i. 403) at 
Dium, near the base of Mt. Olympus, to 
which two roads from Berea are marked 
in the ancient tables. 15. καθιστ.) So 
Odyss. v. 274, τούς μ᾽ ἐκέλευσα Πύλονδε 
καταστῆσαι καὶ epeooa—and Arrian, 
Ind. xxvii. 1, καταστήσειν αὐτοὺς μέχρι 
Kapparias. Who these were is not said. 

The course of Timotheus appears to 


have been, as far as we can follow it from 
the slight notices given, as follows :—when 
Paul departed from Bercea, not having been 
able to revisit Thessalonica as he wished 
(1 Thess. ii. 18), he sent Timotbeus (from 
Bercea, not from Athens) to exhort and 
confirm the Thessalonians, and determined 
to be left at Athens alone (1 Thess. 111. 1), 
Silas meanwhile remaining to carry on the 
work at Bercea. Paul, on his arrival at 
Athens, sends (by his conductors, who re- 
turned) this message to both, to come to 
him as soon as possible. They did so, 
and found him (ch. xviii. 5) at Corinth. 
See Prolegg. to 1 Thess., Vol. LI. 

᾿Αθηνῶν] See a iong and interesting de- 
scription of the then state of Athens, its 
buildings, &e., in C. and H. chap. x. 
vol. i. pp. 407 ff.; and Lewin, i. pp. 268 ff. 
It was a free city. Strabo (ix. 1) gives an 
epitome of its fortunes from the Roman 
conquest nearly to this time: Ῥωμαῖοι 
δ᾽ οὖν παραλαβόντες αὐτοὺς δημοκρατου- 


μένους ἐφύλαξαν τὴν αὐτονομίαν αὐτοῖς 


k. τὴν ἐλευθερίαν. ἐπιπεσὼν δ᾽ 6 Μιθρι- 
δατικὸς πόλεμος τυράννους αὐτοῖς κατ- 
ἔστησεν ods ὃ βασιλεὺς ἐβούλετο, τὸν δ᾽ 
ἰσχύσαντα μάλιστα τὸν ᾿Αριστίωνα κ. 
ταύτην βιασάμενον τὴν πόλιν. ἐκ πο- 
λιορκίας ἑλὼν Σύλλας 6 τῶν Ῥωμαίων 
ἠγεμὼν ἐκόλασε" τῇ πόλει δὲ συγγνώμην 
ἔνειμε, καὶ μέχρι νῦν ἐν ἐλευθερίς τε ἐστὶ 


192 ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATLOSTOAON. x Vig 


17 τ διελέγετο μὲν οὖν ἐν 
a a a ᾽ a , 

τῇ συναγωγῇ τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις καὶ τοῖς ὃ σεβομένοις, καὶ 

5 A a \ a ¢e / 

ἐν τῇ ἀγορᾷ “ κατὰ ἃ πᾶσαν ἃ ἡμέραν πρὸς τοὺς Y παρατυγ- 
/ \ a ’ “wn 

χάνοντας" 18 τινὲς δὲ καὶ τῶν ᾿Εἰπικουρείων καὶ Στυϊκῶν 


/ i \ 4 

qhereonly+. TKATELOWAOVY οὖσαν τὴν πόλιν. 
ἐλαία κατά- 
καρπος, 
Ps. li. 8 (10). 
Hos. xiv. 7. 
κατώδυνος, 
1 Kings i. 


10, xxx. 6, 

διὰ τόπων , >it / " ron 

garabey- φιλοσόφων δ συνέβαλλον αὐτῷ. καί τινες ἔλεγον Τί ἂν 
vy, Diod. > / « , - / 

poms Σ θέλοι ὁ Y σπερμολόγος οὗτος λέγειν; οἱ δὲ 5 Ξένων 

νεανίας 


5 = ch. xiii. 43 reff. t ch. xiii. 27 reff. 
w. dat., Jos. Antt. ii. 9.5. absol., Xen. Apol. Socr. 11. 


1 Mace. iv. 34. γυναιξὶ o λόγους, Eur. Iph. Aul. 830. 


καταβόστρυχος, Eur. Phen. 146. r ver. 2 reff. 
u here only. see Heb. ili. 13 v here only +. 
w Luke xiv. 31. ii. 19. ch. iv. 15. xviii. 27. xx. 14 only. 


x = ch. xiv. 13 re 


ver. 21 only. Ruth ii, 10, 


ins ABDHLPX p 13 rel Syr Chr,. 


bef στοικων, with DHL P(perhaps) rel Chr : 


y here only +. Demosth. 269. 19. 


. ins τοῖς bef ev τὴ ay. D 197 syr-mg sah. 
rec om Ist καὶ (as unnecessary), with Ee fk 36 [vulg syr coptt (eth) arm] ΤῊ] : 
επικουριων ΑΓ B1]DEN ck p. 


2 = Matt. xxv. 35al. Luke, here and 


παρατυχοντας D}(txt 3). 


rec ins των 


om ABEN acd 1 p 13. 40. rec 


στωικων, With B p rel Chr [Thl-sif]: txt ADEHL P(perhaps) δὲ a cf k 13. 36 coptt 


Thil-fin. συνεβαλον Labed fg 


D-corr?). 


kK. τιμῇ παρὰ τοῖς Ῥωμαίοις. See also 
Tacit. Ann. ii. 59. 16. κατείδωλον] 
This ἅπαξ λεγόμενον is formed after the 
analogy of κατάμπελο, κάθυδρος, ke. 
See reff. The multitude of statues 
and temples to the gods in Athens is cele- 
brated with honour by classic writers of 
other nations, and with pride by their own. 
A long list of passages is given in Wet- 
stein. ‘The strongest perhaps is from Xen. 
de Repub. Ath., who calls Athens ὃ ὅλη Bw- 
KOs, ὅλη θῦμα θεοῖς καὶ ἀνάθημα. 
17.1 The οὖν (as De W. remarks against 
Meyer and Schneckenburger) does not ne- 
cessarily give the consequence of what has 
been stated in ver. 16, but only continues 
the narration. See above on ch. xi. 19. 
ἐν τῇ ἀγορᾷ) Strabo (x. 1) speak- 
ing of the Eretrians in Euboea says that 
some suppose them to have been named 
ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Αθήνῃσιν "Ἐρετρίας, ἣ νῦν ἐστιν 
eee (as distinguished from the Cera- 
micus, which was the old for um). It was 
the space before the στοὰ ποικίλη, where 
the Stoies held their διαλέξεις. 18. 
*Eamuxovpeiwv | The Epicurean philosophy 
was «antayonistic to the gospel, as holding 
the atomic theory in opposition to the crea- 
tion of matter,—the disconnexion of the 
Divinity from the world and its affairs, 
in opposition to the idea of a ruling Pro- 
vidence,—and the indissoluble union, and 
annihilation together, of soul and body, as 
opposed to the hope of eternal life, and 
indeed to all spiritual religion whatever. 
The Epicureans were the materialists of 
the ancient world. The common idea 
attached to Epicureanism must be dis- 
carded in our estimate of the persons men- 
tioned in our text. The summum bonum 
of the real Epicureans, far from being a 
degraded and sensual pleasure, was ἀτα- 
oatia of mind, based upon pédynots,— 


h m 36 Chr, Thl-sif : συνελαβον D'[- gr ](txt 
θελη D(txt DS): θελει ς 13. 40. 


perhaps the best estimate of the highest 
good formed in the heathen world ;—and 
their ethics were exceedingly strict. But 
the abuse to which such a doctrine was 
evidently liable, gave rise to a pseudo-Epi- 
cureanism, which has generally passed cur- 
rent for the real, and which amply illus- 
trated the truth, that ‘ corruptio optimi est 
pessima.’? ‘For their chimerical ἀταραξία, 
Paul offered them τὴν εἰρήνην τὴν ὑπερ- 
έχουσαν πάντα νοῦν, Phil. iv. 7. 
Στοϊκῶν | So named from the στοὰ ποικίλη 
(see above), founded by Zeno of Cittium 
in the fourth century B.c., but perhaps 
more properly by Cleanthes and Chr ysip- 
pus in the third century B.c. Their philo- 
sophy, while it approached the truth in 
holding one supreme Governor of all, com- 
promised it, in allowing of any and all ways 
of conceiving and worshipping Him (see 
below, vv. 24, 25),—and contravened it, in 
its pantheistic belief that all souls were 
emanations of Him. In spirit it was di- 
rectly opposed to the gospel,—holding the 
independence of man on any being but him- 
self, together with the subjection of God 
and man alike to the stern laws of an in- 
evitable fate. On the existence of the soul 
after death their ideas were various : some 
holding that all souls endure to the con- 
flagration of all things,—others confining 
this to the souls of good men,—and others 
believing ail souls to be reabsorbed into the 
Divinity. By these tenets they would ob- 
viously be placed in antagonism to the doc- 
trines of a Saviour of the world and the re- 
surrection,—and to placing the summum 
bonum of man in abundance of that grace 
which ἐν ἀσθενείᾳ τελεῖται, 2 Cor. xii. 9. 
τινες ἔλεγον... . οἱ δέ] These are 
not to be taken as belonging the one to the 
Epicureans, the other to the Stoics,—but 
rather as describing two classes, common 


ABDE 
HLPNa 
bedfg 
hkim 

opls3 





17—19. TIPAHEIS ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ. 


b 


195 


ὅτι τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν 5 = here only. 
; Xen. Mem. 1. 
[αὐτοῖς]. 


2 1. 

10:8 ΕἼΤ b= b here only +. 
λαβόμενοί te αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν Λρειον πώγον ἤγαγον Ss” 
Ρ Y ἐμέν; Ὁ absol., Matt. 


\ ΜῈ 
καταγγελεὺς εἰναι" 
\ \ c ? / d > She. 
Kal τὴν “ανάστασιν “ εὐηγγελίζετο 


ἃ δαιμονίων δοκεῖ 


xxii. 22, 23. 30|| L. John xi. 24, 25. ch. xxiii. 8. d constr., ch. xi. 20 reff. e = and 
constr., Matt. xiv. 31. Luke ix. 47. ch. xxi. 30,33. Isa.iv.1. (acc. ch, ix. 27 reff.) 
for οἱ δε, οιδεν D?. καταγγελλεὺυς [A-corr! E] &. om last clause D. rec 


avtos bef ευηγγελιζετο, with 36: om avrors BLP! rel syr sah arm Chr: αὐτου 
eunyy. avtas a 14. 27-9. 68-9. 105-6 Syr copt xth-pl[?]: txt AEHN3cfk m p13 
vulg ΤῊ]. (The varr have principally been produced by αὐτου being inserted after 
αναστασιν, it being imagined that the resurr of Jesus was intended. Hence the origl 
autos was transposed and altered, and, from αὐτου and autos being alternately 
erased, finally disappeared altogether. So Meyer.) 

19. μετα δε nuepas τινας επιλαβ. αὐτου nyayov auvTov em Tov ριον Tay. πυνθανομενοι 
ka Acy. D 137 syr. (om tov D!: ins D?: μ. δὲ nu. τιν. are marked with ast in syr.) 

for τε, δε B p 13. 36 coptt. αριον ADEN, so ver 22. 


perhaps to both schools, —the one of which 
despised him and his sayings, and the 
other were disposed to take a more serious 
view of the matter, and charge him with 
bringing in new deities. σπερμο- 
λόγος) σπερμολόγος εἶδος ἐστὶν ὀρνέου 
λωβωμένου τὰ σπέρματα’ ἐξ οὗ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι 
σπερμολόγους ἐκάλουν τοὺς περὶ ἐμπόρια 
καὶ ἀγορὰς διατρίβοντας, διὰ τὸ ἀναλέγεσθαι 
τὰ ἐκ τῶν φορτίων ἀποῤῥέοντα, καὶ διαζῇν 
ἐκ τούτων. Kustath. ad Odyss. ε. 490, 
where Damm _ observes, σπερμολογεῖν, 
‘verbum recentiorum; dicitur ἐπὶ τῶν 
ἀλχαζονευομένων ἀμεθόδως ἐπὶ μαθήμασιν eK 
τινῶν παρακουσμάτων, si quis quid arripuit 
forte ex disciplinis, eoque se imperite 
jactat:’ babbler is the very best English 
word: as both signifying one who talks 
Jluently to no purpose, and hinting also 
that his talk is not his own. ξένων 
δαιμ. ἀδικεῖ Σωκράτης . . . . καινὰ δαι- 
μόνια εἰςφέρων, was one of the charges on 
which Athens put to death her wisest son. 

δαιμόνια is not plural for singular, 
as Kuin.: nor merely, though this is 
somewhat more probable, marks the cate- 
gory, as Mever: nor can it refer (Chrys., 
Theophyl., @icum., Hammond, Heinrichs) 
to Jesus and the ἀνάστασις, mistaken for 
a goddess (a sufficient answer to which 
strange idea is, that ἢ ἀνάστασις is merely 
a statement in the mouths of others, of 
the doctrine taught by Paul, which he 
would hardly ever, if ever, specity by this 
word,—compare vv. 81 and 32): but 
alludes (as De Wette) to the true God, 
the God of the Jews, and Jesus Christ 
His Son: the Creator of the world (ver. 
24), and the Man whom He hath appointed 
to judge it, ver. 31. καταγγελεύς] 
Compare ver. 29, end; which is an express 
answer to this charge. 19. ἐπιλαβ.] 
No violence is implied : see reff. ἐπὶ 
Tov” Apetov πάγον] There is no allusion 
here to the court of Areiopagus, nor should 
the words have been so renderedin Εἰ. V.— 


VoE Le 


especially as the same ’Apelov πάγου below 
(ver. 22) is translated ‘ Mars’ Hill? We 
have in the narrative no trace of any ju- 
dicial proceeding, but every thing to con- 
tradict such a supposition. Paul merely 
makes his speech, and, having satisfied the 
curiosity of the multitude who came toge- 
ther on Mars’ Hill, departs unhindered :— 
they brought him up to the hill of Mars. 
Wordsworth believes he finds a trace 
of a judicial proceeding in “Avdpes ᾿Αθη- 
vaio, denoting rather a public apology 
than a private discussion: and in the con- 
version of Dionysius the Areopagite. But 
what words other than those would St. Paul 
have been likely to use in making a speech 
to a concourse of Athenians ? for no one sup- 
poses it to have been a private discussion. 
And why should not Dionysius have been 
present ? As a convert of note, he would 
naturally have his title attached. The 
following note is borrowed from Mr. Hum- 
phry’s Commentary :—‘ It might be ex- 
pected that on the hill of Mars the mind of 
the stranger would be impressed with the 
magnificence of the religion which he 
sought to overthrow. The temple of the 
Eumenides was immediately below him: op- 
posite, at the distance of 200 yards, was the 
Acropolis, which, being entirely occupied 
with statues and temples, was, to use the 
phrase of an ancient writer (Aristides), ἀντ᾽ 
ἀναθήματος, as one great offering to the 
gods. The Persians encamped on the 
Areiopagus when they besieged the Acro- 
polis (Herod. viii. 52): from the same 
place the Apostle makes his first public 
attack on Paganism, of which the Acro- 
polis was the stronghold. Xerxes in his 
fanaticism burnt the temples of Greece 
(Eschyl. Pers.: Cic. de Leg. ii. 10). 
Christianity advanced more meekly and 
surely: and though the immediate effect 
of the Apostle’s sermon was not great, 
the Parthenon in time became a Christian 
church (Leake, Athens, p. 277). Athens 


O 


194 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON, XVII. 

, A / θ lal / id f \ ed 2 e A »" 
eMarkicor, λέγοντες Δυνάμεθα γνῶναι τίς ἡ * καινὴ αὕτη ἡ ὑπὸ σοῦ ABE 
8 = 1 Pet.iv. 4, , f δ ὃ . 08 , , het , HLPR a 

zonlyt. Aadoupevyn ἶ διδαχη ; 298 ξενίζοντα yap τινα εἰςφέρεις bedtg 
Si ve ἢ \ Con , a on , m 

reff.) 2Mace. εἰς, rag! ἀκοὰς ἡμῶν βουλόμεθα οὖν γνῶναι * τί ἂν " θέλοι opis 

Sic. xii. 53, = = 91°? i \ ΄ \ eee ὃ n 

ofGorsias, ταῦτα εἶναι. 531 ᾿Αθηναῖοι δὲ πάντες Kai οἱ | ἐπιδημοῦντες 

in ξενί- ΤΊ ΄ Ἦν Ὁ 5 \ . 0 ’ ’ 2 , Ἃ > , 

ae oa ξένοι ™ εἰς οὐδὲν ἕτερον ° ηὐκαίρουν ἢ λέγειν TL ἢ ἀκούειν 

εξεως Ἑ ἊΝ ’ Oc \ ¢ a , a 

ἐπληξε τοὺς P καινότερον. “5 ° σταθεὶς δὲ ὁ Παῦλος ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ 

Αθηναίους. 


‘ >] a 
α - here(Matt. "A ρείου πάγου ἔφη "Ανδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, 'xata πάντα * ws 


vi. 13. Luke 


y. 18,19. xi. 4. xii. 11. 1 Tim. vi. 7. Heb. xiii. 11) only. (Soph. Aj. 149.) i Luke vil. 1. Heb. v. 
11. 1 Cor. xii. 17. Mark vii. 35. Ps. xvii. 44. k = ch. ii. 12 only. Ich. ii. 10 
only +t. m ver. 18. n = Matt. v. 13. ch. xix. 27 al. ο Mark vi. 31. 1 Cor. xvi, 
12 only +t. Polyb. xx. 9. 4. (-pta, Luke xxii.6. -pos, Mark vi. 31. -pws, 2 Tim. iv. 2.) p — Matt. 
xiii. 52. Isa. xlii. 9..compar.,see ver. 22. Winer, edn. 6, ᾧ da. 4. q ch. xi. 13 reff. r— cn. τὴν, 
22 reff. ΕΞ 1 Cor. x, 15.. 2 Cor. vi. 13, 

om 2nd ἡ BD. απο [for ὑπο] D!(Wtst) [6:5 (Ser) ]. λεγομενὴ Εἰ p: καταγ- 


γελλομενὴ D-gr: narratio doctrine 1)-lat. 
20. φερεις D: exspeper: X': add ρηματα DE, 


20, 21.) 


(P has lost a few words in vv 


*riva θέλει (mistake in writing τι av; which was the easier on acct of 


the plural tavta) A B(sic : see table) δὲ p 15 θελη] 40, que hac sint [ copt | sah: τινα θελοι 
a 69: [quinam hi sint syrr : quenam sit wth :| τι αν θελει P: τι αν θελοι DEHL rel vulg 


“ 


(quidnam velint hec esse) Chr Thl[-fin(@eA7) ]. 


21. aft ed. ins εἰς αὐτοὺς D-gr sah. 


ταυτα bef eA. C137: om Tavta E. 
(ηνκαιρουν, so ΑΒ) ΕΝ ¢ p 18. 40 Thl- 


fin.) rec for 2nd ἡ, καὶ (corre to avoid the awkwardness of the recurrence of ἢ 
with different meanings), with ΕΗ ΤΡ p vel 36 [Syr copt eth] Bas Chr: txt ABDR 


vulg syr sah [arm ]. 
alt Aey. 
22. om o ABN Thi-sif. 


ecased to be a κατείδωλος méAts,—and 
the repugnance of the Greeks to images 
became so great, as to be a principal cause 
of the schism between the churches of the 
east and west in the eighth century.’ 
The hill of Mars was so called according 
to Paus. i. 28. 5, ὅτι πρῶτος *Apns ἐνταῦθα 
ἐκρίθη. It was on the west of the Acro- 
polis. The Areiopagus, the highest criminal 
court of Athens, held its sittings there. To 
give any account of it is beside the pur- 
pose, there being no allusion to it in the 
text. Full particulars may be found sub 
voce in Smith’s Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Antt. 
Suvap. yvav.| A courteous method 
of address (not ironical, as Kuin. and 
Stier). 21.] A remark of the nar- 
vator (as I believe, Paul himself, see Pro- 
Jeger. to Acts, § ii. 14) as a comment on 
the καινή and éeviCovra of the verse before. 
evkatp@, vaco, Gloss. Vet. It is 
not a classic Attic word: εὐκαιρεῖν οὐδεὶς 
εἴρηκε τῶν παλαιῶν, Ἕλληνες δέ, Meeris. 
“σχολὴν ἄγω, καὶ “eb σχολῆς Exw,” οὐ 
“σχολάζω"᾽" τὸ δὲ “ εὐκαιρεῖν ” πάντη ἀδό- 
κιμον, Thom. Mag. On this character 
of the Athenians, compare that given of 
them, Thucyd. iii. 38, μετὰ καινότητος 
μὲν λόγου ἀπατᾶσθαι ἄριστοι, where the 
scholiast evidently has our text ἴῃ his 
mind; ταῦτα πρὸς τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους aivir- 
τεται, οὐδέν τι μελετῶντας πλὴν λέγειν τι 
καὶ ἀκούειν καινόν :—Demosth. (Philippic. 
i. p. 48), ἢ βούλεσθε, εἰπέ μοι, περϊιόντες 


aft axove ins τὶ ABN, so [| vulg syrr coptt] but om the τι 
(The repetition has originated in the transposition for elegance.) 
for epn, εἰπεν [ἢ δὰ 180. 


αὑτῶν πυθέσθαι κατὰ τὴν ἀγορὰν Aéyerat 
τι καινόν ; γένοιτο γὰρ ἄν τι καινότερον ἢ 
Μακεδὼν ἀνὴρ κιτ.λ. (so also in Philipp. 
Kpist. pp. 156, 157.) The comparative, 
καινότερον, is used as here by Theophr. in 
giving the character οἵ ἃ loquacious person : 
οἷος ἐρωτῆσαι Ἔχεις περὶ τοῦδε εἰπεῖν και- 
viv; καὶ ἐπιβαλὼν ἐρωτᾷν Μὴ λέγεταί τι 
καινότερον; It implies, as we should say, 
the very last news. 22.) The Com- 
mentators vie with each other in admiration 
of this truly wonderful speech of the great 
Apostle. Chrysostom: τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ εἰρη- 
μένον τῷ ἀποστόλῳ, ἐγενόμην τοῖς avd- 
μοι: ὡς ἄνομος, ἵνα κερδήσω ἄνόμους" 
᾿Αθηναίοις γὰρ δημηγορῶν, οὐκ ἀπὸ προ- 
φητῶν οὐδὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου διελέχθη, ἀλλ᾽ 
ἀπὸ βωμοῦ τὴν παραίνεσιν ἐποιήσατο" 
ἀπὸ τῶν οἰκείων αὐτοὺς ἐχειρώσατο δογ- 
μάτων: διὸ οὐκ εἶπεν “ἄνομος, ἀλλ᾽ 
“ὡς ἄνομος. ‘The oration of Paul be- 
fore this assembly is a living proof of his 
apostolic wisdom and eloquence: we see 
here how he, according to his own words, 
could become a Gentile to the Gentiles, to 
win the Gentiles to the Gospel.’ Neander, 
Pfl.u. L., p.317. And Stier very properly 
remarks (Reden der Apostel, ii. 131), ‘It 
was given to the Apostle in this hour, what 
he should speak ; this is plainly to be seen 
in the following discourse, which we might 
weary ourselves with praising and admiring 
in various ways; but far better than all so- 
called praise from our poor tongues is the 





20—25. 


ἔν 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AITOSTOAON. 


195 


t δεισιδαιμονεστέρους ὑμᾶς Oewpa 23 4 διερχόμενος yap καὶ there only+. 


A \ , A 
Yavabewmpav τὰ “ σεβάσματα ὑμῶν εὗρον καὶ * βωμὸν ἐν 
ἡ ἐπεγέγραπτο 2 ᾿Αγνώ θεῷ 
ᾧ 5" ἐπεγέγραπ γνώστῳ θεῷ. 


compar., ver. 21. 
τῶν ποιημάτων, Diod. Sic. xiv. 109. 
A) ἄς. Beland Dr. 27 Theod. only. 


26. Rev.xxi.12. Heb. viii. 10. x. 16 only. Num. xvii. 2, 3. 
a 1 Cor. vii. 24. 


3. 2 Macc. i. 19. ii. 7 only. 


Ὁ absol., ch. viii. 4 reff. 


= Xen. Cyr. 


iii. 3.58. Jos 

Antt. xiv. 10. 

em > n 13,14, (-Mo- 

26 οὖν ὃ ἀγνοοῦντες yin, Ἴδην 
19 only.) 


v Heb. xiii. 7 only+. @. τὴν κακίαν 
w 2 Thess. ii. 4 only. Wisd. xiv. 20. xv. 17 BX, F(not 

x here only, Jer. vii. 31 al. y Mark xy. 

z here only +. Wisd. xi. 18. xviii. 
b ch, xiii. 27 reff. 


28. for αναθεωρων, διιστορων D1(txt D*, perspiciens D-lat); ἰστορων Clem,[ txt, ]. 


σεβαστα &. 


humble recognition, that the Holy Ghost, 
the spirit of Jesus, has here spoken by the 
Apostle, and therefore it is that we have 
in his discourse a masterpiece of apostolic 
wisdom,’ The same Commentator gives the 
substance of the speech thus: ‘ He who is 
(by your own involuntary confession) w- 
known to you Athenians (religious though 
you are),—and yet (again, by your own 
confession) able to be known,—the all- 
sufficing Creator of the world, Preserver 
of all creatures,and Governor of mankind, 
—now commandeth all men (by me His 
minister) to repent, that they may know 
Him, and to believe in the Man whom He 
hath raised from the dead, that they may 
stand in the judgment, which He hath 
committed to Him.’ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθ.] 
The regular and dignified appellation fami- 
liar to them as used by all their crators,— 
of whose works Paul could hardly be aito- 
gether ignorant. κατὰ π., in every 
point of view: see reff. δεισιδαι- 
μονεστέρους) carrying your religious 
revereuce very far: an instance of which 
follows, in that they, not content with 
worshipping named and known gods, 
worshipped even an wnknown one. Blame 
‘is neither expressed, nor even implied: but 
their exceeding veneration for religion !aid 
hold of as a fact, on which Paul, with ex- 
quisite skill, engrafts his proof that le is 
introducing no new gods, but enlightening 
them with regard to an object of worship 
on which they were confessedly in the dark. 
So Chrysost.: δεισ., τουτέστιν εὐλαβεσ- 
TEPBUS, Αἴαντ: ὥςπερ ἐγκωμιάζειν αὐτοὺς 
δοκεῖ, οὐδὲν βαρὺ λέγων. To understand 
this word as Εἰ. V. ‘ too superstitious’ (‘su- 
perstitiosiores,’ Vulg., so Luther, Calov., 
Wolf), is to miss the fine and delicate 
tact of the speech, by which he at once 
parries the charge against him, and in 
doing so introduces the great Truth which 
he came to preach. The word itself 
has both senses: δεισιδαίμων, 6 εὐσεβής, 
Hesych. :—év τῷ τοιούτῳ (in battle) yap 
δὴ of δεισιδαίμονες ἧττον τοὺς ἀνθρώπους 
φοβοῦνται, Xen. Cyrop. ili. 3. 58: and 
on the other hand, Theophrast. Char. 16, 
explains δεισιδαιμονία by δειλία πρὸς τὸ 
δαιμόνιον ; and Pollux, εὐσεβή», θεῶν ἐπι- 


n (nv D2) γεγραμμενον D 


rec ov and τουτον 


μελής, 6 δὲ ὑπερτιμῶν, δεισιδαίμων καὶ δεισί- 
Geos. The character thus given of the 
Athenians is confirmed by Greek writers : 
thus, Pausan. i. 24. 3, ᾿Αθηναίοις περισσό- 
tTepov τι ἢ Tots ἄλλοις ἐς τὰ θεῖά ἐστι 
σπουδῆς. See other instances in Wetstein. 
Josephus, c. Apion. ii 11, calls them εὐσε- 
βεστάτους τῶν Ἑλλήνων. 28. ἄναθ., 
looking over, ‘reconnoitring.’ σε- 
βάσμ.] not, as Εἰ. V., ‘devotions: but 
objects of religious worship, temples, 
altars, statues, &c.: see reff. καί] 
over and above the many altars to your 
own and foreign deities. πολλὰ yap τῶν 
ἕενικῶν ἱερῶν παρεδέξαντο, . . . καὶ δὴ καὶ 
τὰ Θράκια καὶ τὰ Φρύγια, Strabo, x. p. 472. 

ἀγνώστῳ θεῷ ΤῸ an (not, the) un- 
known God. That this was the verita- 
ble inscription on the altars (not as Jerome 
on Tit. i. 12, vol. vii. p. 707, ‘ Inscriptio are 
non ita erat ut Paulus asseruit: ignoto Deo: 
sed ita: Diis Asie et Europe et Africe, 
Diis ignotis et peregrinis. Verum quia 
Paulus non pluribus Diis ignotis indigebat 


- sed uno tantum ignoto Deo, singulari verbo 


usus est’), the words @ ἐπεγέγραπτο, on 
which had been inscribed, are decisive. 
Meyer well remarks, that the historical fact 
would be abundantly established from this 
passage, being Paul’s testimony of what 
he himself had seen,—and spoken to the 
Athenian people. But we have our nar- 
rative confirmed by the following: Paus. 
i. 1. 4, ἐνταῦθαι καὶ βωμοὶ θεῶν τε ὄνομα- 
Cou€vwv ἀγνώστων, καὶ ἡρώων καὶ παί- 
dav τῶν Θήσεως καὶ Φαλήρου :—Philos- 
tratus, Vita Apollon. vi. 3, σωφρονέστερον 
τὸ περὶ πάντων θεῶν εὖ λέγειν, Kal ταῦτα 
"Afhynow, οὗ καὶ ἀγνώστων δαιμόνων 
βωμοὶ ἵδρυνται. On which Winer well 
says, that it by no means follows that each 
altar had the inscription in the plural, θεοῖς 
ἀγνώστοις, but more naturally that the 
plural has been used to suit βωμοί, and 
that the inscription on each was as here. 
The commonly cited passage of (Pseudo-) 
Lucian, Philopatr. 9, and 29, νὴ τὸν &y- 
νωστον ἐν ᾿Αθήναις, is no testimony, the 
dialogue being spurious, and the reference 
to our text evident. The origin of such 
altars has been variously explained: Diog. 
Laert. (vita Epimenid.) says, that Epime- 


O 2 


196 


c 1 Tim. v.4 
onlyt+. Eur. 
‘Phen. 1331. 
(see ch. iii. 
‘12 reff.) 

dch xiii. 5 
reff. 

e here only t. k 

fch. ix. 20 reff. 

g Matt. xi. 25. 
(Gen xxiv. 

7 


ναοῖς 


i ch. viii. 16 reff. 
1 Pet. ii. 13 only. 
Prov. xii. 9. 


+) 

h Josh. iii. 11, 13. ks 
ii. 13, iv. 3. x. 13. James iii. 7. 
liv. . 7. nhere only. 


TIPAZEI® ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


a la δ. ἐὧὖἷ ΄ lal 
ς εὐσεβεῖτε. ὃ τοῦτο ἐγὼ ἃ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖν. 
/ \ / \ \ = 
© ποιήσας TOV “ κόσμον καὶ πάντα Ta ἐν αὐτῷ, 
lal \ -“ Η / 4 = 7 
νοῦ καὶ 8" γῆς ὑπάρχων ἔν κύριος οὐκ ἐν * χειροποιήτοις 


y. Num. νυ. 6. 
Sir. iv. 3 al4, 


XVII. 


΄ 4A ΄ 
24 ὁ θεὸς ὁ 


᾿οὗτος ὃ οὐρα- 


κατοικεῖ, 35 οὐδὲ ὑπὸ χειρῶν ᾿' ἀνθρωπίνων  θερα- 
πεύεται " προςδεόμενος τινός, αὐτὸς διδοὺς πᾶσι ζωὴν καὶ 


? Rom. νί. 19. 1 Cor. 
Prov. xxix, 26., Isa, 


k ch. vii. 48 (reff.). 
m = here only. 


(see note), with A9EHLPN? 13[e sil} 36 rel [coptt(appy) arm] Clem [Ps-]Ath Chr, 


Cosm, Aug: o and τοῦτον p: txt A1BDR! vulg Orig, Jer. 


vuwy B!(Tischdf). 


24. rec κυρ. bef vrapx., with DHLP rel Clem, Chr, [Thdrt, Thl-sif] Iren-int,: txt 
ABEN ak m p 13. 40 vulg(caum sit dom.) [syrr coptt eth arm] Clem, Thdrt, Thl-fin, 


κατοικοι D!(txt D®). 
25. for οὐδε, ὁοδε D1(txt D5), 


Tec avOpwrwy (probably an error), with E[-gr] HL 


18 rel [vulg syrr coptt arm] Chr, Thdrt, Cosm,: txt ABD a p vulg [ E-lat] Clem 


Thdrt, Iren-int,.—av6p. bef χείρων δὲ. (P def.) 


ins ws bef mposdeouevos RO: 


disapproving) 25 D-lat E-lat [arm] Thdrt(twice, but once in only one ms) Iren-int. 


for τινος, [τι] avtos D8: om D? lectt-12-3. 
ott outos o δους D® (Lor: ovtos] διδους D-corr't?): dvs H Clem, Chry. 


Chr,. 


nides, on occasion ‘of a plague, advised the 
Athenians to let go white and black sheep 
from the Areiopagus, and on the spots 
where they lay down to erect altars τῷ 
προςήκοντι θεῴ : ὅθεν, he adds, ἔτι καὶ νῦν 
ἐστιν εὑρεῖν κατὰ τοὺς δήμους τῶν ᾿Αθη- 
vaitwy βωμοὺς ἀνωνύμους. Eichhorn con- 
jectures that they may have been ancient 
aitars erected before the use of writing, 
and thus inscribed in after-times. But 
1 should rather suppose that the above 
anecdote furnishes the key to the practice: 
that on the occurren: of any remarkable 
calamity or deliverance not assignable to 
the conventionally-received agency of any 
of the recognized deities, an unknown God 
was reverenced as their author. That the 
God of the Jews was meant (as supposed 
by Calov., Wolf.al.) is very improbable. 

‘Quod ignotis Diis altare erexerant, signum 
erat nihil ipsos tenere certi: habebant qui- 
dem ingentem Deorum turbam..... sed 
dum illis permiscent ignotos Deos, hoe ipso 
fatentur nihil de vera Divinitate se habere 
compertum. .... Inde apparet inquietudo, 
quod se nondum defunctos fatentur, ubi 
popularibus Diis litarunt,’ &e. Calvin. 

ὃ.... τοῦτο] The ὅν and τοῦτον of the 
rec. have probably been alterations from 
reverential motives. The neuters give 
surely the deeper, and the more appro- 
priate sense. For Paul does not identify 
the true God with the dedication of, or wor- 
ship at, the altar mentioned: but speaks 
of the Divinity (τὸ θεῖον) of whom they, 
by this inscription, confessed themselves 
ignorant. (It may however be a warning 
of the uncertainty of @ priori internal 
evidence for readings, that De Wette and 
Meyer suppose the masculines to have 
been altered to produce this very sense, 
and fo avoid the inference that Paul iden- 


om avtos H 16. 37. 56. 100 


tified the unknown God with the Creator.) 
But even a more serious objection lies 
against the masculines. The sentiment 
would thus be in direct contradiction to 
the assertion of Paul himself, 1 Cor. x. 20, 
ἃ θύουσιν, δαιμονίοις καὶ ov θεῷ θύουσιν. 
Compare also our Lord’s words, John iv. 
22, ὑμεῖς mposkuvetre ὃ οὐκ οἴδατε. In 
εὐσεβεῖτε, we have another confirmation 
ot the sense above insisted on for δεισιδαι- 
μονεστέρους. He wishes to commend their 
reverential spirit, while he shews its mis- 
direc:ion. An important lesson for all 


who have controversies with Paganism and 


Romanism. katayy.] (See above, 
katayyeAevs ver. 18.) Iam declaring,— 
making manifest, to you. ὑμεῖς we προ- 
ἐλάβετε, φησίν: ἔφθασε ὑμῶν ἢ θεραπεία 
τὸ ἐμὸν κήρυγμα. Chrys. 24.] ‘No 
wonder, that the devil, in order to diffuse 
idolatry, has blotted out among all heathen 
nations the recognition of Creation. The 
true doctrine of Creation is the proper re- 
futation of all idolatry.’ Roos. Einl. in die 
bibl. Geschicht., cited by Stier, Red. der 
Apost. ii. 140, who remarks, ‘ Only on the 
firm foundation of the Old Testament doc- 
trine of Creation can we rightly build the 
New ‘Testament doctrine of redemption : 
and only he, who scripturally believes and 
apprehends by faith the earliest words of 
Revelation, concerning a Creator of all 
things, can also apprehend, know, and 
scripturally worship, THE MAN, in whom 
God’s word, down to its latest canonical 
Revelation, gathers together all things.’ 

οὐκ ἐν χειρ.] A remarkable remi- 
niscence of the dying speech of Stephen: 
see ch. vii. 48. Mr. Humphry notices 
the similarity, but difference in its conclu- 
sion, of the argument attributed to Xerxes 
in Cicero, Leg. ii. 10: ‘ Xerxes inflammasse 


ABDE 
HLPR a 
bedfg 
ἢ ΕἼ] πὶ 
opls 





24—27. ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAON. 197 


0, -— here (ch, 


/ ¢ “ 
υ πνοὴν καὶ Ta πάντα, 36 ἐποίησέν τε ἐξ ἑνὸς ᾿ αἵματος] 


re 2) only. 
ἴω ἢ , na \ \ 
πῶν ἔθνος ἀνθρώπων “ κατοικεῖν 4 ἐπὶ παντὸς ᾿προτώποῦυ Ἂς 
an A ey , Hom. Il. ¢. 
τῆς " γῆς "ὁρίσας ' προςτεταγμένους "καιροὺς Kal τὰς 5". 
G a 7 > a ἐπ Α ᾿ Ww. gen., hey. 
ἡ ὁροθεσίας τῆς “ κατοικίας αὐτῶν, 51 5) ζητεῖν τὸν ἡ θεόν, i, 1048. 
.» Ezek, 
xxxviii. 12. r = Luke xxi. 35. (xii. 56.) GEN. xi. 8. 8 Lake se 22. ch, 


-lv.7 only. L.P.H. Num. xxxiv. 6. t = here 
Gen, i. 14. v here only + (-θετεῖν, Exod. 
w here only. Exod. xxxv.3. Dan. ij. 11 Theod. 


1 Chron, xxi. 30. 


ii. 23. x. 42. xi. 29. ver. 31. Rom.i. 4. Heb 


only. (ch. x. 33 retf.) ἃ absol., Gal. iv. 10. 
xix. 12 Alius [Symm. &c.(Field)] in Hexapl. ) 
x = Rom. x. 20 only. Exod. xxxiil. 7. 


Steph (for καὶ τα) κατα, with HL P(‘certe videtur,” Tischdf,) rel Thdrt, Thl-fin. 
(Meyer thinks xara παντα ver 22 was still in the copyist’s mind. At all events, it 
seems to be an error): kat κατα 40: txt ABDE(X) p 36 vulg syr eth arm Clem,,Chr, 
Thdrt, Cosm, Thl-sifi—om τὰ δὲ} ΓΕ p].—om kat ta παντα 13 Syr. 

26. om Te ‘DE syr [arm]: δὲ m. om aimatos ABN’p 13. 40'vulg coptt eth[-pl 
(xth-rom om εξ eves also) | Clem, Bede: ins DEHLP rel 36 syrr Thdrt, Chrgepe Cosm 
Thl Iren-int. (Meyer well remarks on the omission, that it 1s more likely to have 
happened owing to evos amaros, than that aiuatos should, be a gloss on evos,—for that 


y here only. 


peed would be rather given by av@pwrov.) 


42 vulg [ E-lat] syr-mg Clem Thl-fin Iven-int: 


for εθνος, yevos a c 23. 69. 96: 104-37- 
ανθρωπου. D-gr.. rec παν To 


mpocwrov (corrn for ease of constr), with HL rel’ Chr Thdrt, Cosm :. παν rposwroy 


EP Thdrt,: txt ABDN p 18. 36'Clem). 
prefiniens Iren-int, : 
Chr Thl. 


27. ins μαλιστα bef ζητειν D-gr. 


hardly suppose κυρ. to be genuine, as De W. and Meyer, simply from the a 
difficulty of Paul having used the expression when speaking to heathens : 


YeC TpoTeTay., with D!13 b fk [Cosm, ], 


τεταγμ. a 141, 69:-txt AB D-corrhor? EHLP® rel [vulg] Clem, 
kata οροθεσιαν [)'-or{txt D>) Iren-int. 


rec for θεὸν, κυριον (in this case we can 
priori 
the copyists 


are uniformly so careless where these two words are concerned, as to leave such con- 


siderations very uncertain), with EP rel Cosm, Thl-sif’: 


το (for: τι, or Tt. TOP) θειον 


eotw D Iren-int: txt ABHLN-ad p 18. 36. 40 vulg syrr coptt. [arm] Chr, Thl-fin. 


templa Grecie dicitur, quod, parietibus 
inciuderent deos, quibus omnia deberent 
esse patentia et libera, quorumque hic 
mundus omnis templum esset et domus.’” 
Where Paul stood, he might see the 
celebrated colossal statue of Athena Polias, 
known by the Athenians as 7 @ed, standing 
and keeping guard with spear and shield 
in the enclosure of the Acropolis. 
25.| θεραπεύεται, is (really and truly) 
served. So θεὸς od μυκτηρίζεται, Gal. 
vi. 7. προςδ.] ἐνδεῖσθαι μέν ἐστι. τὸ 
παντελῶς μὴ ἔχειν" προςδεῖσθαι δὲ τὸ ἔχειν 
μὲν μέρος, ἔτι δὲ δεῖσθαι πρὸς τὸ τέλειον. 
Ulpian (in Wetst.). As the assertion 
of Creation contradicted the Epicurean 
error, so this laid hold of that portion of 
truth, which, however disguised, that school 
had apprehended: ‘Omnis enim per se 
divam natura necesse est | Immortali evo 
summa cum pace fruatur.|..... | Ipsa 
suis pollens opibus, nzhil indiga nostri,’ 
Lucret.i.57. There is a verse in 2 Macc. 
xiv. 35, remarkable, as compared with the 
thoughts and words of Paul here: σύ, κύριε, 
τῶν ὅλων ἀπροεδεὴς ὑπάρχων, εὐδοκήσας 
ναὸν τῆς σῆς κατασκηνώσεως ἐν ἡμῖν 
γενέσθαι. τινός | neuter, as referring 
to the temples and statues offered by the 
Athenians. Conv x. mvojnv| He is 
the Preserver, as well as the Creator, of 
2il; and all things come to us from Him. 
Compare, on τὰ πάντα, David’s words, 


1 Chron. xxix. 14, σὰ τὰ πάντα, καὶ ἐκ 
τῶν σῶν δεδώκαμέν σοι. 260.] ἐξ ἑνὸς 
[αἵμ 1 was said, be it remembered, to a 
people who gave themselves out for αὐτό- 
χθονες : but we must not imagine that to 
refute this was the object of the words: 
they aim far higher than this, and contro: 
vert the whole genius of polytheism, which 
attributed to the various nations differing 
mythical origins, and separate guardian 
gods. It, is remarkable, that though of all 
people. the Jews. were the most distin- 
guished in their covenant state from other 
nations of the earth, yet to them only was 
given the revelation of the true history of 
mankind, as all created of one blood: a 
doctrine kept as it were in store for the 
gospel.to proclaim. — Not,‘ hath made of 
one blood,’ &e., as E. V., but. caused every, 
nation of men (sprung) of one [blood] ta 
dwell, &c. See Matt. v.32; Mark vii. 37. 
παντὸς mposwtrov| The omission 
of the art. may be accounted for by the 
words following ἐπί (see Middleton, vi. 1): 
or, perhaps, by the parallelism of πᾶν 
ἔθνος, παντὸς mposmmov: or perhaps, as 
mas οἶκος ᾿Ισραήλ, ch. ii. 36, because πρός- 
wrov τῆς γῆς is regarded as one appel- 
lative. See note on πᾶσα oikodoun, Eph. 
i. 21. Kap 6p08.| He wha 
was before (ver. 24) the Creator, then 
(ver. 25) the Preserver, is now the Gover- 
nor of all men: prescribing to each nation 


198 TIPAEEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XVII. 


΄ 9 £ax \ , , > 

r= ae εἰ ἄρα ye τ ψηλαφησειαν αυτον Kal εὕροιεν, 5 Kal = Te OU 
xXXIlV. . = 7 - 
ie ὑπάρχοντα 38 © ἐν 

ξ a a \ , \ 3 , c ͵ 
ha i0, opt αὐτῷ yap ζῶμεν καὶ ' κινούμεθα καὶ ὃ ἐσμέν, ὡς Kal τινες 
h. iv. 

Pek 

a ch. ii. 18 reff. 

b Matt. viii. 30. 
Mark xii. 34. 
Luke vii. 6. 
xv. 20. 
John xxi. 8. 
Eph. ii. 13, 
U7. (ch. xxii. 
21 reff.) 


b A b > ‘ ec « \ us / - n da 
ακραν ΟἼΤΟ “ενος εκαστου ων 
μακρ 


> / ων id 7 + rn > ’ Λ 
ἐσμέν. 39" γένος οὖν ὑπάρχοντες τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ' ὀφείλο- 
/ A x > ΄ xr ͵ 7 
μεν νομίζειν χρυσῳ 7) αργυρῳ 7) λίθῳ τι χαραγματίι 
Dn , \ 0 > θ , 2 θ , Ρ \ Ρ θ a 3 
τέχνης Kal εν ULNT EWS αν βώπου, το ELOY εἰναι 
Deut. xxx. ll. c w. gen. partit., Luke iv. 40. xvi. 5. chit. 3. παν 58. 1 Thess τὶ. 11 aL ΤΠ Ὁ: d ch. 
ii. 30. viii. 16 reff. e cf. 1 Pet. i. 5, 22. ἢ = here (Matt. xxiii. 4. xxvii. 39 || Mk. ch. xxi. 30. xxiv. 
5. Rev. ii. 5. vi. 14) only. Gen. vii. 14,21 al. Ken. Mem.i.1. 1d. g emphat., Matt. 11. 18, xxiii. 30 al. 
h ch. xviii. 15 reff. i= here only. (Rom. ii. 13 reff.) k = ch. iv. 6 reff. = Por: 
xi. 7,10. Rom. xy. 1. τὰ = here (Rev. xiii. 16,17 al5.) only τ. n = here only. (ch. xviii. 


3 reff.) 3 Kings vii. 14. o = here (Matt. ix. 4. xii. 25. Heb. iv. 12) onlyt. (Job xxi. 27 Symm.) 
phere only +. Xen. Mem.i. 4.18. (2 Pot.i. 3,4. Exod. xxxi. 3.) 


Ψψηλαφησαισαν D: -σαιεν a 8. 64. 95!. 105: «σειεν EX 40 Ee. 
(txt D4) [Iren-int, ]. . for καὶ (bef evp.), ἡ AD 36. 40 vulg(not tol) sah [ Clem, ] 
lren-int,. ευροισαν D!, rec καίτοιγε (alteration to more usual word ; the 
readg και τοι 7s not, as Meyer thinks, any sign that rec is genuine, but merely that τοι 
in the marg had been sometimes prefixed to the γε, sometimes substituted for it), with 
P28 a Chr, Cosm, Thl-fin: καιτοι AE Clem: καὶ τε D!s txt B ([D-corr] HLP! p 13. 


avto D! 


rn h > ς rn j ne ? ͵ὕ “ \ Ἁ k / Ρ 
τῶν καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς ' ποιητῶν εἰρήκασιν Tov γὰρ καὶ * γένος 


36 rel Did Thi-sif. 


28. αὐτὴ D'(txt D*(?)). 
μας B 33. 68. 95-6. 105-37 copt. 
[zth-rom ] Iren-int Ambr;szpe). 


29. ins ovte bef χρυσω D!{and lat]. 
fin: χρυσιω ἡ apyupw & ('Thdrt-ed,]. 
avOpwrev E-gr eth. 


its space to dwell in, and its time of en- 
durance. προςτετ., not προτ., ap- 
pointed, ‘ordered by Him.’ 27.| ἴη- 
τεῖν does not depend on ἐποίησεν, but 
gives the intent of the above-mentioned 
providential arrangement: that they 
might seek God. τὸν κύριον (as rec. and 
two uncial Mss. have) has probably been a 
careless mistake of a transcriber: τὶ τὸ 
θεῖόμ ἐστιν, which appears to have been the 
reading of D, is one of its own strange 
glosses. ei ἄρα] if by any chance, 
denoting a contingency apparently not 
very likely to happen, see Hartung, Parti- 
kellehre, i. 440. ψηλαφήσειαν) Ori- 
ginally an Adolic form, but frequent in 
Attic Greek, for ψηλαφήσαιεν, see Luke 
vi. 11. On the word itself, compare Aris- 
toph. (Pax, 691): προτοῦ μὲν οὖν | ἐψη- 
λαφῶμεν ἐν σκότῳ τὰ πράγματα, | νυνὶ δ᾽ 
ἅπαντα πρὸς λύχνον βουλεύσομεν. These 
lines, as Mr. Humphry observes, ‘ seem at 
once to illustrate the figurative use of 
the verb, and to express the condition 
of man prior and subsequent to revela- 
tion.’ kai ye....] ‘Not that ΗΕ 
is distant from us, but that we are igno- 
rant of Him.’ See Rom. x. 6, 8; Jer. 
xxiii. 23, 24. καί ye, ‘et quidem: see 
Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 398 f. 

28.) There is no justification for the pan- 
therst in this. It is properly said only 
of the race of men, as being His offspring, 


ov μακραν or wv Ds) αφ Ὁ. 
xovros Εἰ lect-12 Clem: amexovta [a] 69. 98-marg 105: om D}(txt 1)5). 
aft ἐσμεν ins To καθ ἡμεραν D. 
των κ΄ vu. bef τινες Ὁ. 
for tov, τουτου )} ε 12 192, 21. 96 Iren-int: 
αὐτου E? 35. 68: ipsius E-lat vulg Hil,: τουτῶν 3: τουτο 137. 


for καὶ, ἡ D-gr Iren-int,;: om coptt eth-rom. 


υμων ΑἸ. Κὶ ut. υπαρ- 
ὠσπερ D. 
om ποιήτων Ὁ 


χρυσιω ἡ αργυριω AE 40 Damase, Thl- 


bound to Him: proceeding from, and up- 
held by, and therefore living, moving, 
and being im Him :—but even in a wider 
sense His Being, though a separate objec- 
tive Personality, involves and contains that 
of His creatures. See Eph. i. 10, where the 
same is said of Christ. ἐν αὐτῷ must not be 
taken for ‘dy Him: the subsequent cita- 
tion would in that case be irrelevant. 
Cop. xiv. ἐσμ.} ‘A climax : out of God we 
should have no Life, nor even movement 
(which some things without life have, 
plants, water, &c.), nay, not any existence 
at all (we should not have been).’ Meyer. 
Storr’s explanation of ζῶμεν by “ vivimus 
beate ac hilare,’ and Kuinoel and Olshau- 
sen’s of ἐσμέν by ‘ real being,’ i.e. ‘the spiri- 
tual life,’ are evidently beside the purpose ; 
the intent being to shew the absolute de- 
pendence for every thing of man on God,— 
and thence the absurdity of supposing the 
Godhead like to the works of his (man’s) 
hands. τοῦ yap kK. y. éop. | Aratus, in 
the opening lines of the Phenomena... . 
πάντη δὲ Διὸς κεχρήμεθα πάντες" τοῦ yap. 
καὶ γένος ἐσμέν. Kleanthes also, Hymn. 


in Jov. 5, has ἐκ σοῦ γὰρ γένος ἐσμέν.. 


Aratus was a native of Tarsus, about 270 
B.C., and wrote astronomical poems, of 
which two, the φαινόμενα and διοσημεία, 
remain. Kleanthes was born at Assos, in 
Troas, about 300 B.c. The Apostle, by 
the plural, seems to have both poets in his 





238—33. ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 199 


, \ => ΄ an >] , e \ 
ὅμοιον. °0 τους μὲν οὖν 4 χρόνους THs * ἀγνοίας § ὑπεριδὼν 4 constr, ch. 
€ ‘ \ n , “- / eee q 
ὁ θεὸς ‘ta ‘viv ἃ παραγγέλλει τοῖς ἀνθρώποις πάντας * PMs, 
a κ , , / 1 Pet. i. 14 
ἡ πανταχοῦ “ μετανοεῖν, “ὶ ἡ καθότι Y ἔστησεν ἡμέραν ἐν only. Levit 
xXX11. . 


a / \ / , 
ἢ μέλλει *KpiVEY THY ὃ οἰκουμένην ἐν ὃ δικαιοσύνῃ, © ἐν She only. 


Levit. xx. 4. 


’ νι δ σ f t fe \ fn h 2 ΄ Deut. xxl. & 
ἀνδρὶ @ “ WPLOEV, “πιστιν “ὃ παρασχων πᾶσιν," ἀναστήσας ὑπεριδὼν 

5. View |: - A 39 2 , δὲ ANY, i κ᾿ τῆς ἰδίας 
αὐτὸν “ εκ νεκρῶν. “ ἀκούσαντες 0€ ' ἀναστασιν 'VEKPOWV ἀσφαλείας, 


9 , e 3 οἰ , Dion. Hal. 
οἱ μὲν " ἐχλεύαζον, of δὲ εἶπαν ᾿Ακουσόμεθά cov περὶ , ant i.ti, 


ch. iv. δ 108 


2 \ ΄ , td a Seen 3 es 
τούτου καὶ πάλιν: *!ovtws ὁ ἸΙαῦλος τ ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ 26h. 4 ret, 
28. xvi. 20. Luke ix. 6. ch. xxiv. 3. xxviii. 22. 1 Cor. iv. 17 only. Isa. xlii. 22. (-χῆ, ch. xxi. 28.) 


w absol., ch. ii. 38. iii, 19. xxvi. 20 al. x = ch. ii. 24 reff. 


: y = here only. z -- Rom, 
iii. 6 (κόσμον). Psa. ix. 8. xcv. 13. xevii. 10. ; 


3, ΞΞ Ch, Xx. 27 Teli. b absol., ch. 
xxiv. 25. Rom. ix. 28. xiv. 17 al. Ps. as above (z). Sir. xiv. 26. c — Matt. xii. 24. Luke 
xi. 15. 1 Cor. vi. 2. d attr., ch. i. 1 reff. fee ch. x. 42. (ver. 26 reff.) f here 
only. Jos. Antt. xv. 7.10, πίστ. παρεῖχε τ. λόγον τ. BaBa παῖδας. g = ch. xvi. 16 reff. 
h ch. ii. 24 reff. i 1 Cor. xv. 12 reff. k here only +. Wisd. xi. 15. 2 Macc. vii. 27 only. Prov. 
xiv. 9 Aquil. (ἐκχλ. ib. Symm. διαχλ., ch. ii. 13.) 1 Rom. νυ. 12 reff. m.2'Cor. 
vi. 17, from Isa. li. 11. 

30. aft της αγνοιας ins ταυτης D'{and lat] vulg. και Tous xpov. μεν ovy Εἰ : et 
tempora quidem vulg. παριδων D}(txt D-corr) = [υἹπεριδων D* 103: despiciens 
vulg. amayyeAAe BN! [Ath-ms, ]. rec maou (alteration, to agree with avépw- 
ποις. Meyer and De Wette’s idea, that πασι was altered to navtas to soften the 
assertion that God commanded ανθ. πασι mavtaxov,—is in the highest degree unpro- 
bable), with HLP rel wth Ps-Ath, Chr Thdrt Cosm ΤῊ] Iren-int: wa waytes |}}: 


omnibus ut omnes Syr: txt ABD4EN 13. 36. 40 [spec] Ath, Cyr,: ut omnes ubique 


penitentiam agant vulg D-lat. 


$1. rec διοτι (explan of καθοτιὺ), with HU rel Chr, Thi-sif: καθὸ 18. 36. 180: txt 


ABDEPX a c 13 Ath, [ Ps-Ath, Bas, } Chdrt, Cyr, Chron Thl-fin. 
for ev ἡ u. κρ., κρειναι 1): jucicari Iren-int,; gudicare Aug). 


D-gr. aft avdpc ins τἡσου 1) Iren-int. 
32. (ειπαν, so BEN.) 


[ἐστησαν D-gr. | 
om 2nd ev 


mapecxev(sic) exibere 1), παρασχειν 32. 57. 
rec παλιν περι TOUTOUV. 


33 και ουτως, With HLP rel 36 


[syrr copt] Chr, Thl-sif: [περι τ. παλ. κι ovr. E:] txt AB(D)X 18. 40 [(vulg] arm) 


Thl-fin.—om καὶ D [ vulg arin J. 


mind. The τοῦ refers to Zeus in both 
cases, the admission being taken as a por- 
tion of truth regarding the Supreme God, 
which even heathen poets confessed. The 
καί has no connexion here, but is (see 
above) part of the verse in Aratus. 
30. ὑπεριδών͵ In this word lie treasures 
of mercy for those who lived in the times 
of ignorance. God overlooked them [the 
rendering of the E.V. bears the same 
meaning, but is to our ears in these days 
objectionable]: 1. 6. corrected not this 
ignorance itself as a sin, but the abuses 
even of this, by which the heathen sunk 
into deeper degradation. The same ar- 
gument is treated more at length in 
Rom. i. ii. The πᾶσι of the rec. and ἵνα 
πάντες Of D! have both been corrections 
occasioned by the apparent ditficulty of τοῖς 
ἀνθρώποις πάντας. The genuine reading 
gives the emphatic πάντας πανταχοῦ, fol- 
lowing on the foregoing assertion of vv. 25, 
26, its proper place. 31. καθότι] 
See var. read. and reff.:—used by Luke 
and him only: ‘seeing that,’ inasmuch as. 
ἐν Sixatog.] δικαιοσ. is the cha- 
racter of the judgment,—the element, of 
which it shall consist. ἐν ἀνδρί] Not, 
‘in (by) @ man,’ but by (i. 6. in the person 
of) the man: the art. is omitted after the 
preposition: see Midd. vi. 1. The ἐν is 


not instrumental, properly speaking, here: 
or any where else. Its judicial use is only 
a particular case of its usage of investiture 
or elementary condition : inthe judge the 
judgment consists, is constituted ; he is its 
vehicle and expression. See ref. 1 Cor. 
and note for examples of this use. 
ator. κιτ.λ.7 ‘Quia res erat vix credibilis, 
argumentum adfert eximium.’ Grotius. 
32. ἀνάστ. vexp.| Perhaps here, 
‘when they heard of a resurrection of dead 
men,’ viz. of that of Christ, νεκρῶν being 
generic. But the same words are used 
in ref. 1 Cor. πῶς λέγουσιν ἐν ὑμῖν τινες 
ὅτι ἀνάστασις νεκρῶν οὐκ ἔστιν ; 80 that 
I would rather take them here to mean 
that they inferred the general possibility of 
the resurrection of the dead, as a tenet of 
Paul’s, from the one case which he men- 
tioned. of .... ot δέ] We must 
not allot these two parties as some have 
done, the former to the Epicureans, the 
latter to the Stoics: the description is 
general. The words ἀκουσόμεθα ... . 
need not be taken as ironical. -The hear- 
ing not having taken place is no proof that 
it was not intended at the time: and the 
distinction between these and the mockers 
seems to imply that they were in earnest. 
33. οὕτως] ‘In this state of the 
popular mind: (with an expectation of 


200 


Mm" μέσου αὐτῶν" 


nm as above (m). 


Matt. xiii. 49 
ch, xxiii. 10 
1 Cor. v. 2 


Col. ii. 14. 
: Thess. ii. 7 
only. Gen. 
KXXV. 2. 

. (ἢ. v. 13 reff. 


onlyt. w. 
ἀπό, ch. i. 4. 
1 Chron. xii. 


TIPAE EIS ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΏΝ: 


» Ud , \ q -“ \ > a 
ὀνόματι Δάμαρις καὶ 4 ἕτεροι σὺν αὐτοῖς. 


XVII. 34. 


, 3 
34 τινὲξ δὲ ἄνδρες 5. κολληθέντες αὐτῳ 
; , «τ κ \ 
P ἐπίστευσαν, ἐν οἷς καὶ Διονύσιος ὁ ᾿Αρεοπαγίτης καὶ γυνὴ 


XVIII. 1 Μετὰ 


[δὲ] ταῦτα " χωριαθεὶς ἐκ τῶν ᾿Αθηνῶν ἦλθεν εἰς Κόρινθον, 
9 \ e , 9 a > ΄ > ΄ Ν 
2 καὶ εὑρών τινα ᾿Ιουδαῖον ὀνόματι ᾿Ακύλαν, ἸΙ]οντικὸν 
ὁ τῷ “'᾿ γένει, ἃ προσφάτως ἐληλυθότα ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Ιταλίας, καὶ 
“ la) Ν , ΄ 
Πρίσκιλλαν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, διὰ τὸ " διατεταχέναι λαύ- 


«Mark νι 6. δίον Τ χωρίζεσθαι πάντας τοὺς ᾿Ιουδαίους ἀπὸ τῆς Ῥώμης, 
36. 


ch. iv. 
ver. 24. 
x. 20.) 


t= ch. vii. 19. 


34. εκολληθησαν D)[-gr](txt D4). 
apeom. ins εὐσχήμων complacens 1}. 


2 Cor. xi. 26. Esth. ii. 10. 
v Luke viii. 55, 1 Cor. vii. 17 al. L.P., exe. Matt. xi. 1. Ezek. xxi. 19. (-ταγή, ch. vii. 53.) 


om ka ‘yur. ov. ὃ. D 


uhere only. Deut. xxiv. 5. (-Tos, Heb. 


for o (bef apeor.), τις D: om B. aft 
: aft yur. ins τίμια E. 


Cuap. XVIII. 1. om δε A Β[μεταυτα B'] δὲ a 13 vulg copt [arm]: ins (D)EHLP 
rel 36 [syr sah Orig-int, 1 Chr,.—a: μετὰ tauvta Syr xth.—avaxwpnoas δε, omg μετα 


ταυτα, 10. 


rec aft χωρισθεις ins ο παυλὺς (inserted just as δε was omitted, at 


beginning of an ecclesiastical portion), with AEHLP rel 36 [syrr ath arm Orig-int ] 


Chr: om BD® 13 vulg [copt] sah. 
2. [evpov Ρ 6 g!. 


(txt D-corr!) : om B. om Tous D. 


χωρισθ. ex in ver 1. 


tor ex, απὸ D. 
[ etseAnA. 13 :] εληλυθα D}(txt 3). 
fk m13: texeva(sic) δὲ : mposterax. ad: διατεταχθεναι 137-73. 


τεταχεναι DELP 
κλαυδιος I} 
rec (for 2nd απο) ex (prob corrn to suit 


So De Wette: Meyer thinks the aro to have been a corrn to 


suit amo τὴς ιταλ., but the other suppn is mueh more likely, the same verb occurring 


in both), with HP ὁ fh} Chr,: om 13: txt ABDELN rel. 


being heard again?) [The “so” of the 
E. V. does not give this forcibly enough, 
but looks like a mere particle of transition. | 
34. Διονύσιος ὁ “Ap.] Nothing 
moreisknownofhim. Euseb. H. Εἰ. iii. 4; 
iv. 23, relates that he was bishop of 
Athens, and Niceph. iii. 11, that he died 
a martyr. The writings which go by his 
name are undoubtedly spurious. 
γυνή) Not, as Chrys., de Saeerd. iv. 7, 
vol. i. p. 412, seems to infer from the form 
of the expression,—7KoAovOnrev αὐτῷ μετὰ 
τῆς γυναικός, the wife of Dionysius: this 
would have been 7 γυνὴ αὐτοῦ. 

Cnap. XVIII. 1.1 Corinth was at this 
time a colony (see note, ch. xvi. 12), the 
capital of the Roman province of Achaia, 
and the residence of the proconsul. For 
further particulars, see Prolegg. to 1 Cor. 
§ ii. 2. Ἰουδαῖον) It appears that 
Aquila and Priscilla were not Christians at 
this time: it is the similarity of employ- 
ment only which draws them to Paul, and 
their conversion is left to be inferred as 
taking place in eonsequence: see ver. 26. 

Ποντικὸν τ. y.] It is remarkable, 
that Pontius Aquila is a name found in 
the Pontian gens at Rome more than once 
in the days of the Republic (see Cicero, ad 
Fam. x. 33; Suet., Jul. Cas. 78; Smith’s 
Dict. of Biogr., art. Aquila, Pontius) ; 
whence some have supposed that this may 
have been a freedman of a Pontius Aquila, 
and that Ποντ. τῷ γένει may have been an 
inference from his name. But besides that 


aft pwuns ins οἱ κε 


Luke’s acquaintance with the real origin of 
Aquila could hardly but have been accu- 
rate,— Aquila, the translator of the O. T. 
into Greek, was also a native of Pontus. 

From the notices of Aquila and Pris- 
cilla in the Epistles, they appear to have 
travelled, fixing their abode by turns in 
different principal cities, for the sake of 
their business. In ver. 19, we have them 
left at Ephesus (see also ver. 26) ; in 1 Cor. 
xvi. 19, still there; in Rom. xvi. 3 ff., 
again at Rome; in 2 Tim. iv. 19, again at 
Ephesus. διὰ τὸ διατεταχέναι . . .7 
Suet. Claud. 25, says, ‘ Judzos impulsore 
Chresto assidue tumultuantes Roma expu- 
lit’ but as he gives this without any fixed 
note of time,—as the words ‘impulsore 
Chresto” may be taken in three ways (as 
indicative either (1) of an actual leader of 
that name, or (2) of some tumult connected 
with the expectations of a Messiah, or (3) 
of some dispute about Christianity),— 
Neander well observes, that after all which 
has been said on it, no secure historical in- 
ference respecting the date of the event, or 
its connexion with any Christian church at 
Rome, can be drawn. It was as a Jew that 
Aquila was driven from Rome: and there 
is not a word of Christians here. If one 
could identify this expulsion of the Jews 
with that of the ‘ mathematici’ in Tacitus 
(Ann. xii. 52), which took place Fausto 
Sulla, Salv. Othone Coss. (A.D. 52), we 
might be on surer ground,—but this is very 
uncertain, and even improbable. The two 








X VIL. 1—5. 


" προςῆλθεν αὐτοῖς, 8 καὶ διὰ TO? 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ, ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 201 


* ὁμότεχνον εἶναι ¥ ἔμενεν w = here only. 


see ch. x. 28. 


Yqap αὐτοῖς καὶ 2 ἠργάζετο, ἦσαν yap * σκηνοποιοὶ τῇ * here only +. 


b , 4e ὃ , \ 9 A a qd \ a zabsol., Matt. 
τέχνη" ἐλέγετο δὲ ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ κατὰ πᾶν xxi 38. xxv. 
‘i - 16. Luke xiii. 

, / \ a Ἢ 
σάββατον, “ ἔπειθέν τε ᾿Ιουδαίους καὶ “Ἑλληνας. 5 ὡς δὲ 14. ομαῖχ 4. 
f 1 Thess. ii. 9 


κατῆλθον ἀπὸ τῆς Μακεδονίας 6 τε 


ς 
Σίλας καὶ o Te oe 
18. 


Exod. v. 


΄ A U e a ‘ 
μόθεος, ὅ συνείχετο TH λόγῳ ὁ Παῦλος, " διαμαρτυρόμενος + here only+. 


xxii. 15 Symm, 


-ποιΐα, Deut. xxxi. 10 LX X-mss. & Alius in Hexapl.) 


(-ποιειν, Isa. 
b = Rev. xviii. 22 (ch. 


xvii. 29) only. Sir. xxxviii. 34. (-νίτης, ch. xix. 24.) ς =ch. xvii. 2 reff. absol., ch. xix. 
8,9. xx.9. Sir. xiv. 20, BN F(not A) Ald. d ch. xiii. 27 reff. e = ch. xix. 26. 2 Cor. 
v.11. Wisd. xvi. 8. f= ch. viii. 5 reff. w. ἀπό, ch. xi. 27. xii. 19. xv. 1. g 2 Cor. 


v. 14. reff. Wisd. xvii. 20. 


watwknoer(-cav D-corr!) es τὴν axaay D, simly syr-mg. 


add o παυλος D. 
3. om εἰναι D. 
mpos avtous TD. 
Orig-int }). om last clause D. 
e 5118. 40 Chr,. 
4. om ver am! fuld lat-mss-in-Bede : 


euewvey E[-gr] HL [a c(?) ἃ m syr] Chr, Thl: 
(npya¢., so ABIDE[N] k 18: 
rec τὴν Texvnv, With H rel 36 Thi: 


h ch. viii. 25 ref 


avtw D!-gr(txt D2). 


manebat E-lat. 
-Covro &![ B copt(Tisehdf) 
txt ABELPX 


εἰσπορευόμενος δε εἰς THY συναγωγὴν κατα Tay 


σαββατον διελέγετο και evTiers[interponens] τὸ ovowa Tov κυριου τήησου και (OM και 
]})-corr) επιθεν δε [om D-lat] ov μονον ιουδαιους αλλα και ελληνας [0 ; simly vulg-ed syr- 


ing aft σαββατον ins εντιθεις TO ονομα του κυριου ιήησου. 
5. for ws δε κατηλθον, mapeyevovto δε D. 
om o bef tin. D 42. 173. 


})'-gr: ot 0. 
stitution from misunderstanding : 


for παν, μιαν H: παντα 13. 
om της Lhk. for o Te, ToTE 
rec for Tw Aoyw, Tw πνευματι (sub- 


or perhaps, as Meyer, originally a scholium on συν- 


evyeTo, and thence has usurped the place of the origl τω Aoyw), with H [ L(sic, Treg) | P 


rel 36 syr-mg arin Chr, : 
om ὁ (bef av.) D. 


could hardly have been united. The cir- 
cumstance related by Dio Cassius, lx. 6, 
which seems to contradict Suetonius and 
our text,—tTobs ᾿Ιουδαίους πλευνάσαντας 
αὖθις, ὥςτε χαλεπῶς ἂν ἄνευ ταραχῆς ὑπὸ 
τοῦ ὄχλου σφῶν THs πόλεως εἰρχθῆναι, οὐκ 
ἐξήλασε μέν, τῷ δὲ πατρίῳ νόμῳ βίῳ χρω- 
μένους ἐκέλευσε μὴ συναθροίζεσθαι,---᾿Ὀτο- 
bably describes a step taken by Claudius 
previously to this expulsion, which not 
improbably occasioned the tumults which 
made the expulsion necessary. The 
edict soon became invalid, or the pro- 
hibition was taken off: we find Aquila at 
Rome, Rom. xvi. 3, and many Jews 
resident there, ch. xxviii. 17 ff. 3. 
ἠργάζετο] “The Jewish Rabbis having 
no state pay, it was their practice to 
teach their children a trade. ‘ What 
is commanded of a father towards his 
son ?? asks a Talmudic writer. “ΤῸ cir- 
cumcise him, to teach him the law, to 
teach him a trade.’ Rabbi Judah saith, 
‘He that teacheth not his son a trade, 
doth the same as if he taught him to 
be a thief:? and Rabban Gamaliel saith, 
‘He that hath a trade in his hand, to 
what is he like? He is like a vineyard 
that is fenced.?” ΟΣ and H. i. p. 58. 

The places where Paul refers to his 
supporting himself by his own manual 
labour are,—ch. xx. 34 (Ephesus) :—1 Cor. 
ix. 12 ff.; 2 Cor. vii. 2 (Corinth) :—1 Thess. 
11.9; 2 Thess. iii. 8 (‘Thessalonica). In 


txt ABDERN c 18, 40 vulg syrr coptt eth Bas, ‘Thdrt,. 
διαμαρτυρουμενος D! 40. 65 Thil-fin. 


2 Cor. xi. 9, we learn that supplies were 
also brought to him at Corinth from Mace- 
donia, i.e. Philippi, see Phil. iv. 15. 

σκηνοποιοί] The general opinion now is, 
that Paul was a maker of tents from the 
‘cilicium,’ or hair-cloth of Cilician goats. 
Thus Kuinoel, citing from Hug and Kich- 
horn, says of the former, ‘‘ Ad hanc sen- 
tentiam comprobandam monuit, Ciliciam, 
Pauli patriam, refertam fuisse hircis et 
capris villosis, eorumque villis Cilices usos 
esse ad conficiendum pannum, Cilicium 
inde dictum. Suidas: Κίλικος τράγος᾽ 6 
δασύς" τοιοῦτοι yap ἐν Κιλικίᾳ γίνονται 
τράγοι, ὅθεν καὶ τὰ ἐκ τῶν τριχῶν συν- 
τιθέμενα Κιλίκια καλοῦνται. Hoc panno 
usos esse milites, nautas, Nomadas, ad ten- 
toria conficienda, v. Vegetius, de Re Mil. 
iv. 6. Plin. N. H. vi. 28, ‘ Nomades, in- 
festatoresque Chaldzorum scenite ....et 
ipsi vagi, sed a tabernaculis cognominati, 
que cilicits metantur, ubi libuit.’? Solin. 
33, ‘Scenitez caussam nominis inde ducunt, 
quod tentoriis succedunt, nec alias domos 
habent, ipsa autem tentoria czlicina sunt ; 
ita nuncupantur velamenta caprarum pilis 
texta.’” If it be objected, that Paul would 
hardly find the raw material for this work 
in cities far from Cilicia, it may be an- 
swered, that this would not be required in 
the fabrication of tents from the hair- 
cloth, which doubtless itself would be an 
article of commerce in the markets of 
Greece. Chrysost. calls Paul sometimes 


202 


i Rom. xiii. 2. 
James iv. 6. 
v.6. 1 Pet. 


34) only. 
3 Kings xi. 
34. Hos. i. 6 
only. 

k = ch. xiii. 45 


ren. 
Ich. xiii. 51 


reff. 
m = ch. xiii. 11. 
Matt. xxvii. 
25. Rom. i. 
18. ii. 2, 9. 
2 Kings i. 16. 
Ὦ — ch: xx. 26. 
Gen. xxiv. 8. 


τῇ συναγωγῇ. 


a r / > / Ww 3 / \ ᾽ / 
Gen χαῖν8. σῶν ἹΚορινθίων ἀκούοντες “ ἐπίστευον καὶ ἐβαπτίζοντο. 


2 Cor. v. 16. 
ΤΡ. [exc. John viii. 11.] Ps. exii. 2. 
q ch. xiii. 43 reff. r= ch, xvi. 14. ver. 13 only. 
viii. 49. xiii. 14. ch. xiii. 15. ver. 17 only Τ. 
w absol., ch. xv. ὃ reff. 


om τοῖς ἰιουδ. AH 177}. 
ins κυριον bef ino. D. 


mg. 
very imperf in yv 6, 7.) 


vuw)v νυν D}(?) (and lat). 
7. om και D1(? ins D2). 


HL[P] rel 36 syr-txt copt Chr, Thl-sif. 
Dl(txt D*): om A 2. 30. 104 eth. 


8. ο δε αρχισ. κρισπ. 1). 
eadem manu ? ]. 


σκηνοῤῥάφος, sometimes σκυτοτόμος, a 
leather-cutter, imagining that the tents 
were made of leather; ἐπὶ σκηνοῤῥαφείου 
ἑστὼς δέρματα ἔῤῥαπτε (in Catena). 

5.] See ch. xvii. 15; 1 Thess. iii. 6. 

συνείχετο τῴ λόγῳ] ‘ When Silas and 
Timotheus arrived {see ch. xvii. 15 note] 
from Macedonia, they found Paul anx- 
tously occupied in discoursing to the 
Jews.’ This 1 believe to be the meaning: 
that they found him in a state of more 
than ordinary anxiety,—more than usually 
absorbed in the work of testifying to the 
Jews (see reff.) :—a crisis in the work 
being imminent, which resulted in their 
rejection of the word of life. (On the 
whole character of his early preaching at 
Corinth, see notes, 1 Cor. ii. 1—5.) Thus 
only, the δέ in ver. 5 and that in ver. 6 will 
both be satisfied: he discoursed in the 
synagogne, &c..... but when Silas and 
Timotheus arrived, he was earnestly 
occupied in discoursing, &c. But, as they 
opposed themselves and blasphemed, &c. 
Wordsworth adopts the view that after 
the arrival of Silas and Timotheus with 
supplies from Macedonia, Paul gave up his 
tent-making and gave himself up (cuvei- 
xeto) to preaching. But surely this is 


TIPABEIS ATIOSTOAON. 


“- 5» / \ \ > lal 
τοῖς “lovdatous τὸν χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν. 
\ > la) ale "ἃ / | BE. / \ ic ΄ 
δὲ αὐτῶν καὶ * βλασφημούντων | ἐκτιναξάμενος τὰ ἱμάτια 
2 κ᾿ ᾽ \ \ ΠῚ Cc) ἣν εἶν SN x \ ἜΣ ΩΝ 
εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτοὺς To αἷμα ὑμῶν ™ ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν ὑμῶν 
‘ \ -“ cal » / 
"xabapos ἐγὼ °aTro τοῦ “ νῦν εἰς τὰ ἔθνη πορεύσομαι. 
ω φ ‘ » , 
7 καὶ Ῥ μεταβὰς ἐκεῖθεν ἦλθεν εἰς οἰκίαν τινὸς ὀνόματι 
» / qr / A r θ / @ e » ‘ Φ s »" 
Τούστου * σεβομένου τὸν ' θεον, οὗ ἡ οἰκία ἣν ὃ συνομοροῦσα 
8 δε, ay δὲ φ eere , u2 / 
Κρίσπος δὲ ὁ ‘apyiovvaywyos © eml- 
a , \ “ Oo: arte or > ~ \ \ 
στευσεν TH κυρίῳ σὺν ὅλῳ τῷ "οἴκῳ αὐτοῦ, καὶ πολλοὶ 


p Matt. xi. 1 al.t Wisd. vii. 27. xix. 19, 


ins εἰναι bef r. χριστ. (see ver 28) ABDN abd ko 13. 36 
vulg Syr syr-w-ast [coptt eth] arm Bas, Thl-fin: om ΕΗ ΠΡ rel Chr Thdrt Thl-sif. 
om ino. P. 
6. at beg ins πολλου de[ que] Aoyou γεινομενου Kat ypapwy Siepunvevouevwy D syr- 
for avtitace., (ε)τι τασσ. D}-gr(txt D4): ανθισταμενων 15-8. 36. (D!-gr is 
aft εκτιναξ. ins o παυλος D tol. 

αὐτου D Ὁ Καὶ ο [vulg-ed tol syrr copt] sah [eth] Thl-sif; pref, 40. 69. 

mopevouat !H1L Chr(some mss). 

for εκειθεν, (απο Tov ακυ͵λα D'(? [δε απο ax., Ser]) 137. 
εἰιφηλθεν A D'(?) δὲ a 13 vulg Syr syr-mg sah eth{(appy) arm] Thl-fin: txt BD?E 


ins τιτιου bef ιουστου B! D2-gr syr; τιτου EPS 
7. 15. 36. 81 vulg copt arm [Thl-fin] Jer, and (omg ιουστου) 2. 30 Syr sah (originally 
prob a mistake arising from ovouatuovot., the τι. being taken for the abbreviated form 
of τιτου or τιτιου): om AB? D'[and lat] HL xth Chr Thi-sif. 
εις Tov κυριον | in domino] D. 

ακουσαντες HL cm Thi. 
τ. OVOMATOS του κυριου ἡμων inoov χριστου 1), somewhat simly [from δια] syr-w-ast. 


XVIII. 


6 i ἀντιτασσομένων 


2 Macc. vi. 1, 9, 24 only. 
t Mark v. 22, &c. Luke 
v ch. x. 2 reff. 


s here only +. 
u — w. dat., ch. xvi. 34 reff. 


aft Ta ἱματια ins 
eyo a(p 


[for οἰκίαν, Tov ocxov 1)}.} ονοματ(οὴς 


5 
συνομοροουσα AD. 
for συν, εν H'{ corrd 
at end add πιστευοντες τω θεω δια 


ungrammatical. The aor. (ὡς κατῆλθον) 
and imperf. (συνείχετο) require the render- 
ing ‘when they arrived, they found him 
συνεχόμενον. 6. ] αἷμα as in ch. xx. 
26. The image and uearly the words, are 
from Ezek. xxxiii. 4. De Wette should 
have known hetter than to eall a citation 
from the LXX an ‘unpaulinijder Sprach- 
gebraud.’ ἀπὸ τοῦ viv] Not abso- 
lutely, only at Corinth: for ver. 19 we find 
him arguing with the Jews again in the 
synagogue at Ephesus. I have adopted 
the punctuation of Lachmann, erasing the 
colon after ἐγώ : I shall henceforth with a 
pure conscience go to the Gentiles. 

7.) In order to shew that he henceforth 
separated himself from the Jews, he, on 
leaving the synagogue, went no longer to 
the house of the Jew Aquila (who appears 
afterwards to have been converted), but 
to the house of a Gentile proselyte of the 
gate, close to the synagogue: q. d. ‘in the 
sight of all the congregation in the syna- 
gogue:’ for this seems to be the object in 
mentioning the circumstance. 8.] On 
this, a schism took place among the Jews. 
The ruler of the synagogue attached him- 
self to Paul, and was, together with Gaius, 
baptized by the Apostle himself (1 Cor. i. 





6—12. 


s , e ΄ A 
9 εἶπεν δὲ ὁ κυρίος Xéy Χγυκτὶ Ov Yopawatos τῷ Παύλω x1 Thess. v.2 
\ AL VS \ ΄ 2 τ 8 only. 
Μὴ φοβοῦ, ἀλλὰ λάλει καὶ μὴ 5 σιωπήσῃς, 10 ἃ διότι ἐγώ 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ. 


203 


Ps. 
lxxxvii. 1. 
y ch. vii. 31 


, \ “ \ >@ \ 5 / ral “- ff. 
> εἰμι META σοῦ, καὶ οὐδεὶς © ἐπιθήσεταί σοι ἃ TOD © κακῶσαί 2 Luke i. 20 al. 


/ ’ 3 \ , 
σε, δ διότε λαός ἐστί μοι πολὺς ἐν TH πόλει ταύτῃ. 


Acts, her 6 
only. Paul, 
never. Isa. 


tA ἈΝ με \ a I a 
11 f ἐκάθισεν δὲ ἐνιαυτὸν καὶ μῆνας ἕξ ὁ διδάσκων ἐν αὐτοῖς afukei 13.41. 


τὸν ὅ λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ. 


12 ΤΤαλλίωνος δὲ ἢ ἀνθυττάτου ὄντος 


L.F. princi- 


ll. “. 
τῆς ᾿Αχαΐας ' κατεπέστησαν * ὁμοθυμαδὸν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι τῷ 2 “γιὸ only. 


d constr., 1 Cor. x. 13 reff. ech. vii. 6 ref?. 
ΧΙ. 1 reff. h ch. xiii. 7 reff. 
9. om ο D. 


i here only t+. 


pally. Isa. 
xii. 2 
@ c = here only. 
Gen. xliii. 18. 
f = Luke xxiv. +9. Judg. xi. 17. g ch. 


k ch. i. 14 reff. 


rec δὲ opauatos bef εν νυκτι, with Εἰ Η [της νυκτος] LP rel syr copt 


[sah] eth Chr,: δὲ op. τω παυλω ev νυκτι D Thi-sif: ev οραματι της vuKtos C: εν opa- 


ματι (omg ev vue.) A, as also Syr: 
(sic) D}(txt D4). 


10. at beg ins αλλα (but marked for erasure) X'. 


(εστι, so ABD.) Γμοι bet ἐστι L. | 


txt BX a m 13. 40 vulg arm Thl-fin. 


σειωση5 


om σοι D-gr E. 


11. rec re (for δε), with E-gr HLP rel eth Chr, Thl: txt ABN ac m 18 vulg E-lat 


[Syr] syr coptt.—ka εκαθ. D. 
tol] demid sah arm. 


add ev κορινθω D Syr syr-w-ast: exe: 40 [vulg-ed 
aft eviavr. ins κα eva δὲ (but « is marked for erasure by δὲ}). 


for ev avt., avtous D-gr 4 [arin]; avros 37. 56. 100. 


12. [for δε, τε D Syr. | 
40. 


rec av@uratevovros, with ΒΗ ΠΡ rel Chr: txt ABD 36. 
ot ιουδαιοι bef ομοθυμαδον B g coptt. 


for τω παυλω και, συνλαλησαντες 


μεθ εαυτων emt TOY παυλον και επιθεντεβ τας χεῖρας Ὁ ; ins επιθ. τ. x. αὐτῶ syr-w-ast sah. 


14): and with him many of the Corinth- 
ians (Jews and Gentiles, it being the 
house of a proselyte), probably Aquila and 
Priscilla also, believed and were baptized. 

9. AGA. κ. μὴ σιωπ.] So, for solem- 
nity’s sake, we have an affirmation and ne- 
gation combined, John i. 8. See also Isa. 
Miii. 1. 10. ἐπιθ. σοι} See ref. and 
examples of this usage in Wetst. :—shall 
set on thee, as E. V. λαός ἐστί μοι 
πολύς) See John x. 16. As our Lord 
Jorewarned Paul in Jerusalem that they 
would not receive his testimony concerning 
Him, so here He encourages him, by a 
promise of much success in Corinth. The 
word λαός, the express title beforetime of 
the Jews, is still used now, notwithstanding 
their secession. 11.1 The year and a 
half may extend either to his departure, 
or to the incident in vv. 12 ff. Meyer 
would confine it to the latter, taking ἐκά- 
θισεν in the sense of ‘ remained in quiet ? 
but (see reff.) it will hardly bear such 
emphasis: and seeing that the incident 
in vv. 12 ff. was a notable fulfilment of 
the promise,—for though they set on him, 
they could not hurt him,—I should be 
disposed to take the other view, and re- 
gard ver. 12 to ἱκανάς, ver. 18, to have 
happened during this time. 12. Γαλ- 
Xiwvos| His original name was Marcus 
Annzeus Novatus: but, having been adopted 
into the family of the rhetorician Lucius 
Junius Gallio, he took the name of Junius 
Annzus Gallio. He was brother of Lucius 
Annezeus Seneca, the philosopher, whose 
character of him is in exact accordance 
with that which we may infer from this 


narrative: ‘Nemo mortalium mihi tam 
dulcis est, quam hic omnibus : ‘ Gallionem 
fratrem meum, quem nemo non parum 
amat, etiam qui amare plus non potest.’ 
He is called ‘dulcis Gallio’ by Statius, 
Silv. ii. 7.32. He appears to have given 
up the province of Achaia from ill health: 
‘lilnd mihi in ore erat domini mei Gal- 
lionis qui cum in Achaia febrem habere 
ccepisset, protinus navem ascendit, clami- 
tans non corporis esse sed loci morbum.’ 
Senec. Ep. 104. He was spared after the 
execution of his brother (Tacit. Ann. xv. 
73): but Dio Cassius, lxii. 25, adds, of 
ἀδελφοὶ ὕστερον ἐπαπώλοντο, and ἰδοὺ. 
Chron. ad ann. 818 (4.D. 66), says that he 
put an end to himself after his brother’s 
death. ἀνθυπάτου] See note on ch. 
xiii. 7. Achaia was originally a senatorial 
province (Dio Cass. lili. 12), but was tem- 
porarily made an imperial one by Tiberius. 
‘Tacit. Ann.i. 76, Achaiam ac Macedoniam, 
onera deprecantes, levari in presens pro- 
consulari imperio, tradique Cesari placuit.’ 
Claudius (Suet. Claud. 25) ‘ Provincias 
Achaiam et Macedoniam quas Tiberius ad 
curam suam transtulerat, senatui reddidit.’ 

τ. "Axatas] The Roman province 
of Achaia contained Hellas and the Pelo- 
ponnesus, and, with Macedonia, embraced 
all their Grecian dominions. It was so 
called, according to Pausanias (vii. 16. 7), 
because the Romans ἐχειρώσαντο“ EAAnvas 
δι ᾿Αχαιῶν τότε τοῦ Ἑλληνικοῦ προεστη- 
κότων (the Achaian league). “The βῆμα 
is mentioned three times in the course of 
this narrative (see vv. 16,17). It was of 
two kinds: (1)\-fixed in some public and 


9204 


Ich. xii, 21 


° σέβεσθαυ τὸν θεόν. 


n here only. 
Jer. xxxVvi. 
(xxix.) 8. 

1 Maec. i. 11 
only. Xen. 
Mem. iii. 11. 


Jonah i. 9. 

p= ch. viii. 35 ἢ 
reff. 

q ch. xxiv. 20. 


Rev. xviii. 5 
only. 1 Kings 


3Mace.iii. 14. Se ἣν αἰτίαν ἀήττητος ὑπάρχειν διείληπτο, καὶ κατὰ λόγον, Diod. Sic. iv. 11. 
l h 


i , > 
xxvi. 18. 
r here only +. βούλομαι ELVal. 
(-γία. ch. 1 4 
xiil. 10.) βήματος. 
s here only. 
xi. 1, ἄς. 2 Tim.iv.3. Heb. xiii, 22, Job vi. 26. 
9. ii. 8. Heb. ii. 2. 1 John u. 7. 
Xen; Cyr: v; 1. 11. x. Matt. xxvii. 4, 24. 
xvii. 8only. = Xen. Mem. ii. 6. 12. 


TPASEIS AIIOS>TOAON. 


XVIII. 


Hlaviw Rat ἤγαγον αὐτὸν ἐπὶ to! βῆμα 15 χέγοντες ὅτι 
m— Rom.i.26.™ παρὰ τὸν νόμον " ἀναπείθει οὗτο ὺς ἀνθρώπ' 
i ρ μο τος τοὺς ἀνθρώπους 
14 μέλλοντος δὲ τοῦ Παύλου Ρ ἀνοί- 
Ν , 5 «ς / \ \ 7 / 
yew τὸ στόμα εἶπεν ὁ Γαλλίων πρὸς τοὺς ᾿Ιουδαίους 
El \ 9 = q Ἰδέ / Xx r « ὃ ’ / 9S 
i μὲν [οὖν] ἣν Iadécnua τι ἢ " padvoupynua πονηρὸν, ὦ 
’ A . Ν / “Ὁ 5] , a 
Ιουδαῖοι, "κατὰ “λόγον av 'nverxounv ὑμῶν. 
΄ U , 
ἕητήματά ἐστιν περὶ “ λόγου Kal ὀνομάτων Kal νόμου 
A w θ᾽ ς la x " θ > Is Ν > \ ΄ > 
τοῦ “καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς, * ὄψεσθε αὐτοί κριτὴς ἐγὼ τούτων οὐ 
16 καὶ " ἀπήλασεν αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ 
ry , , r Ν 
17 2 ἐπιλαβόμενοι δὲ πάντες Σωσθένην τὸν 


15 εἰ δὲ 


t == 2 Cor. 


uch. xv. 2 reff. v= 2 Tim. 1. 13. | Tit. 1. 


w ch. xvii. 28. xxvi.3. Eph. i. 15. ἕκαστος τῶν καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἐρᾷ. 
(Exod. vi. 1.) 
z Ww. acc., ch. ix. 27 reff. 


y here only. Ezek. xxxtv. 12. Wisd. 


for emi, παρα δὲ, syr has πρὸ του Bnuaros, prefixing, w-ast, προς ανθυπατον. 


13. ins καταβοωντες και bef λεγοντες D. 


rec ovtos bef αναπ. (corrn of charac- 


teristic order), with DEHLP rel 36 vulg [(syrr) coptt] Chr, [Thl-sif]: txt ABN a ἢ 


k 13 arm Thl-fin. 


πειθει H 40: ανατρεπει 1. 65. 133. 


14. om ov» (see note) ABDER a Ὁ ς ο 18. 36. 40 vulg syrr [copt] sah eth arm Chr, : 


ins HLP rel.—om nv Ld m 25: 7 Al. 


ins avdpes bef ιουδαιοι D vulg. 


averxouny BN! 13; so, omg av, A 33-4-6 (confusion arising from ανηνεσχ.). 
15. rec (ntnua (corrn to suit αδικημα and padioupynua above: the plur has a mean- 
ing, see note), with D}{and lat] HLP rel 13 [E-lat] Chr Thl-fin: txt AB D*-gr 


E-gr δὲ ἃ ὁ 40 vulg syrr coptt arm Thl-sif. 


for ἐστιν, exete D-gr. rec att 


κριτὴς ins yap, with EHLP rel 36 syrr sah [arm] Chr: om ABDN 18 vulg copt zth. 


for βουλομαι, θελω TD. 


16. απελυσεν D}(txt Dt, abjecit D-lat) 133. 


17. [αἸπολαβομενοι D!-gr(txt D'). 


rec aft παντες ins οἱ ελληνες (see note), 


with DEHLP 13 rel syrr sah eth farm Chr-txt,]; οἱ ιουδαιοι 36. 180; sovd. 15-8: 


om ABX e! vulg copt Chr-comm(but om zraytes too). 


ins μετα (? there is a space, 


but the writing has perished) bef σωσθενὴν D: adprehendentes eum ... cum Sosthenen 


open place : (2) moveable, and taken by the 
Roman magistrates to be placed wherever 
they might sit in a judicial character. Pro- 
bably here and in the case of Pilate (John 
xix. 13), the former kind of seat is in- 
tended. See Smith’s Dict. of Antiquities, 
under ‘Sella. See also some remarks on 
the tribunal—‘the indispensable symbol 
of the Roman judgment-seat,’ in the Edin- 
burgh Review for Jan. 1847, p. 151.” 
C. and H. vol. i. 494. 13. παρὰ τ. 
νόμον] Against the Mosaic law :—the exer- 
cise of which, as a ‘religio licita,’ was al- 
lowed tothe Jews. 14.) Though manu- 
script authority is so strong against the 
οὖν, I have retained it, as also has Tischd?. 
(ed. 7 [not ed. 8]). Its omission may be 
easily accounted for, from the copyists 
finding it unnecessary and seemingly out 
of place: but on no supposition can its 
insertion be rendered probable. It stands 
very appropriately here, referring to the 
complaint of the Jews, either as uttered 
by them, or perhaps recapitulated by Gal- 
lio:—‘ Ye have charged this man with 
lawless conduct. If now this had really 
been £0...6- κατὰ λόγον See 


reff. We have the opposite παρὰ λόγον 
in 2 Mace. iv. 36. av ἤνεσχ. vp. | 1 
should have borne with (patiently heard) 
you. 15.) ζγτήματα has apparently 
been altered to ζήτημα to suit the sense, 
there being but oxe question before Gallio. 
But the plura] expresses contempt: If it 
is questions, &c.: as we should say, ‘a 
parcel of questions.’ See ch. xxiii. 29. 
ὀνομάτων | 6. g. Paul asserted Jesus 
to be the Christ, which the Jews denied. 
This to a Roman would be a question of 
names. τ. καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς, with emphasis : 
see reff. So Lysias (ch. xxiii. 29) declined 
to decide Paul’s case; and Festus (ch. xxv. 
20), though he did not altogether put the 
enquiry by, wished to judge it at Jeru- 
salem, where he might have the counsel 
of those learned in the Jewish law. 
17. πάντες) Apparently, ali the mod, i. 6. 
the Gentile population present. Sosthenes, 
as the ruler of the synagogue (apy. = 
either the ruler, or one of the rulers ; per- 
haps he had succeeded Crispus), had been 
the chief of the complainant Jews, and 
therefore, on their cause being rejected, 


aud themselves ignominiously dismissed, 


ABDE 
HLPRS a 
bedfg 
hklm 
013 








13—18. 


a? ΄ Α ” 
APY lLOVVAYWYIV €TUTT TOV 


\ ΄ ~ " 
οὐδὲν τούτων τῷ [Ι αλλίωνι “ ἔμελεν. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ. 


Ὁ ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ | βήματος" 


205 


αἱ γεν 8 reff. 
Ke — Matt. v.24. 
vii. 6. 2 Cor. 


18 Ὃ δὲ [Tao oer 


» ἃ et Ps enti e constr., here 
ετί σπρροςμεινᾶς rae ἱκανάς, τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς ᾿ ἀποταἕξ- only os 
, : 5 ᾿ ix. 9 reff. 
άμενος 8 ἐξέπλει εἰς THY Συρίαν, καὶ σὺν αὐτῷ ΤΙρίσκιλλα , Job αὶ δ, 
Vie es ΄ ( ΄ 2 a \ / ly. Matt. 
καὶ ᾿Ακύλας, “Keipapevos ἐν Keyypeats τὴν κεφαλήν" τν. 821 Mk. 
h. xi. 23. 
43. 1Tim.i.3. v.5only. Judg. iii. 25 A Ald. Wisd. iii. 9 only. dott i 23 ae 
f— ver. 21. Mark vi. 46. Luke ix. 61. xiy. 33. 2 Cor. ii. 13 only f. es xx. 2. 1 Macc. xi.3 only.) Jos. Antt. 
Vili. 13.7. g ch. xv. 39 reff. h ch. viii. 82. 1 Cor. xi. 6 bis only. 2 Kings xiv. 26. 
D-lat. εμελλεν EHLPR. tune Gallio fingebat eum non videre D-lat(txt 


Dt ΠΕ 7 ἡ: τς ὠ yahAlw.... 
ins των Β', 


18. aft παυλος ins εφη N'(erased by N°). 


πλευσεν K?, enavigavit H-lat. 


rel [syrr sah zth-pl arm] Chr, : 


was roughly treated by the mob. From 
this, certainly the right explanation, has 
arisen the gloss of Ἕλληνες. The other 
gloss, of ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, has sprung from the 
notion that this Sosthenes was the same 
person with the Sosthenes of 1 Cor. i. 1, ἃ 
Christian and a compan‘cn of Paul. But, 
not to insist on the improbability of the 
party driven from the tribunal having 


beaten one of their antagonists in front of 


the tribunal, - why did they not beat Paul 
himself? There is no ground for supposing 
the two persons to be the same, Sosthenes 
being no uncommon name. If they were, 
this man must have been converted after- 
wards; but he is not among those who ac- 
companied Pau! into Asia, either in ver. 18, 
or ch. xx. 4. The carelessness of Gallio 
about the matter clearly seems to be a 
further instance of his contempt for the 
Jews, and indisposition to favour them or 
their persecution of Paul. Had this been 
otherwise meant, certainly καί would not 
have been the copula. ‘So little did the 
information against Paul prosper, that the 
informers themselves were beaten without 
interference of the judge.’ Meyer. 

18.] It has been considered doubtful 
whether the words keip. τ. κεφ. K.T.A. 
apply to Paul, the subject of the sen- 
tence, or to Aquila, the last subject. The 
Jormer is held by Chrys., Theoph., Aug., 
Jer., Isid., Bede, Calv., Beza, Calov., Wolf, 
Olsh., Neand., De Wette, Baumgarten, 
Hackett, Wordsworth (whose uote may be 
profitably consulted), 8]. :—the latter by 
(Vulg.), Grot., Alberti, Kuinoel, Meyer, 
al., and more recently Dean Howson, vol. i. 
p- 498. But I quite agree with Neander 
(Pfl. u. Leit. p. 348, note), that if we con- 
sider the matter carefully, there can be no 
doubt that they can only apply to Paul. 
For, although this vow differed from that 
of the Nazarite, who shaved his hair at the 
end of his votive period, in the temple at 
Jerusalem, and burnt it with his peace- 
offering (Num. vi. 1—21), Josephus gives 


ev, but the rest is illegible). 


aft τουτων 


εξε- 


επλευσεν, navigavit D vulg: 


rec τὴν κεφαλὴν bef ev κεγχρεαις, with DEHLP 
om ev ΚεΎχ. eth-rom: txt (characteristic order) ABN 


us a description of a somewhat similar one, 
B. J. ii. 15. 1, τοὺς γὰρ ἢ νόσῳ καταπονου- 
μένους ἤ τισιν ἄλλαις ἀνάγκαις, ἔθος εὔχεσ- 
θαι πρὸ τριάκοντα ἡμερῶν hs ἀποδώσειν 
μέλλοιεν θυσίας, οἴνου τε ἀφέξεσθαι καὶ 
ξυρήσασθαι τὰς Kouas,—where it appears 
from ξυρήσασθαι (which, as Neander ob- 
serves, if it applied to the end of the time, 
would be ξυρήσεσθαι (or perhaps rather 
θρέψειν)), that the hair was shaved thirty 
days before the sacrifice. At all events, 
no sacrifice could be offered any where 
but at Jerusalem: and every such vow 
would conclude with a sacrifice. Now we 
find, on comparing the subsequent course 
of Aquila with that of Paul,—that the 
former did not go up to Jerusalem, but 
remained at Ephesus (ver. 26): but that 
Paul hastened by Ephesus, and did go up 
to Jerusalem: see ver. 22. Again, it 
would be quite irrelevant to the purpose 
of Luke, to relate such a fact of one of 
Paul’s companions. That he should do so 
apologetically, to shew that the Apostle 
still countenanced conformity with the 
law, is a view which I cannot find justi- 
fied by any features of this book: and it 
surely would be a very far-fetched apology, 
and one likely to escape the notice of 
many readers, seeing that Aquila would 
not appear as being under Paul’s influence, 
and even his conversion to the Gospel 
has not been related, but is left to be 
implied from ver. 26. Again, Meyer’s 
ground for referring κειράμ. to Aquila,— 
that his name is here placed after that of 
his wife,—is untenable, seeing that, for 
some reason, probably the superior cha- 
racter or office in the church, of Priscilla, 
the same arrangement is found (in the 
best Mss. at ver. 26, and) at Rom. xvi. 3; 
2Tim.iv.19. Lastly, the very form of the 
sentence is against a change of subject at 
κειράμενος. There are, from ver. 18 to 23 
incl.,—a section forming a distinct narra- 
tion, and complete in itself,—no less than 
nine aorist participles, eight of which in- 


906 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XVI 
jen. χα, 28 ἱκ εἶχεν yap ἃ εὐχήν. 19 κατήντησαν δὲ εἰς "Εφεσον" 
τὶ take xi. κἀκείνους " κατέλιπεν © αὐτοῦ, αὐτὸς δὲ εἰφελθὼν εἰς τὴν 
vn ΤΡ συναγωγὴν Ρ διελέχθη τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις. 30 9 ἐρωτώντων 
"Games 15) δὲ αὐτῶν "ἐπὶ πλείονα χρόνον μεῖναι οὐκ " ἐπένευσεν, --χρο 1. 
wart ls 9] ἀλλὰ ᾿ ἀποταξάμενος καὶ εἰπὼν πάλιν " ἀνακάμψω SAR DE 


ff. 
n ἘΞ Luke xv. 4. ch. xxiv. 27. xxv. 14. 1 Thess. iii. 1. Dan. x. 13. och. (xv. 34 ν. τ.) xxi. 4. Matt. xxvi. 30 be fg h 
only. 2 Kings xx. 4. p ch. xvii. 2 reff. q constr., ch. xvi. 39 reff. r=ch. xiii.31 k mo 13 
shere only. Prov. xxvi.24. 2 Macc. iv. 10. xi. 15. xiv. 20 only. Ὁ Matt. 
Heb. xi. lb only. Exod. xxxii.27. Judg. xi. 39 A Ald. compl. 


reff. t ver. 18. 
ii. 12. Luke x. 6. 


am 18 vulg Thl-fin. ap(o)sevxnv D!, orationem D-lat. 

19. rec κατηντησε (alteration to singular to suit κατελιπεν below), with HLP rel 
36(sic) vulg syr copt [wth-rom] Chr,: καταντησας D-gr [arm]: txt ABEN k 19, 40 
tol D-lat Syr sah eth-pl. kat execvovus EHP bd ef gl] moChr Thi-sif: καὶ tw 
ertovTt σαββατω exewous D: aft εφεσον ins Tw em. σαβ. 137 syr-w-ast. κατελειπεν 
AHLP 18. for avtou, exes (more usual word) ADEN 13 rel 40: txt BHLP 36 
Chr. διελεξατο (corrn to more usual form) ABN a 13 Thi-fin: dveAeyero D k 
vulg(but am disputavit): txt EHLP rel 36 Chr (Thdrt,). j 

20. for de, τε D}({and lat :] txt D*) Syr eth. om avtwy 137: avrev D[-gr®] 
(txt D!) Lb dg? Καὶ πιξ ὁ {arm ] Thl-fin. πλιον D. ἐπιμεῖναι N3, rec aft 
pewat ins παρ avtos (explanatory addn), with DEHLP rel Syr syr-w-ob copt Chr, ; 
exe: tol sah arm: παραμειναι αὐτοῖς 25: txt ABN ὁ 13. 36. 40 vulg eth. 

21. (On the whole verse, see note.) (adda, so ABDEPN ἢ cf g k 0 13 Thil-sif.) 

rec απεταξατο, omg Και, with HLP rel syr copt Chr Thl-sif: txt ABDERN a 13-5. 
36. 40. 105-80 vulg eth Thl-fin.—om αλλα αποταξ. kat Syr. rec (aft amerat.) 
ins αὐτοῖς, with EHLP rel 86 Thl: om ABDN. rec aft exrwy ins de: we παντως 
τὴν EOpTHY THY ἐερχομενὴν ποιήσαι εἰς ιεροσολυμα, with (D)HLP rel 36. 40 demid syrr 
Chr, Thl, but D has τὴν coptyy nucpay solemnem diem, and omits the second την, D! 
(corrd by D8) has also δὲ for we: aft θελοντος ins sed nunc volo agere festum venturum 
in Jerusalem wth-pl: om ABEN a 13-5. 105-80 vulg coptt ath-rom arm. rec aft 
παλιν ins δε, with HLP rel 15. 103-80 syr Chr Thl sit: om AB D(omits παλιν also) 


ἰ 


ἘΝ a 13. 36. 40 vulg coptt eth [arm ].--ϑνν demid Thl-fin have καὶ παλιν. 


καμψ 


of ανακαμψω has perished in D}(supplied by D*). 


disputably apply to Paul as the subject of 
the section: leaving it hardly open to 
question that κειράμενος also must be re- 
ferred to him. There need be no en- 
quiry what danger can have prompted such 
a vow ou his part, when we recollect the 
catalogue given by him in 2 Cor. xi. Be- 
sides, he had, since his last visit to Jeru- 
salem, been νόσῳ καταπονούμενος (see Jos. 
above, note on ch. xvi. 6, and Prolegg. to 
Gal. § ii. 3): it is true, a considerable time 
ago, but this need not prevent our sup- 
posing that the vow may have been then 
made, to be paid on his next visit to Jeru- 
salem. Th:t he had not sooner paid it, is 
accounted for by his having been since 
that time under continual pressure of 
preaching and” founding churches, and 
having finally been detained by special 
command at Corinth. That he was now 
so anxious to pay it (ver. 21), consists well 
with the supposition of its having been 
long delayed. ἐν Keyxpeais| Key- 
xpeal κώμη κ. λιμὴν ἀπέχων τῆς πόλεως 
ὕσον ἑβδομήκοντα orddia. τούτῳ μὲν 
χρῶνται πρὸς τοὺς ἐκ τῆς ᾿Ασίας, πρὸς δὲ 
τοὺς ἐκ τῆς Ἰταλίας τῷ Λεχαίῳ. Strabo, 
viii. 380. There was soon after a Christian 
ehurch there: see Rom. xvi. 1. 19. 


"Εφεσον ] Ephesus was the ancient capital 
of Ionia (Ptol. v. 2. 8), and at this time, of 
the Roman proconsular province of Asia,— 
on the Cajyster, near the coast, between 
Symrna and Miletus. It was famed for its 
commerce, but even more for its magni- 
ficent temple of Artemis (see ch. xix. 24, 
27, and notes). See a full account of its 
situation and history, secular and Chris- 
tian, in the Prolegg. to Eph. § ii. 2—6; and 
an interesting description, with plan, in 
Mr. Lewin’s Life and Epistles of St. Paul, 
i. 344 ff. αὐτοῦ | Perhaps this may be 
said proleptically, referring to his journey 
to Palestine (De Wette): but on account 
of the δέ which follows, I should rather 
understand it to mean that the Jewish 
synagogue was (as sometimes the case, see 
Winer, Realw., ‘ Synagogen ᾽) outside the 
town, and that Priscilla and Aquila were 
left in the town. διελέχθη, aor., refer- 
ring to one, and a transient occasion: διε- 
λέγετο, imperf., ver. 4, of his long stay, 
and continual discourses in the Corinthian 
synagogue. 21.] The omission of the 
words here inserted in rec., δεῖ we πάντως 
τὴν ἑορτὴν Thy ἐρχομένην ποιῆσαι εἰς ‘lepo- 
σόλυμα, seems necessitated on the principle 
of being guided in doubtful cases by. the 





ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AITOSTOAQN. 207 


19—25. 


πρὸς ὑμᾶς τοῦ " θεοῦ " θέλοντος, YavnyOn ἀπὸ THS v s00 1 Cor. w. 
5 eb. Vi, 


, ¢ \ \ U ᾿ξ 
Ἐφέσου, 55 καὶ * κατελθὼν εἰς Καισάρειαν, ¥ ἀναβὰς καὶ 3:) Jamesiv. 
͵ \ 5 / , > ΄ ix. 6, 
* ἀσπασάμενος τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ὃ κατέβη * εἰς ᾿Αντιόχειαν. wen χἴν 15 
ff. 
93 \ b / b / \ ο 252 ἃ ’ re aA 
Kal Saroujoas..” χρόνον. τινὰ ἐξῆλθεν, διερχόμενος seb 
©xabeEhs τὴν Τ'αλατικὴν χώραν καὶ Φρυγίαν, ἴ στηρίζων Wee, 
, \ , 
πάντας τοὺς μαθητάς. 


Z— Cha ΣΧ ἡ. KES. 15. Oxon, Mwai. 7. 
Ὁ = ch. xv. 33 reff. c absol., ch. xv. 40 reff. 
f = Rom. ἱ. 11]. xvi. 25al. Ps. 1. 12 (14). 


vii. 8, 10. 

xii. 20. Ezra 
vii.6. Neh. 
a John ii. 12. ch. vii. 15. xiv. 25. xvi. 


vii. 6. 
d ch, xiii. 6 reff. 


8. Jonah i. 3. 
e ch. iii. 24 reff.+ 


ins καὶ bef ανηχθηὴ EHLP 13[arnx.] rel 40 eth-pl Chr,: om ABD a 15. 36. 105-80 
vulg sah eth-rom arm: aft ανηχθη ins δὲ &!(X3 disapproving). for ανηχθη to 
avaGas, ακυλαν δε κατελιπεν ev ehetw autos yap εν πλοιω αχθεις ηλθεν εἰς καισαρειαν 


αναβ. de syr-mg; simly 97. 157: Bt Aquélam et Priscillam reliquit Ephesi, et ipse 


iter fecit per mare ac venit Cesaream Syr. 
2. ins kat bef avaBas D [syrr sah eth]. 


for tns, τοῦ D1(txt D8). 
(This καὶ was perhaps intended to be 


placed bef ανηχθη, but insd here by mistake.) 


23. ins kat bef καθεξης ὃ (δ 5 disapproving’. 


κατεξης D'(txt D4), rec 


εἐπιστηριζων, with DEHLP rel 36 Chr, : txt ABN 13.—pref καὶ D 38. 


testimony of our most ancient Mss. The 
text thus produced is the shortest and 
simplest, and the facts, of other glosses 
having been attempted on this verse, and 
of ms. 36 inserting the words without alter- 
ing the construction to suit them, and D 
omitting the καί before ἀνήχθη, and the 
δέ before ἀνακάμψω, tend perhaps to throw 
discredit on the insertion. The gloss, if 
such it be, has probably been owing to an 
endeavour to conform the circumstances 
to those related in ch. xx. 16. If they 
stand, and for those who read them, it 
may still be interesting to enquire at what 
feast they may be supposed to point. (1) 

Yot at the Passover: for the ordinary 
duration of the ‘mare clausum’ was (Livy 
xxxvil. 9) till the vernal equinox. Ac- 
cording to Vegetius de Re Milit. iv. 39, 
‘ex die iii. Id. Novembr. usque in diem vi. 
Id. Martii, maria claudebantur.? And we 
are not at liberty to assume an exceptional 
case, such as sometimes occurred (Philo, 
Leg. ad Caium, ὃ 29, vol. ii. p. 573; Tacit. 
Ann. xii. 43; Plin. ii. 47). Hence, if the 
voyage from Corinth at all approached the 
length of that from Philippi to Jerusalem 
in ch. xx., xxi., he would have set sail at 
a time when it would have been hardly 
possible. (2) Not at the feast of Taber- 
nacles. For if it were, he must have 


sailed from Corinth in August or Sep- 


tember. Now, as he stayed there some- 
thing more than a year and a half, his 
sea-voyage from Bereea to Athens would in 
this case have been made in the depth of 
winter; which (especially as a choice of 
land or water was open to him) is impossi- 
ble. (8) It remains, then, that the feast 
should have been Pentecost; at which 
Paul also visited Jerusalem, ch. xx. 16, 
(The above is the argument of Wieseler, 


Chron. d. Apostelgesch. pp. 48—50, who 
however allows too long for the voyage 
from Corinth, forgetting that from the 
seven weeks’ voyage of ch. xx. xxi. are 
to be taken seven days at Troas (xx. 6), 
seven at Tyre (xxi. 4), one at Ptolemais 
(xxi. 7), ἡμέραι πλείους at Cesarea (xxi. 
10),—in all certainly not less than three 
weeks.) The Apostle’s promise of 
return was fulfilled ch. xix. 1 ff. 22, 
ἀναβάς} Zo Jerusalem: for (1) it would 
be out of the question to suppose that 
Paul made the long detour by Caesarea 
only to go up into the town from the 
beach, as supposed by most of those who 
omit de? .... ‘Iepoo. in ver. 21, and 
salute the disciples,—and (2) the ex- 
pression κατέβη εἰς ᾽᾿Αντ., which suits a 
journey from Jerusalem (ch. xi. 27), would 
not apply to one from Caesarea. 

Gow. τ. ékkd.] The payment of his 
vow is not mentioned, partly because it 
is understood from the mere mention of 
the vow itself, ver. 18,—partly, perhaps, 
because it was privately done, and with no 
view to attract notice as in ch. xxi. 

23.] PAUL’S VISIT TO THE CHURCHES 
IN GALATIA AND PHRYGIA. Either (1) 
Galatia is here a general term including 
Lycaonia, and Paul went by Derbe, Lys- 
tra, Iconium, &c. as before in ch. xvi., 
or (2) he did not visit Lycaonia this time, 
but went through Cappadocia: to which 
also the words διελθόντα τὰ ἀνωτερικὰ μέρη 
(ch. xix. 1) seem to point, 7 ἄνω ᾿Ασία 
being the country east of the Halys. We 
find Christian churches in Cappadocia, 
1 Pet. 1.1. On this journey, as connected 
with the state of the Galatian churches, see 
Prolegg. to Gal. § iii. 1. καθεξῆς im- 
plies taking the churches in order; regu- 
larly visiting them, each as they lay in his 


208 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AMOZTOAQON. XVIL. 
g ver. 2 ref 34. Ἰουδαῖος δέ τις ᾿Απολλὼς ὀνόματι, ᾿Αλεξανδρεὺς ABDE 
here only +. HLPRa 


Herod. ii. 77. 
ich. xvi. 1 reff. 


a / 3 Ἁ / ; ΄, 
δ τῷ ϑγένει, ἀνὴρ ἢ λόγιος, ἱ κατήντησεν 
k = Luke xxiv 


-k Ν xX ~ A 
19. ch.vii 22, Κ δυνατὸς ὧν ἐν ταῖς !yoadais. 


25 πὶ οὗτος ἦν " κατηχη- 


Jer. χχχίχ. ͵ Η op ΠΡῸΣ nA o , \ r¥ s a 8 ΄ 
ni) 19... μένος τὴν °P ὁδὸν τοῦ ° κυρίου, καὶ “' ζέων " τῷ ¥ πνεύματι 
ff. > , \ a7 > -“ Ν \ “ 7 ra 
menix.2 ἐλάλει Kal ἐδίδασκεν ᾿ ἀκριβῶς τὰ περὶ τοῦ ‘Inood, 
ff. ᾽ / / \ , " ’ [4] 2 ’ 
nlukei4. ἢ ἐπιστάμενος μόνον τὸ βαπτίισμα ᾿Ιωάννου" “30 Υ οὗτος τε 
24. Rom. ii. 
18. 1Cor. xiv.19. Gal. vi. 6 only +. Jos. vita 3 65. Ὁ = here only. see Luke xx. 21. ch. xiii. 10. Ps. 
xVii. 21. = ch. ix. 2 reff. (Matt. iii. 3 ||.) q Rom. sii. 11 only. r Job xxxii. 19 
BN ἄς. Philo, vita Mos. iii. ὁ 38, vol. ii. p. 178. s — ch. xvii. 16 reff. t Matt. ii. 8. Luke i. 


3. Eph.v.15. 1 Thess. v. 2 (ver. 26 reff.) only. 


Deut. xix. 18. Wisd. xix. 17 only, 
ch. xxvi. δ. -βεια, xxii. 3. -Bovv, Matt. 1. 7.) 


Dan. vii. 19 Theod. (-Bys, 
u ch. xix. 15 reff. 


v ch. ix. 20 reff. 


24. aroAAwvtos D: ameAAns 8! 15. 180 scholl copt arm: Apollon xth-rom: Apollo 
vulg E-lat Syr [syr].—ovouari bef απ. D 18. γένει bef adctavdpevs, omg τω, 1) 

Syr) |. 
Ut τον δ ἣν κατηχήμενος εν TH πατριδι Tov λογον Tov κυριου Ὦ. for τὴν οδον, τον 
λογον D(as above) ἃ b ο 36. 662. 76. om tov (bef κυρ.) Β k Thl-sif. ins w bef 
ελαλει N}(erased by &%). απελαλει D!, eloquebatur D-lat: eAade δε B. om 
2nd του D 18. 40. 68-9. 137. rec (for ina.) κυριου (see notes. The varn in the art 
is no argument (as De Wette) agst the genuineness of the readg : the constant omn of 
artt aft prepp might easily lead to this: thus we have it omitted also bef κυριου), 
with HP rel Chr, ‘Thl-sif : txt ABDE [L(sic, Treg) ]&® ac ἢ 13. 36. 40 vulg syrr coptt 


eth arm Thl-fin. 


route. One work accomplished by 
hin in this journey was the ordaining (but 
apparently not collecting) a contribution 
for the poor saints at Jerusalem : see 1 Cor. 
xvi. 1. Timotheus and Erastus pro- 
bably accompanied him, see ch. xix. 22; 
2 Cor. i. 1; and Gaius and Aristarcbus, 
ch. xix. 29; and perhaps ‘Titus, 2 Cor. xii. 
18 al. (and Sosthenes? (1 Cor. i. 1), but 
see on ver. 17.) 

2428.] ΑΡΟΙΙΟΒ aT EPHESUS, AND 
IN ACHAIA. ᾿Απολλώς abbreviated 
from ᾿Απολλώνιος [as Lucas from Lucanus, 
&c.]: see var. read. ᾿Αλεξανδρεύς] 
Alexandria was the great seat of the 
Hellenistic [or later Greek] language, 
learning, and philosophy (see ch. vi. 9). A 
large number of Jews had been planted 
there by its founder, Alexander the Great. 
The celebrated LXX version of the O. T. 
was made there under the Ptolemies. 
There took place that remarkable fusion of 
Greek, Oriental, ἐπα Judaic elements of 
thought and belief, which was destined to 
enter so widely, for good and -for evil, into 
the minds and writings of Christians. We 
see in the providential calling of Apollos to 
the ministry, an instance of adaptation of 
the workman to the work. A masterly 
exposition of the Scriptures by a learned 
Hellenist of Alexandria formed the most 
appropriate watering (1 Cor. iii. 6) for 
those who had been planted by the pupil 
of Gamailiel. λόγιος either (1) learned, 
as Philo, Vita Mos. i. 5, vol. ii. p. 84, 
Αἰγυπτίων of λόγιοι, and Jos. B. J. vi. 5. 
3, who distinguishes, in the interpretation 
of the omens preceding the siege, of ἰδιῶται 


from of λόγιοι,---ΟΥ (2) eloquent: so Jos. 
Antt. xvii. 6. 2 calls Judas and Matthias, 
*Iovdalwy λογιώτατοι aud πατρίων ἐξηγηταὶ 
νόμων. The etymologists make the for- 
mer the ancient,—the latter a subsequent 
meaning. So Thom. Mug. λογίους τοὺς 
πολυΐστορας οἱ ἀρχαῖοι ᾿Δττικίζοντες, ὡς 
καὶ ἩρόδοτοΞ᾽ λογίους" δὲ τοὺς διαλεκτικοὺς 
οἱ ὕστερον. The latter meaning is most 
appropriate here, both because the pecu- 
liar kind of learning implied by λόγιος 
[acquaintance with stories and legends] 
would not be likely to be predicated 
of Apollos,—and because the subsequent 
words, δυνατὸς ἐν τ. γραφαῖς, sufficiently 
indicate his learning, and in what it lay. 
See on λόγιος as applied to Papias by 
Eusebius, prolege. to Matt. § ii. 1 (a) note. 
25.| Apollos had received (from 

his youth?) the true doctrine of the 
Messiahship of Jesus, as pointed out by 
John the Baptist: doubtless from some 
disciple of John: but more than this he 
knew not. ‘The doctrines of the Cross,— 
the Resurrection,—the outpouring of the 
Spirit,—these were unknown to him: but 
more particularly (from the words émor. 
μόνον τὸ βάπτ. "Iwav.) the latter, as con- 
nected with Christian baptism: see further 
on ch. xix. 2, 38. The mistake of 
supposing that he did not know Jesus to 
be the Messiunr, has arisen from the 
description of his subsequent work at 
Corinth, ver. 28, but by no means follows 
from it: this he did before, but not so 
completely. The same mistake has led 
to the alteration of Ἰησοῦ into the κυρίου 
of the rec., it having been well imagined 


εἰς Ἔφεσον, befgh 
kmol3 





24---58, MPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 209 


” Ww sre » θ 5 A a Ψ , ᾿ 
ἤρξατο “ παῤῥησιάζεσθαι ἐν τῇ συναγωγῆ. ἀκούσαντες ~ ch. ix. 21τεδ. 


\ 5 a / \ 9 ΄ 4 x= ch. xvii. 5 
δὲ αὐτοῦ ἸΤρίσκιλλα καὶ “Andras * προςελάβοντο αὐτόν, a 
\ 5) a 5... be ear 20, 22” 
καὶ " ἀκριβέστερον αὐτῷ * ἐξέθεντο τὴν ὃ ὁδόν. 27 βουλο- (rer 35 τοῖν 


a absol., = ch, 
οἱ ἀδελφοὶ ἔγραψαν τοῖς μαθηταῖς ἃ ἀποδέξασθαι αὐτόν. 
reff. Josh. 


; a A i , only. 
μένου δὲ αὐτοῦ ὃ διελθεῖν ὃ εἰς τὴν ᾿Αχαΐαν ° προτρεψάμενοι τ". χἰ. 4 reff 
ix. 2 reff. 
b 2 Cor. i. 16 
ἃ e , f / \ a g Jf 
ὃς “παραγενόμενος ᾿ συνεβάλετο πολὺ τοῖς ὅ πεπίιστευ- Piper 
r ΤΥ. 


4 \ a Η , δ᾿ a > = ζω 
κόσιν ἢ διὰ τῆς ™ χάριτος" 38 Ἑεὐτόνως γὰρ τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις 2 Mace: τς 
] / m / nD 3 A \ A ΠῚ an on 

διακατηλέγχετο ™ δημοσίᾳ ® ἐπιδεικνὺς διὰ τῶν ° γραφῶν ἃ ch. ti bok 
xvii. 10 re 


s \ \ >] A 
εἰναι τὸν χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν. Pa ees 
only. ep: xvii. 18 reff.) Jes χχχν, 3 F(not A), Wise. v. 8. μέγα συμβάλλεται εἰς τὸ μανθάνειν, Xen. 


Cyr. i. 2. 8. 8 ch. xv. 5 reff. h absol., Gal. i. 15. Heb. xii. 28 only. ich. 
xiii. 43 reff. k Luke xxiii. 10 only. Josh. vi. 7 (8) only. (-vos, 2 Macc. xii. 23 only. -via, 
Eccl. vii. 8 AN only.) 1 here only +. m ch. xvi. 37 reff. n = Heb. vi, 17 


only ¢. (ch. ix. 39 al. o ch, xvii. 2 reff, 


26. for ovros, nros D1(txt D4): ovrws τη. om te D-gr H sah eth-pl [arm]. 
om τη D'(ins D4). Kat ακουσαντος [)1(εέ quum audivissent D-lat: txt 
D-corr!) Syr. rec ακυλᾶς και πρισκιλλα (alteration of characteristic order, cf 
Rom xvi. 3,2 Timiv. 19), with DHLP rel 36 syrr sah [arm] Chr,: txt ABEN 13 vulg 
copt eth. Vea ἐξ. εξεθοντο D: -θετο H. rec ins Tov θεου bef οδον, with HLP 
rel Chr: τὴν 08. του θεου ABN ὁ k m 13. 40 am fuld tol syr [copt] sah arm Thl-fin : 
τ. 00. τ. κυριου E g 36.177 [vulg-clem] demid Syr: τὸν λόγον του κυρ. 662. 98-marg 
105 lect-58: [τ. A. τ. θεου ἃ :] seripturas domini Cassiod (all these, as shewn by the 
varr, are supplementary emendations of the simple τὴν odor): txt D. 

27. for ver, ev de τη eperw επιδημουντες[ exeuntes | τινες κορινθιοι Kat ἀκουσαντες αὐτου 
παρεκαλουν διελθεῖν σὺν αὐτοῖς εἰς τὴν πατριδα avTwY συνκατανευσαντος redeunte] δε 
αὐτου οι εφεσιοι(αδελῴοι Syr-mg) εγραψαν τοις εν κορινθω μαθηταις ὁπως αποδεξωνται τον 
avipa 1) syr-mg: D adding os ἐπιδημησας ets Τὴν αχαιαν πολυί(πολυν D!) συνεβαλλετο 


Isa. xxxvii. 26.) 


[contulit | ev Tats εκκλησιαιξ. 
57.99 Thi-sif: συνελαβετο 30. 133. 


28. aft δημοσια ins και κατ οἰκον E. 


es THY αχαιαν bef διελθεῖν EK. 
om δια της xapitos (D) ο 137 vulg(not tol) syr. 


συνεβαλλετο A D-gr 


ins διαλεγομενος καὶ bef επιδεικνυς D 187. 


Tov ina. εἰναι χριστον 1) [(syrr)] sah: om tov Εἰ. 


that he could not teach ἀκριβῶς τὰ π. τοῦ 
Ἰησοῦ if he did not know him to be the 
Messiah: whereas by these words is im- 
ported that he knew and taught accurately 
the facts respecting Jesus, but of the con- 
sequences of that which he taught, of all 
which may be summed up in the doctrine 
of Christian baptism, he had no idea. 
ἔπιστ. μόνον) Meyer well remarks, that 
it is not meant that he was absolutely 
ignorant of the fact of there being such a 
thong as Christian baptism, but ignorant of 
its being any thing different from that of 
John: he knew, or recognized in baptism 
only that which the baptism of John was: 
a sign of repentance. 26. ἀκριβέ- 
otepov| The former accuracy was only in 
Jacts: this is the still more expanded ac- 
euracy of doctrine. That was merely τὰ 
περὶ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, as He lived and minis- 
tered on earth: this included also the pro- 
mise of the Spirit, and its performance. 
27. mpotpeapevor] probably Pris- 
cilla and Aquila principally. It may have 
been trom their account of the Corinthian 
church, that he was desirous to go to 
Achaia. After προτρεψ. not Apollos, but 
the disciples (at Corinth) must be under- 


Vou. II. 


stood as an object. Otherwise αὐτόν would 
have been expressed. So the remarkable 
reading of D. ovveB.] contulit, 
Vulg. contributed, to their help. 

διὰ τῆς χάριτος) Bengel, Olsh., Meyer, 
and others join these words with συνεβά- 
Aero, and understand them ‘by the Grace 
of God which was in him.’ But this, from 
their position, is very unnatural; and 
hardly less so from the διά, whereas such 
a sense would rather require τῇ χάριτι. 
In the only other two places where the 
expression occurs (reff.), it refers (1) to 
the electing grace of God, ref. Gal., (2) to 
the grace assisting believers to His service, 
ref. Heb. So that I adopt the more 
natural rendering of the E. V., those who 
had believed through grace. ‘The yap 
should be noticed. His coming was a 
valuable assistance to the Christians 
against the Jews, in the controversies 
which had doubtless been going on since 
Paul’s departure.” C. and H., edn, 2, ii, 
p- 10. 28. | διακατηλέγχετο, argued 
down, as we say,— proved it in their 
teeth : and then the διά gives the sense of 
continuity,—that this was not done once 
or twice, but continuously.. 


P 


210 


m constr., ch. 
iv. 5 reff. 

n ch. ix. 3 reff. 

och. xiii. 6 
reff. 

p here only t. 
see 1 Macc. 
iii. 37. 

2 Macc. ix, 
ie ee 
ἄνω ᾿Ασίη, 
Herod. i. 95 
and al. see σαμεν. 

Wetst. ey 

q ch. i. 6 reff. rch. viii. 15 reff. 

ch. τ, 9. ix. 5 al. u Luke xxiii. 15. 
ix. 25. 1 Cor. vii. 16. Jer. xxxvii. (xxx.) 6. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AHOSTOAON, 


XIX. 


t ellips. 
v = ch. x. 18, John 


w pres., ch. xvi. 38 reff. x ch. viii. 16 reff. 


Cuap. XIX. 1. for evyevero to ελθειν, D syr-mg have θελοντος δὲ Tov παυλου κατα 
τὴν wiav βουλην πορευεσθαι εἰς ιερυσολυμὰ εἰπεν aUTW TO πνευμα ὑποστρεφειν [ revertere 


D-lat syr-mg] εἰς τὴν αἀσιαν διελθων δε Ta αν. μ. ερχεται. 
for ελθ., διελθειν P: κατελθεῖν AEN a Ὁ ο 13. 40 [arm] «61. 


λην δὲ} 180. 


απολλων A?L 40: απελ- 


rec’ εὐρων, omg τε in ver 2 (alteration to simplify constr and get rid of the cha ac- 
teristic re), with (D)EHLP rel sah Chr: txt ABN 13 vulg copt [arm]. 


2. re see above. 


rec aft οἱ δε ins εἰπὸν, with HL rel [ vulg-ed demid Syr coptt 
eth arm], εἰπαν P Chr: om ABDE 13. 40 am tol syr. 
τινες ἡκουσαμεν D}(and lat: txt D4) syr-mg, simly sah. 


αλλ ovde mv. ay. AauBavovow 


rec ovde, with (D!)KHLP 


rel 36 Chr Marc: txt A B(sic: see table) D?. 
3. em. Se Da 133 lect-58: ο δε εἰπ. AEN [Κ(οι δε exrev)] 13 vulg copt Jer: εἰπεν 


ουν c syr Mare,: txt BHLP rel 36 eth [arm] Chr). 


rec adds προς avtous, with 


HLP rel [Syr coptt eth] Chr Mare: om ABDEN a ch 13. 36 vulg syr arm~* autos 


[k] 40 lect-12 Thl-fin. 


Cuap. XIX. 1—41.] ARRIVAL, RESI- 
DENCE, AND ACTS OF PAauL aT EPHESUS. 
1. τὰ ἀνωτερικὰ μέρη) By this 

name were known the eastern parts of Asia 
Minor, beyond the river Halys, or in com- 
parison with Ephesus, in the direction of 
that river. So Herodotus, speaking as a 
Halicarnassian, calls even the neighbour- 
hood of Sardis τὰ ἄνω τῆς ᾿Ασίας, i. 177; 
including in the term, however, many of 
the inland districts, Assyria, Babylonia, &c. 
So that the reading ἀνατολικά, which is 
found in three cursives and Theophy]-sif., 
is a good gloss. τινας μαθητάς These 
seem to have been in the same situation as 
Apollos, see on ch. xviii. 25. They cannot 
have been mere disciples of John, on ac- 
count of πιστεύσαντες, which can bear no 
meaning but that of believing on the Lord 
Jesus: but they had received only John’s 
baptism, and had had no proof of the de- 
scent of the Holy Spirit, nor knowledge 
of His gifts. 2. ἐλάβ. πιστεύσ.] 
The aorist should be faithfully rendered : 
not as E. V. ‘ Have ye received the Holy 
Ghost since ye believed?’ but Did ye 
receive the Holy Ghost when ye became 
(not, when ye had become: cf. mposevia- 
μενοι εἶπαν, ch. i. 24, and Winer, edn. 6, 
§ 45. 6. b, also note on ver. 29) believers ? 
i.e. ‘on your becoming believers, had ye 
the gifts of the Spirit conferred on you?’ 
—as in ch. viii. 16, 17. This is both 
grammatically necessary (see also Rom. 
xiii, 11, ἐγγύτερον ἡμῶν ἡ σωτηρία ἢ ὅτε 
ἐπιστεύσαμεν), and absolutely demanded 
by the sense ; the enquiry being, not as to 


(ειπαν, so ΑΒΕ 18: ελεγον D.) 


any reception of the Holy Ghost during 
the period since their baptism, but as to 
one simultaneous with their first reception 
into the church: and their πού having 
thex received Him is accounted for by the 
deficiency of their baptism. ἀλλ᾽ οὐδέ] 
On the contrary, not even... 

ἠκούσαμεν] Here again, not, ‘we have 
not heard,’ which would involve an ab- 
surdity: ‘mam neque Mosen neque Jo- 
hannem Baptistam sequi potuissent, quin 
de Spiritu Sancto ipso audissent’ (Bengel) ; 
—but we did not hear, at the time of our 
conversion :—Our reception into the faith 
was unaccompanied by any preaching of 
the office or the gifts of the Spirit,—our 
baptism was not followed by any imparting 
of His gifts: we did not so much as hear 
Him mentioned. ἐστιν cannot, from its 
position, be emphatic, nor does it mean 
““were to be had” (Wordsw.), as John 
vii. 39. The stress of the sentence is on 
ἠκούσαμεν : so far from receiving the Holy 
Ghost, they did not even hear of His exist- 
ence. ‘Tiros only will find an objection to 
this rendering in ἐστίν (expecting ἦν) : the 
present is commonly used after the aorist of 
declarat-ve verbs or verbs of sense, in the 
clause which contains the matter declared, 
seen, or heard: the action being transferred 
pro tempore to the time spoken of. See 
reff. 8.1 Paul’s question establishes 
the above rendering, to what then (οὖν, 
if ye did not so much as hear of the Holy 
Ghost at your first believing) were ye bap- 
tized? If the question and answer in 
ver. 2 regarded, as in Εἰ, V., the whole in- 


XIX. 1 ™’Eyévero δὲ "ἐν τῷ τὸν ᾿Απολλὼ εἶναι ἐν aBDE 
Κορίνθῳ, Παῦλον ° διελθόντα τὰ ν» ἀνωτερικὰ μέρη ἐλθεῖν beter 
εἰς "ἕφεσον καὶ εὑρεῖν τινας μαθητάς, 3 εἶπέν τε πρὸς 
αὐτοὺς « Ké πνεῦμα * ἅγιον " ἐλάβετε " πιστεύσαντες ; toi δὲ 
πρὸς αὐτὸν α᾿Αλλ᾽ ὃ οὐδ᾽ Yet πνεῦμα ἅγιόν “ ἐστιν ἠκού- 
3 εἶπέν τε * Eis τί οὖν * ἐβαπτίσθητε ; οἱ δὲ εἶπαν 


s = Rom. xiii. 11. 1 Cor. iii. 5. χν. 2. Eph. i. 18. 
1 Cor. iii. 2. iv. 3. Gal. ii. 3. 


a 


kmol3 











1---ὃ. IIPAZEIS, ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 211 


* Kis τὸ Ἰωάννου βάπτισμα. * εἶπεν δὲ Παῦλος ᾿Ιωαννῆς γ constr, Luke 
Vil. 2d. 


LYS pe Z 9, 1 Ζ f * ei ay δ Ὁ εἰς  Marki. 4. 
¥ ἐβάπτισεν * βάπτισμα 2 μετανοίας, τῷ λαῷ * λέγων ὃ εἰς * ene 
\ > , c ? s Rees -ὔλ b ΄ e fi ch, xiii. 24 
TOV EPKOMEVOV MET QAUTOV wa πιστεύσωσιν, TOUTEOTLY only. 
5) \ ? A 52 ΄, wy 2 / aes , 2 = here only 
ELS TOV Ἰησοῦν. ακούυσαντες δὲ ἐβαπτίσθησαν εἰς TO Megha tes » 
3. xii. 16, Mark iii. 9. . Ὁ w. εἰς, ch. x. 43 reff. c w. person, ch, xiii. 25 (Paul) reff. 
ἃ arrangemt of words, John xiii. 29. Rom. xi. 31. 1 Cor. ix. 15. 2 Cor. ii.4. Gal. ii. 10. e Mati 
xxvii. 16. Mark vii, 2. ch.i.19. Rom. (1. 12.) vii. 18 414, Philem. 12. Heb. ii. 14 415. 1 Pet. iii, 20. 


4. for δε, re H 192 Thl-sif [om Syr sah]. ins o bef ravaos D a 180 lect-58. 
rec aft wwavyns ins μεν (see ch i. 5), with EHLP rel syr copt Chr, Marc,: om ABDN 
a 18. 40 vulg sah [arm]. rec ins χριστον bef ino., with HLP rel 36 Chr: for τὸν 
ιησ., χριστον D: add xp. 105 lect-12 [Syr] sah xth-pl arm: om ABEN a 13[from 


the space] 40 vulg syr copt zth-rom. 
5. aft ακουσ. δὲ ins tovro D ([Syr]). 


terval since their conversion, this enquiry 
would have been more naturally expressed 
in the perfect. See Gal. iii. 27, where 
there is the same necessity of preserving 
the historical sense of the aorists. 

eis ti] unto (with a view to, as intro- 
ductory to) what profession? They an- 
swer, unto (that indicated by) the bap- 
tism of John, viz.: repentance, and the 
believing on Jesus, then to come, but now 
(see ch. xviii. 25, note) the object of our 
Saith. 4. eis τι ἐρχ. . . . ἕνα tr. ] 
This peculiar inversion of words, see reff., 
seems to mark the hand of Paul. ἵνα does 
not give (as Meyer) the mere purpose of 
his baptism (saying that he baptized in 
order that... .), but combines, as in 
similar uses of mposedxouat ἵνα and the 
like, the purport and purpose together : 
‘He commanded them that they should 
(purport)—and he spoke to them, that 
they might (purpose).’ See this discussed 
in note on 1 Cor. xiv. 13. 5.] Two 
singular perversions of this verse have 
occurred: (1) the Anabaptists use it to 
authorize the repetition of Christian bap- 
tism, whereas it is not Christian baptism 
which was repeated, seeing that John’s bap- 
tism was not such, but only the baptism 
which they now for the first time received ; 
and (2) Beza, Calixtus, Calov., Suicer, 
Glass., Buddeus, Wolf, and al., wishing to 
wrest this weapon out of the hands of the 
Anabaptists, oddly enough suppose this 
verse to belong still to Paul’s discourse, 
and to mean, ‘and the people when they 
heard him (John), were baptized into the 
name. of the Lord Jesus. This obviously 
is contrary to fact, historically : and would 
leave our present narrative in a singular 
state: for Paul, having treated their bap- 
tism as insufficient, would thus proceed on 
it to impose his hands, as if it were suf- 
ficient. eis TO ὄν. τ. κυρ. Ἰησοῦ] 
Two questions arise here: (1) Was it the 
ordinary practice to rebaptize those who 
had been baptized either by John or by the 


disciples (John iv. 1 1.) before baptism be. 
came, by the effusion of the Holy Spirit, 
λουτρὸν madryyeveciasP This we cannot 
definitely answer. That it was sometimes 
done, this incident shews: but in all pro- 
bability, in the cases of the majority of the 
original disciples, the greater baptism by 
the Holy Ghost and fire on the day of Pen- 
tecost superseded the outward form or sign. 
The Apostles themselves received only this 
baptism (besides probably that of John) : 
and most likely the same was the case with 
the original believers. But of the three 
thousand who were added on the day of 
Pentecost, very many must have been 
already baptized by John; and all were 
rebaptized without enquiry. (2) What 
conclusion can we deduce from this verse 
respecting the use or otherwise of baptism 
in the name of the Father, and the Son, 
and the Holy Ghost, in the apostolic 
period ? The only answer must be, that at 
that early time we have no indication of set 
formule in the, administration of either 
sacrament. Such formule arose of neces- 
sity, when precision in formal statement of 
doctrine became an absolute necessity in 
the church: and the materials for them 
were found ready in the word of God, who 
has graciously provided for all necessities of 
His church in all time. But, in matter of 
fact, such a baptism as this was a baptism 
into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy 
Ghost. As Jews, these men were already 
servants of the living God—and by putting 
on the Son, they received in a new and 
more gracious sense the Father also. And 
in the sequel of their baptism, the impo- 
sition of hands, they sensibly became reci- 
pients of God the Holy Ghost. Where 
such manifestations were present, the form 
of words might be wanting ; but with us, 
who have them not, it is necessary and 
imperative. Dean Howson regards (i. 517 ; 
ii. 18) St. Paul’s question in our ver. 3 as 
indicative that the name of the Holy Ghost 
was used in the baptismal formula. But 


te 


212 


f ch. viii. 17 
ff. 


reff. 

g here only. 
Ezek. ii. 2. 

h ch. ii. 4 reff. 

ich. ii. 17, 18, 
from Joel ii, 
28. of his- 
torical fact, 
here first. 
= ch. ii. 41 
al. fr. 

Ich. vi. 2 al. fr. 
δεκαδύο, 
ch. xxiv. ll 
v. r. only. 

1 Chron. xy. 
10. Esth. ii. 


absol., 
ch. xviii. 4 
reff. ye 

p ch. xviii. 4. constr., here (ch. xxviii, 23 rec.) only. 


TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


x » fal / 3, | lol 
ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἰησου. 


ν ἐλάλουν τε " γλώσσαις καὶ | ἐπροφήτευον. 
” ὃ k e \ ΧΙ ὃ oy) 
πάντες ἄνδρες * wset ὠδεκα. 
συναγωγὴν ™ ἐπαῤῥησιάξετο " ἐπὶ μῆνας τρεῖς 5 διαλεγό- 
μενος καὶ ἡ πείθων τὰ περὶ τῆς “ βασιλείας τοῦ 4 θεοῦ. 
9 ὡς δέ τινες ᾿ἐσκληρύνοντο καὶ " ἠπείθουν * κακολο- 
wn c ial , δι 
οὔντες τὴν “ ὁδὸν " ἐνώπιον Y τοῦ πλήθους, * ἀποστὰς ἀπ᾽ 
᾽ 
a ’ \ ΄ 
αὐτῶν ἡ ἀφώρισεν τοὺς μαθητάς, 5 καθ᾽ ἡμέραν ° διαλε- 
τοῖς γόμενος ἐν τῇ " σχολῇ Τυράννου. 


ΧΙΧ. 


0 \ f » , ~ Lal ἴω 
καὶ ἴ ἐπιθέντος αὐτοῖς τοῦ 


Παύλου ‘ χεῖρας ὅ ἦλθεν τὸ ὃ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ὃ ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς, 


8 εἰξελθὼν δὲ εἰς τὴν 


10 τοῦτο δὲ ἐγένετο 


n ye," ΝΜ ὃ “ σ΄ 4 \ b lal \ 
ἘΠῚ €T1) vO, WSTE TAVTAS τοὺς κατοίκουντας τὴν 


q Acts, ch. i. 3. viii. 12, xiv. 22 (xx. 25 ν. σ.). xxviii. 


23, 3l only. Luke and Mark passim. r Rom. ix. 18 reff. s ch. xiv. 2 reff. t Matt. 
xv. 4} Mk. (from Exod. xxi. 16). Mark ix. 39 only, u = ch. ix. 2 reff. v =1 Cor. i. 
29. 3 John 6. w absol., ch. ii. 6 reff. x ch. xv. 38 reff. y = Matt. xiii. 49. xxy. 
32. Luke vi. 22. 2Cor. vi. 17. Gal. ii. 12 only. (ch. xiii. 2 reff.) Gen. ii. 10. z ch. ii, 46 reff. 


2 here only ¢. Prov. xxviii. 19 only.) 


om tov D}(ins D3) lect-58. 


(Gen. xxxiii. 12. 


Ὁ constr., ch. i. 19 reff. 


aft ino. ins χριστου D 64. 137 syr-w-ast [Syr sah 


zth-pl] Jer, Ambr,: add further εἰς apeoww αμαρτιων D syr-w-ast (and Jer in ver 4). 


6. em@evto(sic) Di(txt D*). 


rec ins tas bef xecpas, with EL rel 36 Chr, 


Marc,: om ABHPNe m. (13 def.)—xepa Dam demid Syr eth, D also places χείρα bet 


Tov παυλου. 


avrots D}(txt D4) lect-58. 


for ηλθ., evdews εἐπεπεσεν D Jer,: continuo venit tol. 
for τε, δὲ D-gr ο 25 E-lat coptt: om m D-lat arm. 


er 


aft yAwoous ins erepats [so sah] et senserunt illi in seipsis quod et interpretarentur 


ipsi. tives δὲ syr-mMg, 


ABD® 36. (13 def.) 


rec xpoepnt., with EHLP rel Chr: epytevoy al: txt 


7. ἔτος δεκαδύο, with HLP rel Chr, Thl-sif: δωδεκα (see ch xxiv. 11) ABDER 


ak m 13. 36. 40 Thl-fin. 


8. aft evseA@wy Se ins o παυλος D Syr «οἰ. 
om ta BD lect-12 vss: ins ΑΒΗ ΠΡΝ 18. 36 Chr,. 


σιαζετο D syr-mg. 


ins ev 5uvauet weyadn bef erappy- 


for θεου, κυριου 36 (so ὁ in ver 10; and for κυρίου, θεου k in ver 20). 


9. τινες μεν ovy avtwy D[-gr]. 
demid: rou θεου 5. 8. 73 Syr. 


D Syr [syr-w-ast eth]. 
afterwards supplied eadem manu. 


ins to bef καθ᾽ nuepay Dc. 
τυραννιου 1)-οΥ 3. 95). 


aft τὴν οδον ins Tov κυρίου E [vulg-ed tol] am? 
aft του πληθους ins των εθνων DE Syr syr-w-ast. 
[ins] tore [bef amwooras | D Syr syr-w-ast. 


[aft] amooras [ins] 0 παυλος 
om εν δὲ τ: but 
rec aft τυραννου ins 


twos (see ch x. 22, xiii. 15, xvii. 34, where also D inserts tis), with DEHLP rel 36 
[vulg-clem am syr arm] Chr,, add further azo wpas εἰ ews δεκατὴς D 137 syr[-mg]: 
om AB [13 from the space] 27-9. 81 fuld tol [Syr]} coptt. 

10. for wste to €AA., €(w)s[ita ut] παντες οἱ κατοικουντε5 THY ασιαν (η)κουσαν τους 


the inference seems to me insecure. 
6.] See ch. viii. 17; x. 46, and note on 
ch. ii. 4: and on émpog., ch. xi. 27, note. 
7.) ot wavr., in all: so Herod. vii. 
4, βασιλεύσαντα τὰ πάντα ἔτεα ἕξ TE K. 
τριήκοντα : Thue. v. 120, πεσόντων δὲ τῶν 
πάντων πολλῶν. See Kiihner, ὃ 489 6. 
9.1 Probably the school of Tyrannus was 
a private synagogue (called Beth Midrasch 
by the Jews), where he might assemble the 
believing Jews quietly, and also invite the 
attendance of Gentiles to hear the word. 
But it is also possible that, as commonly 
supposed, Tyrannus may have been a Gen- 
tile sophist. The name occurs as a proper 
name, 2 Macc. iv. 40 Ed-vat.(Avpavouv AB), 
—and with τινος (see var. readd.). 
10. ἔτη δύο] We cannot derive any certain 
estimate of the length of Paul’s stay in 


Ephesus from these words,—even if we 
add the three months of ver. 8,—for 
vv. 21, 22 admit of an interval after the 
expiration of the two years and three 
months. And his own expression, ch. xx. 
31, τριετίαν, implies that it was longer 
than from this chapter would αὖ first 
sight appear. He probably (compare his 
announced intention, 1 Cor. xvi. 8, with 
his expectation of meeting Titus at Troas, 
2 Cor. ii. 12, 18, which shews that he was 
not far off the time previously arranged) 
left Ephesus about or soon after the third 
Pentecost after that which he kept in Jeru- 
salem. See Prolegg. to 1 Cor. § vi. 

πάντας τ. Kat. | Hyperbolical :—allhad the 
opportunity, and probably some of every 
considerable town availed themselves of it. 
To this long teaching of Paul the seven 


7 ἦσαν δὲ οἱ 


ABDE 
HLPra 
befgh 
kmol3 





ἃ σουδα- 

Plane 

ABDE 

HLPRa 

bedfg 

hkmo 
13 


6—13. 


TIPAZ EIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


213 


3 A , a“ ᾽ t 
Ασίαν ἀκοῦσαν τὸν “λόγον τοῦ “ κυρίου, ᾿Ιουδαίους τε ech.xiii.49 , 
T 


em. 

\ / 4 / ¢€ Pe ae 
καὶ “EdAnvas. 11 ἀδυνάμεις τε οὐ τὰς “ τυχούσας 6 45 Mitt. vii, 
θ \ > / f 8 \ la “- ΄ 12 “' \ ew, Gal. ili. 5. 

eos ἐποίει ‘Ova τῶν χειρῶν Ilavdov, 1" ὥςτε καὶ ἐπὶ e τ ch. xxi 
\ a a \ only F- ὦ 
τοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας ὅ ἀποφέρεσθαι ἀπὸ τοῦ δ χρωτὸς 3 Mace-ii7. 
? a j / NX "ὦ / \ ΄ > . ΄ 
αὐτοῦ 'ἱ σουδάρια ἢ * σιμικίνθια καὶ ' ἀπαλλάσσεσθαι ἀπ᾽ τὰς ade 
TON ὸ 4 m , ν m δ ὅς,  Polyb.i.25.6. 
αὐτῶν τὰς νάσους τώ τε ἢ πνεύματα τὰ "' πονηρὰ " ἐκ- Foy Ve δ 
πορεύεσθαι. 13 ° ἐπεχείρησαν δέ τινες καὶ τῶν Ῥ περιερχο- σαν ἀπο- 
ρ n,m ‘ χειρη ρ ρχ ρίαν, id. i. 
42.12. οὐχ ὃ τυχὼν ἀνήρ (said of Moses), Longin. de Subl. 3 9. f ch. xiv. 3 reff. 


g w. ἐπί, Rev. xxi. 10. εἰς, Luke xvi. 22. 1 Cor. xvi.3. Rev. xvii. 3. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 7. absol., Mark xy. 1 


only. 
k here only t+. 
m == Luke vii. 21. viii. 2. 
n = here (and Matt. xvii. 21] only. 
XXV11i. 13 ref.) 


h here only. 
1 = 


Aoyous Tov κυριου ιουδαιοι και ελληνες D!-gr(txt (but amayras) D4), 


Exod. xxviii. 38 (42). 

here (Luke xii. 58. Heb. ii. 15) only. 
Acts, here, &c., 4 tirzes only. Luke only, exc. Matt. xii. 45. 
o ch. ix. 29 reff. 


i Luke xix. 20. John xi. 44. xx. 7 only t. 

Job ix. 34. constr., Xen. Anab. vii. 1. 4. 
1 Kings xix. 9. 
p= here only. Xen, Gcon. x. 10. (ch. 


rec aft κυρ. 


ins inoov, with [H(sie, Treg)] LP rel: om ABDEN ack 13. 36. 40 vulg syrr coptt 


[eth] arm. 


11. for re, δε D}-gr(txt D*) a h 38 syr copt Thl-sif. 


rec εποιει bef o Geos, with 


HLP rel [vulg-clem j syrr copt «th Chr, Thi-sif: txt ABDEX m 13 am(and demid fuld 


tol) sah arm Thl-fin. 


12. rec ἐπιφερεσθαι (prob corrn to suit emt τ. ac8.: see note), with DHLP rel [eth 
(appy)] Chr,: περιφ. 96. 142: txt ABEN a 19. 36. 40 [syrr(appy) arm], deferrentur 


vulg [ L! repeats em. aft avtov}. 
ἢ καὶ D-gr arm. 


for #, και 7. 68. 104-5 vulg-ed(and tol) Thl-fin : 
απαλλασεσθαι B! h! ο. 


{for πνευματα τα, mva| τα Ὁ) E}.- 


rec εξερχεσθαι (more usual word for the going out of evil spirits, see Luke iv. 
35, 36, 41, viii. 2, 29, 33 al, ch viii. 7, xvi. 18), with HLP rel Chr: txt ABDEN acd 


k 13. 36. 40. 


rec adds am avtwy (supplementary insertion), with HLP rel Chr: 


εξ avtwy sah: om ABDEN acd k 18. 36. 40 vulg syrr copt [eth] arm. 

13. rec (for καὶ) απο, with LP 13 rel copt Chr: καὶ απο H 25. 73. 951-8-9 (syr) arm: 
et de vulg: ex Ὁ 43 (the kat has beenomd either as unnecessary, or perhaps, as Meyer, 
because it seemed unworthy of St. Paul to couple him with these: then the amo or εκ 
inserted, to define the gen more exactly): txt ABEN ac m Syr. 


churches of Asia owe their establishment. 
11. οὐ tas τυχ.] See reff. miracles 
of no ordinary kind. In what they dif- 
fered from the usual displays of power by 
the Apostles, is presently related : viz. that 
even garments taken from him were endued 
with miraculous power. 12.| The 
rec. reading, ἐπιφέρεσθαι, may have been 
occasioned by the ἐπί preceding : the other, 
again, by the ἀπό following: in such un- 
certainty the reading of the ancient Mss. 
must prevail. covd. | handkerchiefs : 
see ref. Luke, and notes there. 
σιμικ. not napkins, but semicinctia, 
aprons, such as servants and artisans use. 
ἀμφότερα λινοειδῆ εἰσι, Schol. Diseases, 
and possession by evil spirits, are here 
plainly distinguished from each otber. The 
rationalists, and semi-rationalists, are 
much troubled to reconcile the fact related, 
that such handkerchiefs and aprons were 
instrumental in working the cures, with 
what they are pleased to call a ad 
notion founded in superstition and error. 
But in this and similar narratives (see ch. 
v. 15, note) Christian faith finds no diffi- 
culty whatever. All miraculous working is 
an exertion of the direct power of the All- 
powerful ; a suspension by Hem of His or- 
dinary laws: and whether He will use any 


instrument in doing this, or what instru- 
ment, must depend altogether on His own 
purpose in the miracle—the effect to be 
produced on the recipients, beholders, or 
hearers. Without His special selection 
and enabling, all instruments were vain ; 
with these, all are capable. In the present 
case, as before in ch. v. 15, it was His pur- 
pose to exalt His Apostle as the Herald of 
His gospel, and to lay in Ephesus the strong 
foundation of His church. And He there- 
fore endues him with this extraordinary 
power. (Wordsw. sees an especial fitness 
in this having occurred at Ephesus (see on 
ver. 19), and refers ta God having shewed 
in Egypt that His power was greater than 
that of Satan working by magicians: and 
it may well have been so.) But to argue 
by analogy from such a case,—to suppose 
that because our Lord was able, and Peter, 
and Paul, and in O. T. times Elisha, were 
enabled, to exert this peculiar power, there- 
fore the same will be possessed by the body 
or relics of every real or supposed saint, is 
the height of folly and fanaticism, The 
true analogy tends directly the other way, 
In no cases but these do we find the power, 
even in the apostolic days: and the general 
cessation of all extraordinary gifts of the 
Spirit would lead us to the inference that 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON. XT 


τ ἐπὶ τοὺς ABDE 


214 


5 a 
qhereonly+. μένων ᾿Ιουδαίων 4 ἐξορκιστῶν τ ὀνομάζειν 


τρόπους t ¥ \m ΄ \m eon ὙΠ As , HLPNa 

ξξορκώσεων ἡ ἔχοντας TA™ πνεύματα τὰ ™ πονηρὰ TO " ὄνομα τοῦ " κυρίου beats 
ἐλ . a a a κι hk 

Jos Ant. Inoov, λέγοντες ἃ Ορκίζω ὑμᾶς tov “Incody "ὃν Παῦλος “12 

viii. 2. 5 (of : ω 18 

Solomon). Υ͂ 14 ὃ 4 a ah , W Aare 

Solomon). Y κῃρύσσει. ἦσαν δέ τινες Σκεῦα “lovdaiov * apy 


{a}. 
Τ here only. 


, « a C74 Φ lal x Cal 15 Ε] θὲ δὲ A 
Lepéws ἑπτὰ υἱοὶ [οἱ] τοῦτο * ποιοῦντες. ἀποκριθὲν δὲ τὸ 
s 2 Tim. ii. 19. 3 3 : * ae ἜΝΙ i ᾿ 
Isa. xxvi. 13. M m 
ἘΣ i = πνεῦμα TO πονηρὸν εἶπεν ἀὑτοῖς Τὸν Ἰησοῦν" —— 
nlandconstr Καὶ TOV Παῦλον Y ἐπίσταμαι" ὑμεῖς δὲ τίνες ἐστέ; 16 Καὶ 


Mark v.7 z2 , ec + aw > \ 4 2 9 \ m a \ 
Toe ἐφαλόομενος oO ἄνθρωπος ΕἾΤ αὑτοὺς εν @ 7)V TO TVEULA TO 
ees 110: ’ ΄ ᾽ ͵, 4. ΚΟ 
Mi giies ΤΠ πονηρόν, ᾿κατακυριεύσας ἀμφοτέρων" ἴσχυσεν KAT αὐτῶν, 
BN &c.) ἐν- 


Neh. as above, A. ἐξορκίζω, Matt. xxvi. 63 only. Gen. xxiv. 8. Judg. xvii. 2 A 
v ch. ix. 20 reff. w = here only. x constr. (without οὐ), ch. ii. 5 reff. 
y w.acc., ch. xviii. 25, Jamesiv. 14. Jude 10. Deut. xxxi. 27. zhere only. 1 Kings x. 6. xi. 
6. xvi. 13 only. a = here (Matt. xx. 251) Mk. 1 Pet. v.3) only. Num. xxi. 24. xxxil. 22,29. Ps. ix. 25. 
b= Rev. xii. 8only. Exod.i.9. Ps. xii. 4. 


ορκίζω, 1 Thess. v. 27. 
Ald. compl. only. 


περιερχομενω D}[-gr ]. om του D!(ins D3), rec ορκιζομεν (alteration to suit 
the plurals preceding), with HLP rel [syrr sah eth arm-mss] Chr: εξορκιζομεν 
ao 36: txt ABDENX 13. 40 vulg copt [arm]. ins κυριον bef ina. δὲ, rec ins 
o bef παυλος, with L rel Thl: om ABDE ΗΓ sil] PN ὁ m 13. 40 Chr,. 

14. for ver, ev ois[in quo] kailom syr-mg | vior (add ἐπτα syr-mg) σκευα Tivos tepews 
nOcAnoay το αὐτο ποιήσαι εθος ειχαν τους τοιουτους εξορκιζειν καὶ ErseAPovTES προς TOV 
δαιμενψιζομενον [introierunt adimplentes | npkavto εἐπικαλεισθαι To ovoua λέγοντες παραγ" 
γελλομεν σοι εν ιήσου ov παυλος κηρυσσει εξελθειν (εξ. bef κηρ. D!) D syr-mg. 
τινος B(D) E-gr 36 demid Syr copt [arm] (alteration, τινες not appearing to the 
copyist to agree with the definite enta): τινας m: txt AHLPN 18 rel vulg E-lat 
syr Chr,. rec υἱοι bef oxeva (omg it after era), with (D)HLP rel 36 (Syr copt) 
syr Chr: om τῇ 180: txt ABEN a 13(sic) 14'-5-8. 40 vulg arm (sah). σκευινα A. 

tovdaror L. om οἱ (originally perhaps owing to οἱ of νιοι preceding) ABN a 13. 

15. τοτε απεκριθὴη To πν. TO πον. (Και) εἰπεν D, και insd by Dt. rec OM auTots, 
with EHLP rel Thi-sif: ins ABDX ac m 13. 36 vulg syrr coptt eth arm Chr, Thl-fin. 

ins μεν bef incovy B E-gr δὲϑ ο 40. 137 syr [Cassiod, ]. 

16. rec εφαλλομενος, with (D) EHLPN3 rel Chr,: εναλλομ. D: txt ABR?. rec 
er autous bef ο avOpwmos (alteration of characteristic order), with (D)HLP [vulg- 
clem Syr coptt eth] Chr, Thl-sif: om em avrovs a 69. 105 arm: E places it aft τὸ 
movnpov : txt ABN c m 13. 40 am(and demid fuld) syr Chr-comm, Thl-fin.—e:s avtous 
Ὁ vulg. rec ins kat bef κατακυριευσας, with HLPN! rel 36 vulg [arm, Treg] Chr: 
om ABDEN? a ο 13. 40 copt [sah] arm. κυριευσας D: κρατησας 15-8. 36. 180: 
κατακυριευσαν AEHLP rel: -σεν a: txt BN co 18. rec for ἀμφοτέρων, avTwy 
(corrn to suit ἐπτα above: see note), with HLPrel Syr: avrovd: [eorum septemsah : 
eorum] omnium eth-rom: om Εἰ: txt ABDXN a 18. 36. 40 vulg syr-mg-gr [copt arm] 
Thl-fin. evicxuoev δὲ! 6: κατισχυσε C. 


ἃ fortiori these, which were even then the 
rarest (οὐχ ai τυχοῦσαι), have ceased also. 
18. See note on Matt. xii. 27, 
respecting the Jewish exorcists. These 
men, seeing the success of Paul’s agency in 
casting out devils, adopt the Name of Jesus 
in their own exorcisms. 14. apx- 
tepéws | The word must be used in a wide 
sense. He may have been chief of the 
priests resident at Ephesus: or perhaps 
chief of one of the twenty-four courses. 
tives does not belong to érrd, see 

eh. xxiii. 23, but stands alone, recalling the 
τινες of the preceding verse. Without 
the of it would be, ‘certain men, &c. were 
attempting this, ἦσαν and ποιοῦντες being 
taken together. With it, They were (it 
was) certain men, seven sons, ἄς. who 
attempted this. 15.] The narrative, 


from describing the nature of the attempt, 
passes toa single case in which it was tried, 
and in which (see below) two only of the 
brothers were apparently concerned. 

No difference between γινώσκω and ἐπίστα- 
μαι must be pressed :—the two verbs are 
apparently used as separating Jesus and 
Paul, so that they do not stand together in 
the same category :—as in Εἰ, V., Jesus I 
know, and Paul I know: the One being God 
in heaven, the other man on earth. 

16. ἀμφοτέρων] The weight of manuscript 
evidence for this reading is even surpassed 
by its internal probability. There would 
be every reason, as seven have been before 
mentioned, for altering it into αὐτῶν : but 
no imaginable one for substituting it for 
αὐτῶν. Two only, it would seem, were 
thus employed on this particular occasion : 


14—20 


Ὁ“ \ δ. τῷ , d2 a 5b] A 
ὥςτε γυμνοὺς καὶ © τετραυματισμένους “ ἐκφυγεῖν EK TOU 


οἴκου ἐκείνου. 


Ν lal lal \ 
δαίοις τε καὶ “Ελλησιν τοῖς !KatoiKodaw τὴν "Edecor, 
a , \ / \ 
καὶ ὃ ἐπέπεσεν φόβος ἐπὶ πάντας αὐτούς, Kal 


Ν n > nr 

τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ. 
ἤ 

στευκότων ἤρχοντο 

. a 

τες τὰς π' πράξεις αὐτῶν. 


epya πραξάντων ? συνενέγκαντες τὰς 4 βίβλους 


, γ΄ \ 
έκαιον 5 ἐνώπιον TTAVT@V* KAL 


a \ e 
αὐτῶν καὶ " εὗρον 


TIPASEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


17 τοῦτο δὲ ἐγένετο 


215 


c Luke xx. 12 
: ᾿ς ᾿ only. Ezek 
“ γνωστὸν πᾶσιν Ιου- gril Πα. 
Judg. vi. 11. 
6 == ch. i. 19 
h 3 P : ee δ 
constr., -1l. 
ἐμεγαλύνετο Ἢ oe απο 
7, a ἢ 1 
18 πολλοί τε τῶν 'ἱπεπι- ἔτεα 
h = ch. x. 46 
k 3 , \ ] > , 
ἐξο a » ΧΡΗ͂Ν 
ἕξ ΟΝ τος - ον ύκος wi ch. xv. 
192 (Kavot 6€ TOV TH °Tepi- κε 
Mark i. 5. 
ΓΤ KaT- _ James v. 16}. 
lch. xiv. 27 


4 ν 
᾿συνεψήφισαν τὰς " τιμὰς, δι wi. 
ἡ ἀργυρίου * μυριάδας πέντε. 
y A y / “- Ζ / e Z Ἷ 4 ἃ » Ἁ b ΕΙΣ 
ἡ κατὰ Υ κράτος τοῦ ὅ κυρίου ὁ 7 λόγος * ηὔξανεν καὶ " ἴσχυεν. 


27. Luke 
xxiii. 51. 


/ 
20 οὕτως 


Rom. viii. 13. 
(xii. 4.) Col. 
iii. 8 only. 

2 Chron. 


xii. 15. n= ch. xii. 1: reff. o = here (1 Tim. v. 13) only+. (-γάζεσθαι, 2 Thess. 
iii. 11. Sir. iii. 23. ~yeea, Sir. xli. 22.) p = here only$. Xen. Anab. vi. 4. 9. q Matt. 
i.lal. Dan. 1x. 2. r “Matt. xiii. 30. Luke iii. 174]. Gen, xxxviil. 24. = — en. 
ii. 25 reff. Enos Sonly τ: u = Matt. xxvii. 9. 1 Cor. vi. 20. vii. 23. Ps. xlviii. 8. 


v= ch. xxvii. 28. 1 Chron. xx. 

x Luke xii.1. ch. xxi. 20. Heb. 3 xil. 22. 
only+. Jos. Antt. viii. 11. 3. 

Ὁ = here only. Exod. i. 


aft ἐκφυγεῖν ins avrous A. 
17. ins tos. bef ιουδ. EP 192. 
ἐπεσεν (mistake : 
er. D. ins o bef φοβος NX}. 
18. for re, δε Dj -gr] 36 coptt. 
28. 
19. om δὲ D!-gr: τε E syr Bas, Chry. 
aft συνενεγκαντες ins καὶ Ὁ 
om last καὶ D}(ins D2). 


Jude 14. Rev. v.11. ix. 16 only. 


om te DE sah. 
or prep omd as unnecessary) AD 13, ereev E.—qoBos bef 
om tov DP (o! ?) 101-33. 
πιστευοντων D [ vulg E-lat]: 
(Mai Tischdf state expr agst Bch that there is in B no insn aft efou.) 


κατεκαυσαν E vulg. 


w sing. ,= here only. 3 Kings x. 29. see Matt. xxvii. 9. 
Deut. xxxiii. 17. y here 


z ch. xiii. 49 reff. a intr., ch. vi. 7 reff. 


20. Xen. Cyr. vi. 1. 24. see ver. 16. 


om τὴν AIE ο 187. 


-σαντων EK -gr | 


τῶν περι τα epya D'[-gr ](txt D?). 
συνκατεψηφισαν E. 


20. rec o Aoyos bef του κυριου (corrn of characteristic order), with HLPX?® 13. 36 


rel [am sah-marg arm] copt Chr, : 

fuld &c.)] sah[-txt] arm: txt ABN!. 

του θεου nuiave και επληθυνετο(επλήηθυνε 
ἰισχυσεν &. 


and Luke has retained the word as it stood 
in the record furnished to him. Whether 
any similar occurrence happened to the 
rest, we are not informed: this one is se- 
lected as most notorious. γυμνούς] 
With their clothes torn off them. 18.] 
The natural effect of such an occurrence 
was to induce a horror of magical arts, &c., 
which some were still continuing to coun- 
tenance or practise secretly, together with 
a profession of Christianity. Such persons 
now came forward and confessed their 
error. The πράξεις of this verse denotes _ 
the association with such practices: the 
next verse treats of the magicians them- 
selves. 19. περίεργα] ‘ male sedula’ 
(‘curiosa,’ Hor. Epod. xviii. 25). rls τῶν 
περιέργων in Aristenet. Ep. ii. 18, is “ὦ 
magician’ (Kuin.). τὰς βίβλους] Ma- 
gical formula, or receipt-books, or written 
amulets. These last were celebrated by the 
name of ᾿Εφέσια γράμματα. So Eustath. 
ad Hom. Od. τ. p. 694 (Kuin.): ᾿Εφέσια 
γράμματα--- ἐπῳδαὶ γάρ τινες φασὶν ἐκεῖ- 
ναι ἦσαν, &s καὶ Κροῖσος ἐπὶ τῆς πυρᾶς 
εἰπὼν ὠφελήθη" καὶ ἐν ᾿Ολυμπίᾳ δὲ φασί, 
Μιλησίαυ καὶ ᾿Ἐφεσίου παλαιόντων τὰν 


[ο A. 7.] θεου E [ΚΊ 21. 78. 106? vulg[-clem(with 


OUTWS κατα KPATOS ενισχυσεν καὶ ἡ πιστις 
D!) D: Syr also has ἡ πιστις του θεου. 


Μιλῆσιον μὴ δύνασθαι παλαίεεν διὰ τὸ τὸν 
ἕτερον περὶ τῷ ἀστραγάλῳ ἔχειν τὰ Ἐφέσια 
γράμματα' ὧν γνωσθέντων καὶ λυθέντων 
αὐτῷ, τριακοντάκις τὸ ἑξῆς πεσεῖν τὸν 
Ἐφέσιον. See more illustrations in Wetst. 
They were copies of the mystic words 
engraved on the image of the Ephesian 
Artemis. Eustath. in C. and H. ii. 16. 

apy. pup. πέν.) 50,000 arises 
i.e. denarii: for the drachma of the Au-~ 
gustan and following ages was not the 
real Attic drachma, but the Roman de- 
narius—about 83d. of our money: which 
makes the entire value about £1770. That 
drachme and not shekels (Grot., Hamm.) 
are meant, is plain: for Luke is writing of 
a Grecian town, and to a Greek. ι 
κατὰ κράτος] “Ko modo dicitur urbs 
αἱρεῖσθαι κατὰ κράτος, gue vi expugnatur, 
apud Plut. Apophth. p. 176. Hine lucem 
mutuatur locus, Act. xix. 20, ubi dicitur 
verbum Domini κατὰ κράτος ἰσχύειν, per 
wim invalescere, quasi oppugnans et vi 
expugnans corda hominum.” Hermann 
on Viger, p. 632. So κατὰ μικρόν, κατ᾽ 
ὀλίγον, καθ᾽ ὑπερβολήν, κατὰ κόσμον. 


See Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 241, 


« 

216 TIPAZEEIS ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XIX. 
e=tukeviils 21 “Ὡς δὲ “ἐπληρώθη ταῦτα, “ἔθετο ὁ ἸΠαῦλος ἐν Tw ABDE 
iene e ’ f θὰ \ ἊΝ ἢ ΄ ὦ un © HLPRa 

ἐξ. xm. πνεύματι ᾿ διελθὼν τὴν Μακεδονίαν καὶ ᾿Αχαΐαν tro-bedtg 

Hagz. ii. 19 . ε \ hk 

see ch ἢ 2 ρεύεσθαι εἰς ἹἹεροσόλυμα, εἰπὼν ὅτι ὃ μετὰ τὸ γενέσθαι ae 
ecn. xvil. x = ae ay 
Iver, με ἐκεῖ "Set με καὶ “Ῥώμην ' ἰδεῖν. 33 ἀποστείλας δὲ εἰς 

Σ ing. \ / ΄ a ΄ a , 
eh te τὴν Μακεδονίαν δύο τῶν * διακονούντων αὐτῷ, Τιμόθεον 

15, 26 al. 
cen ait, καὶ “Epagtoy, αὐτὸς léméayev χρόνον ™ εἰς τὴν ᾿Ασίαν. 
iat pace, _ 38 ἐγένετο δὲ " κατὰ τὸν " καιρὸν " ἐκεῖνον ° τάραχος ° οὐκ 

ere only. 


k Matt. xxv. 44. 
Rom. xv. 25 
41.τ 

1 = here (ch. iii. 
5 reff.) only. 
Gen. viii. 10, 
12. Xen. 


4 ἀργυροκόπος 


. Och. xii. 18 (reff.). 
vi. 29only. (-metv, Jer. ib.) 

s=here only. ἔπεμψαν de. 
ii. 20. uch. xvi. 16 (reff.). 


ο ὀλίγος περὶ P τῆς ὁδοῦ. 
T ποιῶν 


24 Δημήτριος γάρ τις ὀνόματι 
δναοὺς ἱ ἀργυροῦς ᾿Αρτέμιδος 


uv " ἥν ὟΝ i Tey ο aN , u2 / 
παρείχετο τοις TEVVITALS OUK 0 ὕγὴν εργάσιαν, 
m = Mark i. 39. ch. viii. 40. xxi. 13. xxiii. 1]. xxv. 4 ἃ]. 
p ch. ix. 2 reff. 
r partic., = ch. xv. 29. xvi. 34. 
. » χρυσοῦς ναούς, Diod. Sic. xx. 14. 


n ch. xii. l only. Num. 
q here only. Judg. xvii.4B. Jer. 
2 Pet. i.19. Winer, edn. 6, $ 45. 4. 
{2 Tim. ii. 20. Rev. ix. 20 only. Isa. 
v mid., = Col. iv. 1. Tit. ii. 7, see Winer, edn. 6, ᾧ 38. 6. 


w ver. 38. Rev. xviii. 22. Heb. xi.l0 only. Deut. xxvii. 15. (- νὴ» ch. xviii. 3.) 


21. for ws to ταυτα, tore D. 
om ev E-gr 40. 68. 


(0) παυλος bef εθετο DE 137.—om o D 137. 
διελθειν ADEP k. 
“Aes uniformity) ADE ab ἃ ο 18: om BHLPX rel 36 Chr,. 


ins τὴν bef axaay (corrn 
ins καὶ bef πορευεσθαι 


Pp. rec ιερουσαλημ, with HLP rel 36 Thi-sif: txt ABEN ὁ k [18] 40 vulg Chr- 
comm, Thl-fin [Orig-int, ], ιεροσολυσολυμα D. 


22. for αποστ. δε, kat aroot. D Syr eth. 
διακονουντων avTw, Siaxovovy (= -ων ὃ) avtwy A: for avtw, avtwv [Η] e. 
X! has written ei, but marked it for erasure. 
ev Tn ασιαΪ in Asiam] D sah. 


τινα xp. 40 arm. 
24. for ονοματι, ny D-gr: om D-lat sah. 


ins os bef παρειχε (repeating the termination of Αρτεμιδο5) Ὁ. 
fusion from τοῖς follg) AADE: txt A7BHLPR rel 36 Chr. 


for 
aft avTw 
aft xpovoy ins ολίγον D-gr 25: 


om τὴν EN bk mo. 


ναῦν αργυρουν N}. om apyupous B. 
mapetxe (con- 


rec εργασιαν bef οὐκ 


ολιγην, with EHLP rel syr Chr Thl-sif: txt ABD Καὶ m 18 vulg [arm(Tischdf) } Thl-fin. 


21. ταῦτα] The occurrences of vv. 19, 20. 

ἐν τῷ πν.} An expression mostly 
used by Paul, see ref. Set] As he was 
sent to the Gentiles, he saw that the great 
metropolis of the Gentile world was the 
legitimate centre of his apostolic working. 
Or perhaps he speaks under some divine 
intimation that ultimately he should be 
brought to Rome. If so, his words were 
literally fulfilled. He did see Rome after 
he had been at Jerusalem this next time: 
but after considerable delay, and as a pri- 
soner. Cf. the same design expressed by 
him, Rom. 1.15; xv. 283—28; and Paley’s 
remarks in the Hore Pauline. 22. | 
He intended himself to follow after Pente- 
cost, 1 Cor. xvi. 8. This mission of Timothy 


is alluded to 1 Cor. iv. 17 (see ib. i. 1); ἡ 


xvi. 10. The object of it was to bring these 
churches in Macedonia and Achaia into 
remembrance of the ways and teaching of 
Paul. It occurred shortly before the writing 
of 1 Cor. He was (1 Gor. xvi. 11) soon 
to return :—but considerable uncertainty 
hangs over this journey. We find him again 
with Paul in Macedonia, 2 Cor. i. 1: but 
apparently he had not reached Corinth. 
See 1 Cor. xvi. l.c. ; and 2Cor. xii. 18, where 
he would probably have been mentioned, 
had he done so. On the difficult ques- 
tion respecting a journey of Paul himself to 


Corinth during this period, see notes, 2 Cor. 
xii. 14; xiii. 1,—and Prolegg. to1 Cor. ὃ v. 

Ἔραστον] This Erastus can hardly 
be identical with the Erastus of Rom. xvi. 
23, who must have been resident at Corinth: 
see there: and therefore hardly either with 
the Erastus of 2 Tim. iv. 20; see note 
there. eis τ. ᾿Ασίαν | i.e. in (but beware 
of imagining εἰς to be ‘ put for’ ἐν, here or 
any where. It gives the direction of the 
tarrying, as in the expressions és δόμους 
μένειν, Soph. Ag. 80, and διεκαρτέρουν 
eis τὴν πατρίδα, Lycurg. cont. Leocr., 
p- 158. It is far better to take it thus, 
with Meyer, than with Winer, Gr., edn. 6, 
§ 50. 4. Ὁ, as importing ‘in favour of,’ ‘ for 
the benefit of’) Ephesus: Asia is named 
by way of contrast with Macedonia, just 
before mentioned. This is evident by the 
following event taking place at Ephesus. 

24. ναοὺς apy.| These were small 
models (ἀφιδρύματα) of the celebrated 
temple of the Ephesian Artemis, with her 
statue, which it was the custom to carry on 
journeys, and place in houses, as a charm. 
Chrys. καὶ πῶς ἔνι ναοὺς ἀργυροῦς γε- 
νέσθαι ; ἴσως ὡς κιβώρια μικρά. Ammian. 
Marcellin. xxii. 18 : ‘ Asclepiades philoso- 
phus. .. . dere celestis argenteum breve 
figmentum quocunque ibat secum solitus 
efferre. .. . Diod, Sic. i. 15: vavds xpu- 








21—27. 


TIPAREIS AIIOSTOAON. 


217 


25 ods * συναθροισας, καὶ τοὺς ¥ περὶ TA τοιαῦτα ἐργάτας, een, xi 


ay Deut. 


εἶπεν Λνδρες, ἐπίστασθε ὅτι 5 ἐκ ταύτης τῆς " ἐργασίας Sipe thks x 


ἃ εὐπορία ἡμῖν * ἐστιν, 2 καὶ "ἡ θεωρεῖτε καὶ ἀκούετε ὃ ὅτι οὐ 
, ’ ‘4 ᾽ \ ‘ 7 »“ 5» A 
μόνον ᾿Εφέσου ἀλλὰ “ σχεδὸν πάσης τῆς Ασίας ὁ Παῦλος 


Φ d / 
OVTOS TTELOAS 


> > \ tg Ἢ “τ ἢ , 
οὐκ εἰσὶν θεοὶ οἱ ὅ διὰ χειρῶν © γινόμενοι. 
τοῦτο ἷ κινδυνεύει ἡμῖν τὸ * μέρος εἰς | ἀπελεγμὸν 


ἀλλὰ. καὶ τὸ τῆς 


οὐθὲν % λογισθῆναι, * μέλλειν 


iv. 19. xii. 19. ch. xxvii. 10, 


e , f € \ 
μετέστησεν * LKAVOV 


(Dan. iii. 27 [94]. ). 


> 40,41. περὶ 
τὴν ἐργα- 
σίαν ὄντες 
τῆς χώρας 
ΕΝ ’ - Bie πὰ i 
oyAov, λέγων ὅτι 714. 


z= Luke xii. 


27 οὐ μόνον δὲ xviii, $8.7 
m ἐλθεῖν, ἵ due Ὑὴ ἷΣ 
᾿ ἣν τ οἵ : ; 3 Aquil. Proy, 
n μεγάλης ° θεᾶς ἱερὸν ᾿Αρτέμιδος ΡᾺ εἰς (<iabat, 
τε καὶ 5 καθαιρεῖσθαι. Stark ΠΝ 
. onn 


ech. xiii. 44 reff. d ch. xviii. 4 reff. 


e = here larg Pe xiii. 22 reff.) Josh. xiv. 8. τὰ ἐκεῖ πάντα πρὸς Λακεδαιμονίους μετέστησεν, Xen. 
Hell. j 


ll. ii. f ch, xi. 24 (reff.). 
3. Gen. ii. a i ver. 40. 
and inf., Jonah i. 4. 
xix. 3 || Isa.) m — John τ. 24. 


o here (vv. 35, 37 v. r.) only +. 
ἘΞ ch. xx. 38 al. 
τοῦ θεοῦ δόξης, Diod. Sic. iv. 8. 


absol., Luke viii. 23. 
k= here only. 3 Mace. v. 17. 
Job rene 28 BN F(not A) &c. 

Dp cha xe 
s-= 2Cor.x.5. Jer. xxix. 16, (xlix. 17. ) constr. here only. καθαιρεῖν τι τῆς 


g ch. xiv. 3. John i. 3. 
1 Cor. xv. 30 only. ies. xxviii. 13. w. τοῦ 

lhere only+. (€Aeymos, 4 Kings 
n ch. vili. 9 reff. 
Rom. ii. 26. iv. 3. ix. 8. Wisd. ix. 6. 


Heb. xi. 


4 reff. q 


25. for ous, ουτος (omg kat) D 137 tol [Syr] sah: ὁ has ovros but retains και. 


To.avTas(sic) δὲ. 
for εἰπεν, εφη Ὁ. 


D syr-w-ast sah. επιστασται(ϑὶο) D. 


for epyatas, Texveras D-gr-corr(-tas D!) : 
add προς avrovs D [Syr sah eth]. 


artifices K-lat. 
aft avdpes ins συντεχνειταῖι 
rec μων (corrn, as more usual constr), 


with HLP rel syrr eth Chr, Thl-sif: txt ABDEN ο ἃ 13. 40 vulg coptt [arm] Thl-fin. 


26. akovere και θεωρειτε D Syr. 
141; 


om ort D{-gr]. 
ys am Thl-fin.—zpsius Ephesi D-lat. 


ins ews bef εφεσ. D-gr 


εφεσιου D. aft αλλα ins καὶ A 


1)-οὐ L 13. 36. 40. 106-80 demid Syr Chr, Thl-sif: om BEHPN rel vulg D-lat coptt 


[syr eth arm ] Thl-fin. 

quidam tune D-lat. 
om οἱ 8! 57. 

_ 27. om δε E-gr. 

κινδι nu. AC 137. om ἀλλα Xl. 

order), with ABLN 18. 36 rel Thl-fin: 

rec οὐδεν, with DEL 18. 36 rel Chr: 

of constr) ADE vulg Syr : 


om πεισας &. 


om τὴς D'(ins D?) τη. 
απεστησεν K. 
γενομενοι D'(yervou. [| B']D?) 68. 
nuw bef κινδυνευει D τὴ (-νευσει D2 [vulg)). 
rec apteu.dos bef repov (corrn of characteristic 
txt DEHP b f go Chr, Thi-sif Jer,. 
txt ABHPR d f. 
txt BHLPR® rel 36 Chr Thi. 
Thl (Jer, ]: txt BD2EHLPRN 13 rel Chr ([6.---αλἂῖ καθερισθαι μελλει(ν) Ὁ. 


aft ουτος ins τις Tore D!: hic 
aft or: ins ουτοι D-gr. 


το μερος bef 
λογισθησεται (emendation 


μελλει Al(D?) ae vss 
Steph 


(for te) δε, with HL rel vulg Chr, Thl: om a 6: txt ABEPN ὁ 13 [(Syr) syr coptt 


(2th) arm] Jer). om καὶ Ec. 


σοῦς δύο. Dio Cass. xxxix. 20: νεὼς 
Ἥρας βραχὺς ἐπὶ τραπέζης τινὸς πρὸς 
ἀνατολῶν ᾿ἱδρυμένος. We may find an 
exact parallel in the usages of that corrupt 
form of Christianity, which, whatever it 
may pretend to teach, in practice honours 
similarly the “ great goddess” of its ima- 
gination. 25. τὰ τοιαῦτα] All sorts of 
memorials or amulets connected with the 
worship of Artemis. Dean Howson 
(ii. p. 98) suggests that possibly Alexander 
the coppersmith may have been one of these 
craftsmen : see 2 Tim. iv. 14. 26. | 
The people believed that the i images them- 
selves were gods: τὰ χαλκᾶ καὶ τὰ γραπτὰ 
καὶ λίθινα μὴ μαθόντες, μηδὲ ἐθισθέντες 
ἀγάλματα καὶ τιμὰς θεῶν, ἀλλὰ θεοὺς 
καλεῖν. Plutarch de 1514. p. 379, c (Wetst.): 
see ch. xvii. 29. And so it is invariably, 
wherever images are employed professedly 
as media of worship. The genitives’E@. 
and ’Ao. are governed by ὄχλον. 27. ] 
ἡμῖν is best taken as the dativus incom- 


modi, not for ἡμῶν, nor with τὸ μέρος, 
but with κινδυνεύει. μέρος, as we say, 
department. ἀλλὰ kai] but that 
eventually even the temple itself of the 
great goddess Artemis will be counted 
for nothing. μεγάλη was the usual epithet 
of the Ephesian Artemis : Xen. _Ephes. i. 
p+ dai ὀμνύω τε τὴν πάτριον ἡμῖν θεόν, 
τὴν μεγάλην ᾿Εφεσίων Αρτεμιν. There 
is an inscription in Boeckh, 2969 c, con- 
taining the words τὴς μεγαλης θεας αρτε- 
μιδος προ πολεως. The same inscription 
also mentions γραμματεύς and ἀνθυπατος. 
C. and H. ii. 98. The temple of Arte- 
mis at Ephesus, having been burnt to the 
ground by Herostratus ov the night of the 
birth of Alexander the Great (B.C. 355), 
was restored with increased magnificence, 
and accounted one of the wonders of the 
ancient world. Its dimensions were 425 X 
220 feet, and it was surrounded by 127 
columns, 60 feet high. It was standing in 
all its grandeur at this time. See C. and 


918 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


ΧΙΧ. 


A t ΄ 2 A ev ς ΤἌ / \ « ΠῚ > 
Luke ix.43, τῆς ἡ μεγαλειότητος αὐτῆς ἣν OAn ἡ Acia καὶ ἡ “ OLKOU- 


2 Pet. i. 16 
only. Jer. xl. 
(xxxiii.) 9. 
Dan. vil. 27 
LXA. Eadr. 
i. 5 only. 

Ὁ — ch. xvii. 
31. Rev. iii. 


v ch. xiii. 43 
reff. Bel and 


Dr. 22. 

w = Johni. 14. 
ch. vi. 3, 5, 8. 
ix. 36. xiii. >: is) ς 7, 
10. Isai. αὐτὸν οἱ μαθηταί. 

x = Luke iv. 
28. Eph. iv. 
31. Rev. xii. 
12al. Gen. 

see notes. 


xlix. 6. y ver. 27 al. 


ahere only. Gen. xi.9. 1 Kings v. 12. xiv. 20 only. (χύνειν, ver. 32.) 


bis. 1 Cor. iv. 9 only+. (-τρίζεσθαι, Heb. x. 33.) 
f ch. xii. 22 reff. g constr., ch. viii. 31 reff. 


μένη Y σέβεται. 38 ἀκούσαντες δὲ καὶ γενόμενοι * πλήρεις 
x θυμοῦ ἔκραζον λέγοντες ¥ Μεγάλη ἡ Αρτεμις ᾿Εφεσίων. 
29 καὶ ξΣ ἐπλήσθη ἡ πόλις τῆς " συγχύσεως, ἢ ὥρμησάν τε 
Ὁ ὁμοθυμαδὸν εἰς τὸ ° θέατρον 
᾿Αρίσταρχον Μακεδόνας, “ συνεκδήμους Ἰ]αύλου' 30 Π]αύ- 
λου δὲ βουλομένου εἰςελθεῖν εἰς τὸν ᾿ δῆμον, οὐκ εἴων 
31 τινὲς δὲ καὶ τῶν ᾿Ασιαρχῶν, ὄντες 


d 7 ἢ. \ 
συναρπάσαντες L'aiov καὶ 


᾽ “Ὁ ΄ ΧΝ | yee. / A 
αὐτῷ φίλοι, πέμψαντες πρὸς αὕτον ὃ παρεκάλουν, μὴ 


2 -- Luke iv. 28. v. 26. ch. ν. 17. xiii.45. Gen. vi. ll. 
b ch, vii. 57 (reff.). c here 
d ch, vi. 12 reff. e 2 Cor. viii. 19 only t. 


ree τὴν μεγαλειότητα (see note), with HLP rel vulg Chr Thi: txt ABEN ἃ ὁ 13. 36. 


40 syr sah.—om τ. wey. avtns D. 
not om αὐτῆς 7”.) for nv, ἡ D!. 
om 2nd7 Bk m. 

28. ταυτα δε ακουσ. D [arm]. 
simly syr-mg. om ἡ D}(ins D4). 


(Mai Tischdf note expr agst Bch that B does 
om Ist 7 BD ['Thl-sif: ἡ ασια ολη τὴ]. 


aft θυμου ins δραμοντες εἰς To αμφοδον D 137, 


29. ree aft ἢ πολις ins oAn (see ch xxi. 30), with EHLP rel syr sah Chr,: pref oA, 


Ὁ 36(sic) Syr eth: om ABN 13. 40 vulg copt arm. 


rec om τής, with (D') EX% 


k 13: ins A B(sic: see table) D6HLPN' rel Chr,.—ovvexv6n ολ. ἡ π. αισχυνὴης D}-gr. 


for re, δε D-gr m copt: om sah arm. 


ins καὶ bef συναρπασαντες D. 


paxedoves D1(txt D4 or 8): μακεδονα 15. 180: μακεδονιας ἃ 56. 117-77}: om 100. 
rec ins tou bef παυλου (with e?): om ABDEHLPN rel. 
30. rec Tou de mavaou (possibly from the concurrence of mavdov mavaoy), with EHLP 
rel 36 Chr: BovAouevov δε του παυλου D: του παυλου δε δὲβ Κα: txt ABN! τὴ 13. 
for ovk εἰων avTov ot μαθηται, οἱ μαθ. exwdvoy D(non sinebant D-lat) Syr eth. 


31. for ovtes, ὑπαρχοντές D. 


avtov ®! [6] 100. 


H. ch. xvi. vol. ii. pp. 84 ff. τῆς με- 
γαλειότητος is the more difficult and pro- 
bably original reading: and that she should 
be deposed from her greatness, whom Xc. 

29. εἰς τὸ θέατρον] The resort of 
the populace on occasions of excitement, 
as Wetst. shews by many instances. So 
Tacit, Hist. ii. 80, ‘Tum Antiochensium 
theatrum ingressus, bi ἐἰ 115 consultare mos 
est” ‘Of the site of the theatre, the scene 
of the tumult raised by Demetrius, there 
can be no doubt, its ruins being a wreck 
of immense grandeur. I think it must 
have been larger than the one at Miletus ; 
and that exceeds any I have elsewhere 
seen. ... . Its form alone can now be 
spoken of, for every seat is removed, and 
the proscenium isa heap of ruins.’ Fellows, 
Asia Minor, p. 274. ‘ The theatre of Ephe- 
sus is said to be. the largest known of any 
that have remained to us from antiquity.’ 
C. and H. ii. p. 83, note 3. συναρπ.] 
It is not implied that they seized Gaius 
and Aristarchus before they rushed into 
the theatre: compare mposeviduevor εἶπαν, 
ch. i. 24, also ch. xviii. 27, and Winer, 
edn. 6, § 45. 6. b. Γάϊον] A dif- 
ferent person from the Gaius of ch. xx. 4, 
who was of Derbe, and from’the Gaius of 


αὐτου H-gr: amici ejus vulg. 


for εαυτον, 


Rom. xvi. 23, and 1 Cor. i. 14, who was 
evidently a Corinthian. Aristarchus is 
mentioned ch. xx. 4; xxvii. 2; Col. iv. 10; 
Philem. 24. He was a native of Thessa- 
lonica. 31. ᾿Ασιαρχῶν)] The Asiar- 
che were officers elected by the cities of 
the province of Asia to preside over their 
games and religious festivals. Of these it 
would be natural that the one who for the 
time presided would bear the title of 6 
᾿Ασιάρχος : cf. Eus. H. Εἰ. iv. 15: but no 
more is known of such presidency. Wetst. 
quotes several inscriptions and coins in 
which the name occurs, and cites many 
analogous names of like officers elsewhere : 
Ciliciarcha, Syriarcha, Pheeniciarcha, Hel- 
ladarcha, &c. The Asiarch Philip at 
Smyrna is mentioned by Eusebius (H. E. 
iv. 15) as presiding in the amphitheatre at 
the martyrdom of Polycarp. These Ephe- 
sian games in honour of Artemis took place 
in May, which whole month (another sin- 
gular coincidence with the practices of 
idolatrous Christendom) was sacred to, and 
named Artemisian after, the goddess. In 
Boeckh, Insecr. 2954, we have the decree 
ὅλον τὸν μῆνα τὸν ἐπώνυμον τοῦ θείου 
ὀνόματος εἶναι ἱερὸν καὶ ἀνακεῖσθαι τῇ 
θεῷ, ἄγεσθαι δὲ ἐπ᾽ αὐταῖς (scil. τοῦ μηνὸς 


ABDE 
HLPN a 
bedfg 
hkmo 
13 





98---ὐῦ. 


h δοῦναι ἑαυτὸν εἰς τὸ ° θέατρον. 


” S$ \ e 

TL ἔκραζον: ἣν yap ἡ 
m / ᾽ "ὃ / [χὰ 

πλείους οὐκ ἤδεισαν τίνος ἕνεκα 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


219 


82 i ἄλλοι μὲν οὖν 1 ἄλλο κ = here only. 
Κ ἐκκλησία ᾿ συγκεχυμένη, καὶ ™ οἱ 
" συνεληλύθεισαν. 
δὲ τοῦ ὄχλου *° προεβίβασαν ᾿Αλέξανδρον, Ρ προβαλόντων 
αὐτὸν τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων' ὁ δὲ ᾿Αλέξανδρος ἃ κατασείσας τὴν 
χεῖρα ἤθελεν ᾿ ἀπολογεῖσθαι τῷ 1 δήμῳ. 


εἰς τὰς pn 
plas αὑτὸν 
διδούς, Jos. 
Antt. xv. 7. 
7, and Diod 
Sic. v. 59. 

ich. xxi. 34. 
MOS xviii. 


33 ἐκ 


84 5 ἘΞ ee 39, 
ἐπυγνόντες δὲ 41. oe, 


ὅτι ᾿Ιουδαῖός téotw, φωνὴ ἐγένετο μία υ ἐκ πάντων ὡς are brent 


νυ ἐπὶ ὥρας δύο i weaned Μεγάλη ” ᾿Άρτεμις ᾿Εφεσίων. | 


35 W καταστείλας δὲ ὁ 


11. xxi. 14. Acts, ch. xxiv. 10. xxvi. 24 als. 
(xxxi.)/6. “2 Mace. xiii. 26 only. 
#pres , ch. xvi. 38 reff. 
w here bis only +. 3 pene: iv. 31 only. 
ix. 5. Job xix. 
de Prof. $ 17, Sa % p- 560. 


82. om τι D 42 vuig. 


«λυθησαν L [g!] Thi-sif. 


z here only +. 
a constr., ch. xxiv. 10 reff. 


ἢ yap εκκλησια nv D[-gr]. 
rec evexev, with DEHLP rel: txt ABN 138. 36 Thl-fin. 


m 1 Cor. ix. 19 
reff. 
= ch.i. 6 


γραμματεὺς τὸν ὄχλον: φησὶν, eh, ἜΣ 
ἼΑνδρες ᾿Εφέ y 6 ἢ 
νὸρες [φέσιοι, τὶς γάρ ἐστιν ἀνθρώπων ὃς οὐ γινώ- 
Nis, 19 , , Ζ , a, ete» ΄ 
σκεν τὴν Ἐφεσίων πολιν * νεωκορον ὃ οὖσαν τῆς ” μεγάλης 
τὸ μειράκιον εἰς λόγους ἀποῤῥήτους, Polyb. xxiv. 3.7. συμβ., 1 Cor. ii. 16 reff. 


(Luke xxi. 30) only. Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) 4 AN Ald. compl. 
Rom. ii. 15. 2 Cor. xii. 19 only. L.P. Jer. xii. 1. xxxviii. 


only. Exod. 
xxxv. 34. 
Deut. vi. 7 
only. 
προβιβάσας 
p= here 


4 ch. xii. 17 reff. r Luke xii. 


s Luke xxiii. 7. ch. xxii. 29. xxviii. 1. Jer. v. 5. 
u = ch. v. 38, 39. Foht iii. 25 al. v ch. xiii. 31 reff. 
x — here only. (Ezra vii. 6, &c.) y Matt. 


ἡ λευιτικὴ ule νεωκόρων κ. ἱερέων ἐστίν, Philo 
Ὁ = ch. vv. 27, 28, 34, 


πλειστοι D-gr. 
νεληλυθασιν H: 


33. * συνεβίβασαν ABEX a (corrn, perhaps on acct of the unusual word, perhaps 


to avoid the repetition of mpo): 


ουν εβιβασαν 13(appy): 


κατεβιβ. D!, distraxerunt 


D-lat, détrax. vulg [E-lat: produx. tol]: προεβιβασαν D4 or 8 HLP rel 36 Chr,. 


elz mplBanhnvrc's with DLP b? ¢ 
rel 40 Chr. avtwy 1,1 40 Thl- οἷν 
τὴ χειρι DX? 40 Chr Thil-fin. 


g m[Scriv] ο 13. 36 Thi: 
o ovy A k [am] demid fuld tol: 
for nAGev, ηθελεν δὲ! 


txt ABEHXN [m(Treg)] 
ο δ᾽ ουν &}, 
for δήμω, Aaw EK. 


34. rec επιγνοντων (corrn, to avoid the pendent nominative), with a Ὁ ο 86 Cc: txt 


ABDEHLPR 13 rel Chr, Thi-sif. 
κραζοντες AN. 


om ex D, so vulg coptt. 
om ἡ D}(ins D4). 


wser. B 13. 
bey. ἡ apt. ed. is repeated in B. 


35. κατασεισας» DE ὁ 137 Thi-sif: compescuisset D-lat, sedasset vulg E-lat. 


tov οχλον bef ο γραμματεὺς Β m 190 copt. 
αδελφοι δὲ! [arm ]. 


εφη dixit K vulg. for εφεσιοι, 


rec ἀνθρωπος (corrn), with D(pref ὁ D') HLP rel syr eth Chr, 


Thl-sif: txt ABEN ἃ ὁ k m 18. 36. 40[rwy αν. vulg Syr copt (sah) arm Thl-fin. 


for εφεσ., nuetepay vestiram D. 
[veox. ELP a ¢(?) 18]. 


πολιν bef εφεσ. E coptt. 
for ουσαν, ewa D: 


ναοκορον D1(txt D?) 
add καὶ X'(N? disapproving). rec 


aft μεγαλης ins θεας, with HLP rel eth [arm] Chr: om ABDE® ὁ 13. 36. 40 vulg syrr 


coptt Isid,. 


ἡμέραιΞ5) Tas ἑορτὰς καὶ τὴν τῶν ᾿Αρτεμισίων 
πανήγυριν. C. and H. ii. 95. δοῦναι] 
Kypke remarks: ‘latet in phrasi, quod 
periculum Paulo in theatro immineat.’ 
E. V. adventure himself; an excellent 
translation. 33.] ἐκ τ. ὄχλ. some of 
the multitude. προεβ. urged for- 
ward, through the crowd ; the Jews push- 
ing him on from behind, ‘ propellentibus.’ 
It is uncertain whether this Alexander 
is mentioned elsewhere (but see on 2 Tim. 
iv. 14). He appears to have been a Chris- 
tian convert from Judaism, whom the Jews 
were willing to expose as a victim to the 
fury of the mob: or perhaps one of them- 
selves, put forward to clear them of blame 
on the occasion. 34. ἐπιγνόντες] 
The nom. is an anacoluthon, as in ch. xxiv. 
5 al. See Winer, edn. 6, § 63, i. 1. 
They would hear nothing from a 
Jew, as being an enemy of image-worship. 


35. καταστ.] When he had quieted, 
lulled, the crowd. ὃ γραμματεύς] 
the town-clerk is the nearest English 
office corresponding to it. He was the 
keeper of the archives and public reader 
of decrees, &c., in the assemblies. Thucyd. 
vil. 10, τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ἐπέδοσαν᾽ ὃ δὲ ypap- 
ματεὺς τῆς πόλεως παρελθὼν ἀνέγνω τοῖς 
᾿Αθηναίοις. ‘Among the Ephesian inscrip- 
tions in Boeckh, we find the following: 
M. I. Αυρ. Διονυσιον τον tepoxnpuxa και B 
ασιαρχον ek τῶν ιδιων T. PA. Μουνατιος 
φΦιλοσεβαστος ο γραμματεὺς καὶ ασιαρχησας. 


No. 2990.’ C. and H. ii. 96. 


γάρ 
gives a reason for the καταστείλας. See 
Herm. on Viger, p. 829. vewkdpov | 


Probably a virger or adorner (Suidas says, 
not a sweeper: ὃ τὸν νεὼν κοσμῶν kK. εὐτρε- 
πίζων, ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ 6 σαρῶν) of the temple: 
here used as implying that Ephesus had the 
charge and keeping of the temple. The 


220 


TIPASEIZ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, XIX. 36—41. 


chereonlyt. Αρτέμιδος καὶ τοῦ “ διοπετοῦς ; 36 4 ἀναντιῤῥήτων οὖν 


αὐτὸ μὲν 
τὸ ἄγαλμα 
διοπετές, 
ὡς λέγου- 
σιν, Hero- 
dian i. 11. 

ἃ here only f. 
Symm., Job 
xi. 2. xxxiii. 
13. (-Tws, 
ch. x. 29.) 

el Pet. i. 6 
only. 1 Mace. Pp 
xii. ll. (see 
1 Tim. ν. 13.) 

f ch, ii. 30 reff. 
xxi.7. John vii. 45al. Dan. iii. 13. 
xiii. 6.) 

m ver. 24 reff. 
Heb. iv. 13. 


n=here only. €MoL. 


ii. 16. 


g2Tim.iii.4only. Prov. x. 14. xiii. 3. Sir. ix. 18 only. 
i here only t. 
k constr., Matt. xxvii. 39. 4 Kings xix. 22. 
. . πρὸς τούτους ὁ λόγος, Demosth. πρὸς Aaxp., p. 942. 17. see 
ὁ = here (ch. xvii. 5) only+. τὰς διοικήσεις, ev als τὰς ἀγοραίους ποιοῦνται, Strabo 
xiii, p. 932 (Wahl). μοι ἄγοντι τὸν ἀγοραῖον, Jos. Antt. xiv. 10. 21, 
q ch. xiii. 7, 8, 12. xviii 12 only. see notes. 


" / e δέ b] \ e “Ὁ Ww ’ f ς 
ὄντων τούτων " δέον ἐστὶν ὑμᾶς * κατεσταλμένους ! ὑπ- 
΄ \ \ \ ͵ h » , \ 
άρχειν καὶ μηδὲν ὃ προπετὲς πράσσειν. 51 ἢ ἠγώγετε γὰρ 
, " Way , » 
τοὺς ἄνδρας τούτους οὔτε 'ἱ ἱεροσύλους οὔτε * βλασφη- 
fa ‘ e “ 
μοῦντας τὴν | θεὸν ἡμῶν. 
σὺν αὐτῷ ™ τεχνῖται ἔχουσιν πρός τινα " λόγον, ° ἀγόραιοι 
Μ \ q > Ov / > ea > / > 7 
ἄγονται Kal ἃ ἀνθυπατοί εἰσιν" * ἐγκαλείτωσαν ἀλληλοις. 


33 εἰ μὲν οὖν Δημήτριος καὶ οἱ 


fs h absol., Matt. 
(-etv, Rom. ii. 22. -ta, 2 Macc. 
) 1 fem., here only. 


2 Macc. iv. 42 only. 
(Rom. ii. 24 al. 


p = Luke xxiv. 21. 2 Macc. 
r constr., ch. xxiii. 28. Sir. xlvi. 19. w. κατά. 


and gen., Rom. viii. 33, pass. ver. 40. ch, xxui. 29. xxvi. 2,7 only. L.P. 


διοςπετους D[-gr] 68: hujus jovis D-lat: joviseprolis E-lat: jovisque prolis vulg. 


36. αναντιρητων BL. 
ovT. TOUT. | 


[om ουν E'-gr: E-lat has an empty space for αναντ. οὖν 
τουτων bef ovrwy A bo: om τουτων XN! 13. 


aft mpomeres ins τι N3 


(πρασσειν, so ABDEHL[P 8 13 rel(not m) Chr.) 
37. from nyayere to τουτοὺς is inserted in the margin of P by a later hand. 


aft rovrous ins evade D syr-mg [arm: 7m hune locum sah |. 


D. 
rel 36 Chr-c, Thl-sif. 


for ouvte (twice), μητε 


rec τὴν θεαν (corrn), with D!E?P a b! [6,6 sil] ο 13 Thl-fin: txt ABD§E'HLN 
rec vuwy, with E!-gr HLP rel vulg syr copt eth-rom Chr, 


Thl-fin: txt ABDE?®& Ὁ f 0 18 E-lat Syr sab eth-pl [arm] Chr-c, Thl-sif. 


38. aft Snuntpios ins ovtos D Syr: pref ὁ c 137. 


οἱ bef και D![-gr](txt D4). 


rec προς τινὰ λυγον bef exovow (alteration of characteristic order), with 
13(appy): txt AB(D)EHLPN rel vulg [syr (coptt) arm] Chr Thl.—ins avtous bef twa 


D, cum aliquos quendam D-lat. 


title is found (Wetst.) on inscriptions as 
belonging to Ephesus: 7 φιλοσεβαστος 
Εφεσιων BovAn kat o vewkopos δημος 
καθιερωσαν επιανθυπατου Πεδουκαιυυ Πρεισ- 
κεινου Ψψηφισαμενου Τιβ. KA. Ιταλικου του 
γραμματεωξ του δημου ( Boeckh, No. 2966) ; 
and seems to have been specially granted 
by the emperors to particular cities: thus 
we have ὅσα ἐπετύχομεν παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου 
Καίσαρος ᾿Αδριανοῦ δι᾽ ᾿Αντωνίου Πολέμω- 
vos δεύτερον δόγμα συγκλήτου, καθ᾽ ὃ δὶς 
νεωκόροι γεγόναμεν : and on coins οἵ Ha- 
drian, Ἐφεσίων δὶς νεωκόρων, &e.: and 
similarly of Elagabalus, Νικομηδέων τρὶς 
νεωκόρων: οὗ Maximin, Μαγνήτων vew- 
κόρων ᾿Αρτέμιδος. See also C. and H. ii. 
p- 89, where will be found an engraving 
of a coin exhibiting both the words vew- 
κόρος and ἀνθύπατος (ver. 38). 

τ. διοπετοῦς) To give peculiar sanctity to 
various images, it was given out that they 
had fallen from heaven; so Euripides of 
the statue of Artemis at Tauris, ἔνθ᾽ ΓΑρτε- 
μις σὴ σύγγονος βωμοὺς ἔχει, | λαβεῖν τ᾽ 
ἄγαλμα θεᾶς ὃ φασὶν ἐνθάδε | εἰς Tovsde 
ναοὺς οὐρανοῦ πεσεῖν ἄπο. Iph. Taur. 
86, and 977, he calls it διοπετὲς ἄγαλμα, 
οὐρανοῦ πέσημα. So also Pausan. Att. 26, 
τὸ δὲ ἁγιώτατον. . . ἐστὶν ᾿Αθηνᾶς ἄγαλ- 
μα ἐν τῇ νῦν ἀκροπόλει... φήμη δ᾽ ἐς 
αὐτὸ ἔχει, πεσεῖν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ. The 
image is described by Pliny, xvi. 72: ‘de 
ipso simulacro Dee ambigitur. Ceteri ex 


ebeno esse tradunt: Mucianus ter consul 
ex his qui, proxime viso 60, scripsere, viti- 
gineum, et nunquam mutatum, septies re- 
stituto templo.’ 37.| From this verse it 
appears that Paul had proceeded at Ephe- 
sus with the same caution as at Athens, and 
had not held up to contempt the worship of 
Artemis, any further than unavoidably the 
truths which he preached would render it 
contemptible. This is also manifest from 
his having friends among the Asiarchs, 
ver. 31. Chrysostom, however, treats this 
assertion of the town-clerk merely as a 
device to appease the people: τοῦτο ψεῦδος" 
ταῦτα μὲν πρὸς τὸν δῆμον. ά 

refers to the προπετές with which he had 
charged them: ‘and this caution is not 
unneeded, —for &c.? see Meyer; and 
Herm. as above, on ver. 35. 38. 
ἀγόραιοι] court-days (the grammarians 
distinguish ἀγοραῖος, § cireumforaneus,’ an 
idler in the market, and ἀγόραιος, as in 
our text: so Suidas: but Ammonius vice 
versa: and the distinction is now believed 
to be mere pedantry): and ἄγονται im- 
plies that they were then actually going 
on. They were the periodical assizes of 
the district, held by the proconsul and his 
assessors (see below). The Latin phrase 
for ἀγοραίους ἄγειν was conventus agere, 
or peragere, or convocare ; cf. Ces. B. G. 
i. 54; v. 1; viii. 46. Tence the district 
itself was called conventus. See Smith’s 





gg ne Oe ee Aa ee ee en ee ee 


— | 


ΧΑ, 1,2. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


221 


\ ς , 3 -“" 9 A >] / 
39 εὐ δέ τι περὶ § ἑτέρων ᾿ ἐπιζητεῖτε, ἐν τῇ " ἐννόμῳ ἡ ἐκκλησίᾳ « = ch. xvii. 


W ἐπιλυθήσεται. 


΄ \ a / \ ’ f 
5 στάσεως περὶ τῆς * σήμερον, μηδενὸς ” αἰτίου © ὑπάρχοντος 


40 καὶ γὰρ * κινδυνεύομεν Y ἐγκαλεῖσθαι τ. 


t Rom. xi. 7 


== here 
(1 Cor. ix. 21) 


onlyt. Prol’ 
, a ͵ a o Sir. only. 
περὶ οὗ [ov] δυνησόμεθα ἃ ἀποδοῦναι λόγον τῆς * συστροφῆς εἰθισμένα 
΄ 4] \ re 5. ΤᾺ Nae ee: he Seaces r κ. ἔννομα, 
ταύτης. καὶ ταῦτα εἰπὼν ἴ ἀπέλυσεν τὴν " ἐκκλησίαν. Χο Cyr. 
: , ville 710. 
XX. 18 Mera δὲ τὸ " παύσασθαι τὸν ™ θόρυβον προς- "538i ey. 6. 
, ς n \ θ \ \k , w = here 
καλεσάμενος ὁ ἸΙαῦλος τοὺς μαθητὰς καὶ ὃ παρακαλέσας, only $. (Mark 
A “ Ὶ \ 1V. on ἐ δ 
| ἀσπασάμενος ™ ἐξῆλθεν πορευθῆναι εἰς [τὴν] Μακεδονίαν. ὅν. χη} 


N \ \ μ SLE ἐ δὰ ‘ ΄ » \ 2 Pet. i. 20. 
2 τὸ διελθὼν δὲ τὰ ° μέρη ἐκεῖνα Kat * παρακαλέσας Ρ αὐτοὺς x ver 27 seit. 
y ver. 38 reff. 
z — Mark xv. 7. Luke xxiii. 19, 25. ch. xxiv.5. Prov. xvii. 14. a constr., here only. (ch. xx. 26.) 
b Luke xxiii. 4, 14, 22 only +. (-os, Heb. v. 9.) ech, viii. 16 reff. d Matt. xii. 36. Luke 
xvi. 2. [Rom. xiv.12.] 1 Pet.iv.5. Dan. vi. 2 Theod. ech. xxiii. 12 only. Amos vii. 10. 
f = ch. xiii. 3 reff. g ch, xix. 21 reff. h Judith vi. 1. ich. xxi. 34 reff. 
k ch. xv. 32 reff. 1 = here only. (ch. xviii. 22 reff.) Xen. Anab. vii. 1. 40. m = ch. xy. 40 
reff. n ch. xiii. 6 reff. o ch. xix. 1. p ch. viii. 5 reff. 


39. for περι erepwy, περαιτερων (seems like a mistake from itacism) ἃ 36: περαιτέρω 
B(Tischdf) [13(aeper.) : ulterius D-lat]: περ ετερον E. επιζητειται (itacism ?) & 
cdo [(nrerte ἘΠ. ev Tw vouw εκκλησια D'(so, but εκκλησιας D? and lat: txt D*). 

40. σημερον ενκαλεισθαι oTucews μήηδενος αἰτίου οντος D. περι ov ov δυνησομεθα 
(perhaps, as Meyer, from a careless repetition of ov: more likely, as Bornemann in 
loc, inserted by those who placed a colon at vrapxovtos and regarded wept... TavTns 
as a new member of the sentence) A B(sic: see table) H L(for οὗ, ουν L}) PRbcefgh 
m Ο syrr [zth(appy)] arm: om οὐ DE 13[e sil] 36 rel vulg coptt Chr-comm, Thi-fin. 

Sovva (prob the simple verb was substituted for the compd rather than vice 
versa: both exprr are in ordinary use) HL[P] bd eg [Chr,] Thi-sif: txt ABDEN 
13. 36 rel Chr, @c-ms Thl-fin. ins περι bef της συστρ. (consequent on regarding 
συστρ. α8 in apposn with the preceding gen :—q. d. viz. concerning this συστρ.) ABEX 
dk m 36. 40 D-lat arm Thl-fin: om Dj-gr! HLP rel [vulg] Chr Thl-sif. (13 def.) 


Cuap. XX. 1. for mposxad., μεταπεμψαμενος BEX m 13. 36. 40 coptt e2th-rom Thl- 
fin: μεταστειλαμενος a 69. 98-marg 105: txt ADHLP rel Chr, Thl-sif. om 6 D. 
ins πολλα bef παρακ. D. rec om παρακαλεσαξ (see note), with HLP rel Chr, 
Thl-sif: ins AB(D)EX a ec m 18. 36 [vulg syrr] copt [sah eth arm] Thl-fin.—zapa- 
κελε(υ)σας D! ὃ for ασπ.. ἀποσπασαμενος D!: καὶ ασπ. ER: ασπασαμενος τε D4 
acm 36 Thl-fin. πορευεσθαι (corrn) ABEX 36 Thl-fin: om D 27. 665. 105: txt 
HLP 13(sic) rel Chr Thl-sif. om τὴν BDE Lie sil] δὲ ἃ be Καὶ mo Thl-fin: ins 


AHP 13[e sil] rel Chr, Thl-sif. 
2. ins παντα bef τα μερη Ὁ. 
Xpno(auevo)s(?) Ὠ1-στ(υχὺ D2). 


Dict. of Antiquities, art. Conventus. 
Pliny, H. N. v. 29 fin., mentions Ephesus 
as one of these assize towns. ἀνθ- 
ὕπατοι] there are (such things as) pro- 
consuls: the fit officers before whom to 
bring these causes: a categoric plural. So 
the Commentators generally. But may not 
the ‘ consiliarii’ of the proconsul who were 
his assessors at the “ conventus,’ held in the 
provinces, have themselves popularly borne 
the name? We find in Jos. B. J. ii. 16. 1, 
that Cestius, the ἡγεμών of Syria, on re- 
ceiving an application respecting Florus’s 
conduct at Jerusalem, μετὰ ἡγεμόνων 
€BovAeveto,—which ἡγεμόνες were his 
assessors, or consiliarii. (See on ch. xxv. 
12, and Smith’s Dict. of Antt., ut supra.) 
ἐγκαλ. aX. | let them (the plaintiffs 
and defendants) plead against one an- 
other. 99.] “ Legitimus ccetus est, 
qui a magistratu civitatis convocatur et 


εκεινη D}(txt D4). 


for παρακαλεσας auTous, 


regitur.? Grot. The art. points out the 
regularly recurring assembly, of which 
they all knew. 40.] yap assumes that 
this assembly was an unlawful one. 
μηδενὸς x.7.A.] There being no ground 
why (i.e. in consequence of which) we 
shall be able to give an account, i.e. ‘no 
ground whereon to build the possibility of 
our giving an account.’ The reading περὲ 
οὗ ov (see digest) seems to involve the sen- 
tence in almost inextricable confusion. To 
read περὶ τῆς συστ. τ. aud take it in 
apposit. with περὶ οὗ, ‘ hujus rei, videlicet 
conventus hujus’ (Bornemann), is very 
harsh. 

Cuap. XX. 1—XXI. 16.] JouRNEY oF 
PatL 10 MACEDONIA AND GREECE, AND 
THENCE TO JERUSALEM. 1.] παρα- 
καλέσας has probably been omitted on ac- 
count of the two participles coming to- 
gether: or perhaps on account of the same 


ΧΧ, 


222 TPASEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 
q ch. xr. 32. 


4 eh τ. 32 « λόγῳ πολλῷ ἦλθεν εἰς Ti Ἑλλάδα, ὃ - ποιήσας τε 
een alin i acs as bbicairaii αὐτῷ ἐπιβουλῆς ὑπὸ τῶν Tov- 
u = Philem. 16 δαίων μέλλοντι ᾿ ἀνάγεσθαι alas Συρίαν ἐγένετο 
39. constr, ἃ γνώμης ‘TOU ~ ὑποστρέφειν διὰ Μακεδονίας. . * * συν- 
saa εἰπετο δὲ αὐτῷ " ἄχρι τῆς ᾿Ασίας Σώπατρος Πύῤῥου 

vt Βεροιαῖος, Θεσσαλονικέων δὲ ᾿Αρίσταρχος καὶ Σεκοῦνδος, 
καὶ Γάϊος Δερβαῖος καὶ Τιμόθεος, ᾿Ασιανοὶ δὲ Τυχικὸς 


iii. 12 reff. 
w = ch. viii. 


reff. 
x here only t. 


2 Macc. xv. ἢ e \ , » coon 
zonly. Kat Ἱρόφιμος. ὃ * οὗτοι [δὲ] ὃ προελθόντες ἢ ἔμενον ἡμᾶς 
pa oh xe 20 rest: a= ver. 13. 2Cor. ix. 5. (ch. xii. 10 al.) Gen. xxxiii. 14. 


reff. ] 
b = here only, Job xxxvi. 2. (see ver. 23.) 


3. for re, δε D 38 E-lat copt. 


emBouans bef avrw ABEN ah 13: txt DHLP rel vulg Chr,. 
rec γνωμη, with B?HLP rel syr-mg-gr [Chr,}: txt AB'ER 


E αγεσθαι E. 


13. 36.---ηθελησεν avaxOnvat eis συριαν εἰπεν 


for yevou., και γενηθεισης D?: x. γενήθεις D!-gr. 


μελλων 


δε To πνευμα avTw υποστρεφειν δια της 


μακεδονιας D syr-mg(proceeding as D below as far as εξιεναι). 


4. for συνείπετο δὲ avTw axpl, ME 
μεχρι D (comitari eum D-lat). 
ΒΝ 13 vulg [coptt] «eth Bede. 


λλοντος ovv[autem D-lat syr-mg] egevevar αὐτου 
om axpt ts ασιας (to conform to follg ; of note) 
rec om πυρρου (see note), with HLP rel syrr wth 


Chr Thl-sif: ins ABDEX a Ὁ m 0 18. 36. 40 vulg syr-mg coptt arm Thl-fin Orig-int,. 


βεροιος XN}: 
doverius D\(and lat: txt D‘). 
for τυχικος, evruxos D. 


5. rec om δε, with DHLP rel 36 vulg Syr 
mposedOortes (see ver 13) A(?) BI E-gr HLPN fg km. 


for nuas, avtov D-gr. 


syr copt Thl-fin. 
ewetvoy (but « erased) δὲ. 


word occurring again in ver. 2. 2. 
Notices of this journey may be found 2 Cor. 
ii. 12, 13; vii. 5,6. He delayed on the 
way some time at Troas, waiting for Titus, 
—broke off his preaching there, though 
prosperous, in distress of mind at his non- 
arrival, 2 Cor. ii. 12, 18,—and sailed for 
Macedonia, where Titus met him, 2 Cor. 
vii.6. That Epistle was written during it, 
from Macedonia (see 2 Cor. ix. 2, καυχῶ- 
μαι, ‘I am boasting’). He seems to have 
gone to the confines at least of Lllyria, 
Riom. xv. 19. αὐτούς] The Mace- 
donian brethren: so ch. xvi. 10 al., see 
reff., and Winer, edn. 6, § 22. 3. Ἕλ- 
Adda} Achaia, see ch. xix. 21. 3. 
ποιήσας | This stay was made at Corinth, 
most probably: see 1 Cor. xvi. 6, 7: and 
was during the winter, see below on ver. 5. 
During it the Epistle to the Romans was 
written : see Prolegg. to Rom. ὃ iv. | 
μέλλοντι ἀνάγεσθαι] This purpose, of 
going from Corinth to Palestine by sea, is 
implied ch. xix. 21, and 1 Cor. xvi. 3—7. 
τοῦ ὑποστρ.} The genit. is not (as 
Meyer) governed directly by γνώμης, which 
would be more naturally followed by εἰς τὸ 
ὗπ.: but denotes the purpose, as in reff. 
4. ἄρχι τ. ᾿Ασίας It is not hereby 
implied that they went no further than to 
Asia: Trophimus (ch. xxi. 29) and Aristar- 
chus (ch. xxvii. 2), and probably others, as 
the bearers of the alms from Macedonia 
and Corinth (1 Cor. xvi. 3, 4), accompanied 


βερνιαιος D-gr}(txt D*). 
for ἀσιανοι, εφεσιοι D (syr-mg) sah. 


ins o bef δερβαιος A [13]: δουβ(ε)ριος 


farm] Chr, Thl-sif: ins ABEN a ¢ 13. 40 


him to Jerusalem. Σώπατρος Πύῤῥου 
Βεροιαῖος} This mention of his father is 
perhaps made to distinguish him (?) from 
Sosipater, who was with Paul at Corinth 
(Rom. xvi. 21). The name Πύῤῥου has 
been erased as that of an unknown person, 
and because the mention of the father is 
unusual in the N. 'T.:—no possible reason 
can be given for its insertion by copyists. 

᾿Αρίσταρχος | See ch. xix. 29; xxvii. 
2; Col. iv. 10; Philem. 24. Secundus 
is altogether unknown. The Gaius here 
is not the Gaius of ch. xix. 29, who was a 
Macedonian. The epithet AepBatos is in- 
serted for distinction’s sake. Timotheus 
was from Lystra, which probably gives 
occasion to his being mentioned here in 
close company with Gaius of Derbe. All 
attempts to join AepBaios with Τιμόθεος 
in the construction are futile. Timotheus 
was not of Derbe, see ch. xvi. 1, 2: and 
the name Caius (Γάϊος, Gr.) was far too 
common to create any difficulty in there 
being two, or three (see note, ch. xix. 29) 
companions of Paul so called. With con- 
jectural emendations of the text (Δερβ. δὲ 
Τιμοθ., Kuin., Valck.) we have no concern. 

᾿Ασιανοὶ T. x. Τ. Tychicus is men- 
tioned Eph. vi. 21, as sent (to Ephesus 
from Rome) with that Epistle. He bore 
also that to the Colossians, Col. iv. 7, 
at the same time. See also 2 Tim. 
iv. 12; Tit. iii. 12. Trophimus, an 
Ephesian, was in Jerusalem with Paul, 





9--7. 


ἨΡΑ͂ΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, 


223 


ἐν Tpwadu © ἡμεῖς δὲ “ ἐξεπλεύσαμεν μετὰ τὰς 4 ἡμέρας τῶν © ch. xv. s9reR. 
c 


h. xii. 3 reff. 


qd sp 1 ἌΝ \ > \ > es 2 
ἀζύμων ἀπὸ Φιλίππων, καὶ ἤλθομεν πρὸς αὐτοὺς εἰς ΑΝ 


Rom. i. 13 al. 


τὴν Τρωάδα " ἄχρι ἡμερῶν πέντε, ov ' διετρίψαμεν ἡμέρας 2 Mace. xiv. 


1 


2 ‘. lal A f , 
ἑπτά. Τ᾿ ἣν δὲ ὁ τῇ μιᾷ τῶν ὅ σαββάτων » συνηγμένων ἐπ το σας. 


i? 


2). see ch. xiii. 14 reff. 
k ch. xvii. 2 reff. 


6. om την D. 


Thl-sif.—for αχρι nuepwy πεντε, πεμπταῖοι 1). 
137: και 6: εν ἡ και D: txt BHLP rel 36 Chr. 
om τη Ek. 


7. for de, τε Ὁ Syr eth. 


ἡμῶν 'ἱ κλάσαι ἄρτον, ὁ ἸΠαῦλος ὃ διελέγετο αὐτοῖς μέλ- 


hch. iv. 5 reff. constr., ch. xiii. 44 reff. 


Luke xxiv. l. 
John xx.1(19. 
Mark xvi. 2. 

1 Cor. xvi. 

i ch. ii. 46 reff. 


rec axpis, with H rel: απὸ EN 13: infra E-lat: txt ABLP ἃ 


for ov, orov AEN 18: ov και 40. 
[for exra, πεντε L'(but corrd). | 
aft μια ins tpwrn D-gr. 


rec for nuwy, των μαθητων (alteration to suit avtois—see note), with HLP rel Bas, 
Thi-sif: txt ABDEX a! c 13. 36. 40 vulg syrr (copt) [sah] eth arm Chr, Thl-fin. 
rec ins του bef κλασαι, with D Thl-fin: om ABEHLPR® 13 rel [Bas,] Chr, Thl-sif. 


ch. xxi. 29: and had been, shortly before 
2 Tim. was written, left sick at Miletus. 
(See Prolegg. to 2 Tim. § i. 5.) 5. 
οὗτοι] ‘he persons mentioned in ver. 4: 
not only Tychicus and Trophimus. The 
mention of Timotheus in this list, distin- 
guished from ἡμᾶς, has created an insuper- 
able difficulty to those who suppose Timo- 
theus himself to be the narrator of what 
follows: which certainly cannot be got over 
(as De Wette) by supposing that Timotheus 
might have inserted himself in the list, and 
then tacitly excepted himself by the ἡμᾶς 
afterwards. The truth is apparent here, as 
well as before, ch. xvi. 10 (where see note), 
that the anonymous narrator was in very 
intimate connexion with Paul; and on this 
occasion we find him remaining with him 
when the rest went forward. προελθ. 
«.7.A.| For what reason, is not caid: but 
we may well conceive, that if they bore the 
contributions of the churches, a better op- 
portunity, or safer ship, way have deter- 
mined Paul to send them on, he himself 
having work to do at Philippi: or perhaps, 
again, as Meyer suggests, Paul may have 
remained behind to keep the days of un- 
leavened bread. But then why should not 
they have remained too? The same motive 
may not have operated with them; but in 
that case no reason can be given why they 
should have been sent on, except as above. 
It is not impossible that both may have 
been combined :—before the enc of the days 
of unleavened bread, a favourable oppor- 
tunity occurs of sailing to Troas, of which 
they, with their charge, avail themselves : 
Paul and Luke waiting till the end of the 
feast, and taking the risk of a less desirable 
conveyance. That the feast had something 
to do with it, the mention of μετὰ τ. 7. τ. 
&¢. seems to imply: such notices being not 
inserted ordinarily by Luke for the sake of 
dates. The assumption made by some (see, 
e.g. Mr. Lewin, p. 587), that the rest of 
the company sailed at once for Troas from 
Corinth, while Paul and Luke went by Jand 


to Philippi, is inconsistent with συνείπετο, 
ver. 4. From the notice here, we learn 
that Paul’s stay in Europe on this occasion 
was about three-quarters of a year: viz. 
from shortly after Pentecost, when he left 
Ephesus (see on ch. xix. 10), to the next 
Easter. G. ἄχρ. hp. πέντε] in five 
days, see reff. The wind must have been 
adverse: for the voyage from Troas to 
Philippi (Neapolis) in ch. xvi. 11, seems to 
have been made in two days. It appears 
that they arrived on a Monday. Com- 
pare notes, 2 Cor. ii. 12, ff. 7. ἐν τῇ 
μιᾷ τ. σαββ.] We have here an intimation 
of the continuance of the practice, which 
seems to have begun immediately after the 
Resurrection (see John xx. 26), of as- 
sembling on the first day of the week for 
religious purposes. (Justin Martyr, Apol. 
i. 67, p. 83, says, TH τοῦ ἡλίου λεγομένῃ 
ἡμέρᾳ πάντων κατὰ πόλεις ἢ ἀγροὺς μενόν- 
των ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ συνέλευσις γίνεται.) Per- 
haps the greatest proof of all, that this day 
was thus observed, may be found in the 
early (see 1 Cor. xvi. 2) and at length 
general prevalence, in the Gentile world, 
of the Jewish seven-day period as a divi- 
sion of time,—which was engirely foreign 
to Gentile habits. It can only have been 
introduced as following on the practice of 
especial honour paid to this day. But we 
find in the Christian Scriptures no trace 
of any sabbatical observance of this or any 
day : nay, in Rom. xiv. 5 (where see note), 
Paul shews the untenableness of any such 
view under the Christian dispensation. 
The idea of the transference of the Jewish 
sabbath from the seventh day to the first 
was an invention of later times. 
κλάσαι ἄρτον) See note on ch. ii. 42. 
The breaking of bread in the Holy Com- 
wunion was at this time inseparable from 
the ἀγάπαι. It took place apparently in 
the evening (after the day’s work was 
ended), and at the end of the assembly, 
after the preaching of the word (ver. 11), 
αὐτοῖς, in the third person, the dis- 


224 


᾿ t ” 3 ’ 
leh, xiii 49 τοῦ, A@V 1 ἐξιέναι τ τῇ ἐπαύριον, 


m ch. x. 9 reff, 
n here only. 


Gen. xlix. 13. 
Num, xxiii. G / e κ. - 
=P. ὑὕπερῳῳ οὗ ἦμεν ᾿ συνηγμένοι. 
χχχυ. 10 ξ 
only. TO= 
σοῦτον 
παρατείνειν 
χρόνον, arg ἐς Ἢ 
Jos. Antti. 8 ἐχγὶ πλεῖον, * κατενεχθεὶς ὃ 
f time, Matt. a ΄ ΄ \ " t 
oN ch. τοῦ “ τριστέγου κάτω καὶ ἅ ἤρθη νεκρός. 
x. 30. 
1 Tim. vi. 14 al. Ps. civ. 19. 
xxv.1,&c. John xviii. 3. Rev. iv. 4. viii. 10 only. Gen. xv. 17 
s ch. i. 13 reff. Acts only. t ver. 7 al. 
only. L. © Zech. ii. 4. w 2 Cor. xi. 33 only. Josh. ii. 15, 18. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAQN. 


p Mark xiii. 35. Luke xi. 5. ch. xvi. 25 only. Judg. xvi. 3. 


- XX, 


n 4 , x , 
παρέτεινεν TE TOV λόγον 


ο ΄ Ρ / - 8 S ‘ q gf τ τ \ bd “ 
μέχρι ὃ μεσονυκτίου" © σαν δὲ λαμπάδες * ἱκαναὶ ἐν τῳ 


9° καθεζόμενος δέ τις 


ἡ νεανίας ὀνόματι Ἐὔτυχος ἐπὶ τῆς * θυρίδος, * κατα- 
φερόμενος ὕπνῳ YY βαθεῖ, 5 διαλεγομένου τοῦ Παύλου 


> \ -“ ΄ » > ἈΝ 
ἀπὸ τοῦ ὕπνου ἔπεσεν ἀπὸ 
10 ὁ καταβὰς 


q Matt. 
. Ν r Luke xxiii. 9 4]. 1 Macc. xv. 26. 
u ch. vi. 15 reff. v ch. vii. 58. xxiii. 17 


x = here bis (ch. xxv. 7. xxvi. 10) 


only$. Ps. lxxv.7Aq. Dan.v. 20 Theod. Herodian i. 11,0f the ἄγαλμα διοπετές,---ἐξ οὐρανοῦ κατενεχθῆναι 


λόγος. (καταφορά Aq., Gen. ii. 21. xv. 12.) 
at he z ver. 7. absol., ch. xviii. 4 reff. 


c here only+. Symm., Gen. vi. 16 [17]. Ezek. xlii.6. στοαὶ τρίστεγοι, Dion. Hal. Antt. iii. 68. 
i e = Matt. xxiv. 17. ch. x. 20, 21, 


vi. 29. 1 Mace. ix. 19. 


om te D-gr. μέχρις P. 
8. υπολαμπαδες facule Ὁ). 


y Luke xxiv. 1 (John iv. 11. 


Rev. ii. 24) only. Sir. 
a ch, iv. 17 reff. 


b = ch. xii. 14 reff. 
d = Mark 


1 Kings ix. 27. Xen. Cyr. i. 4. 8. 


rec for nuev, ἡσαν (see above on ἡμων, ver 7), 


with ὁ k [copt eth-rom Thl-sif]: txt ABDEHLPN 18. 36 rel vulg syrr sah [wth-pl] 


arm Chr, Thl-fin. om συνήγμενοι EK. 


9. rec καθήμενος (corrn to more usual form), with HLP rel Chr,: txt ABDEN a 


13. 36. 
om tov (bef παυλου) D. 
kat os ἤρθη D}-gr. 


om veavias E. 


course being addressed to the disciples at 
Troas : but the first person is used before 
and after, because all were assembled, and 
partook of the breaking of bread together. 
Not observing this, the copyists have 
altered ἡμῶν above into τῶν μαθητῶν, and 
ἦμεν into ἦσαν, to suit αὐτοῖς. 8. 
λαμπάδ. ix.| This may be noticed, as 
Meyer observes, to shew that the fall of 
the young man could be well observed: 
or, perhaps, because many lights are apt 
to increase drowsiness at such times. 
Calvin and Bengel suppose, —in order that 
all suspicion might be removed from the 
assembly (‘ ut omnis abesset suspicio scan- 
dali,’ Beng.) ; Kuin. and partly Meyer,— 
that the lights were used for solemnity’s 
sake,—for that both Jews and Gentiles 
celebrated their festal days by abundance 
of lights. But surely the adoption of 
either Jewish or Gentile practices of this 
kind in the Christian assemblies was very 
improbable. 9.1 Who Eutychus was, 
is quite uncertain. The occurrence of the 
name as belonging to slaves and freed- 
men (Rosenm. and Heinrichs, from inserip- 
tions), determines nothing. ἐπὶ τῆς 
θυρίδος On the window-seat. The win- 
dows in the East were (and are) without 
glass, and with or without shutters. 

καταφερόμενος ὕπν.] Wetstein gives many 
instances of the use of καταφέρομαι, either 
absolute, or with eis ὕπνον, signifying ‘ to 
be oppressed with, borne down towards, 
sleep.’ Thus Aristotle, de somn. et vig. 
iii. p. 456. b. 31, ed. Bekk.: τὰ ὑπεωτικὰ 
es TavTa ,.. KapnBaplay... woe... 


emt TN θυριδι κατεχομενος ὑπνω Bape 1). 


for απο, uto DH b o 40 Chr. 


πεσων, omg καὶ follg, E. 


kal καταφερόμενοι καὶ νυστάζοντες τοῦτο 
δοκοῦσιν πάσχειν, καὶ ἀδυνατοῦσιν αἴρειν 
τὴν κεφαλὴν καὶ τὰ βλέφαρα : and Diod. 
Sic. iii. 57, κατενεχθεῖσαν εἰς ὕπνον ἰδεῖν 
ὄψιν. I believe the word is used here and 
below in the same sense, not, as usually in- 
terpreted, here of the effect of sleep, and 
below of the fall caused by the sleep. It 
implies that relaxation of the system, and 
collapse of the muscular power, which is 
more or less indicated by our expressions 
‘falling asleep,’ ‘dropping asleep.” This 
effect is being produced when the first 
participle is used, which is therefore im- 
perfect,—but as Paul was going on long 
discoursing, took complete possession of 
him, and, having been overpowered,— 
entirely relaxed in consequence of the 
sleep, he fell. In the ἤρθη νεκρός 
here, there is a direct assertion, which can 
hardly be evaded by explaining it, ‘ was 
taken up for dead,’ as De Wette, Olsh. ;— 
or by saying that it expresses the judgment 
of those who took him up, as Meyer. It 
seems to me, that the supposition of a 
mere suspended animation is as absurd 
here as in the miracle of Jairus’s daughter, 
Luke viii. 41—56. Let us take the narra- 
tive as it stands. The youth falls, and 
is taken up dead: so much is plainly 
asserted. (First, let it be remembered 
that Luke, a physician, was present, who 
could have at once pronounced on the 
fact.) Paul, not a physician, but an 
Apostle,— gifted, not with medical discern- 
ment, but with miraculous power, goes 
down to him, falls on him and embraces 


ABDE 

HLPRN a 

bedfg 

hkmo 
13 


8—14. 


ΠΡΑΞΕῚΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


225 


“ > a 
δὲ ὁ Παῦλος ‘ ἐπέπεσεν αὐτῷ καὶ ὃ συμπεριλαβὼν εἶπεν τ -- τε. 31. ἐν 


Μὴ " θορυβεῖσθε: ἡ γὰρ ᾿ψυχὴ αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ ἐστιν. 
11} ἀναβὰς δὲ καὶ Ἐ κλάσας τὸν ἄρτον καὶ ' γευσάμενος, οὶ 
a gee 

, c / a lal 
τ ἐφ᾽ ixavov τε " ὁμιλήσας ἄχρι ° αὐγῆς, Ρ οὕτως “ ἐξῆλθεν. , 


viii. 16 re 

Esth. vii. 8. 
g here only. 

Ezek. v. 3 


ch. xvii. 5 


_ ch. xv. 26 


v \ \ cr na 
12 τἤγαγον δὲ τὸν παῖδα ζῶντα, καὶ " παρεκλήθησαν * οὐ ; ch viii.31. 


't μετρίως. 


x μέλλων αὐτὸς * πεζεύειν. 


xxiii. 30. 


Ὁ here only. 
xxvii. 17. see Heb. vi. 15. 


s — Matt. ii. 18. ν. 4. Luke xvi. 25. Gen. xxiv. 67. 

only. (-os, Sir. xxxiv. [xxxi.]20. Ken. Mem. iv. 1. 1.) 
= here bis. ch. xxuli. 31. 
1 Chron. 1x. 33. 
ἐπέζευσεν ἡ στρατιά, Xen. Anab. v. 5. 4- (-¢y, Mark vi. 33.) 


ae 3, . 
vii. 17. xi, 34. L.P., exc. Matt. xi. 1. 


10. aft ἐπέπεσεν ins er c 106: εἐπεσεν er D. 
C [(syrr coptt arm)]: συμπαραλαβων c Καὶ 40. 105: add avroy a 36. 


εἰπεν D!-gr, 
11. [om Ist ka B (sah). ] 


τε, de D-gr E-gr Thl-sif. 


13 ἡμεῖς δὲ Y προελθόντες 
Ὑ ἀνήχθημεν ἐπὶ τὴν ἴλσσον, ἐκεῖθεν * μέλλοντες ¥ ava- 
λαμβάνειν τὸν Παῦλον: οὕτως γὰρ ὅ διατεταγμένος ἣν, 


k ch. ii. 46 reff, 


> \ \ Qn 
€7l TO πλοιονὶ = eh. x. 10 
. T . 
m here only. 
2 Mace. viii. 
25. see Luke 


xxiii. 8. 


14 - “Pe Ὲ ee ae rae = 
ὡς δὲ Ὁσυνέβαλλεν ἡμῖν 14,524 
only. Prov. 
Isa. lix. 9. 2 Macc. xii. 9 only. p = John iy. 6. ch. 
q = ch. xv. 40 reff. r Luke x. 34 al. 1 Kings xy. 20. 


t here only. Ὁ 2 Macc. xy. 38 

v ver. 5. w ch. xiii. 13 reff. 
2 Tim. iv. 11 only. (ch. i. 2. vii. 43.) z 1 Cor. 
a here only+. μέχρις ἐνταῦθα 


Ὁ = here only. (ch. xvi. 18 reff.) 


συμπεριβαλων ΟἹ, and add avrov 
ins καὶ bef 


rec om τὸν (the force of the art being overlooked, 
—see note), with D?>EHLPN rel Chr, Thi-sif: ins ABCD!8? 13 Thl-fin. 
(axpt, so ABIC2EN Thi-sif.) 


for 
αὐυτης ὃξ'. 


12. for ηγαγον δε τον maida, 1) has ασπαζομενων δε avtwy nyaryev_adduxerunt} tov 


VEAVLOKOV. 


13. προςελθ. (see ver 5) AB'EHP f gh k m o Chr, Thl-sif: κατελθ. D[-gr] Syr 


[ascendimus D-lat] 


for Ist em, εἰς Dd 133. 
DHLP rel 36 Chr Thl-sif: txt ABCEN [a] 13. 40 Thl-fin. 


rec (for 2nd em) εἰς, with 
for ασσον, θασον, or 


θασσον L(but not in ver 14) P 0 73-6-8. 99. 100-1 syrr sah: acov Ὁ} fk 18. 106 eth: 


vacov 15-8. 36, and so in ver. 14. 


rec nv bef διατεταγμενος (ἣν Siat.is St. Luke’s 


habit almost uniformly, but it is not the habit of the great uss to alter this order), with 


DHLP rel Chr: evreradmevos nv C 15. 36. 180: txt A Β[-νον B!] EN am 18. 
autos [bef μελ.] E. 

rec συνεβαλεν (alteration to historic aorist as so freq), 
Chr: συνεβαλλον &!: txt AB E-gr PX3 40. 


ws bef μελλων D 36. 
14. om δε C!(appy). 

with CDHL rel 36 vulg E-lat 

Ast es, em: NR. 


him,—a strange proceeding for one bent on 
discovering suspended animation, but not 
so for one who bore in mind the action 
of Elijah (1 Kings xvii. 21) and Elisha 
(2 Kings iv. 34), each time over a dead 
body,—and having done this, not before, 
bids them not to be troubled, for his life 
was in him. I would ask any unbiassed 
reader, taking these details into considera- 
tion, which of the two is the natural in- 
terpretation,—and whether there can be 
any reasonable doubt that the intent of 
Inke is to relate a miracle of raising 
the dead, and that he mentions the falling 
on and embracing him as the outward 
significant means taken by the Apostle to 
that end ἢ 11.] The intended break- 
ing of bread had been put off by the acci- 
dent. τὸν ἄρτ., as ch. ii. 42. Were 
it not for that usage, the article here might 
import, ‘the bread which it was intended 
to break,’ alluding to ἄρτ. above. 

γευσάμενος] having made a meal, see reff. 
The agape was a veritable meal. Not ‘ hav- 


+ Van. se. 


ins 
for 


ing tasted it,’ viz. the bread which he had 
broken ;—though that is implied, usage 
decides for the other meaning. οὕτως] 
‘ After so doing? see reff. 12.] As 
in the raising of Jairus’s daughter, our 
Lord commanded that something should 
be given her to eat, that nature might 
be recruited, so doubtless here rest and 
treatment were necessary, in order that 
the restored life might be confirmed, 
and the shock recovered. The time in- 
dicated by αὐγή must have been before 
or about 5 A.M.: which would allow 
about four hours since the miracle. We 
have here a minute but interesting touch 
of truth in the narrative. Paul, we learn 
afterwards, ver. 13, intended to go 
afoot. And accordingly here we have 
it simply related that he. started away 
from Troas before his companions, not 
remaining for the reintroduction of the 
now recovered Eutychus in ver. 12. 

13. “Agaov] A sea-port (also called Apol- 
lonia, Plin. v.32) in Mysia or Troas, oppo- 

Q 


226 TIPABEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XX. 


9 
ο εἰς τὴν “Accor, ¥ ἀναλαβόντες αὐτὸν ἤλθομεν εἰς Metu- 1ηλθο- 


ς ch. viii. 40 
ren... ΄, 15 > A a2 ΄΄ Νὴρ 7 f MEV... 
dch.xiii,4  Anvyv, 15 κἀκεῖθεν ἃ ἀποπλεύσαντες TH © ἐπιούσῃ * Κατην- ABCDE 
RNa 


οὐδ αν σήσαμεν ἕ ἀντικρὺς Χίου. τῇ δὲ Ἀ ἑτέρᾳ ' παρεβάλομεν bed tg 
here only. εἰς Σώμον, καὶ μείναντες ἐν Τρωγυλίῳ τῇ * ἐχομένῃ 013 
δ δα, ἤχθομεν εἰς Μίλητον. 10 1 κεκρίκει yap ὁ Παῦλος ™ παρα- 
5 ‘Xen Cyr. πλεῦσαι τὴν "Ἔφεσον, ὅπως μὴ " γένηται αὐτῷ " χρονο- 


ἦν 


7. 6. 10. 
— Ἂ A “a > / ” / , \ » SO 
=here (Mark poy Bacar ἐν τῇ ᾿Ασίᾳ Ρ ἔσπευδεν yap, εἰ δυνατὸν εἴη 


reff. 
f ch. xvi. 1 reff. 
ghere only t+. 


ue 


iv. 30 rec.) 
ly}. € A , A a : , ἌΡ, 
pee auto, τὴν ἡμέραν τῆς “ πεντηκοστῆς ™ γενέσθαι " εἰς 
= » ΄ ὔ >] Ὑ Ms 
reste τ ροσόλυμα. 17 Aro δὲ τῆς Μιλήτου πέμψας εἰς Εφε- , 
ΤῊ ὑπ lil. An ? t 
fa. Pron cov ' μετεκαλέσατο τοὺς "ἡ πρεσβυτέρους τῆς " ἐκκλησίας. 
lea 
1= ch. xv. 19 reff. 


k — Mark i. 38. Luke xiii. 33. ch. xiii. 44. xxi. 26. Heb. vi. 9 only. 2 Mace, xii. 39. ; 
m here only+. Xen. Anab. vi. 2. 1. n Matt. xviii. 18. Gal. vi. 14. Gen. xliv. 7, 17. o here 


only+. οἱ δ᾽ ἄνθρωποι τοῖς διπλοῖς χρῶνται ὅταν ἀνώνυμον ἡ K. ὃ λόγος εὐσύνθετος, οἷον τὸ χρονοτρι- 

βεῖν, Aristot. Rhet. iii. 3. p Luke ii. 16. xix. 5,6. ch. xxii 18. 2 Pet. iii. 12 only. 2 Chron. x. 18. 
q ch. ii. 1 reff. τ = Matt. xxvi.6. Luke x. 32. xxii. 40 al. s Luke ivy. 23. ch. xxi. 17. xxv. 15. 
τ ch. vii. 14 reff. Ὁ James vy. 14 only. (see ch. xiv. 23.) v ch, xi. 30 reff. 


15. καὶ exerbev E. rec avtixpu (corr), with B?HP rel [Thl-fin] : txt AB'CDELN 
13. 36. 40 Thi-fin. for ετερα, εσπερα B 15-9. 73. παρελαβομεν D}-gr(txt 
D4). om καὶ μειναντες ev τρωγυλίιω, and aft τη ins de ABCER [a] 18 vulg [copt 
zeth-pl arm]: txt (the occasion of the omn has probably been, that Trogylium is not in 
Samos, which at first sight the text appeared to imply) DHLP rel 36 syrr sah Chr, 
Thl.—ree τρωγυλλιῳ, with HP rel 36: txt (D)L h mo (cfg k) Chr, τρωγυλίια D-gr, 
Trogylio D-lat. epxouevn D! a m 95!-6. 142. ' 

16. rec expive (an ecclesiastical portion begins at ver 16, which has occasioned the 
alteration of the pluperf into the independent historic aor), with C3HLP rel Chr, 


Thi-sif: txt ABC!DEN a 13. 36 vulg. 


for omws un γενηται avtw [avtov H 


χρονοτριβησαι, μηποτε γενηθη avTw κατασχεσι5 Tis we non contingeret et morandi quis 
rec (for en) nv, with LP rel 40 Chr Thi: txt (but looks like a gramml corrn) 


ABCEX a 13.36.—om εἰ δυνατον ey DH eth-rom. 
ιεοουσαλημ AEN ἃ ο 13.40: txt BCDHLP rel 36 Chr. 


for εἰς, ev D! (txt D*). 


17. μετεπεμψατο D. om tous Εἰ. 


site to Lesbos, twenty-four Roman miles 
(Peutinger Table) from Troas, built on a 
high cliff above the sea, with a descent so 
precipitous as to have prompted a pun of 
Stratonicus, the musician (see Athen. viil., 
p. 352), on a line of Homer, Il. ¢. 148, 
Ασσον ἴθ᾽, ὥς κεν θᾶσσον ὀλέθρου πείραθ᾽ 
ἵκηαι. Strab. xiii. 1, p. 126, Tauchn. 
Paul’s reason is not given for 
wishing to be alone: probably he had 
some apostolic visit to make. 14, 
Μιτυλήνην] The capital of Lesbos, on the 
E. coast of the island, famed (Hor. Od. i. 7. 
1: Epist. i. 11. 17) for its beautiful situa- 
tion. It had two harbours: the northern, 
into which their ship would sail, was μέγας 
Kk. βαθύς, χώματι σκεπαζόμενος, Strabo, 
xiii. 2, p. 137. 15. παρεβάλ. we 
pat in: so Charon, in the Frogs, to his 
boatman, ὡόπ, mapaBadod, 180; and 271, 
παραβαλοῦ τῷ κωπίῳ : see many examples 
in Wetst. Then they made a short run in 
the evening to Trogylium, a cape and town 
on the Ionian coast, only forty stadia dis- 
tant, where they spent the night. He had 
passed in front of the bay of Ephesus, and 
was now but a short distance from it. 
Μίλητον) The ancient capital of lonia 


es THY ἡμεραν D: Ty ἡμερα ἢ. 


(Herod. i. 142). See 2 Tim. iv. 20, and note. 

16. κεκρίκει7 We see here that the 
ship was at Paul’s disposal, and probably 
hired at Philippi, or rather at Neapolis, for 
the voyage to Patara (ch. xxi. 1), where he 
and his company embark in a merchant 
vessel, going to Tyre. The separation of 
Paul and Luke from the rest at the be- 
ginning of the voyage may have been in 
some way connected with the hiring or out- 
fit of this vessel. The expression κεκρίκει 
(or ἔκρινε, which will amount to the same 
thing, only it must not be taken ‘for the 
pluperfect, here or any where else) is too 
subjectively strong to allow of our suppos- 
ing that the Apostle merely followed the 
previously determined course of a ship in 
which he took a passage. παραπλ. τ. 
“Ed. ] He may have been afraid of deten- 
tion there, owing to the machinations of 
those who had caused the uproar in ch. xix. 
F. M., in his notes, gives another reason : 
« He seems to have feared that, had he 
run up the long gulf to Ephesus, he might 
be detained in it by the westerly winds, 
which blow long, especially in the spring.” 
But these would affect him nearly as much 
at Miletus. 17.) The distance from 





: 


15—20. TIPABEIS ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


18 ὡς δὲ “ παρεγένοντο ἡ πρὸς αὐτόν, eimev αὐτοῖς Ὕ μεῖς w Matt iti.13, 


e Vil. 


> Ἀ 7 , > e ate 
ἐπίστασθε, *Y ἀπὸ πρώτης ἡμέρας Yad ἧς 5 ἐπέβη» εἰς τὸ fh? 
a ee αν. , ΄ Josh. xviii. 8. 
τὴν ᾿Ασίαν, " πῶς μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν τὸν πάντα χρόνον * ἐγενόμην, xen. x. 30 ref 
Σ 5 . constr., see 
19 > δουλεύων τῷ κυρίῳ “ μετὰ ἃ πάσης “ ταπεινοφροσύνης ‘2... 
ιν a a ly? 
καὶ δακρύων καὶ * πειρασμῶν τῶν ὅ συμβάντων μοι ἐν bh. xxiv. 11, 
ΓΑ ΤΟ: " ἊΝ > ͵ 90 “ arnt ae z = and constr. 
ταῖς " ἐπιβουλαῖς τῶν ᾿Ἰουδαίων, ὡς οὐδὲν ἰ ὑπεστει- ΕΟ ΕΙΣ ΞΕ 


2. xxv. ]. (xxvii. 2 reff.) Josh. xiv. 9. a = Mark v. 16. ch. ix. 27. 
(Rom. vii. (6) 25 al5.) only, exc. Matt. vi. 24, Luke xvi. 15. Ps. ii. 11. 


b = (see note) Paul 
ech, xvii. 11 reff. 


ἃ (‘all possible’) ch. iv. 29. xxiii.1. Rom.i.29. Eph.i.3. 2Pet.i.5. Jude 8 4]. e Eph. 
iv. 2. Phil. ii. 3. Col. ii, 18, 23. iii. 12. Paul only, exe. 1 Pet. v.5+. (-φρων, 1 Pet. iii. 8. «φρονεῖν, 
Ps, cxxx. 2.) f == Luke xxii. 28, Gal. iv.l4al. Deut. iv. 34, g ch. iil. 10 reff. 

h ch. ix. 24 reff. iver. 27. Gal. ii.12. Heb. x. 38 only}. Diod. Sic. xiii. 70, εἰς τὸ λοιπὸν ὁ 


Κῦρος ἐκέλευσεν αἰτεῖν, μηδὲν ὑποστελλόμενον. So Jos. Β. J. i. 20. 1. 


18. for παρεγενοντο, εσκληρυνοντο H-gr. aft αὐτὸν ins opov οντων avtwy A: 
ὑμοσε ovt. avt. D4(ouwo εοντων D1) 40-marg: ομοθυμαδὸν E 73: et simul essent vulg 
(interpolations for particularity): om ΒΟΉ ΠΡῸΣ rel 36 [syrr coptt ath arm] Chr. 

for αὐτοῖς, προς avtovs D} (rp. avros D*). aft ἐπιστασθε ins αδελφοι D: 
pref. 5. 8. 73 sah. for ap, ep D}(txt D4): om h 38. 93. for eis, emt ἢ, 
for πως to eyevounv, D has ws τριετιαν ἢ Kat πλειον TOTATWS μεθ ὑυμων NY παντοβ Xpovov 2, 
D-corr has πὼς for ποταπως, D4(?) τον mayta xpovoy, and D® adds eyevouny: fui per 
omne tempore D-lat. 

19. aft κυριω add μεθ vuwy C c 15-8. 36 [syr] Chr-txt,. rec ins toAAwy bef 
δακρ. (prob interpolation: see 2 Cor ii. 4), with CHLP rel 36 «th-rom arm [Bas, | 


Chr: aft syr: om ABDEN 13. 40 vulg Syr coptt xth-pl Lucif,. 


των Ὁ. 


Miletus to Ephesus is about thirty miles. 
He probably, therefore, stayed three or 
four days altogether at Miletus. TOUS 
πρεσβ. | called, ver. 28, ἐπισκόπους. This 
-cireumstance began very early to con- 
tradict the growing views of the apostolic 
institution and necessity of prelatical epis- 
copacy. Thus Ireneus, 111. 14. 2, p. 201: 
‘In Mileto convocatis episcopis et presby- 
teris, qui erant ab Epheso et ὦ reliquis 
proximis civitatibus.’ Here we see (1) the 
two, bishops and presbyters, distinguished, 
as if both were sent for, in order that the 
titles might not seem to belong to the same 
persons,—and (2) other neighbouring 
churches also brought in, in order that 
there might not seem to be ἐπίσκοποι in 
one church only. That neither of these was 
the case, is clearly shewn by the plain words 
of this verse : he sent to Ephesus, and sum- 
moned the elders of the church (see below 
on διῆλθον, ver.25). So early did interested 
and disingenuous interpretations begin to 
cloud the light which Scripture might have 
thrown on ecclesiastical questions. The 
K. V. has hardly dealt fairly in this case 
with the sacred text, in rendering ἐπι- 
σκόπους, ver. 28, “ overseers ;? whereas it 
ought there as in all other places to have 
been bishops, that the fact of elders and 
bishops having been originally and aposto- 
lically synonymous might be apparent to 
the ordinary English reader, which now it 
is not. 18.] The evidence furnished 
by this speech as to the literal report in the 
Acts of the words spoken by Paul, is most 
important. It isa treasure-house of words, 


συμβαινον- 


idioms, and sentiments, peculiarly belong- 
ing to the Apostle himself. Many of these 
appear in the reff., but many more lie 
beneath the surface, and can only be dis- 
covered by a continuous and verbal study 
of his Epistles.. I shall point out such in- 
stances of parallelism as I have observed, 
in the notes. The contents of the speech 
may be thus given: He reminds the elders 
of his conduct among them (vv. 18—21) : 
announces to them his final separation 
from them (vv. 22—25): and commends 
earnestly to them the flock committed to 
their charge, for which he himself had by 
word and work disinterestedly laboured 
(vv.26—35). ἀπὸ πρ. ip. ] These words 
hold a middle place, partly with ἐπίστασθε, 
partly with ἐγενόμην. The knowledge on 
their part was coextensive with his whole 
stay among them: so that wé may take the 
words with ἐπίστασθε, at the same time 
carrying on their sense to what follows. 
μεθ᾽ ip. ἐγεν.] So 1 Thess. i. 5, 
οἴδατε οἷοι ἐγενήθημεν ἐν dpiv,—ii. 10, 
iu. μάρτυρες ... ὡς ὁσίως... ὑμῖν τοῖς 
πιστεύουσιν ἐγενήθημεν. See 1 Cor. ix. 
20, 22. 19. δουλεύων τῷ kup. | With 
the sole exception of the assertion of our 
Lord, ‘ Ye cannot serve God and mammon,” 
reff. Matt., Luke, the verb δουλεύω for 
‘serving God’ is used by Paul only, and 
by him seven times, viz. besides reff., 
Rom. xii. 11; xiv. 18; xvi. 18; [Phil. ii. 
22(?)] Col. 111. 24; 1 Thess. 1. 9. 
per. π΄. ταπ. Also a Pauline expression, 


2 Cor. viii. 7; xii. 12. πειρασμῶν] 
See especially Gal. iv. 14, 20. umes 


Q 2 


228 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


XX. 


, ~ / lo) “ cal 
Lpart,1cor, λάμην τῶν * συμφερόντων | τοῦ μὴ ™ ἀναγγεῖλαι ὑμῖν καὶ 


Heb. 
(vii. 35. x. 
33 y.r.) Xii. 
10 only. 
Deut. xxiii. 

1 constr., ch. 
xiv. 18 reff. 

m = John iv. 
25. xvi. 13, 
&c. ver. 27. 
1 Pet. i. 12. > 
Deut. xxiv. 8. Eb 

n ch. xvi. 37 


xii. 7. 


νοιαν Kat πίστιν 


reff. 

o — Matt. xxiv. 
1}. (ch. xiv. Ρ ὃ ΄ , 
23. ii. 46 reff.) ιωμαρτυρεταν 

p ch. viii. 25 
reff. 

q ch. xi. 18 reff. 

r = ch. xxiv. 24 reff. 

2.2. 
w = here only. Amos ix. 


> μένουσιν. 


s ch. xili. 11. 
u=ch. xvii. 16 reff. 


ach. xi. 19 reff. Ὁ see ver. ὃ. 


d ch. xv. 26 reff. 


20. των συμφεροντων bef ὑπεστειλαμὴν C. 
κατ οιἰκους Kat δημοσια D. 

H m Bas-ms, Thl-sif: τρουμενος Ὠ)}. 

with ADHLP 13. 36 rel Bas-ms Thl-fin : om BCER dh k Bas, 


Thl-sif Lucif, Jer. 
21. διαμαρτυραμενος 
(corrn for uniformity), 


8. x ch. xv. 21 (36). 
xii. 2. Eph. iv. 17,18. Rev. iv. 8. xix. 14 ἃ]. Winer, edn. 6, ᾧ 59. 4 


διδάξαι ὑμᾶς " δημοσίᾳ καὶ “ κατ᾽ οἴκους, 5: P διαμαρτυ- 
« ρόμενος ᾿Ιουδαίοις τε καὶ “Ἕλλησιν τὴν εἰς θεὸν 4 μετά- 
τ εἰς 
95 5 καὶ νῦν " ἰδοὺ ' δεδεμένος ἐγὼ τῷ " πνεύματι πορεύομαι 
Ἱερουσαλήμ, τὰ ἐν αὐτῇ " συναντήσοντά μοι μὴ 
εἰδώς, 38 ἡ πλὴν ὅτι τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον xX κατὰ * πόλιν 
μοι Y λέγων ὅτι 5 δεσμὰ καὶ " θλίψεις με 
94. ἀλλ᾽ οὐδενὸς © λόγου © ποιοῦμαι τὴν ἃ ψυχὴν 


t - here only. δεδεμ. ἰσχυροτέρᾳ ἀνάγκῃ, Xen. Cyr. viii. 


\ / “-“ lal 
τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦν. 


cel. ii. 14. ix. 11. (ch. x. 25 reff.) 

y masc., Mark ix. 26. 1 Cor. 
; zch. xvi. 26 reff. 
ς = and constr., here only. see Job xiv. 3. xxii. 4. 


v = here only. 
Tit. i. 5. 


om μη D Lucif,. om vuas Ὁ 


rec ins tov bef θεὸν 


Chr, Thl-sif. aft πιστιν ins την EHLP rel Bas Chr Thl: om ABCR a 138. 36; 


also D, which reads δια tov κυριου nM. ind. 


χριστὸν (common addn), with ACDER® 19. 


om BHLP Ὁ cg bh syr sah zth-rom Bas, 


22. rec eyw bef dedeuevos, with DHLP rel 
ἃ k 18 vulg Ath-[4-]mss, Thl-fin. 
συναντησαντα (prob originally a mistake) A D-gr E-gr H [1] 


txt (characteristic order) ABCER 
D 


ρ. om 
6 rel Syr copt zth-pl [arm] Chr, Thl-fin : 


Thi-sif Lucif}. 


nuev KE. rec aft ino. ins 


am [tol syrr Did, Thl-sif] Chr, Epiph, : 
ιεροσολυμα 
m 13: 


συμβησομενα (gloss) C ἃ 15. 36 .68-9. 180 lect-12: txt BLPR rel vss Ath Chr [Thl-fin]. 


euot ΒΝ]. for εἰδως, 
᾿ 23. το ay. wv. D-gr: 
ims πασαν 


E. 
13. 40 Ath-[2-]mss,. 


γεινωσκων Ὦ. 
το my. μοι To ay. ¢ 47. 187 Epiph Chr. 

bef πολιν D vulg syrr eth Lucif,. 
rec om μοι (as unnecessary 


om κατα πολιν 
διεμαρτυρατο AEN? 
2), with HLP rel eth-rom 


Thi-sif: ins ABCDEN ab de k m 18. 36. 40 vulg syrr copt [sah] eth-pl arm Ath, 


Bas, [Epiph, Thdrt-ms, ] Thl-fin Lucif, Jer. 
ΟΝ rel: txt DEHLP 18 f (k?) }} m!? 36. 
with LP rel Thdrt Thl-fin: μοι aft wevovow D: txt 


perhaps to avoid μεμενουσιν), 


ABCEHR ac k 18. 40 vulg arm Cyr-jer Bas, 


ree Acyov, with A B(sic: see table) 
rec pe bef και θλίψεις (alteration 


Did, Chr Thl-sif. at end add ev 


ιεροσολυμοις D vulg[ -ed(aft 6A.) am}(but marked for erasure) (ποῦ demid) syr-w-ast 


sah [Orig-int, ] Lucif,. 


24. rec Aoyov, with ADIEHLPN? 13 rel 40: txt BCD‘N! sah eth arm. 


rec 


aft ποιουμαι ins οὐδε exw, with EHLP rel 36: ins exw οὐδε bef ποιουμαι AN? 13. 40, 


exw μοι ovde D!: om BCD‘N! Syr sah eth arm. 


στειλάμην] So again ver. 27. The sense in 
Gal. ii. 12 is similar, though not exactly 
identical—‘ reserved himself, withdrew 
himself from any open declaration of senti- 
ments. In Heb. x. 38 it is different. 

τῶν συμφερ.] See reff. 21. els 0.... 
εἰς τ. κύρ. 1.1 This use of cis is mostly 
Pauline : and in ch. xxiv. 24 it seems to be 
taken from his own expression. 22. 
δεδεμένος τῷ πνεύματι] bound in my 
spirit. This interpretation is most pro- 
bable, both from the construction, and 
from the usage of the expression τὸ πνεῦμα 
repeatedly by and of Paul in the sense of 
his own spirit. See ch. reff., where the 
principal instances are given. The dative, 
as here, is found Rom. xii. 11, τῷ 7. 
Céovres,—1 Cor. v. 3, παρὼν τῷ πνεύμ. 


(1 Cor. xiv. 15, 16 ?),—2 Cor. ii. 13, οὐκ 


Slesh. 


rec aft τὴν ψυχην ins μου, with 


ἔσχηκα ἄνεσιν τῷ Tv. μου, and al., see also 
ch. xix. 21. How he was bound im the 
spirit is manifest, by comparing other 
passages, where the Holy Spirit of God is 
related to have shaped his apostolic course. 
He was bound, by the Spirit of God leading 
captive, constraining, his own spirit. 

As he went up to Jerusalem δεδεμένος τῷ 
πνεύματι, so he left Judzea again δεδεμένος 
τῇ σαρκί,---α prisoner according to the 
He had no detailed know- 
ledge of futurity—nothing but what the 
Holy Spirit, in general forewarnings, re- 
peated at every point of his journey 
(κατὰ πόλιν ; see ch. xxi. 4, 11, for 
two such instances), announced, viz., im- 
prisonment and tribulations. That ere no 
inner voice of the Spirit is meant, is evi- 
dent from the words κατὰ πόλιν. (‘Two of 


ABCDE 


HLPxR a 
bedfg 
hklm 


013 


21—25. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


229 


e / 3 A id f -" \ o / A A 
"τιμίαν ἐμαυτῷ WS ‘ τελειῶσαι TOV 8 δρόμον μου καὶ THY " = Jemes v. 7. 


ἢ ἊΨ 4 lal f A 
h διακονίαν ἣν ' ἔλαβον ἱ παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου “Inaod, * δια- 


1 Pet. 1. 19 al. 
Prov. iii. 15. 
viii. 11. 


΄ \ Ε LA a k ΄ a a f= John iv. 34 
μαρτύρασθαι TO εὐαγγέλιον τῆς χάριτος του θεοῦ. al. Sir. 1, 19. 
95 ] \ og | ὃ vs ΤᾺ 10 “ ᾽ , t »” Ν ἢ , ΄ 2. sa 

Kal νυν = toov εγω οἰόαώ OTL Οὐκετι ὄψεσθε TO TT POS@WTrOV iv! 13: a 
ς a , > Pe vy ὃ a θ v ΄ A vw Paul (ch. xiii. 
μου ὑμεῖς πάντες, ἐν οἷς " διῆλθον " κηρύσσων τὴν βασι- ὅ 35. 2 Tim. iv 
7 ‘ Ξ 
viii. 6. h = ch. i. 17, 25. νἱ. 4. Rom. xi. 13 Τ. (ch. vi. 1 al. L.P., exc. Heb. i. 14, Ff ii. 19.) 
ich. ii. 33 reff. a k = ch. xiii. 43 reff. ᾿ 1 ver. 22. t = here (Rev. xxii. 4) 
only. θεωρεῖν, ver. 38. Opay, Col. ii. 1. ἰδεῖν, 1 Thess. ii. 17. iii. 10. u = ch. viii. 4 


reff. 1 Chron. xxi. 4. 
ch, xxviii. 31 only. 


D}[-gr |(txt D?). 
[quam] D. 
tion appy: 


τελειωσω BN. 
Syr coptt zth Lucif). 


θεου) D'(ins D6). 
25. om sdov E113. 40. 73 Lucif,. 
for overt, οὐκ ὃξ [D-lat]. 


the three other places where this phrase 
occurs are from the mouth or pen of Paul.) 

23. τὸ mv. Stapaptup.| Compare 
Rom. viii. 16, τὸ πνεῦμα συμμαρτυρεῖ τῷ 
πν. ἡμῶν. 24.) The reading in the text, 
amidst all the varieties, seems to be that 
out of which the others have all arisen, 
and whose difficulties they more or less 
explain. The first clause is a combination 
of two constructions, οὐδενὸς λόγου ποιοῦ- 
μαι τὴν ψυχὴν ἐμαυτοῦ, and ov ποιοῦμαι 
(ἡγοῦμαι, Phil. iii. 7, 8) τὴν ψυχὴν τιμίαν 
ἐμαυτῷ. The best rendering in English 
would be, I hold my life of no account, 
nor precious to me. Then again the con- 
fused construction of the former clause 
shews itself in the ὡς of the latter, which 
is not ‘so that,’ but ‘as,’ q.d. before, ‘so 
precious.’ “1 do not value my life, in 
comparison with the finishing my course. 
Render then the whole verse: But I hold 
my life of no account, nor is it so pre- 
cious to me, as the finishing of my 
course. τελειῶσαι] See the same 
image, with the same word, remarkably 
expanded, Phil. iii. 12—14. There in ver. 
12 he has used rereAciwuar,—and,—as is 
constantly the case when we are in the 
habit of connecting certain words together, 
—the δρόμος immediately occurs to him, 
which he works into a sublime comparison 
in ver. 14. δρόμον] A similitude 
peculiar to Paul: occurring, remarkably 
enough, in his speech at ch. xiii. 25. He 
uses it without the word 6p., at 1 Cor. 
ix. 2427, and Phil. iii. 14. καὶ 
τ. δ. and (i.e. even) the ministry, &c. 
καί in this sense gives that which, in 
matter of fact, runs parallel with the meta- 
phorical expression just used,—stands be- 


v here only. kK. τὸ evayy. τῆς B., Matt. ix. 35. «K. T. B. τ. θεοῦ, 
w absol., Matt. vili. 12. xiii. 19, 38 al. 


D'EH vulg: om ABC D4(and lat) LP ¢ 13[for y., evynv] 36. 40. 


εμαυτου 


for ws, ews B®: wste Εἰ Ὁ ο ἃ ο 18. 40. 187: ws το C 104: του 
rec aft τον Spouov pov ins μετα xapas (interpola- 
see Phil i. 4, Col i. 11, Heb x. 34 4c: the finishing his course appearing 
not emphatic enough), with CEHLP rel 36 syr [arm] Chr;,: 


om ABD® 13. 40 vulg 


aft διακονίαν ins Tov Aoyou D vulg[ with demid tol(not 
um fuld)] Lucif Ambr.—for ny, ov D}-gr(txt D+). 
aft διαμαρτυρασθαι ins ιουδαιοις καὶ ελλησιν D sah Lucif. 


παρελαβον D bck o 137. 
om Tov (bef 


oda bef eyw C m: om eyw 180 Iren-int,. 
rec aft την βασιλειαν ins Tov θεου (supple- 


side it as its antitype. ἔλαβον] Com- 
pare Rom. i. 5, δι’ οὗ ἐλάβομεν χάριν κ. 
ἀποστολήν. 25.] It has been argued 
from ἐν ois διῆλθον, that the elders of 
other churches besides that of Ephesus 
must have been present. But it might 
just as well have been argued, that every 
one to whom Paul had there preached must 
have been present, on account of the word 
πάντες. If he could regard the elders as the 
representatives of the various churches, of 
which there can be no doubt, why may not 
he similarly have regarded the Ephesian 
elders as representatives of the churches 
of proconsular Asia, and have addressed 
all in addressing them? Or may not these 
words have even a wider application, viz., 
to all who had been the subjects of his 
former personal ministry, in Asia and 
Europe, now addressed through the Ephe- 
sian elders? See the question, whether 
Paul ever did see the Asiatic churches 
again, discussed in the Prolegg. to the 
Pastoral Epistles, § ii. 18 ff. I may re- 
mark here, that the word οἶδα, in the 
mouth of Paul, does not necessarily imply 
that he spoke from divine and unerring 
knowledge, but expresses his own convic- 
tion of the certainty of what he is saying: 
see ch. xxvi. 27, which is much to our 
point, as expressing his firm persuasion 
that king Agrippa was a believer in the 
prophets: but certainly no infallible know- 
ledge of his heart :—Rom. xv. 29, where 
also a firm persuasion is expressed :— Phil. 
i. 19, 20, where οἶδα, ver. 19, is explained 
to rest on ἀποκαραδοκία καὶ ἐλπίς in 
ver. 20. So that he may here ground his 
expectation of never seeing them again, on 
the plan of making a journey into the west 


230 TIPASEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XX. 


ach.xxvizz. λείαν, 50 διότι * μαρτύρομαι ὑμῖν ἐν THY σήμερον ἡ ἡμέρᾳ, 


+ high “ 4 θ ͵ > a 2k a yp.” , ε Woe κ᾿ 
1 Thess τ 12 OTL κα apos εἰμι ΟΩἿΤΟ TOU αἰματος TAVT@V OU yap 
ly t. A ξ , a“ \ > “ a \ X a 
ang ὁ ὑπεστειλάμην “τοῦ μὴ ° ἀναγγεῖλαι πᾶσαν τὴν ἃ βουλὴν τοῦ 
Jos. B. J. iii. ὠ ὦ ὦ 98 e , ἧς ef a \ \ ΟῚ 
i: Bee " θεοῦ υμιν. ΤΡρΟζΕΧΕΤΕ ουν ~ EAUTOLS Kab TAVTL T@ TOL[= 
y Matt. xxviii. 
"15, Rom.xi. yigy ἐν ᾧ ὑμᾶς TO πνεῦμα TO ἅγιον 8 ἔθετο ἢ ἐπισκόπου 
8, ἜΡΩΣ: 4 4 μ μ Y S; 
iii. 1 
Josh. Ha Jer. i. 18, z ch. xviii. 6. Gen. xxiv. 8. a = Matt. xxvii. 24. 2 Kings iii. 28. 
b ch. xviii. 6. c ver. 20 (reff.). ἃ ch. ii. 23 reff. Wisd. vi, 4. e Luke xii. 1. xvii. 3. xxi. 
34. ch. v. 35 only. Deut. iv. 9. fhere bis. Luke xii. 32. 1 Pet. v.2,3only. Jer. xiii. 17. 
g = 1 Cor. xii. 18, 28. Gen. xvii. 5. h (here first.) Phil. 1.1. 1 Tim.iii, 2, Tit.i.7. 1 Pet. ii. 25 


only, 2 Chron, xxxiv. 12. Isa, 1x. 17, (-πή, 1 Tim. iii, 1. -πεῖν, 1 Pet. v. 2.) 


mentary addn, as shewn by the variations), with EHLP rel vulg Syr [copt-wilk 
arm-rien] «th Thdrt Thl: tov moov D sah; τ. κυρ. ino. Lucif: om ΑΒΟΝ ¢ 18. 36 
syr copt arm Chr,. 

26. rec (for diort) διο, with C[D®]HL 18. 86 rel [Bas,] Thl: txt A B(sic: see table) 
EPR g: διο και f 32. 57. 104.—tor δίιοτι to ort, αχρι ουν THS σήμερον nuepas D'(propter 
quod hodierno die D-lat: txt D®°). rec (for εἰμι) eyw (see ch xviii. 6, where there 
is no varn), with AHLP rel [Syr] copt Bas, Chr, Thl-sif: eyw εἰμὲ a 69.105 arm: 
εἰμι eyw sah Jer: txt BCDEN c 18, 36. 40 vulg syr [sah] Amm, Bas, [Iren-int, 
Lucif; }. aft παντων add ὑμων E adel syrr copt eth [arm-mss]}. 

27. om μη D'-gr(ins D5(?)) 66?. 73. 81. 177! [arm(Treg) ] Lucif}. rec ὑμῖν bef 
πᾶσαν τ. βουλ. τ. θ., with AEHLPN® rel syrr coptt [eth arm] Bas, Chr, Iren-int, : 
txt BC(D)X! m 18 vulg [Iren-int, ].— yaw D![-gr |(txt D4) [om Lucif; }. 

28. om οὺὐν (mposexerte is the beginning of an ecclesiastical portion) ABDN ὁ 13. 36 


lectt vulg copt [eth arm] Did, Thdrt Lucif, : 
[auras (for εαυτ.) ὨΣ 1.) 


7 " Ἷ 
[ Bas, } lren-int). 


after seeing Rome, which he mentions 
Rom. xv. 24, 28, and from which, with 
bonds and imprisonment and other dangers 
awaiting him, he might well expect never 
to return. So that what he here says need 
not fetter our judgment on the above ques- 
tion. 26.] The use of μαρτύρομαι is 
peculiar to Paul, see reff. 28. προςέχ. 
ἑαυτοῖς} If we might venture to trace the 
hand of Zwke in the speech, it would be 
perhaps in this phrase; which occurs only 
as in reff. τ. ποιμνίῳ) This simili- 
tude does not elsewhere occur in Paul’s 
writings. We find it (reff) where we 
should naturally expect it, used by him to 
whom it was said, ‘ Feed my sheep.’ But 
it is common in the O.T. and sanctioned 
by the example of our Lord Himself. 


τὸ mv. τ. Gy. | See ch. xiii. 2. ἔθετο] 
So Paul, reff. 1 Cor. ᾿ ἐπισκόπους | 


See on ver. 17, and Theodoret on Phil. i. 1, 
ἐπισκόπους τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους καλεῖ" ἀμφό- 
τερα γὰρ εἶχον κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν τὰ 
ὀνόματα (Olsh.). The question be- 
tween θεοῦ and κυρίου rests principally on 
internal evidence—which of the two is 
likely to have been the original reading. 
The manuscript authority, now that it is 
certain that B has θεοῦ a prima manu, as 
‘also &, is weighty on both sides. The early 
patristic authority for the expression αἷμα 
Yeod is considerable, Ignat. Ephes. i., 
p. 644, has ἀναζωπυρήσαντες ἐν αἵματι θεοῦ. 
Tertull. ad Uxor. ii. 3, vol. i., p. 1298, 
“pretio empti, et quali pretio ? sanguine 
Dei.’ Clem. Alex., ‘ Quis dives salvus,’ c. 
34, vol. ii., p. 344, has δυνάμει θεοῦ πατρός, 


ins CEHLP rel spec syrr Chr, 
To ay. tv. D-gr [spec]. 


kK. αἵματι θεοῦ madds, x. δρόσῳ πνεύματος 
ἁγίους On the other hand Athanasius 
(contra Apol. ii, 14, vol. ii., p. 758) says, 
οὐδαμοῦ δὲ αἷμα θεοῦ δίχα σαρκὸς παρα- 
δεδώκασιν ai γραφαί, ἢ θεὸν δίχα σαρκὸς 
παθόντα ἢ ἀναστάντα. In attempting to 
decide between the two readings, the follow- 
ing alternatives and considerations may be 
put: (I.) ΤΕ κυρίου WAS THE ORIGINAL, it 
is very possible (1) that some busy scribe 
may have wriiten at the side, as so often 
occurs, θεοῦ. This having been once done, 
the interests of orthodoxy would perpetuate 
the gloss, and by degrees it would be 
adopted into the text and supersede the 
original word, or become combined with it, 
as is actually the case in HL and a vast 
body of mss. Or, continuing supposition 
I, it may have been (2) that the expression 
ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ κυρίου, not found any where 
else, may have been corrected into the very 
usual one, ἐκκλ. (τοῦ) θεοῦ, which occurs 
eleven times in the Epistles of Paul. Or 
(3), which I consider exceedingly improba- 
ble (see below), the alteration may have 
been made solely in the interest of ortho- 
doxy. Such are possible, and the two 
former not improbable, contingencies. 

On the other hand (II.) 1ΕῈ θεοῦ was THE 
ORIGINAL, but one reason can be given 
why it should have been altered to κυρίου, 
and that one was sure to have operated. It 
would stand as a bulwark against Arianism, 
an assertion which no skill could evade, 
which must therefore be modified. If θεοῦ 
stood in the text originally, ἐξ was sure to 
be altered to κυοίου. The converse was 


ABCDE 
HLPxa 
bedfg 
hkim 
013 





26—29. TIPAREIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 231 


i i ‘ 5 f a *@ al A k ᾽ Ι ; 
ποιμαίνειν Τὴν εκκλησίαν του €OU, ἣν TEPLETTOLNTATO be ome xxl. 


1 Pet. v.2. 
an “ m~ 5" * ¢ ΄ (ἴησδν. 2. 
διὰ τοῦ αἴματος τοῦ ἰδίου. 39 ἐγὼ οἶδα ὅτε ' εἰςελεύσονται, 2 Kings»? 
yA ! ΄ - n 1 Tim. iii. 13 
μετὰ τὴν ἃ ἄφιξίν μου " λύκοι. ὁ βαρεῖς εἰς ὑμᾶς μὴ 3 
xxxi. 5 OHN x. 1. ch. xix. 30. 


only. Gen. 
Ἐ 17 
n = Mart. vii. 15 (x. 16. Luke x.3. John x. 12 bis) only. 


xxxi. 18, Isa. 
m here only t+. 3 Macc. vii. 18. Herodot. ix. 77. 
xxv. 7 refit.) 


(Ezek. xxiil 27.) o = here only. (ch. 


* κυρίου AC'DE a 13. 36. 40 syr-mg coptt arm (Eus,) Ath-ms, (Constt,) Did, Chr(on 
Eph iv. 12) (Thdor-stud,) Thl-fl-ms Iren-int, Lucif, (Aug) Jer, Sedul: χριστου Syr(ed 
and 2-mss[7th cent and later }) zeth-pl [ Ps-Ign,] Ath-4-mss Thdrt, (cf συντρέχετε eis τὴν 
ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ κυρίου ἣν περιεποιήσατο τῷ αἵματι τοῦ χριστοῦ Constt): κυριου Kat θεου 
C3HLP rel: κυριου θεου 3. 952: Geov BN ὁ vulg Syr-5-mss[ 6th and 7th cent] syr syr- 
lect Ign, Ps-Ath, Epiph, Bas, [Chr, Cyr,] Antch, Thl-fin Ambr, Ors, Primas,. 
aft περιεποιήσατο ins eavtw D sah, οὐδὲ constituit Iren{ -int, ]. rece Tov ιἰδιου αιματος 
(alteration, says Meyer, owing to θεου, because του ιδιου might be referred to Christ 
(as agen): but surely this is carrying subtlety somewhat too far. It has been evidently 
a corrn for simplicity, not observing the emphasis), with HLP rel Ath, Chr, [Antch, | 
Thl: txt ABCDE® ac m 13. 36. 40 [vulg syr-mg-gr] arm Did, Iren-int, Lucif}. 

29. rec aft eyw ins yap (to connect and strengthen the sentence), with C7EHLP rel 
syrr sah [arm] Chr,: om eyw B: εγω δε &3 copt: καὶ eyw eth: txt AC!DN! 13. 36 
vulg Iren-int, Lucif}. 


rec aft oda ins Touro (like preceding), with ΟΕ ΠΡ rel 


syr Chr: om ABC!DN a 13. 36 [vulg Syr coptt «th arm] Iren-int, Lucif. 


αφεὲξιν DLE: αφηξιν 1,1]. 


not sure, nor indeed likely, from similar 
reasons, the passage offering no stumbling- 
block to orthodoxy. (III.) Paving 
USAGE must be allowed its fair weight in 
the enquiry. It must be remembered 
that we are in the midst of a speech, which 
is (as observed in the Prolegg. to Acts, § ii. 
17 a) a complete storehouse of Pauline 
words and expressions. Is it per se pro- 
bable, that he should use an expression 
which no where else occurs in his writings, 
nor indeed in those of his contemporaries? 
Is it more probable, that the early scribes 
should have altered an unusual expression 
for an usual one, or that a writer so con- 
stant to his own phrases should here have 
remained so? Besides,—in most of the 
places where Paul uses ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ, 
it isin a manner precisely similar to this,— 
as the consummation of a climax, or in a 
position of peculiar solemnity, cf. 1 Cor. 
x. 32; xv.9; Gal.i.13; 1 Tim. iii. 5, 15: 
and, ceteris paribus, I submit that the 
present passage loses by the substitution 
of κυρίου the peculiar emphasis which its 
structure and context seem to require in 
the genitive, introduced as it is by mpos- 
ἘΜΕΙΓΕΙ Lal mys αὶ ποιμαίνειν, and followed by 
the intensifying clause ἣν περιεποιήσατο 
διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἰδίου. (IV.) On the 
whole then, weighing the evidence on both 
sides,—seeing that it is more likely that 
the alteration should have been to κυρίου 
than to @c0v,—more likely that the speaker 
should have used θεοῦ than κυρίου, and 
more consonant to the evidently emphatic 
position of the word, I have decided 
for the rec. reading, which in Edd. 1, 2 I 
had rejected. And this decision is con- 
firmed by observing the habits of the 


great MSS. respecting the sacred names. 
It appears that B has no bias for θεός 
where the others have κύριος : we find it 
thus reading in Luke ii. 38 (so DLX*ER) ; 
ch. xvi. 10 (so ACER); xvii. 27 (so 
AHL); xxi. 20 (so ACELR); Col. iii. 16 
(so AC!D'F&) ; while ow the other hand it 
has xu wv in Rom. xv. 32, where the others 


rec. has θυ; κυ in ch. viii. 22, with 
ACDEN, where rec. and the mss. have 6v : 
similarly in ch. x. 33, and xv. 40: in 
Rom. x. 17 xv, with CD'!8}, for θυ: xiv. 
4, xs, with ACN, for @s. This evidence 
seems to remove further off the chance 
of deliberate alteration here to θεοῦ, and 
leaves the above considerations their full 
weight. (V.) Of course any reading which 
combines the two, κυρίου and θεοῦ, is by the 
very first principles of textual criticism in- 
admissible. (VI.) The principal names on 
either side are—for the rec. θεοῦ, Mill, 
Wolf, Bengel, Matthii, Scholz: for κυρίου, 
Gyrotius, Le Clere, Wetst., Griesb., Kuin., 
De Wette, Meyer, Lachmann, Tischendorf, 
Tregelles. περιεπ.} Luke and Paul 
(in pastoral Epp. only), see reff. 29.] 
ἄφιξις is here used in an unusual sense. 
An instance is found, Jos. Antt. iv. 8. 47, 
where Moses says, ἐπεὶ πρὸς τοὺς ἡμετέ- 
ρους ἄπειμι προγόνους, καὶ θεὸς τήνδε μοι 
τὴν ἡμέραν τῆς πρὸς ἐκείνους ἀφίξεως 
pie ...-- which is somewhat analogous, 
but more easily explained. That in Herod. 
ix. 77 (init.) also seems analogous. In De- 
mosth. de Pace, p. 58 (fin.), we have τὴν 
τότε ἄφιξιν εἰς τοὺς πολεμίους ἐποιήσατο, 
which is most like the usage here. Per- 
haps, absolutely put, it must signify ‘my 


232 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XX. 


Ν᾿ “ 7 ὦ ς a , A 
P φειδόμενοι. τοῦ ' ποιμνίου, °° καὶ ἐξ ὑμῶν αὐτῶν 4 ἀναστή- 


p Rom. xi. 21 


ae ” 5 Ἂ ἮΝ a r δι , s 0 - 
iis σονται ἄνδρες λαλοῦντες " διεστραμμένα, " τοῦ © ἀποσπᾷν 
4 : \ \ δ sah ς a \ - 
aes v.28, TOUS μαθητὰς ἃ ὀπίσω ἑαυτῶν. 5} διὸ ἡ γρηγορεῖτε, © μνη- 
37. vii. 18, ΄ \ ς -» 
from Exod. μονεύοντες “OTL * τριετίαν YvuKTa Kal γ᾽ ἡμέραν οὐκ 
1, δ, 
Matt. χυϊ. Z 2 7 a , , b a ce x 
δ τ} b. Luke ἐπαυσαμὴν “μετα δακρ υων νουθετῶν μέρας εκαστον. 
ΧΙ. «. Ch, ¢ A a“ / a A A A , 
xii 8.10. 82 καὶ ἃ τὰ νῦν " παρατίθεμαι ὑμᾶς TO θεῶ Kai Τῷ ® λόγῳ 
il. ἢ. ὦ a 4 : ; Es i: 
only. Deut. χῇς 8 γάριτος αὐτοῦ, τῷ δυναμένῳ ' οἰκοδομῆσαι καὶ δοῦναι 
Ἐς Cor. - a e , a ᾽ 
aia ee ς τὴν " κληρονομίαν * ἐν τοῖς * ἡγιασμένοις πᾶσιν. 533 ἀργυ- 
t = here | Matt. a \ , \ 
τ οὐ ἢ eat ; m ¢ Ἐν 
πανὶ. τῆν αὶ ρίου ἢ χρυσίου ἢ | ἱματισμοῦ οὐδενὸς ™ ἐπεθύμησα" ** αὐτοὶ 
ch. xxi. 1 


u ch. v. 37 reff. 
2 Macc. x. 6.) 


only. Jer. xii. 14. 


v — Matt. xxiv. 42. 1 Cor. xvi. 13 al. (Jer. v. 6.) 
w Paul only. Eph.ii.1l. 2Thess. ii.5. (ὡς, 


x here only +. (-τής, 2 Chron. xxxi. 16. -TiGw, 


Gen. xv. 9. see ch. xxviii. 30.) ych. xxvi. 7. 2 Thess. tii. 8. Paul only, exc. Mark iv. 27. Esth. 
iv. 16. elsew. gen., as ch. ix. 24 reff. z constr., ch. xiii. 10 reff. a Heb. v. 7. xti. 11. 2 Mace. 
xi. 6. Ὁ Rom. xv. 14. 1 Cor. iv. 14. Col. i. 28. iii. 16. 1 Thess. νυ. 12, 14. 2 Thess. 111. 15 only. P. Job 
iv.3. (-θεσία, 1 Cor. x. 11.) ce ch. ii. 6 reff. d ch. iv. 29 reff. e Luke 
xxiii. 46. ch. xiv. 23. Ps. xxx. 5. f ch. xiv. 3. g constr., ch. xiii. 26 reff. h ch, 
xiii. 43 reff. i— ch. χ. 91 Tel, k =an constr., Eph. i. 18. (see ch. xxvi. 18.) 1 Luke 
vii. 25. ix. 29. John xix. 24. 1 Tim. ii. 9 only. Ps. xliv. 9. m constr., 1 Tim. ili. l only. (Rom. 


vii. 7 al.) Prov. xxii. 3, 6. 


30. om Ist avrwy Β 6 sah eth. 
rec (for εαυτων) avtwy, with CDEHLP rel Bas, Chr, : 

31. νυκταν A. for και, δε D)[-gr ](txt D*). 
vulg (syrr) coptt eth [Antch,] Thl-fin Lucif, Jer, Ors). 
ver 31 to ch xxi. 2.) 

32. vurv(sic) δ΄ H]. rec aft vuas ins adeAda (for solemnity ; were it genuine, 
as Meyer observes, there would be no possible reason for omitting it), with CEHLP 
rel 36 eth-rom Chr, : aft tw θεω, ¢ 137 lect-58 : om ABDN 18 vulg syrr coptt «th-pl 

arm | Jer, Ors). for θεω, κυριω B 33. 68 coptt. rec εποικοδομησαι, with 
HLP rel Chrexpr(our εἰπεν οἰκοδομῆσαι αλλ εἐποικοδομησαι, δεικνυς οτι dn ωὡκοδομηθησαν. 
But may not this have been the history of its alteration, to render the word more 
strictly appropriate?) : txt ABCDEN 18. 36 [edificare vulg E-lat Jer]. add 
vuas DE 29. 76 lect-58 Syr sah eth: pref, a Ὁ o 141. 66?-9. 76. 81. 105! Chry. 
rec aft δουν. ins vu, with CHLP 13. 36 rel vss: om ABDER vulg copt. 
om την, with DHLP rel [Chr]: ins A B(sic: see table) CEN. add αὐτου A. 

aft ev ins av( . , )s (? avras) D!. for πασιν, των παντων TD. 

33. for Ist η, και D yulg ([demid]not am &c) spec [ Antch, ]. ovBevos AER 
[Antch,]: txt BCDHLP rel 36. add ὑμων DE spec arm, 

34. rec aft avro: ins δε, with 18[(e sil) copt Thl-fin]: yap 106: [et vos Syr xth- 
rom :] om ABCDEHLPX rel vulg syr [sah] zth[{-pl] arm Bas, (Chr,). 


for ἀποσπαν, αποστρεφειν Degr Syr. 

txt ABN. 

at end ins uuwy DEabcdko 
(D-lat is deficient from 


rec 


death ;’ see the above passage of Josephus. 
λύκοι βαρεῖς} not persecutors, but 
false teachers, from the words εἰςελ. eis 
ὑμᾶς, by which it appears that they were 
to come in among the flock, i. e. to be 
baptized Christians. In fact ver. 30 is 
explanatory of the metaphoric meaning of 
ver.29. φείδομαι is only used by Paul, 
except 2 Pet. ii. 4,5. 30. ὑμῶν avr. 
does not necessarily signify the presbyters: 
he speaks to them as being the whole flock. 
31.] μνημ. ὅτι is only (reff.) used by 
Paul, γύκτα κ. ἡμέραν] This ex- 
pression is remarkable: we have it (see 
reff.) in Mark, but Luke always uses the 
genitive, except in the speeches of Paul: 
and so Paul himself, except as in reff. 
νουθετῶν ( reff.) is used only by Paul. 
On the three years spoken of in this verse, 
see note, ch. xix. 10. We may just remark 
here (1) that this passage being precise and 
definite, must be the master key to those 
others (as in ch. xix.) which give wide and 


indefinite notes of time: and (2) that it 
seems at first sight to preclude the idea of 
a journey (as some think) to Crete and 
Corinth having taken place during this 
period. But this apparent inference may 
require modifying by other circumstances: 
cf. Prolegg. to 1 Cor. § v. 4 32. τ. 
Ady. τῆς Xap. αὐτ.7 I should be inclined to 
attribute the occurrence of this expression 
in ch. xiv. 3, to the narrative having come 
from Paul himself, or from one imbued 
with his words and habits of thought. See 
ver. 24. τῷ BSuv.] Clearly spoken of 
God, not of the word of His grace, which 
cannot be said δοῦναι KAnpov., however it 
might οἰκοδομῆσαι. The expression 
KAnpov. ἐν τ. ἣγ. πᾶσ. is strikingly similar 
to τῆς κληρονομίας αὐτοῦ ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις, 
Eph. i. 18, addressed to this same church. 
See also ch, xxvi. 18. 33.] See 1 Sam. 
xii. 3; and for similar avowals by Paul 
himself, 1 Cor. ix. 11, 12; 2 Cor. xi. 8,9; 
xii, 13, 34.] See 1 Cor. iv. 12, which 


ABCDE 
HLPN a 
bedfg 
hkim 
013 


30—38. 


TIPASEIS ATIOSTOAON. 


233 


ῳ a ͵ » b 
yiwwoKeTe ὅτι ταῖς " χρείαις μου καὶ τοῖς οὖσιν μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ n= ch, xxviii 


10. Rom. xii. 
Phil. 1. 


€ , δ lal - , wn 
οὑπηρέτησωαν αἱ χεῖρες αὗται" 35 πάντα 4 ὑπέδειξα ὑμῖν 15. ie 615. 


, ia) a a 
ὅτι οὕτως " κοπιῶντας δεῖ " ἀντιλαμβάνεσθαι τῶν ' ἀσθε- 
, PZ lal - nr 
νούντων, ἃ μνημονεύειν TE τῶν ἡ λόγων τοῦ ἡ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ, 
by . , A 
ὅτι αὐτὸς εἶπεν © Maxapiov ἐστιν * μᾶλλον διδόναι ἢ 


λαμβάνειν. 
σὺν πᾶσιν αὐτοῖς προςηύξατο. 


» “ i @ lal 
αὐτου * θεωρειῖν. 


x ch. vii. 60 reff, 
xlvi. 29. a ver. 10 


Isa. xl. 29, 


1i. 48 (xvi. 24, 25) only. 
ff, h = ch. xix. 27 al. 


ch. i. 1 reff. 


[for ywv.] οἰδατε A. 
πασιν D}, 


wl Or b Luke xv. 20 only. 
d Matt. xxvi. 49 || Mk, Luke vii. 38, 45. xv. 20 onl 


τας xpeias(sic) D}(txt D?). 
aft avra: ins μου D sah: μου avra: Syr copt eth. 
35. ins καὶ bef παντα CD? Ὁ ο 36. 40 Syr [arm]. 


των ασθενουντων bef αντιλαμβανεσθαι A. 


Tit. iii. 14. 
Sir. xxx1x. 33, 

o ch. xiii. 36 
(reff.). xxiv. 
23 only +. 

p constr.,] Cor. 
1x. 25. x. 33. 
Eph. iv.15. P. 


ν fn n A 

36 καὶ ταῦτα εἰπὼν * θεὶς τὰ * γόνατα αὐτοῦ a= Luke (ii. 
e Ἁ 

37 Υ ἱκανὸς δὲ 5 κλαυθμὸς 

ΒΓ Ὁ , \ ab 2 4 ΦΌΝΟΝ δ be U a 

ἐγένετο πάντων, καὶ * ἐπιπεσόντες ἐπὶ Tov °° τράχηλον τοῦ 
΄ ", , / ͵ 

Παύλου ἃ κατεφίλουν αὐτόν, 38 ° ὀδυνώμενοι μάλιστα ἴ ἐπὶ 

A f o αὶ δὲ ἐν “ > , , ee 
TH λόγῳ ὃ ᾧ εἰρήκει, OTL οὐκέτι ὃ μέλλουσιν TO ' πρόςωπον 


k Ul ὃ Ἂ > Ν ᾽ Ν A 
προέπεμπον O€ αὕτον εἰς TO πλοῖον. 
t τ here only. (2Cor. xii. 10. Job iv. 4.) see 1 Thess. v. 14. 


7\| Mt.) vi. 


iv. 6. 
r 1 Cor. xv. 10 


reff. 
s Luke i. 54. 
1 Tim. vi. 2 
only. L.P. 
Isa. xli. 9. 
(συναντιλ., 
Rom. viii. 26.) 
u w. gen., Luke xvii. 32 al. 1 Chron. 
w constr., Mark ix. 42. 1 Cor. ix. 15. see Matthiz, ᾧ 458. 
z Matt. ii. 18. viii. 12 415, Luke xiii. 28 only. Gen. 


Gen. xlvi. 29. c ch. xv. 10 reff. 


y- Exod. iv. 27. Ruthi. 9, 14. e = Luke 
ἢ = James v. lal. Zech. xii. 10. g attr., 
i see ver. 25 reff. k ch. xv. 3 reff. 


aft xp. μου ins 


for παντα, πασι D'(txt D2). 
om τε (A! ?) D! coptt: ins 


D2. τον Aoyov LP ἃ 43 e fk 4. 142. 22. 42. 57. 65-9. 73. 96-9. 126-56-63-91-2 
lect-58 sah eth arm Chr Thl-sif . του Aoyou h 26. 38. 40. 93 lect-18 vulg (oth corrns, 


because but one saying is cited). 
Bas,. 


om τἡσου A[2(?)] 2. 30. 68. 96. 142 Epiph, Chr, 
ovtos and μακαριος D1(txt D’). 


rec 6:50va: bef μαλλον, with a m 


[o Syr Bas,]: txt ABCDEHLP® 13 rel vulg spec syr arm [ Bas, ] Chr. 


36. εἰπας D!(txt D-corr!). 
om autos C! 36 arm. 


37. for δε, τε δὲ [(Syr) ]. 


om αὐτου D}(ins D6) [ arm]. 
mposevéato B'D. 
rec =yeveto bef κλάυθμος (corrn of order to bring 


συμπασιν Li P]. 


κλαυθμος and παντων together), with HLP rel [syrr copt arm] Thl-sif: txt ABCDEN 


a [(c)] h k m 18, 40 vulg [sah] Thi-fin. 


κατεφιλων XR}. 


om tov D-corr ὁ 180 Thl-sif. 


38. μαλιστα em Tw Aoyw bef οδυνωμενοι, omg w εἰρήκει (ins D-corr!) and adding (aft 


οδυν.) ort εἰπεν, D'(om εἰπεν D-corr). 
(txt D4). om αὐτου D'(ins D5), 
mAotov) P. 


he wrote when at Ephesus. χρεία, with 
a gen..of the person in want, is aa expres- 
sion of Paul only; see among reff. 
ὑπηρετεῖν is used only twice more; once by 
Paul, ch. xiii. 36, once of Paul, ch. xxiv. 23. 
The construction is varied in this sen- 
tence. Tats Xp. μου, kal (not τῶν ὄντων, 
but) τοῖς οὖσιν μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ. This is not 
without meaning—his friends were among 
his xpeta:—he supplied by his labour, not 
his and their wants, but his wants and 
them. ai x. αὗται] also [strikingly ] 
in Paul’s manner: compare τῶν δεσμῶν τού- 
των, ch. xxvi. 29,—and ch. xxviii. 20. 
35. πάντα] In all things: so Paul (only), 
see reff. κοπιῶντας) A word used 
by Paul fourteen times, by Luke once only 
(Luke v. 5 (xii. 27 v. r.)). TOV 
ἀσθενούντων] Not here the weak in faith 
(Rom. xiv. 1. 1 Cor. viii. 9),as Calvin, Beza, 
Grot., Bengel, Neander, Meyer, Tholuck, 
—which the context both before and after 
will not allow :—but the poor (τοὺς πένη- 


for ουκετι μελλουσιν, μελλει (oo): D! 
for εἰς, em D. om to (bef 


τας ἀσθενοῦντας, Aristoph. Pac. 636. 6 τε 
γὰρ ἀσθενέστερος ὃ πλούσιός τε THY δίκην 
ἴσην ἔχει, Eurip. ap. Stob. exv. (Wetst.)), 
as Chrys., Theoph., Heinrichs, Kuin., 
Olsh., De Wette. Max. ἐστιν x.7.A.] 
This saying of our Lord is one of very 
few not recorded in the Gospels, which 
have come down to us. Many such must 
have been current in the apostolic times, 
and are possibly preserved, unknown to 
us, in such epistles as those of James, 
Peter, and John. Bengel remarks, ‘alia 
mundi sententia est:’ and cites from an 
old poet in Athenzus, viii. 5, ἀνόητος 6 
διδούς, εὐτυχὴς δ᾽ 6 λαμβάνων. But we 
have some sayings the other way: not to 
quote authors who wrote after this date, 
and might have imbibed some of the spirit 
of Christianity, we find in Aristotle, Eth. 
Nicom. iv. 1, μᾶλλόν ἐστιν τοῦ ἐλευθερίου 
τὸ διδόναι οἷς δεῖ ἢ λαμβάνειν ὅθεν δεῖ, 
καὶ μὴ λαμβάνειν ὅθεν οὐ δεῖ. τῆς ἀρετῆς 
γὰρ μᾶλλον τὸ εὖ ποιεῖν ἢ τὸ εὖ πάσχειν. 


234 


I constr., ch. 
iv. 5 reff. 

m ch. xiii. 13 
reff. 

n = Luke xxii. 
41. (ch. xx. 
30 reff.) 

2 Mace. xii. 


10. 

o ch. xvi. 11 
only t. 

p ch. xxv. 17. 
xxvii. 18. 
Luke vii. 11 
(w. ἡμέρα, 
am 37) only. 


here only. 


w constr, (see note), ch. ii. 5 reff. Winer, edn. 6, ᾧ 45. 5 


TIPASEIS ATIOZTTOAON. 


XXT,. 


XXI. 1 ὡς dé! ἐγένετο ™ ἀναχθῆναι ἡμᾶς " ἀποσπασθέντας 
by > > lal ο 0 ὃ / ” θ » A Ko Ρ τῷ 
ἂπ αὕτων, “ εὐθυὸρομήσαντες ἤλθομεν εἰς τὴν Ko, PTH 
δὲ Ρ ἑξῆς εἰς τὴν “Ρόδον, κἀκεῖθεν eis ἸΠάταρα. 
εὑρόντες πλοῖον «3 διαπερῶν εἰς 


2 καὶ 
Φοινίκην, * ἐπιβάντες 


, , κ \ 
™ ἀνήχθημεν. 3.5 ἀναφανέντες δὲ τὴν Κύπρον καὶ " κατα- 
Pay eck t 22 5 / > > ΄ \ 
λεπόντες αὐτὴν "εὐώνυμον ἐπλέομεν εἰς Συρίαν, Kal 
/ ~ a gS 
ἃ κατήλθομεν eis Τύρον: * ἐκεῖσε yap τὸ πλοῖον HY 


q Matt. ix. 1. xiv. 34 ΜΚ. Mark v. 27. Luke xvi. 26 only. Deut. xxx. 13.. 
s Luke xix. 11] only. Cant. vi. 4 (only ?). constr. pass., Rom. vi. U7. 
u = ch. xxvii. 5. (ch. viii. 5 reff.) 


r adsol., here only. = ch. xxvii. 2. 
Heb, xi. 2 al. t constr., 
v ch. xxii. 5 only. Job xxxix. 29. 


3 
Gal. it 7. 


Cuar. XXI. 1. om αναχθ. Al(appy): ins aft nuas ΑΞ: avaxdevtas N!: αχθηναι Ρ ἃ 


3. 100. 
om τὴν D. 


om τὴν (bef podov) CD 40 Chry. 
pvoa Τὴ vulg-ms, [«.] μυρρα sah. 


αποσπασθεντες BE? [L a b. (13 uncert.) 
ανηχθημεν ἀποσπασθεντων δε (ημωὴν D1(txt D*). 
ree κων, with HLP 1m: Cowm vulg: Chio tol: txt ABCDEN rel 
36 syrr coptt arm (Ke Thl-fin Cassiod,, Cho am. (13 def.) 


(ka). emi(B) avt(e)s 
for ἤλθομεν, ἡκομεν D. 


for εξης, emtovon D 


_ matrepa AC. at end ins « 


2. διαπερουν Εἰ 73. 105: διαπερον LN? a k Thl-fin: Siamopevopevoy 137. 
3. Steph avapavavres (corrn, not perceiwing the force of the passive), with B1(see 
table) X a? Ὁ ὁ o Chr(some mss): txt AB?(see table) CEHL[P] 13. 36 rel (Chr, ]. 


aft de ins εἰς τὴν P [40]. 
tol] demid(not am fuld). 


om τὴν Εἰ. 
καταλειποντε5. AHL h! 13 (but -πόντες HL). 


om καὶ A k m [vulg-clem 


om emAcouey A[}(appy)]: εἐπλευσαμεν E2[-gr]: navigavimus vulg E-lat: collavimus 


D-lat. 


rec (for κατηλθομεν) κατηχθημεν, with CHLP rel Chr, : deposti sumus 


E-lat : venimus vulg: enavigavimus D-lat: txt AB E-gr & 13 [syr] coptt 2th. 


exec H ἃ 133 vulg. 
txt ABCEXN ο 13. 137 [vulg]. 


XXI. 1.7 The E. V., ‘ After we had 
gotten from them,’ does not come up to 
the original: δείκνυσι τὴν βίαν τῷ εἰπεῖν 
ἀποσπασθέντας am αὐτῶν, Chrys. 
εὐθυδρομ.} See ref., having run before 
the wind. Cos, opposite Cnidus and 
Halicarnassus, celebrated for its wines 
(εὔκαρπος πᾶσα, οἴνῳ δὲ καὶ ἀρίστη, καθά- 
περ Χίος x. Λέσβος, Strab. xiv. 2), rich 
stufts (‘nec Coz referunt jam tibi pur- 
pure,’ Hor. iv. 13. 13), and ointments 
(γίνεται δὲ μύρα κάλλιστα κατὰ τόπους 


«ον. ἀμαράκινον δὲ Κῶον καὶ μήλινον," 


Athen. xv. p. 688). The chief town was 
of the same name (Hom. 1]. 8. 677), and 
had a famous temple of Ausculapius (Strabo, 
ibid.). It was the birth-place of Hippo- 
crates. ‘The modern name, Stanchio, is a 
corruption of és τὰν Κῶ [as Stamboul for 
Constantinople is of és τὰν πόλιν]. See 
Winer, Realw. Rhodes was at this 
time free, cf. Strabo, xiv.2; Tac. Ann. xii. 
58: ‘Redditur Rhodiis libertas, adempta 
sepe aut firmata, prout bellis externis 
meruerant, aut domi seditione deliquerant.’ 
See also Suet. Claud. 25, “ Rhodiis (liberta- 
tem) ob penitentiam veterum delictorum 
reddidit.’ It was reduced to a Roman 
province under Vespasian, Suet. Vesp. 8. 
The situation of its chief town is praised 
by Strabo, 1. e. The celebrated Colos- 
sus was at this time broken and lying in 


rec nv bef to πλοιον, with HLP rel 36 [syrr arm Chr, ]. 


ruins, ib. Patara, in Lycia (‘caput 
gentis,’ Liv. xxxvii. 15), a large maritime 
town, a short distance E. of the mouth of 
the Xanthus. It had a temple and oracle 
of Apollo, Herod. i. 182. ‘Delius et 
Patareus Apollo,’ Hor. iii. 4. There are 
considerable ruins remaining, Fellows, 
Asia Minor, p. 219 ff. Lycia, p. 115 ff. 
Winer, Realw. Here they leave their 
ship hired at Troas, or perhaps at Nea- 
polis (see note on xx. 16), and. avail 
themselves of a merchant ship bound for 
Tyre. 8, avadavevtes] for the con- 
struction, see reff. and Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 39. 
1: having been shewn Cyprus, literally. 
Wetst. cites from Theophanes, p. 392, 
περιεφέροντο ἐν TH πελάγει, ἀναφανέντων 
δὲ αὐτῶν τὴν γῆν, εἶδον αὐτοὺς οἱ στρατ- 
ηγοί. ‘The graphic language of an eye- 
witness, and of one familiar with the 
phraseology of seamen, who, in their own 
language, appear to raise the land in ap- 
proaching it.’ Smith, Voyage and Ship- 
wreck of St. Paul. But would not this re- 
mark rather apply to the active participle ? 
Compare ‘aerias Phzacum abscondimus 
arces, Ain. iii, 291. εὐώνυμον] 
sc. αὐτήν, i.e. to the E. This would be 
the straight course from Patara to Tyre. 

ἐπλ. eis ¥.,—we held our course, 
steered, for Syria. κατήλθ.] we 
came down to, the result of having borne 


ee (Je 


νεικὴν 


ABCEH 
LPNab 
cafgh 
kimo 
13 


ἰ- 


1—5. TIPASEIS, ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 235 


’ , 
x ἀποφορτιζόμενον τὸν γ γόμον. 4 ἀνευρόντες δὲ TOUS x here only +. 
θ ΣΦ , aoe A OS e ΕΘ ps κυβερνήτης 
μαθητὰς * ἐπεμειναμεν " αὑτοῦ ἡμέρας ETTTA, © OLTLVES Τῷ χειμώνων 
; =f \ a , \ ἐπ. γινο- 
Παύλῳ ἔλεγον “4 διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος μὴ “ ἐπιβαίνειν εἰς 
«ς ΄ ΕΟ nm 
Ἱεροσόλυμα. ὅ ὅτε δὲ ἴ ἐγένετο 8 ἐξαρτίσαι ἡμᾶς ὃ τὰς 


μένων ἀπο- 
φορτίζεται, 

vol, ii. p. 413. y Rev. xviii. 11,12 only. Exod. xxiii. 5 only. 
a= ch. x. 48 reff. Ὁ ch. xviii. 19 reff. c ch. x. 41 reff. 


Philo de 
z Luke ii. 16 only Ta 
e = and constr., ch. xx. 18. (xxvii. 2 reff.) - constr., ver. 1 al. 


Prem. 5 
d ch. xi. 28 reff. 
f g = here (2 Tim. iii. 
17) only +. Jos. Antt. iii. 2. 2. h = Luke ii. 6, 22, 43, 


4, rec kat ανευροντες (corrn of copula, as frequently), with C73HLP rel D-lat syrr 
eth [arm] Chr, Thl[-sif]: txt ABC!E a m 18. 36. 40 vulg copt [sah] Thl-fin. 
om Tous (corrn, the art not seeming in place) HLP bc def ghklo 137 Chr Thi[-sif]. 

αυτοις (alteration to suit oirwes which follows) AKL Καὶ Thl-fin: προς avtous 
Chr,, apud eos D-lat E-lat [syrr coptt eth]: txt BCHP® 19 rel. eAeyay B: 
repeated by B! after πνευματος (see table). rec ἀναβαινειν (substitution of more 
usual word), with EHLP rel vulg Chr Did, [Epiph,] Thl-sif: txt ABCX 13(appy) 36. 
40 Thl-fin. rec ιερουσαλημ, with HLP rel Epiph, Chr Did,: txt ABCERN a k 
13. 36. 40 vulg D-lat Thl-fin. 

5. rec nuas bef εξαρτισαι (alteration of order to avoid nuas τας nuepas), with B(see 
below) CHL (Port... εξαρτησαι]) δὲ rel 36 Chr: txt A B(but marking the words for 
transposition) E: ore δὲ eyevero εξελθειν ἡμᾶς nuepas εξαρτησαι em. (9. 100) 13: 
sequenti autem die exeuntes ambulamus viam nostram D-lat: post hos autem dies amb. 


down upon. Τύρον This city, so 
well known for its commercial importance 
and pride, and so often mentioned in the 
O. T. prophets, was now a free town (Jos. 
Ant. xv. 41. Strabo, xvi. 2, οὐχ ὑπὸ τῶν 
βασιλέων δ᾽ ἐκρίθησαν αὐτόνομοι μόνον, ἀλλὰ 
καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν Ῥωμαίων) of the province of 
Syria. ἐκεῖσε] If this is an adv. of 
motion as generally, the reference may be 
to the carrying and depositing the cargo 
in the town (De Wette), or to the thither- 
ward direction of the voyage (Meyer): but 
in the only other place where ἐκεῖσε occurs 
(ref. [see also ref. Job]) it simply = ἐκεῖ, 
so that perhaps no motion is included. 

amodopt.| The pres. part. indicates the 
intention, as διαπερῶν before. 4. δέ] 
Implying, ‘the crew indeed were busied 
with unlading the ship: but we, having 
sought out (by enquiry) the disciples.’ 
ofa eho ‘ Finding disciples’ (E.V.) is quite 
wrong. It is not improbable that Paul 
may have preached at Tyre before, when 
he visited Syria and Cilicia (Gal. i. 21) 
after his conversion,—and again when he 
confirmedsthe churches (ch. xv. 41): τοὺς 
pad. seems to imply this. Tp. err. | 
The time taken in unlading:—they appa- 
rently proceeded in the same ship, see 
ver, 6. The notice here is very 
important, that these Tyrian disciples 
said to Paul by the Spirit, that he should 
not go to Jerusalem,—and yet he went 
thither, and, as he himself declares, δεδε- 
μένος τῷ πνεύματι, bound in spirit by the 
leading of God. We thus have an in- 
stance of that which Paul asserts 1 Cor. 
xiv. 32, that the spirits of prophets are 
subject to prophets, i.e., that the reve- 
lation made by the Holy Spirit to each 
man’s spirit was under the influence of 


that man’s will and temperament, moulded 
by and taking the form of his own capa- 
cities and resolves. Sohere: these Tyrian 
prophets knew by the Spirit, which testi- 
fied this in every city (ch. xx. 23), that 
bonds and imprisonment awaited Paul. 
This appears to have been announced by 
them, shaped and intensified by their own 
intense love and anxiety for him who was 
probably their father in the faith (see 
[τοὺς pad. above, and] ver. 5). But he 
paid no regard to the prohibition, being 
himself under a leading of the same Spirit 
too plain for him to mistake it. See 
below, vv. 10 ff. 5. ἐξαρτίσαι]) This 
is ordinarily a naval word, signifying to 
fit out or refit a ship (with or without 
πλοῖον, Passow). But this can hardly be 
the meaning here. Meyer would render 
‘when we had spent these days in refitting,’ 
so that τ. 7m. would be the accusative of 
duration,—‘ when we had refitted during 
the days. But not to mention that τὰς 
ἦμ., without ταύτας, would be harsh in 
such a connexion,—is not the aorist ἐξαρ- 
τίσαι fatal to the rendering ? Would it 
not in this case be present, if implying 
the continued action during the days,—- 
perfect, if implying that that action was 
over (in which latter case 7u., would be 
dative)? The aorist, as almost invariably 
in dependent clauses, must refer to some 
one act occurring at one time. So that 
if the meaning given by Theoph., (ic. 
πληρῶσαι (Hesych. τελειῶσαι) be found 
no where else, it is almost necessary so to 
understand the word here. And it is 
doing no violence to its import: the 
same verb which indicates the comple- 
tion of a ship’s readiness for a voyage, 
might well be applied to the completion of 


290 


i = ch. xv. 40 
reff. 

k ch. xv. 3 reff. 

1 w. prepos., 
ch. xxvi. ll. 
Luke xxiv. 
50. Levit. 
xxiii. 14. 

m Luke xiii. 
33. ch. xiv. 19. 
Neh. xiii. 20. 

n ch. vii. 60 reff. 

o Matt. xiii. 2, 
48. John xi. 
4. ch. xxvii. 
39, 40 only. 
Judg. v.17 A 
Ald. compl. 
Sir. xxiv. 14 
A(not F) BX 
Ald. only. 

p absol., ch. x. 
9 reff. Ezra 
p+ 

q here only t+. 

6 ch. viii. 25 reff. t John xvi. 32. xix. 27. 


TIPAZEIS ATIOSTOAQN. 


r= Matt. xiv. 32 |) Mk. xv- 39. John xxi. 11. 
Esth. vy. 10. 
v here only +. 2 Mace. xii, 17 only. πολλὴν ὁδὸν διήνυσαν, Xen. Cyr. iv. 2. 15. 


XXI. 


e ἊΣ το, ’ ’ U θ k f £ Lal 
ἡμέρας, | ἐξελθόντες ἐπορευόμεθα, * προπεμπόντων ἡμᾶς 
πάντων σὺν γυναιξὶ καὶ τέκνοις | ἕως ™ ἔξω τῆς πόλεως, 
\ Dn θέ Ν n U ’ \ \ 0 ᾽ 4 Pp , 
καὶ " θέντες TA” γόνατα ἐπὶ τὸν ὃ αἰγιαλὸν Ῥ προςευξάμενοι 
6 q > , θ > / \ r > , > Ν lal 
ἀπησπασάμεθα ἀλλήλους, καὶ " ἀνέβημεν εἰς TO πλοῖον, 
" - δὲ 5 e , > t \ [ὃ 
ἐκεῖνοι δὲ ὃ ὑπέστρεψαν εἰς ‘TA LOLA. 
u an Vv 4 ’ \ / w / > 
πλοῦν " διανύσαντες ἀπὸ Τύρου Κ᾽ κατηντήσαμεν εἰς 


ἡμεῖς δὲ τὸν 


Πτολεμαΐδα. καὶ * ἀσπασάμενοι τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς Y ἐμείναμεν 
3 
» -“ 
ἡμέραν μίαν Υ παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς. 
v ’ , \ 3 Γ Σ Ἀ 4 
ἤλθομεν εἰς Καισάρειαν, καὶ εἰςελθόντες εἰς τὸν οἶκον 


8 2 τῇ δὲ ἐπαύριον * ἐξελθόντες 


/ fe) a > lal ” b > c “ «ς ’ 
Φιλύτπου τοῦ εὐωγγελιστοῦ, Ὄντος “εκ τῶν €TTA, 


Jonah i. 3 Ed-vat.(not B) Ald. 
uch, xxvii. 9,10 only +. Wisd. xiv. 1 only. 
w ch. xvi. 1 reff. 


x ch. xviii. 22 reff. y John i. 40. iv. 40. ch. ix. 48, xviii. 3. ᾿ 2 ch. x. 9 reff. a Eph. iv. 
11. 2 Tim. iv. 5 only. b Luke xxii. 58 al. c see ch, ii. 14 al. 

v. n. Syr. om εξελθοντες A 105. γυναιξιν CELH]P: txt ABLLJN rel. om 

ews N D-lat. in δὲ mposevEauevos is written before em τ. avy., but marked for 


erasure by N! oT 3, and repeated in its proper place. 

5,6. rec for mposevéauevor απησπασαμεθα αλληλους Kat, Tposnuiapeda και ἀσπασαμενοι 
αλλήλους, with HLP rel vulgChr, ΤῊ]: txt A B(sic : see table) CEN a ἃ 138. 36. 40 Syr.— 
mposevt. LP 4. 100-6 Chr,.—ameoracaucba C: απησπασαμενοι 40: απησπασμεθα [151]. 

6. τος ἐπεβημεν (corrn to more usual term), with HLP 13[e sil] rel Thl-sif: 
ἐνεβημεν (more usual) BEN? k 73 Chr,: txt ACN? a c ἃ 36. 40. 1387 Thi-fin. 


7. κατεβημεν (corrn to more usual word) AEN®. 


επεμειναμεν A k 40. 


πτολεμαιδαν N!. 


8. rec aft εξελθοντες ins οἱ περι Tov παυλον (εξελθ. begins an ecclesiastical portion), 
with HLP rel eth-rom Thl-sif; οἱ arooroAo: 47 lectt-13-4: om ABC [D( Wetst) ] E(&) 
ce hk 13. 36. 40 vulg D-lat syrr copt [sah eth-pl] arm Chr, Thl-fin.—X has o written, 


but marked for erasure ‘ prima manu.’ 


Steph nA@ov (to suit οἱ περι τ. παυλονῚ, 


with HLP rel Thi-sif: txt A(B)C [D(Mill)] EX k 13. 36 vulg [D-lat] syrr coptt «th 


[arm(Tischdf)] Eus, Chr, [Thl-fin ].—7Aé@ayev B [ecseaé. D( Mill) }. 


rec ins Tov 


bef ovros (for precision), with a 13[e sil]: om ABCEHLPN rel Eus, Chr. 
(D-lat is deficient in vv 8—10; but readings are preserved in Scriv’s notes.) 


a period of time. Our own word ‘fulfil’ 
has undergone a similar change of meaning 
since its first composition: and πληρῶσαι 
is used both of manning a ship and of ful- 
filling a period of time. é&e0. | from 
the house where they were lodged. 

ἕως ἔξω τ. w.] “ We passed through the 
city to the western shore of the ancient 
island, now the peninsula, hoping to find 
there a fitting spot for the tent, in the open 
space between the houses and the sea.” 
Robinson, iii. 392. ἐπὶ τὸν αἰγιαλόν] 
“Yet had we looked a few rods further, we 
should have found a very tolerable spot by 
a threshing-floor, where we might have 
pitched close upon the bank, and enjoyed, 
in all its luxury, the cool sea-breeze, and 
the dashing of the surge upon the rocky 
shore.” id. ibid. 7. τὸν πλοῦν δια- 
νύσ.] Having ended our voyage, viz. 
the whole voyage, from Neapolis to Syria. 
The E.V., ‘when we had finished our 
course from Tyre, is allowable, but this 
would more probably have been τὸν ἀπὸ 
Τύρου. “ With their landing at Ptolemais 
their voyage ended: the rest of the journey 
was made by land.’ (De Wette.) ἀπὸ 


Τύρου will thus be taken with κατηντήσα- 
μεν. Πτολεμαΐδα Anciently Accho 
(Axxo, LXX, Judg. i. 31,—in Gr. and 
Rom. writers Ακη, Ace), called Ptolemais 
from (probably) Ptolemy Lathurus (Jos. 
Antt. xiii. 12. 2 ff., see 1 Macc. x. 56 ff. ; 
xi. 22, 24; xii. 45, 48; 2 Mace. xiii. 24). 
It was a large town with a harbour (Jos. 
Antt. xviii. 6. 3). 
31) fully possessed by the Jews, but be- 
longed to the Pheenicians, who in after 
times were mixed with Greeks. But after 
the captivity a colony of Jews is found 
there (Jos. B. J. ii. 18. 5). The emperor 
Claudius gave it the “ civitas,’ whence it is 
called by Pliny, v. 17; xxxvi. 65, ‘ Colonia 
Claudii Cesaris.’ It is now called St. Jean 
d’Acre, and is the best harbour on the 
Syrian coast, though small. It lies at the 
end of the great road from Damascus to 
the sea. Population now about 10,000. 

The distance from Ptolemais to Ceesarea is 
forty-four miles. For Cesarea, see on ch. 
na, 8. dur. τ. evayy.} It is possible 
that he may have had this appellation from 
his having been the first to travel about 
preaching the gospel: see ch. viii. 5 ff 


It was never (Judg. i.. 


ABCEH 

LPS ab 

cedfgh 

kimo 
13 


D προ- 
φητης... 
AKCDE 
HLPXR a 
bedfg 
hkim 
013 


6—11. TIPAE EIS ATLOSTOAON. 237 


y τι / y ᾽ > n 9 7 δὲ 4 θ , , ἢ 
ἐμείναμεν Tap αὐτῷ. 9 τούτῳ δὲ ἧσαν θυγατέρες τέσ- ach. xix. brea 
, , j , Goh. x. 48 reff 
capes παρθένοι ἃ προφητεύουσαι. 10 © ἐπιμενόντων δὲ f= ἐμ. ( 
ἡμέρας ' πλείους, ὃ κατῆλθέν τις τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας ® eg ἢ 


ἀπὸ reff. 
‘apopyntns ὀνόματι "AyaBos, 11 καὶ ἐλθὼν πρὸς ἡμᾶς 


h ch. xi. 27 τοίξ, 
i = Mark xv. 


gre ἦ ; 5: , Σ Ἢ 24 al. 
καὶ ἄρας τὴν * ζώνην τοῦ Ἰ]αύλου, δήσας ἑαυτοῦ τοὺς * be, , 
΄ \ \ - > ͵ , \ r \ ι Mk. x. 9 
πόδας καὶ τὰς χεῖρας εἶπεν Tade λέγει TO πνεῦμα TO | Mk Rev. 

«“ ἣν “ ἫΝ ς , ¢ ἊΝ 1, 13. Xv. 
ἅγιον, τὸν ἄνδρα ov ἐστιν ἡ * ζώνη αὕτη οὕτως δήσουσιν δον 
S56 nN e 5 ὃ a Χ | 5 ΄ ? - 1 = Matt. xvii. 

ἐν ᾿Ιερουσαλὴμ οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι nat! παραδώσουσιν εἰς χεῖρας x a1. τι 
Job xvi. 12. 


9. rec παρθενοι bef τεσσαρες, with ΕΗ ΠΡ rel [syrr] ΤῊ] : παρθενοι bef θυγατερες C 
Eus,: txt AB [D(Wtst) | δὲ a k m 13 D-lat [am fuld demid tol arm(Tischdf) }. 

10. rec aft επιμενοντων δὲ ins ἡμων (addn for precision), with ELPX?3 rel syr-mg 
[arm] Chr, : avtwy δὲ! : txt ABCH k 18. 36 syr[-txt] Bas,. προφητη5 bef amo 
Tns ιουδαιας L. 

11. om καὶ D-lat: ανελθων δε D!-gr: txt D2. rec for eavtov, Te αὕτου (in 
some late mss αὐτου probably from misunderstanding, supposing that it was Paul’s 
hands and feet that he bound), with HLP rel [Syr] Chr, : txt ABCDEN a Ὁ c (m) ὁ 
13. 36 [syr coptt arm] Cyr-jer, Bas,, also Orig(5no. eavtov χειρων κ. ποδων) Aug 
Cassiod. rec Tas χειρας καὶ Tous ποδας (corrn from Luke xxiv. 39, 40? see var 
read John xi. 14: so De W. Meyer thinks 705. x. x. arose from its beiny the natural 
order of binding : but surely this would be more likely to be the orig) order of narrating, 
than to strike a copyist as necessary to be observed), with A al c ἃ m coptt exth 
Chr,(omg tas and τους) Orig(above) : txt BCDEHLPR 13 rel 40 vulg syrr arm Cyr- 


jer Bas. 
Orig). 


The office of Evangelist, see reff., seems 
to have answered very much to our 
missionary : Theodoret, on Eph. iv. 11, 
Says, ἐκεῖνοι περιϊόντες ἐκήρυττον : and 
Euseb. H. E. iii. 37, ἔργον ἐπετέλουν 
εὐαγγελιστῶν, τοῖς ἔτι πάμπαν ἀνηκόοις 
τοῦ τῆς πίστεως λόγου κηρύττειν τὸν 
χριστὸν φιλοτιμούμενοι, καὶ τὴν τῶν θείων 
εὐαγγελίων παραδιδόναι γραφήν. The latter 
could hardly have been part of their em- 
ployment so early as this; nor had εὐαγ- 
γέλιον in these times the peculiar meaning 
of a narrative of the life of Christ, but 
rather embraced the whole good tidings of 
salvation by Him, as preached to the Jews 
and Heathens. See Neander, ΒΗ͂. u. L., 
pp. 258, 264. Euseb., ili. 31, appa- 
rently mistakes this Philip for the Apostle : 
as did also (see Valesius’s note, Euseb. 1. c.) 
Clement of Alexandria and Papias. 

ὄντος ἐκ τ. ἑπτά] See ch. vi. 5, and note. 
Meyer and Winer (edn. 6,.§ 20. 1. 6.) well 
remark (see De Wette also), that the par- 
ticiple without the article implies that the 
reason why they abode with him was that 
he was one of the seven: ‘ut qui esset,’ 
ἄς. and in English being (one) of the 
seven. The fact of Philip being settled at 
Cesarea, and known as 6 εὐαγγελιστής, 
seems decisive against regarding the occur- 
rence of ch, vi. 3 ff. as the establishment of 
any permanent order in the church. Ἢ 
9.) This notice is inserted apparently with- 
out any immediate reference to the history, 


for ev, εἰς D 26. 63. 97-8. 106 Chr, Epiph, and (prefixg απελθοντα) 
om οἱ D!(ins D?) Chr Thi-sif. 


aft εἰς ins τας N'(N3 disapproving). 


but to bring so remarkable a circumstance 
to the knowledge of the readers. The four 
daughters had the gift of προφητεία: see 
on ch. xi. 27. Eusebius (see, however, 
his mistake above) gives from Polycrates 
traditional accounts of them,—that two 
were buried at Hierapolis, and one at Ephe- 
sus. From that passage, and one cited 
from Clement of Alex. (δύο θυγατέρες 
αὐτοῦ γεγηρακυῖαι παρθένοι, Polycr., Euseb. 
111: SY Seago Φίλιππος Tas θυγατέρας ay- 
Spdow ἐξέδωκε, Clem., Eus. iii. 30), it 
would appear that two were afterwards 
married, according to tradition. To 
find an argument for the so-called ‘ honour 
of virginity’ in this verse, only shews to 
what resources those will stoop who have 
failed to apprehend the whole spirit and 
rule of the gospel inthe matter. They are 
met bowever on their own ground by an 
argument built on another misapprehen- 
sion (that of Philip being a deacon in the 
ecclesiastical sense): ὥςτε οὖν καὶ τῷ κοι- 
νωνήσαντι γάμων διακονεῖν ἔξεστι. 

10.1 This Agabus in all probability is iden- 
tical with the Agabus of ch. xi. 28, That 
there is no reference to that former men- 
tion of him, might be occasioned by different 
sources of information having furnished 
the two narratives. 11.] Similar sym- 
bolical actions accompanying prophecy are 
found 1 Kings xxii. 11; Isa. xx. 2; Jer. 
xiii. 1 ff.; Ezek. iv. 1 πὶ, 9 ff.; v. 1, &e. 
De Wette remarks that τάδε λέγει τὸ 


238 


3 »" 

m == Matt. xiv. ἐθνῶν. 
36 al. fr. 

2 Macc. ix. 
26. a ag 
here only. ἰμ 

n here only t. σαλὴμ. 
see Gen. 
xxvi. 7. 

o ch. iii. 12 reff. 

p ch. xi. 2 reff. 

q 1 Cor. xv. 29 
reff. 

r here only t. 

s = ch. xix. 22 
reff. 

t 2 Cor. xii. 14. 
1 Pet. iv. 5 
only. Dan. 
iii. 15 only. 


τὸ Y θέλημα ¥ γινέσθω. 


ΠΡΑΞΕῚΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


ΧΧΙ. 


12 ὡς δὲ ἠκούσαμεν ταῦτα, ™ παρεκαλοῦμεν ἡμεῖς 
Χ ς n a ’ ο “ \ p > / Pe > ‘I 

Te καὶ οἱ " ἐντόπιοι ° TOD μὴ P ἀναβαίνειν αὐτὸν εἰς ‘lepov- 

13 core ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Παῦλος Τί 4 ποιεῖτε κλαίοντες 
, , 

καὶ * συνθρύπτοντές μου THY καρδίαν ; ἐγὼ γὰρ οὐ μόνον 

δεθῆναι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀποθανεῖν " εἰς Ἱερουσαλὴμ * ἑτοίμως 

ἃ ἔχω “ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἡ ὀνόματος τοῦ κυρίου “Incod. 
w θ | δὲ ? ~ xe , > , a / 

πειθομένου δὲ αὐτοῦ * ἡσυχάσαμεν εἰπόντες Tod κυρίου 
" / 

15 2 Μετὰ δὲ τὰς * ἡμέρας * ταύτας 


1! μὴ 


(allw ἔχειν.) ὃ ἐχισκευασάμενοι P ἀνεβαίνομεν εἰς ἱἱεροσόλυμα' 16 » συν- 
Χ. 


see 2 Cor. 


6. Χθ δὲ \ rn 6 A SF WN K / \ c a 
uasabove(t). WAVOV O€ Kal τῶν μαθητῶν aTro Δαισαρείας σὺν ἡμᾶν, ... 


ch. vii. 1 reff. 


Mark νυ. 23 al. v ch. ix. 16 reff. 


w absol., ch. xvii. 4. Luke xvi. 31. 


Esth. iv. 4B ἄς. Xen. 


Cyr. v. 1. 8, x = Luke xiv. 4. ch. xi. 18 (Luke xxiii. 56. 1 Thess. iv. 11) only. Neh. νυ. 8. 
y Marr. vi. 10, xxvi. 42 only. iz here (ch. i. 5) only. see ch. xv. 36. xxiv. 24. Heb. viii. 10. a here 
only}. 2Chron. xxxiv.10, ἐπ. ὅσα ἐδύναντο ὑποζύγια, Xen. Hell. vii. 2. 18, b = ch. i: 21 reff. 


12, παρακαλουμεν D'[-gr](txt D4). 
ins τὸν παυλὸον D eth. 
end add τοτε (see next ver) C m 138. 40. 


επιβαινειν D. 


om te D Thl-sif. 
om avtov EK. 93-5 Bas. 


aft ot εἐντοπιοι 
at 


13. rec απεκριθη δε, with C113 syr Chr, [Bas,]: amexpidn τε HLPdfghkim 


eth ΤῊ] : e:rev[respondit] δὲ προς nuas Ὁ (from the various assignment of tore to 
ver 12 or ver 13, it was omitted altogether, and then some copula became necessary) : 
txt ABC?EN 13 rel 36. 40 vulg Syr coptt arm. om ὁ B(ins_ B!-corr y see 


table). aft mavAos ins καὶ εἰπεν AEN a Ὁ ἃ k ὁ 18 vulg Syr [sah(Tischdf) | eth 
arm. om κλαίοντες καὶ δὲ], συνθριπτοντες ΡΟ: θορυβουντες D (txt D®) 
Tert Jer. for yap, δε E-gr 95! vulg-ms Tert;. aft δεθηναι ins βουλομαι D. 


for ers, ev N(but εἰς is written over the line ‘ prima ut videtur manu ἢ). 


ετοιμως exw bef εἰς ιερουσαλημ A [f] wth. 
Thdrt, Tert,) Jer, Ambrst Aug,. 
14. ins οἱ bef εἰποντες D'[-gr]. 


aft εἰπ. ins προς αλληλους Ὁ. 


aft τἡσου ins χριστου CD Syy arm (Cyr, 


rec To 


θελημα bef του κυριον (alteration of characteristic order), with DHLP rel vss Chr, [ Bas, 
Tert, |}: txt ABCEN m 13 vulg arm.—for κυρ., θεου D-gr 32. 73 th ['Tert, ]. 
rec γενεσθω (corrn to more usual), with HLP 13 rel Chr [Bas,]: txt ABCDEN f g mo 


36. (yew. AB! DER.) 
15. τινας ἡμέρας [omg ταῦτ. D-gr. 


rec αποσκευασαμενοι, with α 13: 


παρασκευασ. C a 7. 69. 73. 105: αποταξαμενοι D-gr: επισκεψαμενοι H 68. 106: 
preparati vulg syrr copt eth: preparantes E-lat: refecimus nos D-lat: txt AB E-gr 
LP(X) rel 36. 40 Pamph Chr, Thl-sif Thl-fin-comm.—emoxevacauevov (but corrd) δὲ}, 


αναβαινομεν ΟΣ βίοι N?), 


rec ιερουσαλημ, With HLP 18 rel vulg 


ΤῊ] : txt ABC D[Wtst Mill] EX a 86 Euthal, Chr,. 


16. om συνηλθον δε και των μαθητων D'[Wtst Mill ](and lat). 
for απο, ex D}[ Wtst ](txt D?). 


μαθ. E vulg. 


πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον is the N. T. prophetic 
formula, instead of τάδε λέγει ὁ κύριος of 
the O. T. 12. τοῦ μή] A similar 
gen. after exhortation, is found ch. xv. 20. 
13.] The τότε, which has been 
changed in the ree. for the ordinary copula, 
gives solemnity to the answer about to be 
related : ᾳ. ἃ. It was then that Paul said. 
ovvOpumrovtes| The present part. 

does not imply the endeavour merely, here 
or any where else, but as Meyer quotes 
from Schaefer, Eurip. Phen. 79, ‘ Vere 
incipit actus, sed ob impedimenta caret 
eventu.’ γάρ] Either, ‘your pro- 
ceeding is in vain, for... .’—or ‘ cease 
to do so, for... .’ eis ‘Iep.] on my 
arrival at: the motion to, which was the 
subject in question, is combined with that 
which might result on it: see reff. and ch. 


ins ex bef των 


ii. 39. 14. τ. κ. τὸ θέλ. yiv. ] One of 
the passages from which we may not un- 
fairly infer, that the Lord’s prayer was used 
by the Christians of the apostolic age. See 
note on 2 Tim. iv. 18. 15. ἐπισκευα- 
σάμενοι) The remarkable variety of read- 
ing in this word shews that much difficulty 
has been found in it. The rec. ἀποσκευα- 
σάμενοι (which may perhaps have arisen 
from the mixture of ἀποταξάμενοι (D) 
with ἐπισκευασάμενοι), would mean, not, 
‘having deposited our (useless) baggage,’ 
—hbut, ‘having discharged our baggage,’ 
‘unpacked the matters necessary for our 
journey to Jerusalem, from our coffers.’ 
But ἐπισκ. is the better supported reading, 
and suits the passage better: having 
packed up, made ourselves ready for the 
journey. ‘ Carriages’ in the E. V. is used, 


ABCDE 
HLPN a 
bedfg 
hklm 
013 


ex 

κεσα Ὁ. 
ABCEH 
LPR ab 
cedfgh 
klmo 
13 


12—20. ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


ὁ ἄγοντες ἃ παρ᾽ ᾧ " ξενισθῶμεν 
ἀρχαίῳ μαθητῇ. 
σόλυμα | ἀσμένως 


12. x. 33 A (-vos, Β &c.) only. 
111. 3 reff. n absol., ch. xvii. 10 reff. 


q ch. x. 8. xv. 12,14. Luke xxiv. 35, Luke only, exc. Johni. 18. Judg. vii. 13. 
. xx. 24 reff, 
ν = John iv. 19. xii. 19. ch. xxvii. 10. 


5 attr., Rom. xv. 18 reff. tch 


18 al. Exod. xv. 2. 


for αγοντες, ουτοι Se ἡγαγον D[ Wtst Mill]: stmulque adducerunt D-lat. 
for παρ ὠ, προς ovs D!-gr(Wtst: txt Ussher). 
Kat παραγενομενοι εἰς τινὰ (THY 501-110} κωμὴν εγενομεθα παρα D syr-mg. 
νασωνι D(and lat) fuld tol: τασωνι δὲ demid οορῦ : μνασω Β g 1. 18, 


DE sah arm. 


Al, μαθητη bef: αρχαιω D(Wtst). 


lal y ς 
17 8° γενομένων δὲ ἡμῶν ὅ εἰς ‘Tepo- 
- 9 , ει. Ὁ ς Ἰ A 
Ἐ ἀπεδέξαντο " ἡμᾶς οἱ ἀδελφοί. 38 τῇ 
δὲ ] Ἵ / m Sites e lal Ἃ e a e \ 7 7 f 
εἾ ἐπιούσῃ ™ eisner ὁ [Παῦλος σὺν ἡμῖν “ πρὸς ‘laxw Por, 
πάντες TE" παρεγένοντο οἱ 5 πρεσβύτεροι. 
΄“ , A Ὁ“ - 
HLPN ἃ σάμενος αὐτοὺς « ἐξηγεῖτο καθ᾽ Ev" ἕκαστον ὃ ὧν ἐποίησεν 
8 \ A “-“ ! ΄- 
bk 17m ὁ θεὸς ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν διὰ τῆς ᾿ διακονίας αὐτοῦ. 


’ Πα x me 
ἀκούσαντες ἃ ἐδόξαζον τὸν θεόν, εἶπόν τε αὐτῷ " Θεωρεῖς, 
k ch. ii, 41 reff. 


239 


Μνάσωνί τινι Κυπριῳ - = eh, xvii 15 
al. 


d attr., here 
only? 


h constr., ch. 
iv. ἃ, xvi. 16. 
2 Cor. xii. 21 
al. see 2 Cor. 
iv. 18. 
Winer, ᾧ 30. 
11 remark. 
i here (ch. ii. 
41 rec.) only: 
2 Macc. iv. 
1 ch. xvi. 11 reff. m ch, 
o ch, xi. 30 reff. p == ch. xviii. 22 reff. 
rch. xvii. 27 reff. 
u Matt. xv. 31. Luke v. 25, 26. ch. xi. 
Heb. vii. 4. 2 Macc. ix. 23. 


19 καὶ Ῥ ἀσπα- 


“Ὁ οἱ δὲ 


add ἡμὰς 
aft ξενισθ. add 
om τινὶ 
D-lat has the passage thus: δέ cum 


venerunt in quendam civitatem fuimus ad nasonem quendam cyprium discipulum 
antiquum et inde exeuntes venimus hierosolyma (thus far, nearly, syr-mg also) suscepe- 
runt autem nos cum letitia fratres. (readings of D-gr [vv 16—18] are in Scriv’s notes, 


see above on ver 8.) 


17. rec εδεξαντο (substitution of simpler word), with HLP rel: υπεδεξ. D(Mill &c) 
[υπεδεξαν te D(Wtst), υπεδεξαν δε D(Ussher)]: txt ABCEN a k 13. 36 40 Chr-comm. 
18. for δε, re A E-gr δὲ 40 syrr ath: txt BCHLP 18. 36 rel vulg D-lat E-lat coptt 


Chr,. 
ins συνηγμενοι D 34. 


19. ovs aomauevos(sic) διηγειτο eva εκαστον ws εποιησεν D!-er(txt D*). 
μ Ὕ 5 


(5 D-corr!). om δια NI. 


20. axovovres HL k. 


for παρεγΎ.; noay δὲ παρ avtw D![and lat ](txt D®). 


εδοξασαν DX Thl-fin. 


aft οἱ πρεσβυτεροι 
om ἐν 


rec (for θεον) κυριον, with 


DHP rel syr sah: txt ABCELN ad fg k ο 13. 36. 40 vulg Syr copt arm Chr. 


for εἰπὸν τε, εἰποντες CD ὁ g ἢ πὶ syr Chr. 


as at Judg. xviii. 21 (where it answers to 
τὸ βάρος, LXX-B), for baggage, things 
carried. 16.] Two renderings are 
given to the latter clause of this verse: (1) 
making Μνάσωνι, &. depend on ἄγοντες, 
and agreeing by attr. with ᾧ, as E. V., 
‘and brought with them one Mnason,.... 
with whom we should lodge’ (so Beza, 
Calvin, Wolf, Schétt., &c.): and (2) re- 
solving the attraction into ἄγοντες παρὰ 
Μνάσωνα, map ᾧ &. ‘bringing us to Mna- 
son, ¥e. (So Grot., Valcknaer, Bengel, De 
Wette, Meyer, al.) Both are legitimate : 
and it is difficult to choose between them. 
The probability of Mnason being a resident 
at Jerusalem, and of the Cesarean brethren 
going to introduce the company to him, 
seems to favour the latter : as also does the 
fact that Luke much more frequently uses 
ἄγω with a person followed by a preposi- 
tion than absolutely. Of Mnason nothing 
further is known. ἀρχαίῳ probably 
implies that he had been a disciple ἐξ 
ἀρχῆς, and had accompanied our Lord 
during His ministry. See ch. xi. 15, where 
the term ἐξ ἀρχῆς is applied to the time 
of the Pentecostal effusion of the Spirit. 
17—XXIII. 35.) Pav av JERUSA- 
LEM: MADE PRISONER, AND SENT TO 


(ειπαν EX: εἰπεν 13.) om avtw Ὁ. 
CSAREA. 17. ot ἀδελφοί The 
Christians generally : not the Apostles and 
elders, as Kuin., who imagines from vy. 
20, 21, that ‘ccetus non favebat Paulo.’ 
But (1) this is by no means implied: and 
(2) James and the elders are not mentioned 
till ver. 18. 18. ᾿Ιάκωβον] James, 
‘the brother of the Lord:’ the president 
of the church at Jerusalem : see ch. xii. 17 ; 
xv. 13; Gal, ii. 12, and notes,—and Pro- 
legg. to the Epistle of James, vol. iv. pt. 1, 
§ i. 24—37. 19.] On the particular 
kind of attraction (reff.), in a gen. plur. 
after a partitive adjective, see Winer, 
edn. 6, § 24. 2. b. 20.1 While they 
praised God for, and fully recognized, the 
work wrought by him among the Gentiles, 
they found it requisite to advise him re- 
specting the suspicion under which he 
laboured among the believing Jews. They, 
—led, naturally perhaps, but incorrectly 
(see 1 Cor. vii. 18), by some passages of 
Paul’s life (and of his already written 
Epistles ὃ), in which he had depreciated 
legal observances in comparison with faith 
in Christ, and spoken strongly against 
their adoption by Geutile converts,— 
apprehended that he advised on the part 
of the Hellenistic believers, an entire 


240 


TIPAZEI> ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


XXI. 


w = Luke xii ἀδελφέ, πόσαι ™ μυριάδες εἰσὶν ἐν τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις τῶν 


. (ch, xix. 19 


X πεπιστευκότων, Kal πάντες ¥ ζηλωταὶ τοῦ νόμου 2 ὑτ- 


y ech. xxii. ἄρχουσιν" “1.8 κατηχήθησαν δὲ περὶ σοῦ ὅτι ἢ ἀποστασίαν 


1 Cor. xiv. 12. 
Gali ὁ διδάσκεις ἀπὸ Μωυσέως ° τοὺς ἃ κατὰ τὰ ἃ ἔθνη πάντας 
1 5 / / \ , \ A /, \ 
ituke vis, Ιουδαίους, λέγων μὴ © περιτέμνειν αὐτοὺς τὰ τέκνα μηδὲ 
ch. i. 13) only. f ἔθ a Whe/ 5 > i ! 
2 Mace. iv ἃ τοῖς [ἔθεσιν ὃ περιπατεῖν. τί οὖν ἐστιν; ἵπάντως 
x 
nv a a ὧν / 

zh 20 ref. det " συνελθεῖν ' πλῆθος, ἀκούσονται yap ὅτι ἐλήλυθας. 
oh. XVII. “ ει na / 

ὁ rea - %3 χρῦτο οὖν ποίησον 6 σοι λέγομεν: εἰσὶν ἡμῖν ἄνδρες 
2 ess. ll. 
3 1 / m > \ m » ἢ 2 ’ ς ΠΣ ἢ V4 0 / 
ὃ ΚΗ αν, TETTApES ™ εὐχὴν ἔχοντες “Eh ἑαυτῶν τούτους 
(xxi.) 13 A p \ as f 6 : \ 9 A \ τὸ , S.u28 
Ald compl. ἢ παρωλχαβὼν 1 ἁγνίσθητι σὺν αὐτοῖς, καὶ * δαπάνησον ἐπ 
2 Chron, xxix. 


19. ‘Jer.1i. 19 
(xxxvi.(xxix.) 
32 compl.). 1 Mace. ii. 15 only. 
d here only. e 1 Cor. vii. 18 reff. 
18. (see ch. ix. 31.) h 1 Cor. xiv. 15, 26. 


(ν. 10.) ix. 10, 22. xvi.12 only+. L.P. Tobit xiv. 8 (not δ᾽). 
m ch. xviti. 18 (reff.) only. 
q - here bis. ch. xxiv. Js. 

r w. ἐπί, here only. w. ὑπέρ, Ὁ οΣ. xii: 

s 1 Cor. xi. ὅ, 6 only. 


labsol., see ch. ii. 6 reff. 
p = ch. xvi. 33 reff. 
3) only. Exod. xix. 10. 


v.26. Luke xv. l4onlyt. 1 Macc. xiv. 32. 


> aA 7 ς 7 \ 7 \ , , 
αὐτοῖς ἵνα ὃ ξυρήσονται τὴν κεφαλήν, καὶ γνώσονται πᾶν- 
ο constr., Mark vi. 34. 

f ch. vi. 14 reff. 


John xiv. 26. Heb. v.12. Prov. xxii. 21. 

g constr., Gal. v. 16. 2 Cor. xii. 

i = Luke iv. 23. ch. xxviii. 4. (Rom. iii. 9.) 1 Cor. 

2 Mace. iii. ἐν only. k = ch. i. 6 reff. 

= here only. o ch. ix. 20 reff. 

John = 55 (James i Wy, 8. 1 Pet. i. 22. 1 John iii. 

w. ἐν, James iy. 3. absol., Mark 
Numge. vi, 18, 19. 


rec (for ev Tots ιουδαιοι5) ιουδαιων, with HLP rel syr Chr [and, after πεπιστ.» 


arm] Thdrt, ΤῊ] : 
36. 40 vulg copt eth Ambrst). 

Ambrst, Aug, [(ητουσιν και 131. 

τ sae 25. 40: 
om ta D!. 


Aeywy D: Acyw RN}. 


ev Tn ιουδαια D Syr sah Aug, 


κατήηκησαν D\(diffamaverunt D-lat : txt D?). 


for maytas, εἰσιν Di(and lat): om AE 18 vulg copt: txt 
BCD 'HLP NS rel 36 [syrr sah eth arm] Chr,. 


[ins ] οφιλειν [bef] περιτεμνειν KE vulg. 


: om εν τ. ιουδ. N: txt ABCE ἃ 18. 


aft mayres ins ουτοιί(τουτοι D!) D 38 tol Syr 


om δε 


om 
μητεῖ unde D4] ev 


ιουδαιοις D}(txt D*). 


τοις εθνεσιν 1)1, neque gentes ejus ambulant D-lat.—ins αυτονζαυτους D*) bef περιπ. D!. 
22. om det συνελθεῖν πληθος and yap (expunged as not understood) BC? 15. 73. 


137-80 syrr coptt eth arm : 


yap C2: om yap οτι NI. 
23. for 6, omep E. 
24. em avrovs Aa 18: εἰς αυτους D. 

(sic)] rel 86 Chr; ξυρωνται D!: 


txt Bl(sic) D?EPX cklo 18. 
(grammatical corrn aft wa), with HLP rel Chr, Thl-sif, cognoscant D-lat: 


ins AC? DEHLPX rel vulg Chr,.—ins to bef πληθος D*.— 
rec πληθος bef cuveA@ev, with DHLP rel Chr: 


εληλυθες B. 
for ep’, ap(sic) B(Tischdf) &. 


txt AC?EN ἃ ἃ h 13, 40 vulg.—om 


rec ξυρησωνται, with AB2CH 1[ξυρισων 
rec yvwot 
txt 


ABC D-gr EX a ἃ τὰ 13 (96) 40 vulg (Thl-fin).—(-cwvra: 36 Thl-fin.) 


apostasy from Moses and the ordinances 
of the law. θεωρεῖς | This can hardly 
be a reference (as Olsh.) to the elders 
present, as representatives of the μυριάδες 
of believing Jews ; for only those of Jeru- 
salem were there :—but refers to Paul’s 
own experience, and knowledge of the 
vast numbers of the Jews who believed at 
Jerusalem, and elsewhere in Judea. 

πόσαι μυριάδες is perhaps not to be 
strictly taken: see reff. Baur suspects, 
on account of this expression, that the 
words τῶν mwemioT. are spurious ; but quite 
without reason. Eusebius quotes from 
Hegesippus (H. E. ii. 23), πολλῶν καὶ 
τῶν ἀρχόντων πιστευόντων ἦν θόρυβος 
τῶν Ιουδαίων καὶ γραμματέων καὶ Φαρι- 
σαίων λεγόντων ὅτι κινδυνεύει πᾶς ὁ Aads 
Ἰησοῦν τὸν χριστὸν mposdoxav. On the 
other hand, Origen (tom. i. in Joann. ὃ 2, 
vol. iv. p. 3) says, that probably the whole 
number of believing Jews at no time had 
amounted to 144,000. On εἰσὶν... imap- 
χουσι, see note, ch. xvi, 20, 21. 21. 


κατηχήθησαν] they were sedulously in- 
formed (at some time in the mind of the 
speaker. The sense of the aor. must be 
preserved. Below, ver. 24, it is the per- 
fect): viz., by the anti-Pauline judaizers. 

τοῖς ἔθεσιν) The dat. of the rule, or 
form, after which: see reff. 22. πάν- 
τως ὃ. συνελθ. rA.] Not, as E. V., Calv., 
Grot., Calov., ‘the multitude must needs 
come:together, i.e. there must be a meeting 
of the whole church (τὸ πλῆθος, ch. ii. 6) : 
but a multitude (of these Judaizers) will 
certainly come together: ‘ they will meet 
and discuss your proceeding in a hostile 
manner.’ 23. εὐχήν) A vow of Na- 
zarites. 'This vow must not be confounded, 
historically or analogically, with that of 
ch. xviii. 18: see note there, and Num. vi. 
2--21. 24. παραλαβών] having 
taken to thyself, as comrades. ayy. 
σὺν αὐτ.] become a Nazarite with them. 
The same expression occurs in the LXX, 
Num. vi. 3, in describing the Nazarite’s 
duties. Samay. ἐπ᾿ αὖτ.) “ More 


ABCDE 
HLPN a 
bedfg 
hklm 
013 





21—-27. TIPASEIS AIOSTOAON. 241 


Ὁ ΞΞ eh. xvi 


7 al , » 
τες ὅτι ‘wy ὅ κατήχηνται περὶ σοῦ " οὐδέν ἐστιν, ANNA, τ attr, Luke 
7 al \ , > \ \ 7 be . 1x. al. 
‘ στουχεῖς “ καὶ “ αὐτὸς * φυλάσσων τὸν νόμον. 35 περὶ “ἢ 
me A y ͵ 20 A c aA. 9 3 , , vellips., here 
ε τῶν ὃ πεπιστευκότων εθνων ἡμεῖς “ ἐπεστείλαμεν, ἃ κρί- 
ναντες μηδὲν τοιοῦτον ὃ τηρεῖν αὐτούς, εἰ μὴ ° φυλάσσεσθαι 
2 \ 7 d 6 40 \ \ - Nite \ 
αὐτοὺς τὸ τε 3 εἰδωλόθυτον Kai [τὸ] αἷμα καὶ " πνικτὸν 
/ Ld a 
καὶ “ πορνείαν. “ὃ τότε ὁ ἸΙαῦλος ἱπαραλαβὼν tots 
4“). δι A g 5 , ¢ 4 \ ? Ap δ 6 \ h 4“. ἢ 
ἄνδρας τῇ ὅ ἐχομένῃ ἡμέρᾳ σὺν αὐτοῖς ᾿ ἁγνισθεὶς ὃ εἰςήηει δῶ 
> . , is , \ j 3 7 a ς a x=ch. xvi.4 
εἰς TO lepoy, ' διαγγέλλων THY ἐκπλήρωσιν τῶν ἡμερῶν ref 
ὸ y = cn. Xv. 


»Ἥ kee δ“ ὦ ἘΠ Wham én) εἰν Χο κυ ΟΝ Θὰ ἢ £ 
του “αγνίσμου, EWS OV ™ προςηνεχθη ὑπὲρ ™ ενὸς εκάστου͵ , HO) 


only. 9O7., 
Rom. iv. 12. 
Gal. v. 25. 
vi. 16. Phil. 
iii. 16 only. 
Eccles. xi. 6 
only, but 
not =. 

w ch. xv. 27, 
32. Matt. 


Ce εἶν e ΄ 9 ς \ / ec —chy xy. 19 
αὐτῶν  ™ προςφορά. 51 ὡς δὲ Ρ ἔμελλον αἱ ἑπτὰ ἡμέραι are, ieee 
= CN. XV. 


reff. c w. acc., = 2 Tim. iv. 15. 2 Kings xx. 10. d 1 Cor. viii. 1 reff. ech. 
xv. 20 (reff.). f ver. 24. g = ch. xx. 15 reff. h ch. tit. 3 reff. 


i Luke ix. 60. Rom. ix. 17 (from Exod. ix. 16) only. j here only+. 2 Mace. vi. 14 only. (-povr, 
ch. xiii. 33.) k here only. Num. vi. 5. Ich. vii. 42 reff. Heb. v. 1,3. ix.7. Levit. i. 
Ὁ. 5.8]. m Heb. x. 8. n ch. xvii. 27 reff. o = ch. xxiv.17. Heb. x. 5, 10, 


14,18. Ps. xxxix. 6. p == Luke vii. 2. John iv. 47. ch. xxvii. 33. Jer. xxxvi. (xxix.) 10. 


ins περι bef wy C ἃ ὁ 36. 40. ins καὶ bef στοιχεις A: ott mopevov D!-gr(ambulans 
D-lat : txt D? or 4). om και D}(and lat: txt D? °F 4), rec τὸν νομὸν bef 
φυλασσων, with HLP rel Syr Thi-sif: txt ABCD E[ φυλασσιν] & ἃ ὁ m 18 vulg [syr} 
Chr, Thl-fin. 

25. for εθνων, ανθρωπων EK. aft εθνων ins ovdev exovot λεγειν προς σε, and (aft 
nuecs) yap D sah. απεστειλαμεν (more usual word) B D[-gr] 140 syr copt [arm] : 
txt ACKHLPN 18. 36 rel vulg D-lat Syr sah [zth(appy)j Chr,. κρινοντες D1 (txt 
D2 or 4) 100. om μηδεν τοιουτον Thpe avTous εἰ μὴ ABN 13. 40 vulg Syr copt [sah] 
zth[? | (prob because no such clause is found in the apostolic decree ch xv. 28. It can 
hardly have been interpolated) : ins CDEHLP rel 36 syr arm Chr Aug.—rtoouto CE. 


om te ἢ) ὁ 187 [ Chr, ]. 


sah Jer Aug: om και 15. 36. 


om To (bef ama) ABCDN ac 13: azo ιἰδωλοθυτων 
και αιἱματος και πνικτου καὶ Tropyias Εἰ [syr]: txt HLP rel Chr. 
ins τὸ bef πνικτον 1 m 40. 99 Chr Thl-fin. 


om καὶ πνικτον D 


Syr 


zth-pl invert the order, πορν. x. πνικτ. K. atua. 


26. om c DE. 


donec D. om ἡ Ὁ [65]. 


[for exou., | extovon D. 


essnABev D. 


for ews ov, oTws 


27. συντελουμενὴς δε THS eBdouns nuepas D: cum advenisset dies septimus Syr. 


ἡμελλὺν ELP ch m. [om w E. | 

apud Judzos receptum erat, et pro insigni 
pietatis officio habebatur, ut in pauperum 
Nasireorum gratiam ditiores sumptus ero- 
garent ad sacrificia (see Num. vi. 14 ff.) 
quéee dum illi tonderentur, offerre necesse 
erat.” Kypke. Jos. Antt. xix. 6. 1, relating 
Agrippa’s thank-offerings at Jerusalem, 
says, διὸ καὶ NaCipaiwy ξυρᾶσθαι διέταξε 
μάλα συχνούς. On the shaving the head, 
see Num. vi. 18. De Wette remarks: 
‘ James and the elders made this proposal, 
assuming that Paul could comply with it 
salva conscientid,—perhaps also as a proof, 
to assure themselves and others of his sen- 
timents: and Paul accepted it salvd con- 
scientid. But this he could only have 
done on one condition, that he was sure by 
it not to contribute in these four Nazarites 
to the error of justification by the works 
of the law. He might keep, and encou- 
rage the keeping of the law,—but not with 
the purpose of thereby deserving the appro- 
bation of God.’ 25.] See ch. xv. 28, 
29. 26.] Paul himself entered into 
the vow with them (σὺν αὐτοῖς ayv.), and 
the time settled (perhaps the least that 

Vou. II. 


could be assigned: the Mischna requires 
thirty days) for the completion of the vow, 
i. e. the offering and shaving of their heads, 
was seven days. No definite time is pre- 
scribed in Num. vi., but there seven days 
is the time of purification in case of un- 
cleanness during the period of the vow. 
διαγγέλλων] making known to 

the ministers of the temple. τὴν 
ἐκπλήρωσιν] the fulfilment, i.e. that he 
and the men had come to fulfil: an- 
nouncing their intention of fulfilling. 
ἕως οὗ mposnvexOn | ‘donec offer- 
retur, Vulg. The aor. indic. is unusual in 
an indirect construction, where the aor. 
subj. is almost always found (ch. xxiii. 12, 
21; xxv. 21). But we have Plato, Gorg. 
p- 506, ἡδέως... av. . . διελεγόμην, ἕως 
αὐτῷ Thy τοῦ Audiovos ἀπέδωκα ῥῆσιν,--- 
and Cratyl. 396, οὐκ ἂν ἐπαυόμην διεξιὼν 
.. 2. ἕως ἀπεπειράθην τῆς σοφίας ταυτησὶ 
τί ποιήσει. (De W.) ἣ προςφορά] See 
Num. vi. 13—17. 27. αἱ ἐπτ. Fu. | 
Of the votive period: not (as Chrys. and 
Bede) since Paul’s arrival in Jerusalem. 
Five days of the seven had passed: see 

K 


242 


q Mark xiii. 4. 
Luke iv. 2, 13. 
Rom. ix. 28. 
Heb. viii. 8 
only. Jobi. 5. 


30. ch. v. 18. 
Gen. xxii. 12. 
see ch. iv. 3. 
t ch. xvi. 9 reff. 
τ Matt. xxiv. 
15. ch. vi. 13. 
Ps. Ixvii. 6. 
2 Macc. ii..18. 
v here only. 
Isa. xxiv. 11. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ. 


XXT. 


ᾳ συντελεῖσθαι, of ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Ασίας ᾿Ιουδαῖοι θεασάμενοι 
αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ ":"συνέχεον πάντα τὸν ὄχλον, καὶ 
5 ἐπέβαλον " ἐπ’ αὐτὸν τὰς " χεῖρας 38 κράζοντες Ανδρες 
Ἰσραηλῖται, " βοηθεῖτε. 


ΕΝ é ? c τῶν ε \ 
οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὁ κατὰ 


i τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τοῦ ἃ τόπου τούτου πάντας 
ἡ πανταχῆ διδάσκων,  étt τε καὶ “EdAnvas * εἰξήγαγεν 
εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν καὶ Y κεκοίνωκεν τὸν " ἅγιον ἃ τύπον τοῦτον. 
29 2 ἦσαν γὰρ 25 προεωρακότες Τρόφιμον τὸν ᾿Εἰφέσιον ἐν τῇ 
πόλει σὺν αὐτῷ, ὃν ἐνόμιξον ὅτι εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν * εἰςήγαγεν 


Wisd. ii. 9. 
eee ξ nw 7 / δ ‘ 
2Mace. vii, ὁ Παῦλος. 39 ἐκινήθη τε ἡ πόλις ὅλη, καὶ ἐγένετο 
- οὔ, h. \ -“ lal \ , nr , 
ri.) ο συνδρομὴ Tod λαοῦ, καὶ ἃ ἐπιλαβόμενοι τοῦ Lavrov 
w Luke xiv. e \ , Lr. aA ͵ 
aonly, see © εἷλκον αὐτὸν 'é&w τοῦ ἱεροῦ, καὶ εὐθέως ὃ ἐκλείσθησαν 
--Σ . i . . » > oe i f 
‘ fake ai ai θύραι. 31} ξητούντων τε αὐτὸν ἀποκτεῖναι, ' ἀνέβη 
84. Jer. xlu. A s a e oe / 
° (exxv.) 4 k φάσις τῷ l χιλιάρχῳ THE σπείρης OTL OAN ἢ συγχύννεται 
ἄο. i. Heb. ix. 13 (ch. x. 15. xi. 9) only +. z constr., ch. xxii. 29 reff. a = here (ch. ii. 25 from 
Ps. xy. 8) only . Ὁ = ch. xxiv. 5 (xvii. 28 reff.). see 1 Macc. xiii. 44. c here only+. Judith 


x. 18. 3 Macc. iii. 8 only. 
i. 5. see ch. xvi. 19. 
ch. x. 4. 

m ch. x. 1 reff. 


(-τρέχειν, ch. iii. 11.) 
f ver. ὃ 


er. 5. g 
khere only+. Susan. 55 Theod. 
n ver. 27. 


aft oc ins de D-gr. 
aft ἰουδαιοι ins εληλυθοτες D. 


2. 41. 


d ch. xvii. 19 reff. e James ii. 6 only. Eccl. 
y. 23 reff. h = ch. xiii. 8 reff. isee 
1 = John xviii. 12. vv. 33,37, &c. 1 Kings xviii. 13. 


a only of απο is written by Ὁ}, the rest supplied by D?. 
θεασαμενοι avTov εν Tw Lepw bef οι a. τ. a. ιουδαιοι 
C180: θεασ. avtov bef οι α. τ. a ιουδ. ὁ 137. 
συνεκεινησαν τε E: concitaverunt vulg E-lat: confuderunt D-lat. 
ἐπεβαλαν AN!: επιβαλλουσιν D: ἐπεβαλλον Ὁ] o Thi-sif. 


συνεχεαν C 180: συνεσχον 20. 41: 
om παντα K 
rec Tas 


χειρας bef em avrov (corrn of arrangement), with HLP rel coptt Thl-sif: txt ABCDERX 
ac ἢ (k) m 18. 40 vulg syrr arm Chr Thl-fin. 


28. aft τόπου ins του ayiov AC# 73 lectt-13-4. 


erased) NX}. 
txt ABCDEX Ὁ co 18. 36. 
om to D'(ins D?). 
κεκοινωνκεν (but ν marked and erased) δὲ}. 


τουτους (but s marked and then 


rec πανταχοῦ (alteration to more usual word), with Ἡ ΤΡ rel Chr: 
om te D m. 
κεκοινωνήηκε B2E 0 86. 187 : εκοινωνησεν D': εκοινωσεν D-corr: 


εισηγεν D'(txt D3) 963. 


29. for προεωρ., εορακοτες HL, ewpakores Ρ ἃ ἔφ ἢ k 1 m vulg(not tol) sah eth Chr, 


Thi-sif. om τον &. 
30. τὸν παυλον E ἃ. 
(σαν being written above the line) δὲ!. 


ενομισαμεν (but putaverunt) D. 
om αὐτὸν D fuld. 


om o D. 
for καὶ to Oupat, ἐεκλισθησαν evdews 


31. rec (for τε) δε, with D?{-gr] HL[P] rel 36 vulg syr coptt Chr: txt ABEN a Syr 


eth. (13 def.)—(ka:) ζητ. θ᾽ [and lat]. 


rec συγκεχυται, with EHLPN® rel Chr, 


confusa est D-lat E-lat: txt AB! D-gr &}, συγχυνεται B? 13, confunditur vulg. 


on ch. xxiv. 11. Cf. on the whole, Bp. 
Wordsworth’s note. ἀπὸ τ. Ag. | 
From Ephesus and the neighbourhood, 
where Paul had solong taught. ‘ Paulus, 
dum fidelibus placandis intentus est (viz. 
the believing Jews), in hostium furorem 
incurrit (viz. of the unbelieving Asiatic 
Jews).’ Calv., in Meyer, who adds, ‘ In 
how many ways had those who were at 
Jerusalem this Pentecost, already perse- 
cuted Paulin Asia?’ Notice the simi- 
larity of the charge against him to that 
against Stephen, ch. vi. 19. 28. 
Ἑλληνας The generic plural: only one 
is intended, see next verse. They meant, 
into the inner court, which was forbidden 
to Gentiles. 29. Τρόφ.] See ch. xx. 
4, note. We here learn that he was an 
Ephesian. 30.| The Levites shut 


the doors to prevent profanation by a riot, 
and possibly bloodshed, in the temple: 
hardly, as Bengel, ‘ne templi tutela ute- 
retur Paulus :'—the right of asylum was 
only (Exod. xxi. 13, 14) for murder un- 
awares (Meyer). But byver. 14 there, and 
by Joab’s fleeing to the altar, 1 Kings ii. 
28 ff., we see that it was resorted to on 
other occasions. 31. ζητούντων κ.τ.λ.] 
By beating him: see ver. 32. ἀνέβη] 
went (was carried) up; wp, either because 
of his high station, as commanding officer, 
or because he was locally stationed in the 
tower Antonia, overlooking (from the 
N.W.) the temple, where the riot was. 

τῷ χιλιάρχῳ τ. σπ.] Claudius Lysias (ch. 
xxiii. 26), the tribune of the cohort (whose 
proper complement was 1000 men). 

33. advo. δυσί) See ch. xii.6. He would 


ABCDE 
HLPNa 
vbedfg 
hklm 
ο 19 


ἜΤ 
θυραι C. 
ABDE 
HLPNa 
bedfg 
hkim 
013 


28—37. 


‘Tepovoadnp 53 ds 


καὶ 4 ἑκατοντάρχας ' κατέδραμεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς. 

τοὺς στρατιώτας 

33 , { > / e λί 
τότε ᾿ ἐγγίσας ὁ χιλίαρχος 


\ ] / \ 

TOV χιλίαρχον καὶ 
x a 

πτοντες tov [[αὔλον. 


᾿ ἐπελάβετο αὐτοῦ καὶ ᾿ ἐκέλευσεν δεθῆναι 
καὶ ἐπυνθάνετο τις [av] εἴη καὶ τί ἐστιν πεποιηκώς. 
34 χ ἄλλοι δὲ * ἄλλο τι " ἐπεφώνουν ἐν τῷ ὄχλῳ: μὴ 
δυναμένου δὲ αὐτοῦ γνῶναι τὸ 5 ἀσφαλὲς Sid Toy ἃ θόρυ- 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΏΝ. 


243 


οἐξ αὐτῆς P παραλαβὼν στρατιώτας ¢ och. x. 33 reff. 


ch. xvi. 33 
οἱ δὲ ἰδόντες 4 “ΠΑ 1 reff. 


53 , here only. 

ἐπαύσαντο TU- 5 Kings xix. 
20 B. Job 

xvi. 11. Xen. 
Anab. vii. l. 
20. (-δρομή, 
2 Macc. v. 3.° 

s constr., ch. 
xiii. 10 reff. 

t Luke xii. 33. 
xviii. 40. 
xxiv. 15. 
ch. xxiii. 15. 
pia xxvii. 


e ΄, 
“ ἁλύσεσι δυσί, 


Bov, ν ἐκέλευσεν ἄγεσθαι αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν "παρεμβολήν. ἃ ch, xi 19 


35 ὅτε δὲ ἐγένετο ἐπὶ τοὺς 


“ἀναβαθμούς, 


v constr., ch. 
d © Ba- xii. 19. 
w ch. xii. 6 reff. 


ouvepn 


στάζεσθαι αὐτὸν ὑπὸ τῶν στρατιωτῶν διὰ τὴν ' βίαν τοῦ ν eh. xx. 32 


(τ 61.) only. 
y ch. xii. 22 


ὄχλου: 86 ἠκολούθει yap TO πλῆθος τοῦ λαοῦ κράζοντες * ver 


8 Aipe αὐτόν. 


87 μέλλων τε εἰςώγεσθαι εἰς τὴν ὃ παρεμ- 


(Phil. ins 1, 

\ ς an , A , Ce a / Heb. vi. 19 
βολὴν ὁ Παῦλος λέγει τῷ χιλιάρχῳ © Ki } ἔξεστιν μοι ony $s. is 
> an , ς δὲ κι Mem. iv.6. 15. 
ELTTELY τί προς σε Σ; O Εε ἔφη Ελληνιστὶ γινώσκεις ; ΗΝ eae xxvi. 5 

XXVil. 
24. Mark v. 38. ch. xx. 1. xxiv. 18 only. Jer. xxx. (xlix.) 2. (-βεῖν, ch. xvii. 5.) b = here 
bis. ch. xxii. 24. xxiii. 10, ἄς. Heb. (xi. 34.) xiii. 11,13. Rev. xx. 9 only. Isa. xxi. 8. ¢ ver. 
40 only. 3 Kings x. 19, 20. d impers. ‘and corres here only. (ch. iii. 10 reff.) 2 Mace. iii. 2. 
e ch. iii. 2 reff. f ch. v. 26 reff. — Luke xxiii. 18. Isa. lvii. 1. see ch. xxii. 22. 
h ch. i. 6 reff. i W. aor., ch. ii. 29. Matt. xix. 3. i) Cor. xii. 4. Esth. iv. 2. Ezraiv.14. 1 Macc. 
xiv. 44 (only). k John xix. 20 only. ξυνίει λληνιστέ, Xen. An. vii. 6.8. “ατϑοὸ scire,’ Cic. 

de Fin. ii. 5. 


32. for παραλ.. AaBwy B, sumptis D-lat. 


36 Chr: txt ABD'EN 13. 


33. εγγισας δε HLP rel Syr[Ka eyy.] Ee Thll-sif] : 
αλυσεσιν δυσιν DEHP: 


vulg syr [coptt] zth Chr, Thl-fin. 

ABL® 18 rel. 
τις εστιν TeETOLKwS(sic) D!. 

34. for αλλο τι, αλλα D syr Chr,. 


Chr Thl-sif: emeBowy ἃ (m) 25. 40: txt ABDERN 13. 36 Thil-fin. 


rec ins av bef e:n, with ΕΗ ΠΡ rel Chr: 


rec exatovtapxovus, with D?HLP rel 


txt ABDEN ac m 13. 36 
αλυσεσι δυσιν Mm: txt 


om ABDN a 36. (13 def.) 


rec (for ἐπεφωνουν) εβοων, with HLP rel 
rec μὴ δυναμενος 


δὲ and om αὐτου (emendation of style), with HLP rel 36 Chr [Thl-sif]: txt AB(D)EN 


-m 13 Thl-fin.—ka: μη Suv. avr. D. 
35. for em, εἰς D. 
Aaov D. 
36. om Tov Aaov D. 


[vulg(with am fuld demid tol) E-lat syr] Chr : 


copt ΤῊ]. αναιρεισθαι tollite D. 
37. om ὁ παυλος D: ὁ π. bef εἰς arm [simly sah]. 
D. for εἰπειν, λαλησαι D [arm ; logui latt]. 


for βαστ. αυτον, Tov παυλον βαστ. D. 


for οχλου, 


rec κραζὸον (grammatical emendation), with DHLP rel 


txt AB E-gr Na bd ko 18. 36. 40Syr 


Tw χειλιαρχ. αποκριθεις εἰπεν 


om τί DHLP df g h 1 tol Syr 


zeth[?] arm Thl-sif: ins ABEX 18. 36 rel vulg syr copt Chr Thl-fin {τις m]. 


thus be in the custody of two soldiers. 

τίς [ἂν] εἴη, who ke might be 
(subjective possibility): and ti ἐστιν wer., 
what he had done (assuming that he must 
have done something). 34. παρεμβ.] 
The camp or barracks attached to the tower 
Antonia;—or perhaps ‘into the tower’ 
itself: but the other is the more usual 
meaning of mapeuB. “For a full history 
and description of the fortress of Antonia, 
see Robinson, i. pp. 431, 485; Williams, 
Holy Cty 99 - i. 403—411 ; Howson, 
ii. 311.” Wordsworth. 35. ἀναβαθμ.] 
The steps leading up into thetower. The 
ilescription of the tower or fort Antonia in 
Jos. B. J. v. 5. 8, sets the scene vividly 
before us :--πυργοειδὴς δὲ οὖσα τὸ πᾶν 


σχῆμα, κατὰ γωνίαν τέσσαρσιν ἑτέροις 
διείληπτο πύργοις" ὧν οἱ μὲν ἄλλοι πεν- 
τήκοντα τὸ ὕψος, ὃ δὲ ἐπὶ τῇ μεσημβρινῇ 
καὶ κατ᾽ ἀνατολὴν γωνίᾳ κείμενος ἐβδο- 
μήκοντα πηχῶν ἦν, ὡς καθορᾷν ὅλον ἀπ’ 
αὐτοῦ τὸ ἱερόν. καθὰ δὲ συνῆπτο ταῖς 
τοῦ ἱεροῦ στοαῖς, εἰς ἀμφοτέρας εἶχε κατα- 
βάσεις: δι’ ὧν κατιόντες οἱ φρουροί, καθ- 
στο γὰρ ἀεὶ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς τάγμα Ῥωμαίων, 
καὶ διϊστάμενοι περὶ τὰς στοὰς μετὰ τῶν 
ὅπλων, ἐν ταῖς ἑορταῖς τὸν δῆμον, ὡς μή- 
Th νεωτερισθείη, παρεφύλαττον" φρούριον 
γὰρ ἐπέκειτο τῇ πόλει μὲν τὸ ἱερόν, τῷ 
ἱερῷ δὲ a ᾿Αντωνία. 37. “Ἑλληνιστὶ 
yy: J as ‘ Greece nescire,’ Cie. pro Flace. 4, 
- τοὺς Συριστὶ ἐπισταμένους, Xen. Cyr. 
vii. 5. 31: and reff. There is no ellipsis of 


R 2 


244 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ, ΧΧΙ, 38--40, 

teh. xvii.erett. 9S οὐκ ἄρα σὺ εἶ ὁ Αἰγύπτιος ὁ πρὸ τούτων τῶν ἡμερῶν ARDE 

m here only τ. HLPra 
ΣΟ he lavactaTwoas Kal ἐξαγαγὼν εἰς τὴν ἔρημον τοὺς τετρα- bedig 
+h. xvi ͵ » na 5 . £ a hkim 

nh κιςχιλίους ἄνδρας τῶν ™ σικαρίων ; 595 εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Παῦλος 013 


τ 
o here only f. 


Ἐγὼ κ ἄνθρωπος μέν εἰμι lovdaios Ταρσεύς, τῆς Κιλικίας 


40 ᾳ ἐπιτρέψαντος δὲ αὐτοῦ 


ἃ σρροςξεφώνησεν τῇ 


G . ae 
2. Job xlii. Z i Ξ j x : s Ἢ 
pitt. 15, οὐκ 5 ἀσήμου πόλεως P πολίτης, δέομαι δέ σου 3 ἐπίτρεψον 
xix. 14. Heb. a \ , 
viii, only. {LOL λαλῆσαι πρὸς τὸν λαόν. 
gia αν δ, ὁ Παῦλος ἑστὼς ἐπὶ τῶν ᾿ ἀναβαθμῶν " κατέσεισεν τῇ χειρὶ 
Lukeix.61, 9 τταῦλος μ 7 χειρ 
ch. ii. 3 »" Lal al \ “- 
al. ‘Job τῷ λαῷ, πολλῆς δὲ * συγῆς γενομένης 
ΧΧΧΙΙ. Ὃ 
r ver. 35. s ch. xii. 17 reff. t Rev. viii, 1 only. 


Ἀ 
τὰς eee tite ως 
838. for οὐκ apa, ov D. 
39. om εἰμι δὲ. 

D-gr. 

ins λόγον bef Aad. &'(N* disapproving). 
40. ins και bef επιτρεψαντος δὲ D!-gr: 

for αὐτου, Tov χιλιαρχου D sah. 


for Tw Aaw, Tov Aaov H ὁ Καὶ Chr(some mss): προς avtovs D Syr. 
γενομενης bet ovyns B. 


Te novxeas D. 


λαλεῖν. 88. οὐκ ἄρα σὺ et] Thou 
artnot then, 851 believed ..... 
E. V., after the Vuig. . ‘art not thou’ 
(‘nonne tu es ...’) would require ἄρ᾽ οὐ 
or οὔκουν, Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 57. 3. See 
also Luke xvii. 17; John xviii. 37. 
Αἰγύπτιος] The inference of the tribune 
was not, as in Bengel, " Grece loquitur : 
ergo est Agyptius ;’ ‘put the very contrary 
to this. His being able to speak Greek 
is a proof to Lysias that he is not that 
Egyptian. This Egyptian is mentioned 
by Josephus, Antt. XX. 8. 6, ἀφικνεῖται δέ 
τις ἐξ Αἰγύπτου κατὰ τοῦτον τὸν καιρὸν εἰς 
τὰ Ἱεροσόλυμα, προφήτης εἶναι λέγων, καὶ 
συμβουλεύων τῷ δημοτικῷ πλήθει σὺν 
αὐτῷ πρὺς ὄρος τὸ προξταγορευόμενον Ἐλαιῶν 
ἔρχεσθαι, ὃ καὶ τῆς πόλεως ἄντικρυς κεί- 
μενον Gméxe: στάδια πέντε" θέλειν γάρ, 
ἔφασκεν, αὐτοῖς ὑκεῖθεν ἐπιδεῖξαι, ws κελεύ- 
σαντος αὐτοῦ πίπτοι τὰ τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων 
τείχη, δι’ ὧν τὴν εἴφοδον αὐτοῖς παρέξειν 
ἐπηγγέλλετο. Φῆλιξ δὲ ὡς ἐπύθετο ταῦτα, 
κελεύει τοὺς στρατιώτας ἀναλαβεῖν τὰ 
ὅπλα, καὶ. . .. mposBadAet τοῖς περὶ τὸν 
Αἰγύπτιον. καὶ τετρακοσίους μὲν αὐτῶν 
ἀνεῖλε, διακοσίους δὲ ζῶντας ἔλαβεν. 6 δὲ 
Αἰγύπτιος αὐτὸς διαδράσας ἐκ τῆς μάχης 
ἀφανὴς ἐγένετο. Βαΐ ἴῃ B. J. ii. 13.5, he 
says of the same person, περὶ τριςμυρίους 
ἀθροίζει τῶν ἠπατημένων, περιαγαγὼν δὲ 
αὐτοὺς ἐκ τῆς ἐρημίας eis τὸ ᾿Ελαιῶν καλ. 
ὄρ. K.T.A.. 22.» . ὥςτε συμβολῆς γενομένης 
ἐν νι νιον διαφθαρῆναι Kx. ζωγρηϑῆναι πλεί- 
στους τῶν σὺν αὐτῷ. It is obvious that 
the numerical accounts in Jos. are incon- 
sistent with our text, and with one another. 
This latter being the case, we may well 
leave them out of the question. At dif- 
ferent times of his rebellion, his number 


Ὁ absol., Luke xiii. 12. xxiii. 20 only. 


εξαναστατωσας E. 
for ταρσεὺυς to πολίτηπ, εν ταρσω δε THS κιλικιας ὙεγεννγΉμενος 
for emitp., συνχωρησαι D(cujus rogo obsegro autem mihi D-lat). 


Wisd. xviii. 14 only. ἦν πολλὴ πανταχόθεν 
2 Chron, xxix. 28 Ald. 2 Macc. 


σιρικαριων EK. 


και επιτ., omg δε, D-lat Syr: om δὲ L 96. 


εστως OT. em. τ. αν. Kat σεισας D. 
for δὲ ovyns, 
yevauevns A. 


of followers would be variously estimated ; 
and the tribune would naturally take it as 
he himself or his informant had known it, 
at some one period. That this is so, we 
may see by noticing that our narrative 
speaks of his leading out,—whereas Jose- 
phus’s numbers are those whom he brought 
back from the wilderness against Jerusa- 
lem, by which time his band would have 
augmented considerably. τοὺς τετρ.] 
the four thousand,—the matter being one 
of notoriety. σικαρίων) From sica, 
a dagger ; they are described by Jos. 
B. J. Ss, ἕτερον εἶδος λῃστῶν ἐν 
“Ἱεροσολύμοις ὑπεφύετο, οἱ καλούμενοι 
σικάριοι, μεθ᾽ ἡμέραν καὶ ἐν μέσῃ τῇ πό- 
λει φονεύοντες ἀνθρώπους" μάλιστα δὲ ἐν 
ταῖς ἑορταῖς μισγόμενοι τῷ πλήθει, καὶ 
ταῖς ἐσθήσεσιν ὑποκρύπτοντες μικρὰ ξι- 
φίδια, τούτοις ἔνυττον τοὺς διαφόρους. 
: πρῶτος μὲν οὖν ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν ᾿Ἰωνά- 
Ons ὃ ἀρχιερεὺς ἀποσφάζεται' μετὰ δὲ 
αὐτὸν καθ᾽ ἡμέραν ἀνῃροῦντο πολλοί... - 
The art. is generic. 39. μέν] Our 
indeed, —implying ‘not the Egyptian, but,’ 
—exactly renders it: I indeed am: so 
Aristoph. Plut. 355, μὰ AC ἐγὼ μὲν οὔ. See 
Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 413. οὐκ 
ἀσήμου πόλ.} See note, ch. ix. 11. 
The expression is an elegant one, and very 
common. Wetst. gives many examples, 
and among them one from Eurip. Ion 8, 
ἐστὶν γὰρ οὐκ ἄσημος Ἑλλήνων πόλις. 
There was distinction in his being a πο- 
Airns of an urbs libera. ‘Many of the 
coins of Tarsus bear the epigraphs μητρό- 
moAis and αὐτόνομος. Wordsw. from 
Akermann, p. 56. 40. τῇ “EBp. 
διαλ.} The Syro-Chaldaic, the mother+ 
tongue of the Jews in Judea at this time: 
» 


XXII. 1--ῦ. 


IIPAZEIS ΔΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ.: 


245 


Ἑβραίδι W διαλέκτῳ ii  aonaae MAvdpes ἀδελφοὶ + ch. xxii. 2. 


Kal πατέρες, X ἀκούσατέ 
γίας. 


τῆς Κιλικίας, 
ἴ παρὰ τοὺς πόδας 


τὴν * ὁδὸν | ἐδίωξα τ ἄχρι ᾿' θανάτου, ® δεσμεύων καὶ ° παρα- 
διδοὺς εἰς φυλακὰς ἄνδρας τε καὶ γυναῖκας, ὅ ὡς καὶ 


is asd τῆς πρὸς ὑμᾶς νυνὶ ἡ ἀπολο- | 
3 ἀκούσαντες δὲ ὅτι τῇ 5 Ἑβραΐδι 3 διαλέκτῳ, 
8 προςεφώνει αὐτοῖς, μᾶλλον ὃς παρέσχον “ ἡσυχίαν. 
φησιν 8 Εγώ εἰμι ἀνὴρ ᾿Ιουδαῖος, γεγεννημένος ἐν Ταρσῷ 
© ἀνατεθραμμένος δὲ ἐν τῇ πόλει ταύτῇ δ ΡΟΝ 
ΤΓαμαλιήλ, 
" ἀκρίβειαν τοῦ ἱπατρῴου νόμου, J ζηλωτὴς 
τοῦ θεοῦ καθὼς πάντες ὑμεῖς ἐστε σήμερον" 


xxvi. 14 


only. 

, x constr., John 
xii. 47. 

yw. πρός, 
here only. 
Xen. Mem. 


καί 


ix.3. 1 Pet. 
δὶ ae Ἀν 


reff, 
ὑπάρχων ork am 40. 
4 ὃς ταύτην © Luke vi32 
uke vii 
5 ΠΕ li \| Mt. ksdg, 
a ae (18). 
22 only. 
ἘΞ ‘Luke vi. 
13. abs., ch. 
xxi. 4 


8 πεπαιδευμένος κατὰ 


0. 
ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς Ρ μαρτυρεῖ μοι καὶ πᾶν τὸ 4 πρεσβυτέριον ὃ- b= ch. xvi. 16 


@ Job xxxiv. 29. 
ili. 4.) 
iv. 35,37. v.2al. 4 Kings i iv. 37 Ald. 
16 (see note and ch. xviii. 25. reff.). 
vi. 1 Ed-vat. Ald. compl. &c.(not AB). 


k ch. ix. 2 reff. 1 = ch. vii. 52 reff. 
xiii. 14. ἢ = here (Matt. xxiii. 4) 

p Rom. x.2. Gal.iv.15. Col. iv..13. q 
Ald. compl.) 


for εβραιδι, Sia A. 


ἃ -= 1 Tim. ii. 11, 12 (2 Thess. iii. 12) only. Prov. vii. 9. (- τίος, 1 Tim. i ii. τ 
e ch. vii. 20, 31 only+. Wisd. vii. 4, BX F(not A) &c. only. 


on 


1 Pet. 
f Luke viii. 35. ch. 
g = ch. vii. 22 reff. h here only. Dan. vii. 

ich. xxiv. 14. xxviii. 17 only. Prov xxvii. 10. 2 Macc. 

j ch. xxi. 20 reff. (-Aovv, Num. xxv. 13.) 

m Rev. ii. 10. xii. 11 only. μέχρι θαν., 2 Macc. 

mly. Gen. xlix. 11. © constr., ch. viii. 3 reff. 
Luke xxii, 66 (1 Tim. iv.14) only t+. (Susan. 50 Theod. A 


Cuap. XXII. 1. rec νυν, with a f 13[e sil] Chr: txt ABDEHLPR rel 36 ΤῊ]. 

2. mpospwve: D E[-gr] H am fuld tol Gc Thl-sif: mposepwrvncey L ἃ Ὁ ck 0 36. 40, 
adlocutus est E-lat: txt ABPX rel [Syr coptt eth] Chr, Thl-fin, doguebatur demid 
[ oqueretur vulg-clem. (13 uncert.) | (D-lat is deficient from this point to ver 10.) 


om avtras D: 


avtwy A}(perhaps). 


3. rec aft eyw ins μεν, with HUP rel syr copt eth Chr, : 

tovdatos bef ανηρ D. 
γαμαλιήηλου B 36 Chr,. 

1). aft πεπαιδευμενος ins δε Η k m [syr] Chr). 


sah [arm]. 
vyeyevynuevos D: 


avnp bef εἰμι δὲ! ; 
yeyevnuevos A Ο. 


ἐσται umet «παντες ἢ. 

4. for os, και D Syr eth. 
80 am. 

5. om o D'(ins D-corr!) 56. 180. 


μαρτυρήσει 1): εμαρτυρει B: 


his motive is implied (ch. xxii. 2) to be, 
that they might be the more disposed to 
listen to him. Cuap. ΧΧῚΙ. 1.] This 
speech of Paul repeats the narrative of his 
conversion to Christianity, but this time 
most skilfully arranged and adapted (with- 
in legitimate limits) to avoid offence and 
conciliate his hearers. Proofs of this will 
appear as we go on. See an enquiry into 
its diction and rendering into Greek, in the 
Prolegg. § ii. 17 B. 3.| De Wette 
and others would place the comma after 
ταύτῃ, so to make the two clauses, begin- 
ning with yey. and avar., exactly corre- 
spond. But (not to insist, with Meyer, on 
the reason that a new circumstance is 
introduced with each participle) it is surely 
better, as the rule of the sentence seems to 
be to place the participles before the words 
which qualify them, to take ἐν τῇ πόλει 
ταύτῃ παρὰ τ. π. T., all as the qualifica- 
tion of ἀνατεθραμμένος, and punctuate, as 
commonly done, after Γαμαλιήλ. On 
Gamaliel, see note, ch. ν. 34. The 


μεχρι Ὁ 6: ews k [Chr]. 


emiuaptuper 137. 


for παρεσχον ἡσυχιαν, novxacay D, 


om ABDEN a 138. 36 vulg 
ev Tapow τ. KA. bet 

παιδευομενο" 
om ὑπαρχων D vulg. 


φυλακὴν Ὁ 96. 142: 


aft ἀρχιερεὺς ins avavias 137 syr-w-ast. 
for παν, ολον D [απαν k 40]. 


expression παρὰ τ. πόδ. (see ch. iv. 35, 
note) indicates that the rabbi sat on an ele- 
vated seat and the scholars on the ground 
or on benches, literally at his feet. 
κατὰ axp. | (The art. omitted aft. a prep.) 
According to the strict acceptation of the 
law of my fathers; = κατὰ τὴν ἀκριβε- 
στάτην ἀἵρεσιν τῆς ἡμετέρας θρησκείας, 
ch. xxvi. 5 ;—i.e. as ἃ Pharisee. So Jos. 
B. J. ii. 8. 18, Φαρισαῖοι. . . of δοκοῦντες 
μετὰ ἀκριβείας ἐξηγεῖσθαι τὰ νόμιμα. 
Some of the older Commentators make τοῦ 
πατρῴου νόμου governed by πεπαιδ., and 
take κατὰ ἀκρίβ. adverbially : which would 
give a very vapid sense, the accuracy and 
carefulness of his education having been 
already implied in παρὰ τ. 7. Γαμαλιήλ. 
καθὼς. ..] Not meaning * in the 
same way as YE are all this day’ (but now 
in another way): but as ye all are this 
Gay: “1 had the same zealous character (not 
excluding his still retainingit) which vou all 
shew to-day.” A conciliatory comparison. 
5. ὁ apx. | ‘The High Priest ef ‘hat 


246 TPAZEIS ATOSTOAQON. XXII. 
, \ , 
r=chix? Tap ὧν καὶ "ἐπιστολὰς δεξάμενος πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς ABDE 
κι πῇ : : b HLPR a 
sch-xxi-3 εἰς Δαμασκὸν ἐπορευόμην, ἄξων καὶ τοὺς " ἐκεῖσε ὄντας bed τ 
only. Job ? & 
xxxix. 29. 5 5 , ate / “ t a 6 u2nZ hklm 
τῶν ἐκεῖσε δεδεμένους εἰς ᾿Ιερουσαλήμ, iva " τιμωρηθῶσιν. ἐγένετο 013 
ἐθνῶν, Jos. ὃ , ͵΄ ae / A a w \ 
_amtii21 δέ ou πορευομένῳ καὶ ἐγγίζοντι τῇ Δαμασκῷ ~ περὶ 
. ΧΧῪῚ 
ly. 8 «, ἃ ͵ Vv 5 / > “Ὁ > lal / lal 
only. Ezek. ἃ μεσημβρίαν " ἐξαίφνης ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἡ περιαστράψαι φῶς 
Heb. x. 29.) zt \ ΝΣ, ΟἿΣ / > Nav \ oo» 
vein) 5 ἱκανὸν περὶ ἐμέ, 7 ἔπεσά τε εἰς TO ὅ ἔδαφος καὶ ἤκουσα 
inf., Matt. ΝΞ ΄, \ , , , 2% 
xvii. 13. ch. φωνῆς λεγούσης μοι Σαοὺλ Σαούλ, τί pe ὃ διώκεις ; 8 ἐγὼ ~uor ἃ. 
5 να , / 
wat | δὲ ἀπεκρίθην Tis εἶ, κύριε; εἶπέν τε πρός pe ᾿Εγώ HLPNa 
(reff.). ? ’ a ς a a \ υ ὃ , 9 ς δὲ \ befgh 
wochxe, ett ᾿Ιησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος ὃν σὺ ὃ διώκεις. 9 οἱ δὲ σὺν kim¢ 
att. xx. 3. es 
2 Mace:-v.1. ῥμοὶ ὄντες TO μὲν φῶς ἐθεάσαντο [Kai ° ἔμφοβοι ἐγένοντο], 
ly. G ‘al “-“ . 
ria τὴν δὲ φωνὴν οὐκ “ἤκουσαν τοῦ λαλοῦντός μοι. 10 εἶπον 
y ch. ix.3 \ , , 7 e \ ΄ ᾿ ΄ , 
1 ° . ~ e = 
“oniyt. 9 δὲ Te ποιήσω, κύριε ; ὁ δὲ κύριος εἶπεν πρός με Ανα- 
ἐδ eta πορεύου εἰς Δαμασκὸν, xaKet σοι ὁ λαληθήσεται περὶ 
Ps. exvili. 25. ΄ A 
Ὁ ver. 4. πάντων ὧν ' τέτακταί cot ποιῆσαι. 11 ὡς δὲ οὐκ 8 ἐν- ...nav- 
cath 5 ‘ee isd J \ 512, ep k των D. 
ached έβλεπον » ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿ δόξης τοῦ φωτὸς ἐκείνου, * χειραγω- ABEHL 
ren. \ lal , 3 ν᾽ 
τον γούμενος ὑπὸ τῶν 'ἱ συνόντων μοι ἦλθον εἰς Δαμασκόν. tgnkl 
(reff.). moil3 


f — ch. xiii. 48. xv.2 al. 1 Mace. xii. 26. constr., here only. Xen. de Rep. Lac. xi. 6, Tots δὲ ἕπεσθαι τέτακται. 
g = Mark viii. 25 only Σ. h = ch. xii. 14 reff. Exod. vi. 9. i= Luke. ix. 31,32. 1 Cor. xv. 40, 

41. 2 Cor. iii. 7,18. Exod. xvi. 10. kch.ix. 8 only. Judg. xvi. 26 A compl. only. (-y0s. ch. xiii. 11.) 
I Luke ix. 18 only. Jer. iii. 20. Esdr. vi. 2. 2 Macc. ix. 4 only. 


om και (bef emor.) D 3 fuld coptt [Syr eth]. for προς τους ad., mapa 
των αδελφων D. αξαι E [ἐξ @v(sic) 18: om αξων to δεδεμενους H. exer D: 
at adducerem inde vinctos vulg. for εἰς (bef ιερουσ.), ev Ὁ. 

6. for ever. to weonuBp. D! has ενγιζοντι 5(€ μ)οι μεσημβριας (ins τη D2) δαμασκω 
(txt D®). for ex, a(7o) D}(txt D?). περιεστραψεν Εἰ 137: -ψα μ(ε) DI 
{-ψαι D-corr): περιαστραψαν P. 

7. for ew. τε, και ew. D [ez. δὲ coptt]. (ereca, so ΑΒΕΗΡΝ ἃ ἔπι 36. 40 Ath, 
Thl.) σαυλε σαυλε (as lat, ver 13) Ὁ 1 25. for εἰμι, εἰ D}(txt D? or 3), 
at end ins oxAnpoy σοι προς κεντρα λακτιζειν X demid syr-mg Ath,. 

8. aft απεκριθην ins kat εἰπα N [Syr]. for τε, δε D. eve [A]BN}. 
ψαζοραιος [ D1(txt D?)] δὲ}. 

9. δὲ! has omitted σαν in εθεασαντο. om καὶ εμφοβοι eyevovro ABHN 13 vulg 
Syr copt arm: ins DELP rel (36) syr sah eth Chr,. (On the one hand we may place 
the possibility of omn from similarity of endings (so Meyer) ; on the other, interpola- 
tion from the εἰστηκεισαν evven of ch ix. 7: the fact noticed by Tischdf (N. T. ed 7 
[not ed 87) that eup. γεν. is a phrase almost peculiar to St. Luke does not tell dis- 
tinctly either way : evveo: could not be used in this connexion.) nrovoy E-gr 8% 

Thl-sif’}. 7 
[ 10. am D. om κυριος D k, simly sah eth. evreraxtat Bl: εντεταλ- 
ται Β3. for περι to σοι, τι σε δει (see ch ix. 6) H 41. 84. 95!-8-marg 100 Chr: 
de omnibus que te oporteat facere vulg (H-lat). om σοι ΕἸ. 

11. ουδενεβλεπον (i. 6. either οὐδὲν εβλεπὸν or οὐδ᾽ ενεβλεπον)ὴ B: εβλεπὸν E 18, 
ανεβλ. 68. 100 Thl-fin: ut autem surrexi(surrexit D!) non videbam D-lat. for 
υπο, απο A. 


day, who is still living : i. 6. Theophilus, who were there. ἐκεῖσε | if resolved, 


see on ch.ix.1. Similarly, the whole San- 
hedrim = ‘ those whe were then members, 
and now survive. παρ᾽ ὧν kat} from 
whom, moreover. πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφ.] 
to the Jewish (their) vrethren (see ch. 
xxviii. 21). Bornemann’s_ rendering, 
‘against the (Christian) brethren,’ is al- 
together inadmissible. If ever Paul spoke 
to the Jews as a Jew, it was on this 
occasion. καὶ τοὺς ἐκ. even those 


would be εἰς Δαμασκόν, ---ι similar con- 
struction to eis οἶκόν ἐστιν, Mark ii. 1, 
‘those who had settled at Damascus and 
were then there.’ 6.] On Paul’s con- 
version and the comparison of the accounts 
in chapp. ix., xxii., and xxvi., see notes on 
ch. ix. I have there treated of the dis- 
crepancies, real or apparent. 
notes, ch. ix. 8, 18. 12.} That Ananias 
was a Christian, is not here mentioned,— 


- 


11.] See © 





6—19. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ. 


247 


¢ , Ἁ . 
19 ᾽᾿Ανανίας δέ τις ἀνὴρ τὸ εὐλαβὴς " κατὰ τὸν ἣ νόμον meh. ii.5 reft 


/ € ‘XN ΄ al 
ο μαρτυρούμενος ὑπὸ πάντων τῶν Ῥκατοικούντων Lovdaiwr, 
\ , \ ’ \ o 7 , re 
18 ἐλθὼν πρός με καὶ ἃ ἐπιστὰς εἶπέν μοι Σαοὺλ ἀδελφέ, zw. 11. 
κἀγὼ " αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ "' ἀνέβλεψα ' εἰς αὐτόν. τοῦ 
Ὗ 7) 7 ρᾳ Ρ 


᾿ ἀνάβλεψον. 


¢ ¢ Ν lal ς΄ n 
14. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν Ὃ " θεὸς τῶν Y πατέρων " ἡμῶν “ προεχειρί- 
“Ὁ \ / -“- nr ‘ 5 
σατό σε * γνῶναι τὸ * θέλημα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἰδεῖν τὸν ¥ δίκαιον 
\ “ “ 4 fa) ae ΎΡ » 
καὶ ἀκοῦσαι * φωνὴν 2 ἐκ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ, 15 ὅτι ἔσῃ 


n ch. xxiv. 14. 
Phil. in. 5. 
Heb. viii. δ 

Deut. 


p ellips., ch. 
xiii. 1 reff. 

q absol., Luke 
ii. 38. x. 40. 


sch. xvi. 18 


a / > lal \ / > / b = Cos \ refi. δ 
μάρτυς αὐτῷ πρὸς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὃ ὧν ἑώρακας καὶ + = Matt: xiv. 


ἤκουσας. 


ὄνομα αὐτοῦ. 


16 καὶ νῦν τί © μέλλεις ; ἃ ἀναστὰς βάπτισαι 
\ e > , a e / f ’ ΄ \ 
Kat ©amoNovoat Tas ἁμαρτίας σου, ᾿ἐπικαλεσάμενος τὸ fr. 


19 al. Gen. 
xv. 5. 

u ch. vii. 32. 
Deut. i. 11 al. 


v ch. v. 30 reff, 


17 ἀγένετο δέ μοι 8 ὑποστρέψαντι εἰς “Lepov- 2h. iit 20. 


xxvi. 16 only, 


\ Loh , > al ks A t 6 Exod. iv. 13. 
σαλὴμ Kab σπροςευχομένου μου ἐν τῳ ιξέρῳ YEVETUAL με veel iii. Pa 
: , sau x , , οἷς 2 Mace. iii. 7. 
ἐν ἱέκστάσει 18 καὶ ἰδεῖν " αὐτὸν λέγοντά μοι ' Σ-πεῦσον || viii. only. 
ΔΎ Τ50 ΄ c ΄ ἢ » 47.) Rom. 
καὶ ἔξελθε τ ἐν τάχει ἐξ ‘lepovoadnp, διότι ov " παρα- |} ji is. see. 
͵ a Eph. v. 17 
f ny | oP ‘av P ὶ ἐ 19 κἀγὼ εἶπον Col. i.8. 
δέξονταί σου [τὴν] °° μαρτυρίαν ἢ περὶ ἐμοῦ. 19 κἀγὼ εἶπον 1.1.9. 
y absol., ch. vii. 52 reff. zch. xi.9al. Isa. Ixvi. 6. a= ch. i. 8 reff. b attr., 
ch. i. 1 reff. see ver. 10. c = here only. Xen. Cyr. i. 3. 15. ἃ ver. 10 
61 Cor. vi. ll only. Job ἰχ. 80 only. f ch. ii. 21 reff. g ch. viii. 25 reff. 
h absol., ch. x. 9 reff. ich. x. 10 reff. k = Mark iv. 38 al. 1 ch, xx. 16 


reff. constr., Gen. xviii. 6. xxiv. 18, 20. 
xvi. 21 (reff.). Exod. xxiii. 1. 
phere only. see Johni. 7. 


o -- Johni. 19. iii. 11, &c. 


n = Mark iv. 20. ch. 
lJohnv..9. Rev. i. 2,9. xi. 7 al. 


m Rom. xvi. 20 reff. 


12. rec (for evAaBys) evoeBys, with E rel: om A vulg (the omn has prob been 
because the sentence is complete without the epithet: evoeBns, a gloss on evAaBys): txt 


BHLPRabegko 18. 36. 40. 


μαρτυρομενος Al. 


aft κατοικουντων ins 


ev δαμασκω (supplementary gloss) HL 13 rel demid tol syr [sah] eth arm Chr,: aft 


sovd., 73: om ABEPR fg vulg Syr copt. 
13. eve ABN. εβλεψα A. 


14. προεχειρήησατο ΑΙ, k: mposexetpnoaro N(but s marked and erased) P. 


Ast καὶ Al. om tov A k 1 951. 
15. μαρτ. av. mp. π. avOp. bef eon B. 


om 


aft wy ins te E-gr Ὁ Ὁ o 36 [Thl-sif-comm]. 
16. the second A of weAAecs was appy added by P-corr. 


rec (for αὐτου) Tov 


κυριου, with HL rel Thi-sif: add inoou k 48. 99 (explanatory corrections) : txt ABEPR 
ac 13. 36 vulg D-lat syrr coptt eth arm Chr, Thl-fin. 


17. mposevxoucyvw, omg pov, E e 93-5. 
25. 40. 96. 105. 
18. for dev, ov δὲ [96] 180. 


for we, μοι L a?-marg 99. 106-37 : om 


in δὲ σθαι of yeveoOa is written twice. cae 
rec ins τὴν, with EHLP rel 36 Chr: testimonium 


meum D-lat: om (as unnecessary ?) ABN a 15. 


and ἀνὴρ ... Ἰουδαίων is added: both, 
as addressed toa Jewish audience. Before 
the Roman governor in ch. xxvi., he does 
not mention him at all, but compresses 
the whole substance of the command given 
to Ananias into the words spoken by the 
Lord to himself. A heathen moralist could 
teach,—‘ Quid de quoque viro, et cui dicas, 
seepe videto’ (Hor. Ep. i. 18. 68): and a 
Christian Apostle was not unmindful of the 
necessary caution. Such features in his 
speeches are highly instructive and valuable 
to those who would gather from Scripture 
itself its own real character: and be, not 
slaves to its letter, but disciples of its spirit. 

13. ἀνέβλ. εἰς αὐτόν] De W. re- 
marks, that the two meanings of ἀναβλέπω 
here unite in the word: I looked, with 
recovered sight, upon him. 14—16 is 


not related, but included, in ch. ix. 15—19. 
14. ὁ 0. τ. rar. ἧμ.} So Peter, ch, 
iii. 13; v.30. In ch. ix. 17, 6 κύριος 15 
the word: this title is given for the Jews. 
τὸν δίκαιον] So Stephen, ch. vi. 
52. How forcibly must the whole scene 
have recalled im, whom presently (ver. 
20) he mentions by name. 16. ἀπό- 
λουσαι ...] This was the Jewish as well 
as. the Christian doctrine of baptism. 
See ref. 1 Cor. and uote. αὐτοῦ] 
of Jesus, τοῦ δικαίου. Paul carefully 
avoids mentioning to the Jews this Name, 
except where it is wnavoidable, in ver. 8: 
so αὐτόν again, ver. 18. 17.] viz. as 
related ch. ix. 26—30, where nothing of 
this vision, or its having been the cause of 
his leaving Jerusalem, is hinted. 18.] 
περὶ ἐμοῦ is to be taken with μαρτυρίαν; 


24.8 TIPASEIS ANOSTOAQN. XXII. 

΄»ν» » \ 5» ’ [χὰ > \ q » Τ ΄ῳ Ἀ 
qeonstr,ch. Κύριε, αὐτοὶ ἐπίστανται ὅτι ἐγὼ 4 ἤμην " φυλακίζων καὶ ABEH 
xi. 5 reff. \ , LPrab 
r here only τι ὁ δέρων ‘kata τὰς συναγωγὰς τοὺς " πιστεύοντας “ ἐπὶ ef ghk 
“angen , 20 εἶδεν Ὡς ἘΝ χ - τ' ΄ a Pee Imo 13 
sche ores, GE. 70 καὶ ὅτε " ἐξεχύννετο TO αἷμα Στεφάνου Tod “ μάρ- 
t Luke ys 
ch. viii. 3. 


, \ > ‘ q ” x > \ \ y ὃ “ 
τυρός σου, καὶ avTos “μην * ἐφεστὼς καὶ Y συνευδοκῶν 


\z ΄ ᾿ς ὅ α΄. ἐν oY aes ΄ > ak 21 \ 
Kal φυλάσσων τα ματιὰ TOV αναιρουντῶν auTov. KQL D και 
φυλασ-. 
x ver. 13. perf.,ch. σων. - 
z= Luke χὶ. 21. Exod. 


xx. 20. xxVvi. 
11. 

Ὁ ch. ix. 42 
reff. 


Ww see note. 


v- ν. Matt. xxiii. 35. xxvi. 28. Luke xi. 50 ἃ]. 
teh y 1 Cor. vii. 12, 13 reff. 


xxviii. 2. 2 Tim.iv.6only. Zech. i. 10. 
xxii. 7. a= ch. v. 33 reff. 


19. πεπιστευκοτας E-gr: qui credebant vulg D-lat E-lat. 

20. rec εἔεχειτο (corrn to more usual form), with HLP rel Chr, [Thl-sif]: txt 
ABER 13. 36 Thl-fin. (εξεχυνετο B°E 18. 36: txt AB}. ) om στεῴανου A 68: 
τ. μαρτ. bef cred. 38. 73 (the omn is hardly accountable, if it was originally in the 
text : at the same time, the manuscript authority is too light to allow of its being now 
omitted. Meyer suggests the similarity of ending, otepavov tov: but this would 
oecasion the omn of tov, not of στεφανου) : txt BEHLPN [vulg ἄς} Chr. 
mpwrouaptupos Lack m: πρωτου μαρτ. 7 syr. eotws A 37. rec aft cuvev- 
Soxwy ins Tn αναιρεσει αὐτου (interpolated from ch viii. 1), with HLP rel (13) 36 syr 
farm} Chr,: tm BovAn τῶν αναιρουντων αὑτὸν (and λιθαζοντων for αναιρ. below) Syr: 


om AB D(appy: D-lat ends with consentiens) EX 40 vulg coptt eth. 


om καὶ (bef 


φυλασσωνὴ HLP Ὁ cf 1 o syr Chr, Thi-sif: ins ΑΒ ΕΝ rel 36 vulg coptt.—oua. τε c 


137. 


not with the verb, as Meyer and Winer 
maintain. Their objection, that then it 
must be τὴν μαρτ. τὴν περὶ ἐμοῦ is an- 
swered by remarking, (1) that Paul does 
not always observe accuracy in this usage 
of the article: e. g. Eph. vi. 5, ὑπακούετε 
τοῖς κυρίοις κατὰ σάρκα, for τ. Kup. Tots 
κατα σάρκα, οΥ τοῖς κατὰ σάρκα κυρίοις, 
which he has written in the ||, Col. iii. 22, 
—1 Thess. iv. 16, of νεκροὶ ἐν χριστῷ 
ἄναστήσονται πρῶτον. See also Rom. vi. 
4; Col. ii. 14, and notes :—and (2) that 
there may have been a reason for the irre- 
gularity here, inasmuch as, if either the 
article had been expressed after wapr., or 
τὴν π. ἐμ. wapt. had been used, cov would 
have appeared to be governed by zapa- 
δέξονται--- they will not receive from thee 
thy testimony concerning me,’—which is 
not precisely the meaning intended to be 
conveyed. (See Mr. Green’s Gram. of 
N. T. p. 163.) 19.] The probable ac- 
count of this answer is, that Paul thought 
his former great zeal against Christ, con- 
trasted with his present zeal for Him, 
would make a deep impression on the Jews 
in Jerusalem: or, perhaps, he wishes by 
his earnest preaching of Jesus as the Christ 
among them, to wndo the mischief of 
which he before was the agent, and there- 
fore alleges his former zeal and his con- 
senting to Stephen’s death as reasons why 
he should remain in Jerusalem. αὐτοί 
can only refer to the same persons as the 
subjects of παραδέξονται above: not (as 
Heinrichs) to the foreign Jews ;—“ Idcirco 
iter apostolicum extra urbem detrectat, 
quod undique odio petitum se iri previdet, 
Hiecrosolymis autem in apostolorum col- 


legio delitescere se posse opinatur :’’—a 
motive totally unworthy of Paul, and an 
interpretation which happily the sentence 
will not bear. 20. μάρτυρός σου] 
“<E. V. ‘thy martyr, following Beza: 
Vulg., and Erasm, testis tui. The Apostle 
may have here used the (Hebrew, 19, as 
Wordsworth) word in its strict primary 
sense; for a view of Christ in His glory 
was vouchsafed to Stephen, and it was by 
bearing witness of that manifestation that 
he hastened his death (ch. vii. 55 ff.). The 
present meaning of the word martyr did, 
however, become attached to it at a very 
early period, and is apparently of apostolic 
nuthority: 6. g. Rev. xvii. 6, and Clem. 
Rom. 1 Cor. v., p. 217 (cited in note on ch. 
i. 25)... . The transition from the first to 
the secondary sense may be easily accounted 
for. Many who had only seen with the 
eye of faith, suffered persecution and death 
as a proof of their sincerity. For such 
constancy the Greek had no adequate term. 
It was necessary for the Christians to pro- 
vide one. None was more appropriate than 
μάρτυρ, seeing what had been the fate of 
those whom Christ had appointed to be His 
witnesses (ch. i. 8). They almost all suf- 
fered: hence to witness became a synonym 
for to suffer; while the suffering was in 
itself a kind of testimony.” (Mr. Hum- 
phry.) Bp. Wordsworth well designates 
this introduction of the name of Stephen 
“Α noble endeavour to make public repa- 
ration for a public sin, by public confession 
in the same place where the sin was com- 
mitted.” καὶ αὐτός} I myself also. 

21.) The object of Paul in relating 
this vision appears to have been to shew 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAON. 249 


90— 25, 
! s g , Ὁ s Ny > y b ‘ e 2 ? 7 
ἔα, εἶπεν προς ME Πορεύου, OTL ἔγω εἰς ἐθνη μακραν ἐξ- Ὁ absol., Luke 
c fe 99 » Ν > A ie: vii 
ABCDE αποστελῷῶ σε. Ὦ 55 ἤκουον δὲ αὐτοῦ ἄχρι τούτου τοῦ ὃ eae 
αν Ὁ fe Ἢ , πο ιν 5: ὦ \ ἃ \ 4 γα , e > 11. 13,17 
<n o λόγου, καὶ “ἐπῆραν τὴν φωνὴν αὐτῶν λέγοντες Alpe only. Zech. 


“ > \ a > Ἐπ᾿ A viper’ 
f τοιοῦτον, ov yap ὃ καθῆκεν αὐτὸν ζῆν. oh"? 
d ch. ii. 14 reff. 
e = ch. vill. 33 


« 3 \ lol “ ᾿᾽ 
13 ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς Τον 
ζ “ » A ἂν. ὦ ΄ 
23 2 κραυγαζοντων τε αὐτῶν καὶ ἱ ῥιπτούντων τὰ ἱμάτια 


ΟὙΜῸΣ x , Ε] Ν > Zz 9A. WE ΄ te _v.5, 

Kal “ KOVLOPTOV βαλλόντων εἰς τὸν aépa, ἐκέλευσεν ο f=} Sr. ¥- 5, 
΄ ee > ety. > \ / 6, 2. zik 

χιλίαρχος εἰςάγεσθαι αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν 'tapewBorny, ™ εἴππας (i. 28) 


n ΄ o 2 ΄ω 9) (Οὐ “ p2 A 4 sf τ τς =} 
μάστιξιν ἀνετάξεσθαι ig ἵνα Ὁ ἐπυγνῷ δι ἣν “ αἰτίαν τε. Deak. 
a ἡ Lal ~ > > 

οὕτως ᾿ἐπεφώνουν avT@. ~ ὡς δὲ Smpoétewav αὐτὸν F286" 

see ch. xxv. 


a ἐ 4.4 3 \ \ ust an c ͵ ς 
τοις ἐμᾶάσίιν, εὐσπτεὲν TT pos TOV EO TWTAaA EKATOVTAPVOV [o 22 reff. 
xii. 19. Ezra iii. 13. i= ‘see note) here only. Herodot. iv. 94, 188. 
lch. xxi. 34, 37 reff. m = Mark τ. 43. x. 49. Luke xix. 15. Exod. xxxv. 1. 
xi. 36 (Mark iii. 10. v. 29,34. Luke vii. 21) only. Prov. xxvi. 3. 
vi. 29 A Ald. compl. only. Susan. 14 Theod. 


h absol., Matt. 
k ch, xiii. 51 reff. 
n = Heb. 
over. 29 only. Judg. 
p = ch. xxiii. 28 reff. Gen. xxxi. 32. 


q ch. x. 21 reff. rch. xii. 22 reff. dat., here only. s here only +. 2 Macc. xv. 15. 
t Mark 1. 7} L.J.only. Job xxxix.10. Isa.v.18,27. Sir. xxx. (xxxiii.) 26 only. Demosth. wept παραπρ. 
p. 402, end Ὁ absol., ch. xvi. 9. Matt. xx. 6. xxvi.73. John xii. 29al. 
21. eue Ὁ. εθνος E-gr 25. εξαποστελλω Ὁ 6 Ath, : αποστελω [B Chr,, 


αποστελλω(θαῦ mittam) | E. 

22. nxoveay D syrr. rec καθηκον (the meaning of the imperf not being appre- 
hended, as the varr shew), with [D-corr] a Thl-fin: καθήκει 68-9. 987. 105: καθηκαν 
18. 43: txt ABCD'EHLP® rel 36 Hip, Ath, Chr, Thl-sif. 

23. κραζοντων Ὁ 6 5] ο Chr, Thi-sif. rec δε (alteration of characteristic Te), 
with DEHLPN rel 36 vulg [syr arm] copt Chr: txt ABC Syr eth. om avtwy D? 

ρίπτοντων DEHL a Ὁ o 40 Thi. for aepa, ουρανον D Syr Cassiod, : aepay N?. 

24. rec αὑτον bef o χιλίαρχος, with HLP rel 36 Thi-sif: omc 137-42: txt ABCDEX 
ἃ ἢ Καὶ m 13. 40 vulg Chr, Thl-fin. rec ἀγεσθαι, with HLP ἢ [13(sic)] rel eth-rom : 
txt ABCDEN a m 36. 40 vulg Chr, Thi-fin. (Zhe e:s- seems to have been dropped 
out when the order was altered.) rec εἰπὼν (more usual form), with HLP (13) 
rel 36 Chr: εἰπε δὲ k: txt ABCDEN. averatew D!(txt D*): εταζεσθαι E m 40: 
eter. 4. Ύνω A 13. 36 Chr,. κατεφωνουν D ο 137. for avtw, περι αυτου 
D: αὐτου 137 [Chr]. 

25. rec προετεινεν (to suit the subject o χιλ., no more persons having been mentd: 
this the varr shew), with P k 1m o: zposerewev H Thi-sif: προετεινον AE Thi-fin : 
txt BL& a be g ἢ 18. 86 Chr(some mss have zposerewov), rposerewway CD 40. 137 
{adstrinzissent vulg, extendissent E-lat, simly syrr copt εὐ arm]. (f doubtful [sah 


def ].) exatovtapxnv D 73. 


that his own inclination and prayer had 
been, that he might preach the Gospel to 
his own people: but that it was by the 
imperative command of the Lord Himself 
that he went to the Gentiles. 22. τού- 
του τ. λόγου viz. the announcement that 
he was to be sent to the Gentiles. ‘ Populi 
terrarum non vivunt,’ was the maxim of the 
children of Abraham. Chetubb. fol. iii. 2 
(Meyer). καθῆκεν | ‘decuerat:’ imply- 
ing, he ought to have been put to death 
long ago (when we endeavoured to do it, 
but he escaped). 23. ῥιπτούντων 
Not ‘flinging off their garments,’ as pre- 
paring to stone him, or even as representing 
the action of such preparation : the former 
would be futile, as he was in the custody of 
the tribune,—the latter absurd, and not 
borne out by any known habit of the 
Jews : but shaking, jactitantes, their gar- 
ments. as shaking off the dust, abominat- 
ing such an expression and him who uttered 


om ὁ παυλος D syr Chr,: ins ABCEHLPX 


it. The casting dust into the air was part 
of the same gesture. Chrys. explains it, 
ῥιπτάζοντες, ἐκτινάσσοντες. 24. The 
tribune, not understanding the language in 
which Paul spoke, wished to extract from 
him by the scourge the reason which so 
exasperated the Jews against him. In this 
he was acting illegally: ‘Non esse a tor- 
mentis incipiendum, Div. Augustus con- 
stituit.” Digest. Leg. 48, tit. 18, c. 1(De 
W.). ἐπεφών.} they were thus cry- 
ing out against him. 25.] And 
while they were binding him down with 
the thongs. Dr. Bloomfield quotes from 
Dio Cassius, xi. 49, ᾿Αντίγονον ἐμαστίγωσε 
σταυρῷ προδήσαντες, and explains rightly, 
I think, the προ in both verbs to allude to 
the position of the prisoner, which was, 
bent forward, and tied with a sort of gear 
made of leather to an inclined post. De W. 
and others render τοῖς ἱμᾶσιν, ‘for the 
scourge ’ (dat. commodi) ; but why should 


250 ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAON. XXII. δ 


v=ch.i.6 
reff. 

w ch. xvi. 37 
reff. 

x ch. xvi. 37 
only τ. Ξ 
w. pres., cn. 

Α xvi 2) το 

z here only. 
Num. xxii. 
25. Wisd. v. 
11 only. 
(-γοῦν, 
Matt. x. 17 


al.) 
a — here (Heb. 
viii. 1) only. 


Παῦλος] " Et ¥ ἄνθρωπον Ῥωμαῖον καὶ * ἀκατάκριτον » ἔξ- 
εστιν ὑμῖν “ μαστίζειν ; 50 ἀκούσας δὲ ὁ ἑκατόνταρχος 
προςελθὼν τῷ χιλιάρχῳ ἀπήγγειλεν λέγων Τί μέλλεις 
ποιεῖν ; ὁ γὰρ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος Ῥωμαῖός ἐστιν. 31 προς- 
ελθὼν δὲ ὁ χιλίαρχος εἶπεν αὐτῷ Λέγε μοι, σὺ Ρωμαῖος 
x PX ¢ ry μ 3 μ 
Ψ e yo > > \ 
εἶ; ὁ δὲ ἔφη Nai. 38 ἀπεκρίθη ὁ χιλίαρχος ᾿Εγὼ πολ- 
od ᾿᾿ κεφαλαίου τὴν ὃ πολιτείαν ταύτην © ἐκτησάμην. ὁ 
ΠΑΝ δὲ ΤΠΙ]αῦλος ἔφη ᾿Εγὼ δὲ καὶ γεγέννημαι. 39 εὐθέως οὖν 
ii. mehr Ὰ ἃ 
3 Mace. iil. 
21. \ ς / \ b] , \ “ « ar 
c—andconstr., ‘Kal ὁ χιλίαρχος. δὲ ἐφοβήθη §& ἐπυγνοὺς ὅτι ‘Pwpaios 
Josh, xxiv. 


32. ν΄. ἐκ, ch. i.18. w. διά, ch. viii. 20. Matt. x. 9. (Luke xxi. 19. 1 Thess. iv. 4 only.) 
e ver. 24. f Matt. x. 18. John vi. 51. viii. 16, 17. ch. iii. 24. g ch. xix. 34 reff. 


ἃ ch, ν. 38 reff. 


18. 86 rel vss ΤῊ] (ἔς, but copt arm put it after εἰπεν. (17 the words originally formed 
part of the text, it is very unlikely that they should have been omitted, while insertions 
of this kind are very common: but the manuscript evidence being so very strong, it 
seems best to insert the words in brackets.) εξεστιν vu bef avOpwrov ... D [Syr 
eth: μαστ. bef uu. H:] for εξεστιν, ἐστιν RX}. 

26. for axovoas δε, τουτο ax. D. exatovtapxys ACDN!: txt BEHLPR? 13. 
36 rel Chr. add ort ρωμαιον εαυτον λεγει D 187. rec απηγγειλεν bef τω 
xrrapxw (alteration of order to avoid the ambiguity, rposerA9. Tw X. OF τω X. aTNYY-), 
with HLP rel Thl-sif: txt ABCDERX a (c) h Καὶ m 13. 40 vulg [syrr eth] copt arm 
Chr, Thl-fin.—(e)rny. D1(Wtst, Kipl: txt D? [avny. 67). om Aeywy 1) c 137 
syr: D syr-w-ast ins αὐτῷ in place of λεγων. rec ins opa bef τι (interpolated 
appy to give precision, and break the abruptness of the text), with DHLP rel eth 
Chr, : om ABCER 13. 36. 40 vulg syrr copt arm. om ‘yap D}(ins D?(?)) eth. 

27. Tote προξελθ. o x. ἐπηρωτησεν αυτον D. from ελθων δε to evdews o ver 29 
has been re-written by B}. for avtw, Tw παυλω L. om μοι XN}. rec ins 
et bef σὺ (interpolated, to make the interrogation plainer), with LP rel [vulg-clem] 


> / > ᾽ > la e / a e > / 
ἀπέστησαν AT αὐτοῦ οἱ μέλλοντες αὐτὸν “ ἀνετάζειν. - 


demid Chr,: om ABCDEHX ἃ cf m 18. 86 am fuld tol syrr copt arm Amm-c. 


for εφη vat, εἰπεν εἰμι Ὦ. 


28. rec aft amex. ins re, with HP rel vulg [Syr (60 8}}] Thl: δε ΒΟῈΝ ack 13. 86 
syr copt: om AL 40 arm Chr,: καὶ αποκριθεις o x. (και) εἰπεν (avtw) Πίκαι erased, 


avtTw added by D?(?)). 
Bede. 


de egy D: om Η. 
γεγενημαι A D-corr 6 m! 13. 
29. for ev@ews ουν, τοτε D [ (eth) ]. 


μάστιξιν be varied ? and can it be shewn 
(as Dr. B. asks) that the word in the plural 
will bear this meaning ἢ ἑκατόντ- 
apxov] The ‘centurio supplicio prepo- 
situs’ of Tacitus and Seneca,—standing by 
to superintend the punishment. εἰ 
ἄνθ. x.7.A.] See ch. xvi. 37, note. 

28.] Dio Cassius, lx. 17, mentions that, 
in the reign of Claudius, Messalina used to 
sell the freedom of the city, and at very 
various prices at different times: # πολι- 
Tela μεγάλων τὸ πρῶτον χρημάτων mpa- 
θεῖσα, ἔπειθ᾽ οὕτως ὑπὸ τῆς εὐχερείας 
ἐπευωνήθη, ὥςτε καὶ λογοποιηθῆναι ὅτι 
κἂν ὑάλινά τις σκεύη συντετριμμένα δῷ 
τινί, πολίτης ἔσται. ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ 
yey-] But I (besides having the privilege 
like thee of being a Roman citizen) was 
also born one. How was Paul a Roman 
citizen by birth? Certainly not because 


om δε δὲ], 


for πολλου, o15a ποσου D and “ alia editio” mentd by 
(Remarkable, and possibly original, πολλου being a gloss: but if so, the 
genuine reading has been now overborne by the intruder.) 
om 2nd δε CN! 42. 96. 142 Thl-sif: om δὲ καὶ copt. 


om τὴν C. παυλος 


ins πολιτὴς bef pwuaos E vulg. 


he was of Tarsus: for (1) that city had no 
such privilege, but was only an ‘urbs 
libera,’ not a Colonia nor a Municipium: 
and (2) if this had been so, the mention 
of his being a man of Tarsus (ch. xxi. 39) 
would have of itself prevented his being 
scourged. It remains, therefore, that his 
father or some ancestor must have obtained 
the civitas, either as a reward for service 
(‘ urbes, merita erga P. R. allegantes,.... 
civitate donavit,’ Suet. Aug. 47) or by pur- 
chase. It has been suggested that the 
father of Saul may have been sold into 
slavery at Rome, when Cassius laid a heavy 
fine on the city [of Tarsus] for having 
espoused the cause of Octavius and Antony, 
Appian, B.C, iv. 64, and very many of the 
Tarsians were sold to pay it. He may have 
acquired his freedom and the citizenship 
afterwards. See Mr. Lewin, i. p. 4. But 


ABCDE 

HLPR a 

befgh 

kimo 
13 


ΧΟΡΟΊ. 


h 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 251 
ἐστιν καὶ ὅτι αὐτὸν inv ' δεδεκώς. 80} τῇ δὲ j ἐπαύριον » pres. ch. 
΄ A Ὁ ee , γ: re a . Bes reff. 
βουλόμενος γνῶναι τὸ * ἀσφαλές, ! τὸ Ti ™ κατηγορείτων ᾿ ξραρῖς,, ch. 
ei n » ὃ ἢ » φῶς \ eed D i. 17. viii. 16. 
ὑπὸ τῶν ‘lovdaiwy, ἔλυσεν αὐτὸν Kal ἐκέλευσεν " συν- ix. 88, xii. 6. 
Αἱ 7 pe Ps β xviii. 25. 
ελθεῖν τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ πᾶν τὸ ° συνέδριον, καὶ Ῥ κατ- 
ἀγαγὼν τὸν Παῦλον ἃ ἔστησεν εἰς αὐτούς. XXIII. 1 τ ἀτε- 


(xxi. 33.) 

Gal. ii. 11. 

/ Ne a A reff. 
νίσας δὲ ὁ Liatdos τῷ ° συνεδρίῳ εἶπεν “Avdpes ἀδελφοί, 1 Lake. 6. 


j ch. x. 9 reff. 
k = ch, xxi. 34 


. Rom. viii. 26. 
n — ch. i. 6 reff. 
only. (see ch. vi. 6.) 


. τῇ pass., Matt. xxvii. 12. ch. xxv. 16 only +. 2 Macc. x. 13. 
o ch. iv. 1δ reff. p ch, xxiii. 15 reff, q constr., here 
r w. dat., ch. iii. 12 reff. L.P. 


rec nv bef avroy, with HLP rel Chr, Thl-sif: txt ABCEX 13 Thl-fin. 
δεδωκως A! 36-8. 73. 99. 101-6 Thl-sif: δεδηκως A2C: δεδοικως 962, 105. add 
Kat παραχρημᾶ ελυσεν avtoy 137 syr-w-ast. (Henceforth in Acts, D being deficient, its 
readings may be approximated to by noticing those of its nearest cognates, 187 and 
syr-w-ast.) 

30. επιουση c 137. om το EK. κατηγορειτο c 137. rec (for υπο) παρα, 
with HLP g [1] m Thl-sif: txt ABCEN 13. 36 rel 137 Chr, Thl-fin. ins πεμψας 
bef ελυσεν 137 syr-w-ast. rec aft αὐτὸν ins amo των δεσμων (supplementary 
gloss), with HLP rel eth-pl Thl: om ABCEN a 13. 40 vulg syrr coptt eth[-rom | 
arm Chr. rec eAGew (see note: or the preceding -cev perhaps, as Meyer, 
caused the omn of συν-), with HLP rel Syr copt eth Thl-sif: e:seA@ew 99, 137: 
συνειξελθειν c: txt ABCEN a Ὁ Καὶ m ο 36. 40 vulg syr sah Chr Thl-fin. (18 def.) 
rec for παν, ολον (see Mk xiv. 55), with HLP vel Thi-sif: txt ABCEN ach k m13. 
36. 137 Chr Thl-fin, απαν 40 (omne vulg, but so also in Mk xiv. 55 and Matt xxvi. 59.) 


rec aft συνεδριον ins avtwy (gloss, referring to tovda.wy above), with HLP rel 


(Syr) Thl: om ABCEN a ck 18. 36. 40. 187 vulg syr coptt «th arm Chr. 


tov E 


[om 


Cuap. XXIII. 1. tw cuvedpiw bef o παυλος ACEN ἃ 18 vulg Lucif,: txt (B)HLP 


this is mere conjecture. 29. wai... 
δέ] moreover, ‘more than that.’ ἐφοβ.] 
There is no inconsistency (as De W.) in 
the tribune’s being afraid because he had 
bound him, and then letting him remain 
thus bound. Meyer rightly explains it, that 
the tribune, having committed this error, 
is afraid of the possible consequences of it 
(‘ facinus est vinciri civem R., scelus verbe- 
rari,’ Cic. Verr. v. 66), and shews this by 
taking the first opportunity of either wn- 
doing it, or justifying his further deten- 
tion, by loosing him, and bringing him be- 
Sore the Sanhedrim. His fear was on ac- 
count of his first false step ; but it was now 
too late to reverse it : and the same reason 
which leads him to continue it now, operates 
afterwards (6 δέσμιος Π., ch. xxiii. 18) when 
the hearing was delayed. That ἦν dedexds 
cannot, as Bloomfield and Wordsworth 
suppose, refer only to the binding before 
scourging, its immediate juxtaposition 
with ἔλυσεν in the next verse sufficiently 
shews. Besides, the mere circumstance of 
a preparation for scourging having been 
begun in ignorance, and left off as soon as 
the knowledge was received, would rather 
have relieved, than occasioned, the fear of 
the tribune. A more cogent reason still 
is, that ἦν δεδεκώς can properly only apply 
to an action still continuing when the 
fear was felt: that he had put him into 
custody. ‘The centurion believed Paul’s 


word, because a false claim of this nature, 
being easily exposed, and punishable with 
death (Suet. Claud. 25), was almost an un- 
precedented thing.’ Hackett. 30. τὸ 
τί] Theart. is epexegetical: see reff. It 
seems remarkable that the tribune in com- 
mand should have had the power to sum- 
mon the Sanhedrim: and I have not seen 
this remarked on by any Commentator. 
Some of the ancient correctors of the text, 
however, seem to have detected the diffi- 
culty, and to have altered συνελθεῖν into 
the vapid ἐλθεῖν in consequence. 

katay. | From Antonia to the council-room, 
According to tradition (see Biscoe, p. 147, 
notes), the Sanhedrim ceased to hold their 
sessions in the temple about twenty-six 
years before this period. Had they done 
so now, Lysias and his soldiers could not 
have been present, as no heathen was per- 
mitted to pass the sacred limits. Their 
present council-room was in the upper 
city, near the foot of the bridge leading 


-aeross the ravine from the western cloister 


of the temple. Lewin, p. 672. 

XXIII. 1.] ἀτενίσας seems to describe 
that peculiar look, connected probably with 
infirmity of sight, with which Paul has 
already been described as regarding those 
before him: and may perhaps account for 
his not knowing that the person who spoke 
to him was the high priest, ver. 5. See ch, 
xiii. 9,note. The purport of Paul’s asser- 


252 


6 — (all pos- 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AMOSTOAON. 


XXIII. 


, , A -« a 
ἐγὼ "πάσῃ “aouverdnoes ' ἀγαθῇ "πεπολίτευμαι TO θεᾷ ἄχρι ABCE 


ale xx. PRE ea Bids δὲ > . Ἂ βΈΠΓῊ - HLPRa 
tl Tim. 1.519. TAUTNS TIS MMEPAS. ~ 0 OF APVLEPEUS vavlas ἐπέταξεν mae & 
t. 11}, a a > a “ > a \ ΄ / 
a. (Heb. τοῖς Y παρεστῶσιν αὐτῷ τύπτειν αὐτοῦ TO στόμα. ὃ. τότε 13 
xiii. 18.) ς aA 4 \ c , 
u2Cor.i12 Ὁ Ἰ]αῦλος πρὸς αὐτὸν. εἶπεν Τύπτειν σε * μέλλει ὁ θεός, 
v Phil. i, 27 a Ἂν b Sees \ Nou ga 10 / \ \ 
only +. τούχε Κεκονμνίαμενε'" καὶ σὺυ Κασῇ κρινὼῶν μὲ KATA TOV 
μετὰ πάσης , Xd - Ά s θ 4 ε δὲ 
. ἀρετῆς ΨΟμΟΨ, Και παρανομὼν κελεύεις ME τυπτεσῦσαι; οι € 
ἐνθάδε y A 3 \ > , “- θ eer ὃ - 
πεπολί- παρέστωτες €l7TOV Tov uUpXlLEepEea TOV cov “ λοι Opes , 
τευμαι Pag) J F 
Jos. Life, ἢ 49 and $2. τοῖς νόμοις πολιτεύεσθαι, 2 Macc. vi. 1. (-τευμα, Phil. iii. 20.) x w. inf. 
pres., here only. Xen. Anab. ii. 3.6. w. inf. aor., Mark vi. 39. Luke viii. 31 al. Esth.i. 8. y = Mark 
xiv. 47,69,70. Luke xix. 24. John xviii, 22. xix. 26. = ch. xiii, 34 reff. a here 


only. Exod. xxx. 3 al. (see Eph. ii. 14.) 
c = Matt. xxii. 44 (from Ps. cix. 1). xxvii. 19. 
iv. 4,21. (-ta, 2 Pet. ii. 16. -os, Prov. ii. 22.) 


Rev. iv.2, &c. 


Deut. xxvii. 2,4. Prov. xxi. 9 only. 
Ps. exviii. 51. Xen. Mem. 
Deut. xxxiii. 8. pass., 1 Cor. 


Zz 
Matt. xxiii, 27 only. 
d here only. 
e w. acc., John ix. 28 only. 


iv. 12. 1 Pet. ii. 23 only. (-a, 1 Tim. v. 14. 1 Pet. iii. 9. τος, 1 Cor. ν. 11. vi. 10.) 


rel 36 [syrr coptt «th arm] Chr,.—om ὁ B ο 40. 137 Chry. 


ec m 13. 137 [syr]. 
2. for επεταξεν, εκελευσεν C a 86. 
auTw X}, 


Ts nuepas bef ταυτης 


τ᾿ παρεστ. autw bef εἐπεταὲξεν ὁ 137: om 


3. πρὸς avrov bef o παυλος N: εἰπεν bef προς avroy C vulg(not am fuld tol) [Syr coptt 


eth]: om zp. avt. 100. [13 def. ] 
mapa Tov νομον Εἰ vulg [arm] Lucif. 
4, εἰπαν ΒΝ [13]. 


tion seems to be this: being charged with 
neglecting, and teaching others to neglect 
the law of Moses, he at once endeavours to 
disarm those who thus accused him, by 
asserting that up to that day he had lived 
a true and loyal Jew,—obeying, according 
to his conscience, the law of that divine 
πολιτεία of which he was a covenant mem- 
ber. Thus πεπολίτευμαι τῷ θεῷ will have 
its full and proper meaning: and the words 
are no vain-glorious ones, but an important 
assertion of his innocence. 2. *Ava- 
vias} He was at this time the actual high 
priest (ver. 4). He was the son of Nebe- 
dus (Jos. Antt. xx. 5. 2),—succeeded 
Joseph son of Camydus, Antt. xx. 1. 3; 
5. 2,—and preceded Ismael, son of Phabi 
(Antt. xx. 8. 8,11). He was nominated 
to the office by Herod, king of Chalcis, 
in A.D. 48 (Antt. xx. 5. 2); and sent to 
Rome by Quadratus, the prefect of Syria, 
to give an account to the emperor Claudius 
(Antt. xx. 6. 2): he appears, however, not 
to have lost his office, but to have resumed 
it on his return. This has been regarded 
as not certain,—and the uncertainty has 
produced much confusion in the Pauline 
chronology. But as Wieseler has shewn 
(Chronol. d. Apostelgeschichte, p. 76, 
note), there can be no reasonable doubt that 
it was so, especially as Ananias came off 
victorious in the cause for which he went to 
Rome, viz. a quarrel with the Jewish pro- 
curator Cumanus,—who went with him, 
and was condemned to banishment (Antt. 
xx. 6. 3). He was deposed from his office 
not long before the departure of Felix 
(Antt. xx. 8. 8), but still had great power, 
which he used violently and lawlessly (ib. 


κεκονιασμενε C} Orig). 


for παρανόμων, 


9. 2): he was assassinated by the sicarii 
[see ch, xxi. 38, note] at last (B. J. ii. 17, 
9). 3. | It is perfectly allowable (even 
if the fervid rebuke of Paul be considered 
exempt from blame) to contrast with his 
conduct and reply that of Him Who, 
when similarly smitten, answered with 
perfect and superhuman meekness, John 
xviii. 22, 23. Our blessed Saviour is to 
us, in all His words and acts, the perfect 
pattern for all under all circumstances : 
by aiming at whatever He did in each 
case, we shall do best: but even the 
greatest of his Apostles are so far our 
patterns only, as they followed Him, 
which certainly in this case Paul did not. 
That Paul thus answered, might go far to 
excuse a like fervent reply ina Christian 
or a minister of the gospel,—but must 
never be used to justify it: it may serve 
for an apology, but never for an example. 

τύπτειν σε μέλλει K.7.A.] Some 
have seen a prophetic import in these 
words ;—see above on the death of Ananias. 
But I would rather take them as an expres- 
sion founded on a conviction that God’s 
just retribution would come on unjust and 
brutal acts. τοῖχε κεκον.} Lightfoot’s 
interpretation, “quod (Ananias) colorem 
tantum gestaret poutificatus, cum res ipsa 
evanuerit,” is founded on the hypothesis 
( for it ts none other) that the high priest- 
hood was vacant at this time, and Ananias 
had thrust himself into it. The meaning is 
as in ref. Matt.; and in all probability Paul 
referred in thought to our Lord’s saying. 

κάθῃ κρίνων με] This must not be 
taken as favouring the common interpreta- 


tion of ver. 5 (see below): for the whole © 


2—6 


MIPASETS, ATMOS TOAQN. 


253 


5 ἔφη τε ὁ Παῦλος Οὐκ ἤδειν, ἀδελφοί, ὅτι ἴ ἐστὶν ApY= fpres.,ch._ 


xvi. 38 reff. 


zr \ ᾽ an an = on 
LEPEUS” γέγραπται yap [ὅτι] δ Ἄρχοντα τοῦ λαοὺυ σου οὐκ eens xxii. 


" ἐρεῖς © κακῶς. 


here onfy. 


\ ς a ¢ \ τ ᾽ νν Te 
6 γνοὺς δὲ ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι τὸ ἕν μέρος ' ἐστὶν ᾿ Exod. 1.ς. 


ev. xix. 


14. Isa. viii. 21 only. so καλῶς εἰπεῖν, w. acc., Luke vi. 26, 


δ. rec om 2nd om, with CEHLP rel 36 Chr, Thl-sif (Ες : ins ABN k 13 Thl-fin. 


Sanhedrim were the judges, and sitting to 
judge him according to the law. : 
Hence we see that not only by the Jews, 
- but by the tribune, who was present, Ana- 
nias was regarded as the veritable high 
priest. 5.| (1) The ordinary inter- 
pretation of these words since Lightfoot, 
adopted by Michaelis, Eichhorn, Kuinoel, 
and others, is, that Ananias had usurped 
the office during a vacancy, and therefore 
was not recognized by Paul. They regard 
his being sent to Rome as a virtual setting 
aside from being high priest, and suppose 
that Jonathan, who was murdered by order 
of Felix (Antt. xx. 8. 5), was appointed 
high priest in his absence. But (a) there 
is no ground whatever for believing that his 
office was vacated. He won the cause for 
which he went to Rome, and returned to 
Jerusalem: it was only when a high priest 
was detained as hostage in Rome, that we 
read of another being appointed in his room 
(Antt. xx. 8. 11): and (8) which is fatal 
to the hypothesis, Jonathan himself (6 
ἀρχιερεύς) was sent to Rome with Anunias 
(B. J. ii. 12. 6, τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς ᾿Ιωνάθην 
καὶ ᾿Ανανίαν . . . . ἀνέπεμψεν ἐπὶ Καί- 
σαρα). Jonathan was called by the title 
merely as having been previously high 
priest. He succeeded Caiaphas, Antt. xviii. 
4. 3: and he was not high priest again 
afterwards, having expressly declined to 
resume the office, Antt. xix.6.4. Nor can 
any other Jonathan have been elevated to 
it,—for Josephus gives, in every case, the 
elevation of a new high priest, and his 
whole number of twenty-eight from Herod 
the Great to the destruction of Jerusalem 
(Antt. xx. 10.5) agrees with the notices 
thus given. (See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. 
der 4 Evv. p. 187, note: and Biscoe, pp. 
48 ff.) So that this interpretation is un- 
tenable. (2) Chrys. and most of the ancient 
Commentators supposed that Paul, having 
been long absent, was really unacquainted 
with the person of the high priest. But 
this can hardly have been: and even if it 
were, the position and official seat would 
have pointed out to one, who had been 
himself a member of the Sanhedrim, the 
president of the council. (3) Calvin, Ca- 
merar., al., take the words ironically: “1 
could not be supposed to know that one who 
conducted himself so cruelly and illegally, 
could be the high priest.’ This surely 
needs no refutation, as being altogether 


out of place and character. (4) Bengel, 
Wetst., Kuinoel, Olsh., Neander, al., un- 
derstand the words as an acknowledgment 
of rash and insubordinate language, and 
render οὐκ ἤδειν, “1 did not give it a 
thought, ‘I forgot ? and so Wordsworth. 
But as Meyer remarks, ‘reputare’ is 
never the meaning of εἰδέναι; and were 
any pregnant or unusual sense intended, 
the context (as at 1 Thess. v. 12) would 
suggest it. (5) On the whole then, I be- 
lieve that the only rendering open to us, 
consistently with the simple meaning of 
the words, and the facts of history is, I did 
not know that it (or he) was the high 
priest: and that it is probable that the 
solution of his ignorance lies in the fact 
of his imperfect sight—he heard the inso- 
lent order given, but knew not from whom 
it proceeded. I own that I am not entirely 
satisfied with this, as being founded per- 
haps on too slight premises: but as far as 
I can see there is no positive objection to 
it, which there is to every other. The 
objection stated by Wordsworth, “If St. 
Paul could not discern that Ananias was 
high priest, how could he see that he sat 
there as his judge?” would of course be 
easily answered by supposing that Paul 
who had himself been a member of the 
Sanhedrim may have known Ananias by 
his voice: or indeed may not (as above) 
have known him at all personally. It is 
hardly worth while to notice the rendering 
given by some, ‘I knew not that there was 
a high priest” Wad any such meaning 
been intended, it would have been further 
specified by the construction. Besides 
which, it renders Paul’s apology irrelevant, 
by eliminating from it the person who is 
necessarily its subject. γέγραπται 
γάρ] Implying in this, ‘ and the law is the 
rule of my life.’ Even in this we see the 
consumuate skill of Paul. 6.1 Surely 
no defence of Paul for adopting this course 
is required, but all admiration is due to his 
skill and presence of mind. Nor need we 
hesitate to regard such skill as the fulfil- 
ment of the promise, that in such an hour, 
the Spirit of wisdom should suggest words 
to the accused, which the accuser should 
not be able to gainsay. All prospect of a 
fair trial was bopeless : he well knew from 
past and present experience, that personal 
odium would bias his judges, and violence 
prevail over justice: he therefore (Neand.) 


254 


i ch. xxii. 30. 
= here only. 
see Ps, xv. 9. 

11 Cor. xv. 12 


= ΄ \ 
men xxiv. Wept * eXmridos Kat ! 


Ps. cviii. 7. 

n = ch. xv. 2 
(reff.). 

o ch. xiv. 4. 

1 Mace. vi. 
45. 

p absol., ch. il. 
6 reff. 

q absol., ch. 
xvii. 18 reff. 

r = Luke 
xxiv. 37, 39. 
Heb. i. 14. 

3 Kings xxii. 
21. 

s = John xii. 
42. Rom. x. ΄ 
9,10. 1 Tim. TOUT@" 
vi. 12. ¢ 

t Luke i. 42. 

xxi. 4 only. 


Rev. xiv. 18 only. Neh. v. 1. 
v=ch.i. 15. xv. 7 al. 
xxili. 14, Mal. i. 6. z = Rom. ix. 22. 


6. [aft erepor ins των L. | 
arm] Chr,: txt BCX 36 [Syr]. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ AMOZTTOAON. 


XXL 


Σαδδουκαίων, τὸ δὲ ἕτερον Φαρισαίων, ἔκραζεν ἐν τῷ ' συν- 
εδρίῳ "Άνδρες ἀδελφοί, ἐγὼ Φαρισαῖος εἰμι, υἱὸς Φαρισαίων' 
ἀναστάσεως 


] n b] \ m / 
VEKP@V EY@ Κρινομαιύυ. 


7 τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοῦ λαλήσαντος ἐγένετο " στάσις τῶν Φαρι- 
σαίων καὶ Σαδδουκαίων, καὶ 5 ἐσχίσθη τὸ ἡ πλῆθος" ὃ Lad- 
δουκαῖοι μὲν γὰρ λέγουσιν μὴ εἶναι ἃ ἀνάστασιν μήτε ay- 
γελον μήτε ' πνεῦμα, Φαρισαῖοι δὲ " ὁμολογοῦσιν τὰ ἀμφό- 
τερα: 9 ἐγένετο δὲ “ κραυγὴ ᾿ μεγάλη. 
τινὲς τῶν γραμματέων τοῦ “ μέρους τῶν Φαρισαίων * διεμα- 
xovTo λέγοντες Οὐδὲν κακὸν ¥ εὑρίσκομεν ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ 
Ze, δὲ πνεῦμα ἐλάλησεν αὐτῷ ἢ ἄγγελος ; 


Ὁ as above (t). Matt. σχχν. θ. Eph.iv.3l. Heb. ν. 7. Rev. 
2 Chron. xx. 5. 


only. 2 Kings xiv. 6(compl.). Sir. viii. 1, 3. XxXViii. 28. li. 19 Ed-vat. &c. (not ABN) only. 


ae tee ΄ 
Kab avacTaVTES 


w ver. 6, x here 


y= Luke 


rec expagev, with AEHLP rel vulg [syr coptt eth 
rec (for 2nd φαρισαιων) φαρισαιου (corrn, the 


relation being conceived to be that of a son to his father only), with EHLP rel [coptt 


eth arm] Chr: txt ABCX 13. 36. 40 vulg Syr syr(sic) Tert,. 


[sah Tert,. (ΟἹ doubtful.) ] 


om 2nd eyw B copt 


%. for λαλήησαντος, εἰποντος AEN a Ὁ k 013. 40 Thl-fin: εἴπαντος &': λαλουντος 
B(sic: see table) 661. 100: txt CHL[P] rel 36 Chr, Thl-sif. for eyeveTo, ἐπεπεσεν 
Bb! ; erecev B-corr!:?(appy) [6] syr. rec ins των bef oad. (insn for uniformity), 
with HL rel 36: om ABCD k mo Thl-sif.—tav oa55. και pap. EX ὁ g m [13] syr Chr 
Thl-fin—om και σαδδ. (homeotel) Ῥ 78. 101-4. διεσχισθη Εἰ. 

8. σαδδουκαι(ϑ10) δὲ). om μεν Β ο vulg E-lat sah: ins AC E-gr HLPN rel 36 
syr copt [arm] Chr. rec for Ist unte, unde (corrn, see note), with HLP rel Chr 
Thi-sif: txt ABCEN a ch k 1138. 36. 40 Thl-fin. 

9. rec (for τινες των γραμματεων) οἱ Ὕραμματεις, with rel Thl-sif: γραμματεῖς HLP ἢ 
eth: τινες (and om τοὺ pepous) AE 13 vulg copt: tives γραμματεῖς k 21? Syr: τινες 
των (φαρισαιων)ὴ γραμματεων m: txt B(C)X ἃ ὁ 13. 36. 40 syr sah arm Chr, Thl-fin.— 
quidam scribarum et pars phariseorum sah: scribe et pharisai eth: for pépovs, 


γενους 99. 105: ins ex bef τ. γραμμ. C. 
om εν δὲ} 137. 


uses, in the cause of Truth, the maxim so 
often perverted to the cause of falsehood, 
‘divide et impera.’ In one tenet above all 
others, did the religion of Jesus Christ and 
the belief of the Pharisees coincide ~ that 
of the resurrection of the dead. That they 
looked for this resurrection by right of 
being the seed of Abraham, and denied it 
to all others,—whereas he looked for it 
through Jesus whom they hated, in whom 
all should be made alive who had died in 
Adam,—this was nothing to the present 
point: the belief was common—in the 
truest sense it was the hope of Israel—in 
the truest sense does Paul use and bring 
it forward to confound the adversaries of 
Christ. At the same time (De W.) by this 
strong assertion of his Pharisaic standing 
and extraction, he was further still vin- 
dicating himself from the charge against 
him. So also ch. xxvi. 7. vi. Φαρι- 
σαίων] A son of Pharisees, i.e. 4 Pha- 
risee of Pharisees,—‘by descent from 
father, grandfather, and upwards, a pure 


aft διεμάχοντο ins προς αλληλους ὃξ. 


rec aft αγγελος ins μη θεομαχωμεν (interpoln from ch v. 


Pharisee.? This meaning not having been 
apprehended, the -wv was altered into -ov. 

ἐλπ. k. avacr.| the hope and the 
resurrection of the dead. The art. is 
omitted after the prep., see Midd. ch. vi. 
§ 1. 8.] See note, Matt. iii. 7, for 
both Pharisees and Sadducees: and for an 
account of the doctrine of the latter, Jos. 
Antt. xviii. 1.4; B. J. ii. 8.14. In the 
latter place he says, ψυχῆς τὴν διαμονήν, 
kal τὰς καθ᾽ ἅδου τιμωρίας καὶ τιμὰς avai- 
ροῦσι. The former μήτε has been 
altered to μηδέ to suit τὰ ἀμφότερα, be- 
cause with dvaor. μήτε ἄγγ. μήτε πν. 
three things are mentioned (and thus we 
have hec omnia as a var.): whereas, if 
μηδέ is read, the two last are coupled, and 
form only one. But τὰ au. is used of 
both things, the one being the resurreetion, 
the other the doctrine of spiritual ex- 
istences: the two specified classes of the 
latter being combined generically.—ra 
ἀμφ., them both,—both of them,—the 
two. 9.] The sentence is an apo- 


ABCE 
HLPxRa 
befgh 
klmo 
13 


Ρ ovdev., 


ABCE 
HLPNa 
befgh 
klmo 
p 13 


7---1 5. ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 25 


Ly | 


10 TONAN δὲ EVO ένγ a 4 * } $ ver 
js ὃὲ γενομένης ἃ στάσεως, * φοβηθεὶς ὁ χιλίαρχος «ver Ὑ 


\ a ς al a , “- 
μὴ " διασπασθῇ ὁ ἸΙαῦλος ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν, ἐκέλευσεν τὸ “ στρά- snyder ie 
d Ba ef ΄ ὯΝ f2 7 > A ” c = Luke 
τευμα ἃ καταβὰν “ ἁρπάσαι αὐτὸν ἴ ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν ἄγειν “ xxiii.11. 
= \ " Ἢ . » ver. 27 ἐπε 
τε εἰς τὴν 5 παρεμβολήν. 11 τῇ δὲ * ἐπιούσῃ νυκτὶ (Matt. xxii. 
ΟΣ ΠΗ ς- ΄, 5 : 
dox- ἐπιστὰς αὐτῷ ὁ κύριος εἶπεν Θάρσει: ws yao * διεμαρ- 15.15.1, 
ριος ἐ δι, ρ μ ρ 19 bis) ΟὨΪῪ +t. 
ABCE χύρω 1 7a) περὶ ἐμοῦ ™ εἰς Ἱερουσαλή ὕ δὴ καὶ ie 
Bence τί pl ἐμ is Ἱερουσαλήμ, οὕτως σε " δεῖ καὶ 3. 


{ > ς / A 12 , \ τ 7 ΄ ff. 
Beet ™ εἰς “Ῥώμην μαρτυρῆσαι. ° γενομένης δὲ 5 ἡμέρας ποιή- “νη vi. 


\ cia n , ΄ 15. ch. viii. 
opls σαντες Ῥσυστροφὴν ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι 4 ἀνεθεμάτισαν ἑαυτούς, 19. Jude. 
y / a ΄ an xxi. 21. ᾿ 
λέγοντες μήτε " φαγεῖν μήτε " πιεῖν ἕως οὗ ἀποκτείνωσιν τὸν £ x8 
3 a ; h. xxi 34, 
Uadrgov. 15 ἦσαν δὲ πλείους τεσσεράκοντα οἱ ταύτην τὴν © Ἡ τοῦ. 
h ch. vii. 26 
(xvi. 11 reff.). i = ch. iv. 1 reff. k ch. viii. 25 reff. w. acc. ch. xviii. 5. xx. 21, 24, XXVili. 


23. Exod. xviii. 20. 
n ch. iv. 12 reff. 
ἄς. 3ce. 


o ch. xii. 18 reff. 
Mark xiv. 71 only. Num. xxi. 2. 


1 ver. 15. ch. xxviii. 31. 


ch. xix. 22 reff. 
q here, 


Sir. xix. 30. m= 
p ch. xix. 40 reff. 4 Kings xv. 15, 
rch.ix.9. Tobit vii. 11. 


39), with C3HLP rel 36 sah; quid est in hoc ? Syr: om ABC'ER 13. 40 vulg syr copt 
zth arm, also (from their explanations) Amm, Chr, Isid,. 
10. cracews bef yevowevns AC vulg: txt BEHLPR p 13. 36 rel Chr,.—[-yivou. Βίγειν.) 


XN, ] -wevos (but ἡ is written above o) δὲ]. 


sif: φοβηθεις ABCEN a cp 13. 36. 40. 137 arm Chr, Thl-fin Lucif. 
CE καταβηναι και H[ LP rel 137 vulg syr sah ΤῊ]: txt ABCEN a f p 18. 36 


Syr Chr. 


om εκ μεσου auTwy XR}, 


deducere vulg: txt BCHLPR p 13. 36 rel. 


* rec εὐλαβηθείς, with HLP rel Th- 


QT aUT@V 


atrayew (corrn for particularity) AK, 
om τε Β τὴ copt. 


11. rec aft θαρσει ins παυλε, with C3HLP p rel arm-zoh(1805) Thl Ambrst, ; 
aft εἰπεν ins Paulo Syr eth, avrw bo: om ABC'EN [a] 13. 36. 40 vulg syr coptt 


arm[-mss} Chr, Lucif,. 
12. for δε, re B ὁ syrr eth. 


διεμαρτυρου C. 
rec τινες τῶν tovdaiwy ovatpopny ‘corrn to suit 


ver 13), with HLP rel vulg Syr sah Thi-sif Lucif: txt ABCERX (a) p 13. 36. 40. 157 
syr copt eth arm Chr Thl-fin.—(L Καὶ m have συστροφην bef τινες ; ὁ 137 syr Chr Thl- 


fin, aft οἱ covd.: a omits οἱ.) 
arm Chr,. mew B(so ver 21). 
113 Chr. 


siopesis, not requiring any filling up: an- 
swering to our Engl. But what if a spirit 
(genus) or an angel (species) have spoken 
to him? Perhaps in this they referred to 
the history of his conversion as told to the 
people, ch. xxii. | On the recent criticism 
which sees in all this a purpose in the 
writer to compare Paul with Peter, see 
Prolegg. to Acts, ὃ 111. 4. 10.] The 
fact of all our best Mss. reading φοβηθείς 
here, and not the unusual word εὐλαβηθείς, 
must carry it into the text. It is one of 
those cases where, notwithstanding our 
strong suspicion that the later Mss. con- 
tain the true reading, we are bound to fol- 
low our existing authorities: no sufficient 
subjective reason being assigned for the cor- 
rection either way. διασπασθῇ | to be 
taken literally, not as merely = ‘should 
be killed.’ The Pharisees would strive to 
lay hold of him to rescue him: the Sad- 
ducees, to destroy him, or at all events to 
secure him. Between them both, there 
was danger of his being pulled asunder 
by them. 11.] By these few words, 


om λεγοντες CR? a Ὁ ὁ ἢ o 40 syrr(ins syr-mg) 


for αποκτεινωσιν, aveAwow A h 14. 38. 


the Lord assured him (1) of a safe issue 
Srom his present troubles; (2) of an ae- 
complishment of his intention of visiting 
Rome ; (8) of the certainty that however 
he might be sent thither, he should preach 
the gospel, and bear testimony there. So 
that they upheld and comforted him (1) 
in the uncertainty of his life from the 
Jews: (2) in the uncertainty of his libera- 
tion from prison at Cesarea: (3) in the 
uncertainty of his surviving the storm in 
the Mediterranean : (4) in the uncertainty 
of kis fate on arriving at Rome. So may 
one crumb of divine grace and help be 
multiplied to feed five thousand wants and 
anxieties. eis, see reff. and ch. ii. 39, 
—pregnant. 12.] ot Ἰουδ. as opposed 
to Paul, the subject of the former verse. 
The copyists thought it unlikely that al 
the Jews were engaged in it, and so altered 
it to τινες τῶν Ἰουδ., and then transposed it 
for euphony. Wetstein and Lightf. ad- 
duce instances of similar conspiracies,—not 
to eat or drink till some object be gained. 
See 1 Sam, xiv. 24 ff. ; and Jos, Antt. xv. 8. 


256 


s here only. 
(-ότης, Gen. 
xiv. 13.) 

t = ch. x. Αἵ 


reff. 
ἢ = ch. ix. l 
reff. 
x Rom, ix. 3 
reff. 
τὸ Deut. xiii. 15. 
x 2 Cor. iii. 1 
7 γ ς 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


κτείνωμεν τὸν [[αῦλον. 
- ΄ b \ r c / “ ἃ / >] Ν 
τῷ χιλιάρχῳ ὃ σὺν τῷ συνεδρίῳ, ὅπως ἃ καταγάγῃ αὐτὸν 


XXIII. 


Ἶ / [τ ;’ “ 

5 συνωμοσίαν ποιησάμενοι, 158." οἵτινες ἃ πρροςελθόντες τοῖς 
5 a \ - / - ᾽ ,ὔ 

ἀρχιερεῦσιν καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις εἶπαν “"᾿Αναθέματι 
ΞΡ | / \ ‘ ᾿ / » 

W ἀνεθεματίσαμεν "ἑαυτοὺς μηθενὸς " γεύσασθαι ἕως οὗ ἀπο- 


15 Z ypp 5 οὖν ὑμεῖς * ἐμφανισατε 


Ὁ“ f Ζ 
yen caconstr, εἰς ὑμᾶς “ ὡς μέλλοντας ᾿ διαγινώσκειν 8 ἀκριβέστερον 


Luke xiv. 24. 
1 Kings xiv. 
24 


z ch. x. 33 reff. 

,Ἅ “- Ver. 22. 
ch. xxiv. 1, 
xxv. 2, 15. 
(Matt. xxvii. 
53. John 
xiv. 21, 22.) 
Heb. (ix. 24. 
xi. 14 only. 
Esth. ii. 22. 


2 Cor. i. 1. 
Phil. i. 1. ἐν 
ech. iy. 15 reff. “ EVEL 
d act., = Luke 
w. 12, ch: ix. 
30. xxii. 30. 
vv. 20, 28. 
Rom. x. 6, 
L.P. 3 Kings 
i. 33. pass., 
ch, xxvii. 3. 
xxviii. 12. 
xxxiii. 56. 2 Macc. ix. 15. (-γνωσις, ch. xxv. 21. 
h ver. 11. i Luke xxii. 15. Gal. ii. 12 al. 
here only. (Luke xxii. 33.) 1 Kings xiii. 21. 
2. Luke xxi.9al. 3 Kings x. 1. 
al. fr.in LXX. -dpeveur, ver. 21.) 
rch. xx. 9 reff. 


xxy. 26 al. uch. xvi. 33 reff. 


e = Luke xxiii. 14. ver. 20. ch. xxvii. 30. xxviii. 19. 
-γνωρίζειν, Luke ii. 17.) 
Gen. xiii. 10. 


ἢ \ \ > 5 a δὲ i \ ΑΚ. / 2. δ 1“ 
τὰ περὶ αὐτοῦ: ἡμεῖς δὲ ἱ πρὸ τοῦ " ἐγγίσαι αὐτὸν ' ἕτοι- 
ris ~am2 δι - Ia 16 n2 Ay. δὲ evan a 
μοί ἐσμεν τοῦ ™ ἀνελεῖν αὐτὸν. ἀκούσας δὲ ὁ υἱὸς τῆς 
a ’ ‘ \ 
ἀδελφῆς Παύλου τὴν ° ἐνέδραν, ? παραγενόμενος καὶ εἰς- 
ελθὼν εἰς τὴν 4 παρεμβολὴν ἀπήγγειλεν τῷ Παύλῳ. 
᾿ 17 προςκαλεσάμενος δὲ ὁ Ἰ]αῦλος ἕνα τῶν ἑκατοντάρχων 
. ἔφη Τὸν " νεανίαν τοῦτον " ἀπάγαγε πρὸς τὸν χιλίαρχον" 
\ > ὮΝ f > - 18 ς ἈΝ io u X. ‘ 
yap ἀπαγγεῖλαί τι αὐτῷ. ὁ μὲν οὖν ' παραλαβὼν 
> hy. 4 \ \ ἢ Ὅ Vv δέ 
αὐτὸν ἤγαγεν πρὸς τὸν χιλίαρχον, και φησιν έσμιος 
a 4 3 ’ a 
Παῦλος προςκαλεσώμενός μὲ “ἠρώτησεν τοῦτον τὸν 
νεανίσκον ἀγαγεῖν πρός σε, ᾿ ἔχοντα τι λαλῆσαί σοι. 


f ch. xxiv. 22 only. Nam. 
g = ch. xviii. 26 reff. 
1 constr., 

n constr., Matt. x1, 


k ch. xxi. 33 reff. 
τὴ = ch. vy. 33 reff. 


och. xxv.3 only. Josh. viii.7. (-dpov, Josh. viii. 2. Wisd. xiv. 12 
absol., ch. xvii. 10 reff. 

s = Luke xiii. 15. (ch. xxiv.7.] 4 Kings xi. 4. 

v ch, xvi. 25, 27 reff. 


q ch. xxi. 34, 37 reff. 
t = Luke vii. 40, 42. ch. 
w ch. xvi. 39 reff. 


13. rec πεποιήκοτες (corrn appy to connect πεπ. noay as pluperf), with HP rel Chr, 
Thi: ποιήσαντες Le g 11. 27-9. 80.126: om o: txt ABCEN a [p] 18. 36. 40 Thl-fin. 


14. (erway, so ABCEP p.) 
BCEHPR® rel 36: txt AL k. (13 def.) 


rec undevos (corrn to more usual form), with 


15. syr-mg (and simly sah Lucif,) after nune igitur has rogamus vos ut hoc nobis 
aciatis, ut quum congregaveritis consessum, indicetis chiliarcho ut deducat eum ad 
q greg 


nos. 


τα 137. om 2nd του EX! a g. 


rec aft omws ins αὐριον (interpoln from ver 20), with HLP rel Thl: om 
ABCEN a p 18. 36 vulg syrr copt «th arm Chr, Lucif,. 
with HP rel Chr,: txt ABCELN a g hk πὶ p 13. 40 vulg arm Chr-e, Lucif,. 
(for es) προς (corrn to more usual), with CHLP rel 36 Chr: txt ABE 
ακριβεστερον bet διαγινωσκειν (C) 6 1 m 40. 137 vulg [arm] Lucif,. (γινωσκ. C.) 
at end ins eav den και ἀποθανεῖν 137 syr-mg. 


rec αὐτὸν bef katayayn, 
rec 
δὲ p sah. 

om 


16. elz ro ενεδρον, with HLP rel Chr, Thl-sif: txt ABCEN ack p 19. 36.—B? has 


τὴν évedpar(sic). mapayevauevos Bl. 


17. for edn, εἰπεν [Ὁ] p 36. 180. 


απαγε BN p. 


[for mapeuB., συναγωγὴν A. | 
rec τι bef amayyeiAa, 


with CHLP® rel 36 vulg [syrr 2th arm] Chr: txt ABE Καὶ p 18. 
18. rec veaviay (from preceding verse), with BHLP rel 36: txt AEN a g p 18. 40. 


σοι is written over the line by B'. 


8, 4. 14. ] It is understood from the nar- 
rative that it was to the Sadducees, among 
the chief priests and elders, that the mur- 
derers went. That the high priest be- 
longed to this sect, cannot be inferred with 
any accuracy. 15.] σὺν τῷ συνεδρ. 
belongs to ὑμεῖς, or perhaps better to 
éupavioare—do you give official intima- 
tion (intimation conveyed by the whole 
Sanhedrim). ὅπως expresses the pur- 
pose of ἐμφαν.;---τοῦ ἀν. avt., that of ἕτοι- 
μοί éou. (Meyer). διαγιν. ἀκρ.} not 
as E. V. ‘enquire something more per- 
Jectly ’ —but (see reft.) to determine with 


greater accuracy, or perhaps, neglecting 
the comparative sense, to determine ac- 
curately. 16.] It is quite uncertain 
whether Paul’s sister’s son lived in Jeru- 
salem, or had accompanied him thither. 
The ἡμᾶς of ch. xx. 5, will include more 
than merely Luke. But from this know- 
ledge of the plot, which presupposes other 
acquaintances than he would have been 
likely to make if he had come with Paul, 
I should suppose him to have been domi- 
ciled at Jerusalem, possibly under instruc- 
tion, as was formerly Paul himself, and 


ABCE 
HALPRa 
bedtg 
hkim 
op 13 


«ὐχι- 

Acap C. 

ABEH 

LPx ab 

edfgh 

klimno 
p 13 


thus likely, in the schools, to have heard» 





14---91., ΠΡΑΞΕῚΙ͂Σ ATOSTOAON. 


/ \ a la) 
19x ἐπιλαβόμενος δὲ THs * χειρὸς αὐτοῦ ὁ χιλίαρχος Kal 
Υ ἀναχωρή 2 κατ᾽ ἰδίαν * ἐπυνθά Τί ἐ ὃ “ἔ 
χωρήσας ὅ κατ᾽ ἰδίαν " ἐπυνθάνετο Ti ἐστιν ὃ "ἔχεις 
> - 7, ᾿ 90) 3 δὲ A e al ὃ “- b 46 
ἀπαγγεῖλαί μοι; 2 εἶπεν δὲ ὅτι οἱ ᾿Τουδαῖοι » συνέθεντο 
c na a ’ an , a” e bd \ A f 
τοῦ δΔἐρωτῆσαί σε ὅπως “αὔριον tov ἸΠαῦλον ἴκατ- 
4 ? yg “ὃ a a WN 73 , 
ayayns εἰς τὸ ὃ συνέδριον ἢ ὡς μέλλων τι 'ἱ ἀκριβέστερον 
ἕν \ r 5, i \ “ Aw 
k πυνθάνεσθαι περὶ αὐτοῦ. 31 σὺ οὖν μὴ ᾿πεισθῆῇς αὐτοῖς" 
m2 / \ αν ον 5“ 2) Peto: 7 ὃ 7, 
ἐνεδρεύουσιν γὰρ αὐτὸν ἐξ αὐτῶν ἄνδρες πλείους τεσσε- 
4 > 4 e \ / cal 
ράκοντα, " οἵτινες " ἀνεθεμάτισαν ἑαυτοὺς μήτε ” φαγεῖν 
, A ᾽ 7, 5 / \ rf > 
μήτε " πιεῖν ἕως οὗ " ἀνέλωσιν αὐτόν' καὶ νῦν εἰσιν ἕτοιμοι, 
0 ὃ ΄ ᾿ SN σὰ PP 7 99 ¢ \ 5 
προςδεχόμενοι τὴν ἀπὸ σοῦ ὃ ἐπαγγελίαν. ὁ μὲν οὖν 
, \ }- 
χιλίαρχος Tamédvoev τὸν νεανίσκον, "παραγγείλας μηδενὶ 
5 ἐκλαλῆσαι ὅ ὕτα ᾿ ἐνεφά ᾷ ἢ 59. καὶ 
σαι ὃτι ταῦτα ‘evepavicas πρὸς ἅμε. καὶ 
\ A ς ΄ 
προςκαλεσάμενος δύο " τινὰὲ τῶν ἑκατοντάρχων εἶπεν 
Ξ 7 / ΄ - 
» “Ετοιμάσατε στρατιώτας διακοσίους, ὅπως πορευθῶσιν 
ὃν Ν ν © a ς ΄ 
* ἕως Καισαρείας, καὶ Σ᾽ ἱππεῖς ἑβδομήκοντα καὶ * δεξιολά- 


/ a > ‘ fe b “ “ b / 94, ο 7 1 
Bous διακοσίους, ὃ ἀπὸ τρίτης ὃ ὥρας τῆς ὃ νυκτός, ΚΤΉνη 


d A ivf e 3 / \ II na f ὃ ΄ 
τε ' παραστῆσαι, ἵνα " ἐπιβιβάσαντες τὸν [Παῦλον * διασώ- 
ἘΠ (-δρα, ver. 16, ch. xxv. 3.) n see vy. 12—15. 

i. 4 reff. q=ch. xui.3reff | rch. xvi. 18 reff. 
Qonly. τίς 6 ἐκλαλήσας ; Demosth. περὶ τ. Tapamp., p. 354. 23. 
here only. Wisd. xvi. 21. u constr., ch. i. 4. xvii. 3 al. 
w and constr., Rey. viii. 6. (ix. 15.) x ch. xvii. 15. 
z here only +t. a = Matt. xxvii. 45. Ὁ ch. xvi. 33. 
ἃ constr., here only. see Col. i. 22. e Luke x. 34. xix. 35 only. 


o ch. xxiv. 15 reff. 


p ch. 
shere only+. Judith xi. 

t ver. 15 veff. w. πρός, 

v.= Luke vii. 19 Jz 

y ver. 32 only. 

c 1 Cor. xv. 39 reff. 

2 Kings vi. 3. see Matt. xxi. 5. 


257 


x Mark viii. 23. 
Zech. xiv. 13, 

y Matt. ii. 12 
al9. Mark 
iii. 7. John 
vi. 15. ch. 
xxvi. 31 only. 
1 Kings xix. 
10. 

z Matt. xiv. 13, 
23. xvii. 1 al. 
fr: 


b Luke xxii. 5. 
John ix. 22 
only. 1 Kings 
xxii.13. Dan. 
ii. 9 Theod. 

¢ constr., ch. 
11:1. 12 reff. 

d Luke vii. 3. 
xi. 37. see 
ver. 18. 

e 1 Cor. xv. 32 
reff. 

f ver. 15 reff. 

g ch. iv. 15 reff. 

h = ver. 15 
reff. 

i = ch. xviii. 
26 reff. 

k w. περί, here 


τὴ (trans.) Luke 
xi, 54 only. 
Deut. xix. 

ch 


Gen. 1.9. 


f = ch. xxvii. (43) 44. xxviii. 1, 4 (Matt. xiv. 36. Luke vii. 3. 1 Pet. iii. 20). w. εἰς, Gen. xix. 19. Jos. Antt. 


xii. 4. 9, end, 
19. em:AaBouevov(sic) δὲ}. επυνθανετο bef κατ ιδιαν A. 
20. συνεθοντο H}. 
Cie : 


rec ts TO συνεδριον KaTay. Tov παυλον, with HP rel Thl-fin 
καταγαγης bef τον παυλον 1, ο [(k)] 187 [vulg-clem] syrrcoptt [(zth) ] (perhaps 


transpositions to avoid avpiov Tov TavAov): Om τον παυλον (home@otel) 40: txt ABEN 


am p 13 am(and demid fuld tol) {arm] Chr. 


rec weAAovtes (corrn to suit ver 15), 


with b? ec d 1 [vulg syrr sah arm] Thl-fin: weAAovra HLP am Thi-sif: μελλοντων &F 


f x k 36. 137 Chr: txt ABE 0 p 40 copt eth, μελλον δὲ! b? 18, ins 


H}(7a H?). 


τι bet περι 


21. rec ετοιμοι bef εἰσιν, with HLP rel 96 vulg Chr,: txt ABEN a m p 18. 40 Thl-fin. 


22. ree veaviav (ver 17), with HLP p rel 36 Chr,: txt ABENa 13. 40. 


eue BR. 


23. τινας bef δυο BN p 13: om τινας 73 [not exprd in vulg Syr (coptt ?) arm]. 


for eBdounkovta, exatov 137 syr-mg sah eth-rom. 


δεξιοβολους A (ms mentd by 


Erasm) : jaculantes dextra Syr: lancearios vulg sah eth: jaculatores copt. 


24. [om re H(Treg, expr). ] aft παυλον ins νυκτος 137 syr-mg. 


the scheme spoken of. 21. (τὴν) 
ἐπαγγελίαν | not, ‘an order’ (as Rosenm., 
al.), nor “ὦ message’ (as Grot., Beza, Wolf, 
al.): but the [not a, as Εἰ. V.] promise (to 
that effect): as constantly in N. T. 
΄, 22,2 ὅτι. . . pe, a variation of person, as 
in reff. 23. δύο τινάς) some two: 
see reff., and Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 25. 2. ὁ. 
στρατιώτας, the ordinary heavy- 
armed legionary soldiers: distinguished 
below from the ἱππεῖς and δεξιολάβοι. 
δεξιολάβους} This word has never 
been satisfactorily explained. Suidas, Pha- 
vorinus, Beza, Kuin., al., explain it παρα- 
φύλακες :—Meursius, in his Glossarium 
Grecobarbarum,—a kind of military lic- 
tors, παρὰ τὸ λαβεῖν τὴν τοῦ δεσμίου 


ΝΟ ΤΙ: 


latores or funditores. 


τῶν στρατηγῶν ἐτάχθησαν. 
τοιοῦτον ἀξίωμα τὸν ἔχοντα 


men could ποῦ be said to do. 


is apperently 2 correction. 


διασωσι BIL H] * 


δεξιάν ;—the Vulgate, lancearios (spear- 
men, Εἰ. V.) :—Meyer, asort of light-armed 
troops, rorari or velites,—either jacu- 
He quotes a pas- 
sage from Coustantine Porphyrogenitus 
(οἱ δὲ λεγόμενοι τουρμάρχαι εἰς ὑπουργίαν 
σημαίνει δὲ 


bd’ ἑαυτὸν 


στρατιώτας τοξοφόρου: πεντακοσίους, καὶ 
πελταστὰς τριακοσίους, καὶ δεξιολάβους 
ἑκατόν) where they are distinguished from 
bowmen and peltaste,— and derives the 
name from grasping the weapon with the 
right hand, which the peltaste and bow- 
The reading 
of A, δεξιοβόλους ‘jaculantes dextra Syr.), 


24. 8 
5 


ta- 


258 


σωσιν πρὸς Φήλικα τὸν 
[ περιέχουσαν τὸν * 


g — here ἄς., 
Sce. ch. xxiv. 
1, 10. xxvi. 

30. Matt. 
xxvii. 2, &c. 
Luke xx. 20. 
(Gen. xxxvi. 
15 al.) Jos. 
Antt. xviii. 
3. 1. 

h ch. ix. 2 reff. 
i= 1 Pet. 1.6 
(Luke v. 9) 

only. 

2 Macc. zi. 
16. ἡ μὲν 
ἐπιστολὴ 
τοῦτον 
TEPLELXE 
τὸν τρόπον, 
Jos, Antt. xii. 
4. 11, beg. 

x= (Rom. vi. 
17). 3 Mace. iii. 30. 

n ch. i. 16 reff. 

s = Lukei.4. ch. xxii. 24. 

v ch. iv. 15 reff. 

31. Rom. i. 32 only. 
xvi. 26 reff. xxvi. 29, 31 al. 
Ὁ ch. xxv. 16 only τ. 


τοῦτον ὃ 


μενός τε § ἐπιγνῶναι 


© ver. 15. 


1 Cor. xiii. 12. Jer. v. 5. 


y= as above (x). 
Ps. ii. 3. 


0: διασωσουσιν Em: διασωσονται 40. 
(aft διασωσωσιν) syr-w-ast. 


TIPASEIZ AMOSTOAON. 


» ΄ 
βηγεμονα, 
τύπον τοῦτον" 

a, / ΄ , / ͵ὔ 
τῷ ἱ κρατίστῳ 8 ἡγεμόνι Φήλικι ™ χαίρειν. 


τὴν 


1 Luke i. 3. ch. xxiv. 3. xxvi. 25 only ¢. 
p = ch. iv. 1 reff. 


weh. xv. 2 reff. plu., ch. xviii. 15. 
Luke xii. 48. ch. xiii. 46 al. 
a= i Tim. v. 12. 


XXITI, 


25 γράψας ὃ" ἐπιστολὴν 
26 Κλαύδιος Λυσίας 
27 τὸν ἄνδρα 


, \ ~ Ψ , 
συλλημφθέντα ὑπὸ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων καὶ μέλλοντα 
» e , ~ A ΄ 
ο ἀναιρεῖσθαι ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν Ρ ἐπιστὰς σὺν τῷ “ στρατεύματι 
tr) ‘“ yee. \ .-“ ς ΡΣ Ἔ 
ἐξειλάμην [αὐτὸν] μαθὼν ὅτι Ρωμαϊῖός ἐστιν. 


38 βουλό- 


> / » 
αἰτίαν δι ἣν * ἐνεκάλουν 


1 A YW , Ἐπ ’ . oy ἔν 5. πον ΘΝ ἃ 
αὐτῷ, “ κατήγαγον αὐτὸν εἰς τὸ " συνέδριον αὐτῶν" 3598 ὃν 
ΜΒ \ 4 / r 
εὗρον ᾿ ἐγκαλούμενον περὶ “ ζητημάτων τοῦ νόμου αὐτῶν, 
\ ry WwW / Xx A » 
μηδὲν δὲ *¥ ἄξιον * θανάτου ἢ * δεσμῶν * ἔχοντα 


> ἔγκλημα. 


m ch. xy. 23 reff. 
q ver. 10. r = ch. vii. 10 reff. 

tch. xix. 38 reff. u ver. _15 reff. 
x Luke xxiii. 15. ch. xxv. 11, 25. xxvi. 

Deut. xxv. 2. 


zch. 
John ix. 41. xv. 22, 24. xix. 11. 1 ab i. 8. 


aft ἡγεμόνα add εἰς καισαρειαν 951]. 137, so 


at end ins εφοβηθη yap μηποτε αρπασαντες avTov ot 


tovdarot αποκτενωσι Kat avTos μεταξυ εγκλημα εχὴ ὡς apyupioy εἰληφως 137 syr-w- 
ast, so also vulg-ed(not am demid fuld tol ὧς) and (aft διασωσιν) arm-usc(rejected by 


Zohrab). 


25. rec περιεχουσαν, with AHLP rel 36 Chr,, περιεχουσα f: om sah: 


ac p 13. 137. 


27. (εξειλαμην, so ABEN p 13.) 


εχουσαν BEN 


om αὐτὸν (as superfluous in the constr) 


ABEX a d p 13. 36 vulg sl Chr: ins HLP rel Thi. 


28. rec (for re) δε, with HLP rel E-lat syr copt [arm] Chr, : 


E-gr δὰ 36 vulg Syr eth ΤῊ]. 
Nack p 13. 30, 137 Chr-ms. 


ουν sah: txt AB 


rec Ὕγωναι, with EH LP rel Chr,: txt A B(sic) 


om (passing from avtw to avtwv) κατηγαγον avTov 


εἰς To συνεδριον avtwy B}(ins B!-marg(see table)) p [om ets To συν. aut. ath-rom }. 


om avtov AN k 13. 137. 


29. aft avtwy ins μωυσεως και tnoov Tivos 137 syr-mg. 


137 Chr,. 


μολις τη Bia 137 syr-w-ast(but amny.). 


σώσωσιν] escort safe the whole way. 

Φήλικα] FELIX was a freedman of 
the Emperor Claudius : Suidas and Zonaras 
gave him the prenomen of Claudius, but 
Tacit. (Ann. xii. 54) calls him Antonius 
Felix, perhaps from Antonia, the mother 
of Claudius, as he was brother of Pallas, 
who was a freedman of Antonia (Tacit. ib. 
and Jos. Antt. xx. 7. 1). He was made 
sole procurator of Judea after the deposi- 
tion of Cumanus (having before been three 
years joint procurator with him, Tacit. ib.) 
principally by the influence of the high 
priest Jonathan (Antt. xx. 8. 5), whom he 
afterwards procured to be murdered (ibid.). 
Of his character Tacitus says, ‘ Antonius 
Felix per omnem sevitiam et libidinem 
jus regium servili ingenio exercuit,’ Hist. 
v. 9. His procuratorship was one series 
of disturbances, false messiahs, sicarii and 
robbers, and civil contests, see Jus. Antt. 
xx. 8. 5, 6, and 7. He was eventually 
(4.D. 60) recalled, and accused by the 


om.3a. LE hee ee 


rec eyxAnua bef exovta, with ELP rel ((Syr)] Chr: txt AB [H(Treg 
expr)] Nab Κ] mo p13. 40 vulg (syr arm] Thl-fin. 


at end ins εξηγαγον avtov 


Cesarean Jews, but acquitted at the in- 
stance of his brother Pallas (Antt. xx. 8. 


10). On his wife Drusilla, see note, ch. 
xxiv. 24. 25.| [περι]έχ.. τύπ., see 
reff. 26. κρατίστῳ] See ref. Luke. 


This letter seems to be given (translated 
from the Latin) as written, not merely ac- 
cording to its general import (see the false 
statement in ver. 27): from what source, 
is impossible to say, but it may be ima- 
gined that the contents transpired through 
some officers at Jerusalem or at Casarea 
friendly to Paul. Such letters were 
called elogia : so Modestin. Dig. lib. 49, tit. 
16, leg. 3(Facciolati): ‘ Desertorem auditum 
ad suum ducem cum elogio preses mittet,’ 
‘with an abstract of the articles brought 
against him.’ 27. σὺν τῷ στρ. with 
the troop; see above ver. 10, and note, 
eh. xxi. 32. ἐξειλ. μαθὼν ὅτι Ῥ. 
ἐστιν] This was an attempt to conceal 
the fault that he had committed, see ch. 
xxii, 29. For this assertion cannot refer 


ABEH 
LPN ab 
cdfgh 
klmo 
pis 


25 35, ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAON. 


259 


30 © μηνυθείσης δέ μοι ἃ ἐπιβουλῆς " εἰς τὸν ἄνδρα ἔσεσθαι, c Luke xx. 31, 


ohn xi. 57. 


[ἐξ αὐτῆς ἔπεμψα πρός σε, SrapayyelAas καὶ τοῖς 190. x8 
ἃ κατηγόροις λέγειν ita ἱ πρὸς αὐτὸν " ἐπὶ σοῦ. 31 Οἱ μὲν 7. viet. 
οὖν στρατιῶται κατὰ TO | διατετωγμένον αὐτοῖς ™ ἀναλα- ἃ chix δὲ rei 
βόντες τὸν Παῦλον ἤγαγον " διὰ νυκτὸς εἰς τὴν ᾿Αντι- τοῖα. 38τοῦ: 


g ch. i. 4 reff. 
h (John viii. 10 
rec.] ver. 35. 


lal \ / lA A 
πατρίδα, 33. τῇ δὲ ο ἐπαύριον Ῥ ἐάσαντες τοὺς 4 ἱππεῖς 


\ ᾿ a / 3 Ϊ 
᾿ ἀπέρχεσθαι σὺν αὐτῷ, "ὑπέστρεψαν εἰς τὴν ‘rapeu- ται δῖ 
, 83 u 7% » θό 3 \ 7 . only. ee 
βολὴν. οἵτινες εἰφελθόντες εἰς τὴν Καισάρειαν καὶ τον. xiii 
Β Macc. 

, \ 3 \ ra ς ͵ I 

ἡ ἀναδόντες THY ἣ ἐπιστολὴν τῷ * ἡγεμόνι, Y παρέστησαν Pon 
υ ITO ὴ \ Rev. xii. 10. 
καὶ tov Παῦλον αὐτῷ. 53 ἀναγνοὺς δὲ καὶ 5 ἐπερωτή - ich xxvii 10 


reff. 
15. 
= Matt. 
xxviii. 14. ch. 
xxivi 19. xxv. 
9. χχνὶ. 2. 
m -- οἷ. χχ. 13,14. 2 Tim. 
ο ch. x. 9 reff, p = here 
r= ch. v. 26 reff. s ch. viil. 25 reff. 
v here only +. Sir. i. 22 only. ἀνέδωκε τοῖς 
w ch. ix. 2 reff. x vv. 24,26 
= Matt. xii. 10 al. 1 Kings 
b = ch. iv. 7 reff. ς ch. 
ehereonly. Deut.i. 16. Job 


see ver. 


a b] b / ec 2 / d 5 “ Ν θό “ 
σας EK ποιᾶς ETTAPV LAS ἐστιν, καὶ TUUOMEVOS OTL k 


΄ s f δ e 
δ ἀπὸ Κιλικίας, 535 Διακούσομαί cov, ἔφη, ὅταν Kai οἱ 


1 Luke xvii. 9.10. 1 Cor. vii. 17. L.P., exc. Matt. xi. 1. 
iv. 11 only. (ch. i. 2. vii. 43.) 
(ch. xvi. 7 al.) only. q ver. 23. 

t ch. xxi. 34, 37 reff. u = ch. x. 41 reff. 
ἐφόροις τὰς ἐπιστολάς, Diod. Sic. xi. 45. 

y — Matt. xxvi. 53. ch. ix. 4i. (2 Cor. iv. 14.) Gen. xlvii. 2 Ald. 
xvil. 56 A Ed-vat. &c. (B def.) a ch. ii. 5 reff. 
xxy. 1 only+. (-os, Ezra v. 3.) d pres., ch. xvi. 38 reff. 
ix. 33 BN F(not A) &c. only. 


Judg. v. 9. 
n ch. τ΄ 19 reff. 


30. rec ins weAAew bef εσεσθαι (see ch xi. 28; xxiv. 15; xxvii. 10), with HLP rel 
syr Chr,: om ABER a p 18. 36. 40. 137 vulg eth. rec aft ἐσεσθαι ins ὑπὸ των 
tovdaiwy (explanatory gloss), with HLP rel Syr sah: om ABEN ac p 13. 36. 40. 137 
vulg syr copt arm.—for εξ avrys, εξ avtwy AEN ac p 13. 40syr arm [Chr,]: txt BHLP 
rel 36 Syr copt [sah] Thl.—emB. εσεσθαι εἰς Tov avdpa εξ avtTwy επεμψα «.T.A. 13: et 
quum mihi perlatum esset de insidiis, quas paraverant illi, misi &e vulg: aft εξ avrns 
ins ovy L. aft τ. κατηγοροις ins αὐτου E Syr coptt. for Ta προς avTov, avTous 
AX 18 vulg[ué dicant: not represented in] coptt [eth]: αὐτου 40: om τα B E-lat Syr 
[arm ]. om em: σου p: for em, περι 67. 157. ree at end adds eppwoo, with 
ELN p rel 36 [vulg-clem] demid tol syrr eth-pl (Chr[-montf]) ΤῊ] He; eppwode (see 
ch xv. 29) HP 26. 78. 100-1 Chr(mss and ed[{-morel]): om AB 13 am fuld coptt 
zeth-rom. 

31. [aft αὐτοῖς ins ἐποίουν L. | rec ins τῆς bef νυκτος, with HLP rel Thi-sif: 
om (cf ch v.19; xvi. 9; xvii. 10) ABEX p 13. 40. 137 Chr, Thl-fin. 

32. rec [for amepx.] πορευεσθαι (corrn for less usual exprn), with HLP rel 36 
syr Cyr, ΤῊ], are E-lat, wt zrent vulg: txt AB E-gr Ne p18, abire copt. επε- 
στρεψαν &. 

33. Tw ἡγεέμονι bef τὴν επιστολην L m 40 [arm]. 
tov 137. 

94. rec aft avayvous δὲ ins o nyeuwy (supplementary), with HLP rel sah ΤῊ] : om 
ABER p 13. 36. 40 vulg syrr copt «th arm Chr,. aft κιλικιας ins ἐστιν A X'(but 
marked for erasure) 68. avaryvous Se τὴν επιστολὴν ἐπηρωτησε TOY TMaVAOV εκ ποιας 
ἐπαρχία εἰ και εἰπεν κιλικιας καὶ πυθομενος εἰπεν ακουσομαι οταν K.T.A. Syr-Mg: simly 
137 ins τὴν επιστολὴν [και erepwrnoas|, has εἰ for ἐστιν, and continues εφη κιλιὲξ k. 
πυθ. En ακουσ. σου οταν K.T.A. 


om καὶ τον παυλον E: om 


to the second rescue, see next verse. Realw.). They might have well made 


30.] Two constructions are combined here: 
(1) μηνυθείσης ἐπιβουλῆς τῆς ἐσομένης, 
and (2) μηνυθέντος, ἐπιβουλὴν ἔσεσθαι. 
91.) ANTIPATRIS, forty-two Roman 
miles from Jerusalem, and twenty-six 
from Czsarea, was built by Herod the 
Great, and called in honour of his father. 
It was before called Kapharsaba (Jos. 
Antt. xiii. 15.1; xvi. 5. 2). In Jerome’s 
time (Epitaph. Paul, 8, vol. i. p. 696) 
it was a ‘semirutum oppidum’ (Winer, 
5 


so much way during the night and the 
next day,—for the text will admit of that 
interpretation,—77 ἐπαύρ. being not neces- 
sarily the morrow after they left Jeru- 
salem, but after they arrived at Antipatris. 

82. τοὺς ἱππεῖς) As they had now 
the lesser half of their journey before 
them, and that furthest removed from 
Jerusalem. The δεξιολάβοι appear to have 
gone back with the soldiers. 35. 
S.axove.} ‘The expression is in conformity 


2 


900 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATIOZTOAON. 


XXIV. 


, ΄ ’ -“ 
rver.20ref ἵκατήγοροί σου ὃ παραγένωνται, κελεύσας ἐν τῷ "πραι- 
ryoP ; ‘ 


g ubsol., ch. 


Κ κατέβη ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς 


2a κληθέντος δὲ αὐτοῦ ἤρξατο " κατηγορεῖν ὁ 


7 ne I 5 , > , 
Le Wre® φρρρίῳ TOU Ηρώδου ἢ φυλάσσεσθαι αὐτόν. 
28 || Mt. Mk., j \ \ U ae 
33, xix.9. XXIV. ᾿ Mera δὲ πέντε ἡμέρας 
Phil. i. 13 ῳ ᾿ \ - = Sere Τ yi 
ἥν ἐμ i Avavias μετὰ πρεσβυτέρων τινῶν καὶ ' ῥήτορος 'Γερτύλ- 
eH. ’ / ΄ al ΄ ΄ \ 
b absol eh, Rou τινός, ™ οἵτινες "Ὁ ἐνεφάνισαν τῷ ἢ ἡγεμόνι °KaTa τοῦ 
rill, 15 reff. 
] Ra: are TlavXov: 
m so ch. ix. 35. rg 
n ch. xxiii. 15 
reff. o and constr., ch. xxv. 2. 


τ ver. 19, ch. xxv. 16. xxviii. 191. 1 Mace. vii. 6. 


35. om «a: 37. 101-37 vulg(not am demid) syrr copt eth Thi-sif. 
P: -yevovra ἔ p[ Ser]: -yovra HL [p(Treg) }. 


p ch. xxiii. 24 &c. reff. q- 


ch. iv. 18. 2 Kings ix. 9. 


παραγινονται 
rec exeAevoe τε (emendation of 


style), with HLP 13. 36 rel [vulg Syr copt ath] Chr,: κελευσαντος δὰ] : txt A Bésic: 


see table) [ΕἸΝ ὁ k p 40. 187 syr Thl-fin. 
txt AEN c hm p13. 


for tov, τω B: om HLP rel 137 Chr, : 


rec αὐτὸν bef εν τω πραιτωριω, With HLP rel 80 Chr: txt 


ABE® ck p 138. 40. 137 vulg [coptt} arm Thl-fin. 


CuHap. XXIV. 1. for πεντε, τινας A. 


rec (for πρεσβ. τινωνὴ των πρεσβυτερων, 
ρ ρ ρ 


with HLP rel Syr copt eth: txt ABER ck τὰῷ [p] 19. 36. 40. 137 vulg syr sah arm 


ΤῊ]. [ἀνεφ. Κ΄: ἐπεφαν[ησαν] P. 
with the Roman law; the rule was, “ Qui 
cum elogio mittuntur, ex integro audiendi 
sunt.”’ Hackett. ἐν TO πραιτ. τ. 
“Hp.] The procurator resided in the former 
palace of Herod the Great. Here Paul 
was ‘militi traditus’ (Digest. cited by 
De W.), not in a prison, but in the build- 
ings attached to the palace. 

Cuap. XXIV. 1—XXVI. 32.] Pavr’s 
IMPRISONMENT AT CHSAREA. 1. μετὰ 
πέντε Hp. | After five days—or on the fifth 
day—from Paul’s departure for Cesarea. 
This would be the natural terminus a quo 
from which to date the proceedings of the 
High Priest, &., who were deft in Jeru- 
salem. That it is so, appears from ver. 11. 
See note there. πρεσβ. τινῶν] The 
more ancient MSs. reading this, all we can 
say is that we have not sufficient authority 
to retain the reading of the rec. τῶν πρεσ- 
βυτέρων, though it appears more likely to 
be original, and to have given offence as 
seeming to import that the whole San- 
hedrim went down. This is one of the 
eases where, in the present state of our 
evidence, we are obliged to adopt readings 
which are not according to subjective 
canons of criticism. ῥήτορος} An 
orator forensis or causidicus, persous who 
abounded in Rome and the provinces; 
sometimes called συνήγοροι, or δικολόγοι. 
Kuin. says: ‘ Multi adolescentes Romani 
qui se foro dederant, cum magistratibus 
in provincias se conferebant, ut caussis 
provincialinm agendis se exercerent, et 
majoribus in urbe actionibus preepararent.’ 
So Celius (see Cie. pro Calio, c. 30), in 
Africa. TeprvAAov| A diminutive 
from Tertius, as Lucullus from Lucius,— 
Catullus from Catius. The name occurs 
Plin. Ep. v. 15; and Zertudla, Suet. Aug. 


2. om autov B. 


69 (Wetst.). ἐνεφάνισαν | (not, “ ap- 
peared,’ ἑαυτούς, sub. ;—see reff.) laid 
information; and, as it seems, not by 
writing, but by word of mouth, since they 
appeared in person, and Paul was called to 
confront them. 2.] ‘Inter precepta 
rhetorica est, judicem laudando sibi beue- 
volum reddere.’ (Grot.) Certainly Ter- 
tullus fulfils and overacts the precept, for 
his exordium is full of the basest flattery. 
Contrast with πολλῆς eip. tTuyx., Tac. 
Ann. xii. 54: § Interim Felix intempestivis 
remediis delicta accendebat, emulo ad de- 
terrima Ventid. Cumano, cui pars provincize 
habebatur : ita divisis, ut huic Galileorum 
natio, Felici Samarite parerent, discordes 
olim, et tum, contemptu regentium, minus 
coercitis odiis. Igitur raptare inter se, 
immittere latronum globos, componere in- 
sidias, et aliquando preliis congredi, spo- 
liaque et predasad Procuratores referre ;’ 
—Hist. v. 9, quoted above, on ch. xxiii. 
24;—and Jos. Antt. xx. 8. 9, of mpw- 
τεύοντες τῶν τὴν Καισάρειαν κατοικούντων 
Ἰουδαίων εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην ἀναβαίνουσι, 
Φήλικος κατηγοροῦντες" καὶ πάντως ἂν 
ἐδεδώκει τιμωρίαν τῶν εἰς ᾿Ιουδαίους ἀδικη- 
μάτων, εἰ uh) πολλὰ αὐτὸν 6 Νέρων τῷ 
ἀδελφῷ Πάλλαντι παρακαλέσαντι συν- 
εχώρησε... .. There was just enough 
foundation for the flattery, to make the 
falsehood of its general application to Felix 
more glaring. He had put down some 
rebels (see ch, xxi. 38, note) and assassins 
(Antt. xx. 8. 4), ‘ ipse tamen his omnibus 
erat nocentior’ (Wetst.). It has 
been remarked (by Dean Milman, Bampton 
Lectures, p. 185) that the character of this 
address is peculiarly Latin (but qu. ?); and 
it has been inferred from a passage in Va- 
lerius Maximus (cited at length in C. and 


ABEH 
LPR ab 
edigh 
klmo 
p is 


]—6. ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAON. 


Τέρτυλλος λέγων 3 Πολλῆς εἰρήνης " τυγχάνοντες 
σοῦ καὶ " διορθωμαάτων 


0] 


t διὰ s = Luke xx. 


35. ch. xxvi. 


΄ A ΄ 
᾿ γινομένων τῷ ἔθνει τούτῳ διὰ ἔπι ἢ 


A a Ww Ud a x ΄ Ν y A ¢Z ’ Heb. viii. 6. 
τῆς ONS “προνοιῶς, “TAVTH TE Καὶ " παντάχου “ ATEO-  xi.36. L.P.H. 
. , a , = b \ c , a 4 ͵ 42. acc. il. 

δεχόμεθα, " κράτιστε Φῆλιξ, ἢ μετὰ “ πάσης “ εὐχαριστίας. , Mra 
47 5 \ ες yi ΑΙ Ἐ"5 / g >. na» a xvii. 7. 
Wa O€ μὴ “ἐπι πλείον GE © EYKOTTTM, © TWAPAKANW AKOU=- Luke xxii. 
: 221}. Rom 
7 ς - h ΄ A a i) / 5 k e ΄ Ἂ ἑ κ. 
σαι σὲ ἡμῶν “TVUVTOLWS Τῇ TH ᾿ ἐπιεικείᾳ. -EUPOVTES _ ¥. 12, Ge. 


Ν , a ‘ \ lal ΄, 
yap τὸν ἄνδρα τοῦτον ἱ λοιμὸν καὶ " κινοῦντα " στάσιν 


u here only +. 

v constr., ch. ii. 
43 al. fr 

w Rom. xiii. 14 


κ »“" ’ / n \ \ ’ / 
πᾶσιν τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις τοῖς ° κατὰ τὴν °P οἰκουμένην, ἃ πρωτο- ΣΤΉΝ, τ 
xx. not ! 
, rf “ ψνὸς ἃ \ ἈΝ an 
στάτην τε τῆς τῶν Nalwpaiwy *aipecews, 805 καὶ τὸ «ἴθι! Nid 
4. iN s 2 . A aA a ae / \ 2 Mace. iv. 
ἱερὸν ὃ ἐπείρασεν ' βεβηλῶσαι, ὃν καὶ ἃ ἐκρατήσαμεν [«αἱ δ only . 
νοεισθαι. 
Rom. xii. 17.) x here only+. Sir. 1. 22 only. y ch. xvii. 30 ie ch. 
ii. 41 reff. a ch. xxiii. 26 reff. Ὃ ch. xvii. ΕΗ] reff. = ch. xx. 19 reff. 
ἃ =1Cor. xiv. 16. 2 Cor. iv. 15. ix. 11, 151: ἜΤΕΙ ante exc. Rev. iv. 9. vii. 12+. Wisd. ἘΠ .38.. Sir. XXxXvii. 
11. 2 Mace. ii. 27 only. h. iv. 17 re f Rom. xv. 22. Gal. v.7. 1 Thess. 
ii. 18. 1 Pet. 111. 7 only +. Dan. ix. 26 Theod. ( Ald.) g = Matt. xviii. 29. ch. xiii. 42. constr. 
ch. viii. 31 reff. h here only. Prov. xxili. 28 only. (-os, 2 Macc. ii. 31.) i2 Cor. 
x. 1 only+. Wisd. ii. 19. (-κής, Phil. iv. 5. -κῶς, 1 Kings xii. 22.) constr. gat. Matthia, $ 499. 
k = Rom. vil. 10 al. 1 = here (Luke xxiv. 11) only. 1 Kings xxx. 22. Ps. i. 1. m = ch. 
xxi. 30 bias 28 reff.). n = ch. xix. 40 reff. o here only. —=eh: 


xvii. r ch. v. 17 reff. 
ch. xvi. 7 only αὶ 


Le 
Ὁ = acc., Matt. xviii. 28 al. 


Job xv. 24 only. 
t Matt. xii. 5 only. 
Ps. ly. tit. 


q here only. 


3. rec κατορθωματων, with HLP rel Chr, Thi: 
yevouevwy Lc 137 Thi-fin: γιγνωμενων m. 
4, exxontw 1, Thi-fin: κοπτω Al(appy) m13. (ενκοπτω A?B!EN.) 


E: om ce Le m 36 Chr. [om συντόμως Al(appy: insd eadem manu). | 


s = and constr., 
Neh, xiii. 17,18. Ezek. xxii. 26. (-Aos, 1 Tim. i. 9.) 


txt ABEN p 13. 36. 137 Chr-ms. 


σε bef ακουσαι 


5. στασεις (corrn as suiting better πασιν τ. ιουδ. κιτ.λ.) ABER p 18. 96. 40 valg copt 


Chr, Thi-fin: txt HLP rel syrr sah eth Thi-sif. 


[for τε, δε E 13.] 


6—8. om from καὶ κατα to προς σε ABHLPN ἃ g! ἢ 1 p am"(and fuld tol) coptt: ins 


H., vol. i. p. 3), that all pleadings, even in 
Greek provinces, were conducted before 
Roman magistrates in Latin. But Mr. 
Lewin has well observed (ii. 684), “ under 
the emperors trials were permitted in 
Greek, even in Rome itself, as well in the 
senate as in the forum (Dio Cassius, lvii. 
15, says of Tiberius, πολλὰς μὲν δίκας ἐν TH 
διαλέκτῳ ταύτῃ (viz. Greek) καὶ ἐκεῖ (in the 
senate) λεγομένας ἀκούων, πολλὰς δὲ καὶ 
αὐτὸς ἐπερωτῶν) ; and it is unlikely that 
greater strictness should have beeu ob- 
served in a distant province. The name 
Tertullus proves little, as the Greeks, and 
even the Jews, very commonly adopted 
Roman names.” On this latter point, see 
note, ch. xiii. 9. Sidp8wpa i is ‘an amelio- 
ration or reform: κατόρθωμα, ‘res preclare 
facta,’ generally, whether military or civil 
(‘que nos aut recta aut recte facta dica- 
mus, si placet, illi autem appellant κατορ- 
θώματα.᾽ Οἷς. de Fin. ili. 7). Phrynichus 
remarks, p. 250, ἁμαρτάνουσιν οἱ ῥήτορες 
οὐκ εἰδότες ὅτι τὸ κατορθῶσαι, δόκιμον. 
τὸ δ᾽ ἀπὸ τούτου bvoua ἀδόκιμον, τὸ κατόρ- 
@wua,—where see Lobeck’s note. I have, 
as always where reason to the contrary is 
not very clear, followed the authority of 
the most ancient Mss. προνοίας] 
* providentiz.’ ‘ Hoc vocabulum szpe diis 
tribuerunt’ (Beng.). “ Providentia Ce- 


saris’ is a common phrase on the coins ot 
the emperors (Mr. Humphry). 3. 
πάντη K. πανταχοῦ) belongs to amodex., 
not to γινομένων, in which case they 
would naturally precede the participle,— 
We receive, &c., not only here in thy 
presences, but also at all times and in 
all places. A refinement of flattery 

4. ἐπὶ πλεῖον) viz. than the matter 
demands: too long. ἐγκόπτ. See 
reff. συντόμως) As Meyer observes, 
we need not supply λεξόντων, but take 
συντ. as the measure of the time implied 
in ἀκοῦσαι. 5. λοιμόν) ὃ See reif. 
and Demosth. p. 794. 5, οὗτος οὖν αὐτὸν 
ἐξαιτήσεται 6 φαρμακός, 6 λοιμὸς... The 
construction here is an anacoluthon, there 
being nothing to follow up the part. εὑρόν- 
tes. The part. cannot be taken for the 
finite verb. See Winer, edn. 6, § 45. 6. b. 

ἧ οἰκουμένη] would here mean the 
Roman ‘orbis terrarum.’ Nalwp. ’ 
This is the only place in the N. T. where 
the Christians are so called. The Jews 
could not call them by any name answer- 
ing to Christians, as the hope of a Messiah 
was professed by themselves. [6. } 
Considerable difficulty rests on the omis- 
sion of the words καὶ κατά to πρὸς σέ. 
Their absence from the principal Mss., 
their many variations in those which cons 


262 TIPAZEIS ATOSTOAQON. XX 
v= Luke xi, κατὰ τὸν ἡμέτερον νόμον ἠθελήσαμεν κρῖναι. 7 παρ- 
Exot. τι... ελθὼν δὲ Λυσίας ὁ χιλίαρχος “ μετὰ πολλῆς * βίας ἐκ 
oN” τῶν Χχειρῶν ἡμῶν Y ἀπήγαγεν, ὃ κελεύσας τοὺς 5 κατ- 
ychaexiii ηγγόρους αὐτοῦ ἔρχεσθαι πρὸς oé]: παρ᾽ οὗ δυνήσῃ αὐτὸς 
z ch. xxiii. 30 ‘ ΄ 


reff. 
ach. iv. 9 reff. 
b ch. xxiii. 28 


ἃ κατηγοροῦμεν αὐτοῦ. 


reff. ‘ 
c attr., ch. 1.1 


reff. 
d constr., ch. τὴ “Μ 
xxv.ll. Mark xv. 3,4. 1 Macc. vii. 25. see Luke xxiii. 14. 
iii. 7 AN Ald. compl. 
g ch. vii. 1 reff. aes 


ὃ a κα / ~ 8 [4 8 ” 
atot, ‘packovtes ταῦτα ὃ οὕτως § ἐχειν. 


fch. χχν. 19. Rom. i. 22only. Gen. xxvi. 20. 


a e f 
δ avaxpwas περὺ πάντων τούτων ὃ ἐπιγνῶναι “ ὧν ἡμεῖς 


9 ὁ συνεπέθεντο δὲ καὶ οἱ ἾἼου- 
10 ἀπεκρίθη τε 


e here only. Deut. xxxii. 27. Ps. 
2 Macc. xiv. 27, 32 only. 


(with consid varr, see below) E13 rel 36. 40 syrr eth Chr, ΤῊ] Cassiod. (See notes.) 


for ηθελ., ηβουληθημεν (or εβ.) [Ὁ] τὰ 40. 66%. 


κριναι Ea Ὁ g? k mo 18. 86 Chr Thl-sif. 


αὐτὸν εκ των χειρων nuwy πεμψας προς σε f. (ef in below.) 
for arnyayev, apeideto g? 92. 42[-Aaro]-6. 57.—[add] καὶ προς 


46. 57. 66'. 


rec κρινεῖν, with rel Thl-fin : 
7. for wera woAAns to προς σε, ἡρπασεν 
Bia πολλη δ" 32. 


σε απεστειλεν 32. 42-6. 57. 661: [simly Syr:] κελευσασθαι ems σε παραγγειλας τοις 


κατηγυροις ερχεσθαι emt σοι 180. 
των χειρων μῶν Τὰ. 
om αὐτου [a 0} 69. 


aft amnyayev ins avroy [and transp bef] ex 
8. aft κελευσας ins καὶ ἃ g? 32. 42. 57. 69. 133 arm. 
rec em, with rel: προς EK a 46. 133. 


8. for οὗ, ὦ E 36: wv Ὁ m' 0 8. 15. 27-9. 661. 106-80: txt ABHLPX vulg copt Chr 


ΤῺ] Ge. om autos A: autous 40. 


syr-w-ast. 


at end ins e:wovTos δε avtov ταυτα 137 


9. rec συνεθεντο, with b 0: απεκριναντο sah xth: adjecerunt vulg E-lat: litigarunt 
Syr: txt AB E-gr HLPN p rel 36. 40. 187 syr Chr, : συνεπειθοντο 13. 180. 
10. rec δε (alteration of characteristic τε), with HLP 18. 36 rel E-lat [vulg syr 


tain them, are strongly against their genu- 
ineness; as also is the consideration that 
no probable reason for their omission can 
be suggested. On the other hand, as De 
Wette observes, it is hardly imaginable that 
so little should have been assigned to the 
speaker as would be if these words were 
owitted. Besides this, the historic aorist 
ἐκρατήσαμεν seems to require some sequel, 
some reason, after this seizure, why he was 
there present and freed from Jewish dur- 
ance. The phenomena are common enough 
in the Acts, of unaccountable insertions, 
and almost always in D (here deficient). 
See a list of such in Prolegg. to Acts, 
ὃν. 3. But in this place it is the omission 
which is unaccountable, for no similarity 
of ending, no doctrinal consideration can 
have led to it. The two reasons cited from 
Matthei by Bloomfield, ed. 9,—1) “that 
the critics believed the Jews hardly likely 
to have accused Lysias himself,”—2) “ be- 
cause the words παρ᾽ οὗ, at ver. 8, must be 
referred to Paul: though by its (516) posi- 
tion, it seems to refer to Lysias,” are futile 
and childish enough (on the latter of them, 
see below); and I only refer to them, to 
shew by what sort of considerations English 
readers are still supposed to be influenced. 

I still retain the words, in dark 
brackets, being as much at a loss as ever 
to decide respecting them, and being 
moved principally by the aorist expa- 


τήσαμεν, inexplicable without any sequel. 
It may of course be said that this very 
circumstance may have given rise to their 
insertion. But of the two it seems to me 
less likely that Tertullus should have ended 
with ἐκρατήσαμεν, than that an abridg- 
ment of his speech should have been at- 
tempted. It may be a question how far 
we can detect traces of deliberate abridg- 
ment, in our early Mss., of the text of the 
Acts.] 8.1 map’ ov, if the disputed 
words be inserted, refers naturally enough 
to Lysias; but if they be omitted, to 
Paul, which would be very unlikely,— 
that the judge should be referred to the 
prisoner (for examination by tortwre (Grot. 
and al.) on one who had already claimed 
his rights as a Roman citizen can hardly 
be intended) for the particulars laid to his 
charge. Certainly it might, on the other 
hand, be said that Tertullus would hardly 
refer the governor to Lysias, whose inter- 
ference he had just characterized in such 
terms of blame; but (which is a strong 
argument for the genuineness of the 
doubtful words) remarkably enough, we 
find Felix, ver. 22, putting off the trial ἐδ 7 
the arrival of Lysias. 9. συνεπέθ.7 
joined in setting upon him, bore out Ter- 
tullus-in his charges. 10. ἐκ πολλῶν 
ἐτῶν) Felix was now in the seventh year 
of his procuratorship, which began in the 
twelfth year of Claudius, A.D. 52. The 


ABEH 
LPxrab 
cdfgh 
klmo 
p 13 





7—12. 


ὁ Παῦλος, ὃ 


πολλῶν ἐτῶν 


TIPAEEIS ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΔΩΝ. 263 


’ Ψ A Φ Sie s 
νεύσαντος αὑτῷ τοῦ ἱ ἡγεμόνος λέγειν, * EK h Jobnaiii.2t 


only}. Prov. 


” A “Ὁ la . 
ὄντα σε κριτὴν τῷ ἔθνει τούτῳ ἐπιστάμενος, i: Bony. 


ich. xxiii, 24 


> / Ἂ ἈΠ. ΒΝ la al 
™ εὐθύμως " τὰ " περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ ° ἀπολογοῦμαι, 11] δυναμένου x enh. 33, 


xv. 21 al. 


la] / , / 
σου P ἐπιγνῶναι ὅτι ov πλείους εἰσίν P μοι ἡμέραι, * δώδεκα | onstr., par 


ticip., Luke 
iv. 23. viii. 


ἀφ᾽ «ἧς "ἀνέβην " προςκυνήσων εἰς “Ἱερουσαλήμ, 13 καὶ i "1. 


12. xix. 35. 


vv ’ A € a e [: ’ Ν 
οὔτε ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ εὑὕρον με ἱ πρὸς τινα ἃ διαλεγόμενον ἢ ταν. 5. 


2 Tim. ii. 8. 
m here only t¢. 


3 / A / lal “ 
᾿ ἐπίστασιν ποιοῦντα ὄχλου, οὔτε ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς οὔτε "PIN ἘΝ Si, 


-- = -“- 
ch, xxvii. 36, -€tv, ch. xxvii. 22.) 


20. 23. och. xix. 33 reff. 
q constr., 1 Cor. vii, 1. see ch. xx. 18. 
viii. 27 reff. 


Υ 2Cor. xi. 28 only+. 2 Macc. vi. 3 only. 


coptt Cassiod, ] Chr, : txt AB E-gr δὲ a! ὁ p 40. 187 Syr eth Thl-sif. 


t Mark ix. 34. ch. xvii. 17 only. Exod. vi. 27. 


9. (-ος, 
n ch. xxiii. 15. xxviii. 15. Luke xxii. 31. Phil. ii. 19, 
p constr.. Matthie, $ 388. Hom. Il. x. 155. w. 766. 
=ch. xi. 2 reff. Ezra vii. 6, 7. s = ch. 
u= ch. xvii. 2 reff, 


[for λεγειν to 


κριτὴν syr-mg has defensionem habere pro se, statum autem assumens divinum dizit, 


Ex multis annis es judex. | 


for ετων, ενιαυτων E. 


aft κριτὴν ins δίκαιον Εἰ 


cehk 36. 40. 137 syr Chr,(ovx ἔστι ταῦτα κολακείας τὰ ῥήματα, τὸ μαρτυρῆσαι τῷ 


δικαστῇ δικαιοσύνην) Thi Avit. 


rec εὐθυμοτερον, with HLP rel Chr Thl-sif: txt 


ABEN ὁ d p 18. 36. 40. 137 [vulg coptt 2th arm] Ath, Thl-fin. 


11. om σου A. 
137 ΤῊ]. 


rec aft nuepa: ins ἡ: om ABEHLPX rel. 


rec yvwvat, with HLP 18 rel Chr,: txt ABEX bck op 36. 


* rec δεκαδύο (see ch 


xix. 7 reff), with HLP rel 36 Chr: δωδεκα ΑΒΕ ὁ m p 18. 40. 137 Thl. 


mposkuynoat EK 137 sah, adorare vulg [-vnow Ρ]. 


rec (for es) ev, with L[P] rel 


[syr] Chr: om 13: txt ABEHN a? ἃ p 13. 36. 40 [Syr exth] ΤῊ]. 


12. τινας E-gr. 


rec επισυστασιν, with HLP rel: ἐποστασιαν p!: αποστασιαν p? 


[Ser]: txt ABEN 18. 40 vulg. (There is the like varn in the uss in the only other 


place where the word occurs.) 


contrast between Tertullus’s and Paul’s 
‘captatio benevolentie’ is remarkable. The 
former I have characterized above. But 
the Apostle, using no flattery, yet alleges 
the one point which could really win atten- 
tion to him from Felix, viz. his confidence 
arising from speaking before one wedl 
skilled by experience in the manners and 
customs of the Jews. 11. ἡμέραι 
δώδεκα] The point of this seems to be, 
that Felix having been so long time a 
judge among the Jews, must be well able 
to search into and adjudicate on an offence 
whose whole course was comprised within 
so short a period. The twelve days may 
be thus made out: 1. his arrival in Jeru- 
salem, ch. xxi. 15—17; 2. his interview 
with James, ib. 18 ff.; 3. his taking on 
him the vow, ib. 26; 3—7. the time of 
the vow, interrupted by—7. his apprehen- 
sion, ch. xxi. 27; 8. his appearance before 


the Sanhedrim, ch. xxii. 30 ff.; 9. his de- . 


parture from Jerusalem (at night) ; and so 
to the 13th, the day now current, which was 
the 5th inclusive from his leaving Jeru- 
salem. ‘This, which is also De Wette and 
Meyer’s arrangement, is far more natural 
than that of Kuin., Olsh., Heinr., &., who 
suppose that the days which he had already 
spent at Caesarea are not to be counted, be- 
cause his raising disturbances while in cus- 
tody was out of the question. The view 


for 3rd oure, ουδὲ p. 


advocated by Wieseler (Chron. der Apost.- 
gesch. pp. 103 ff.), that Paul was appre- 
hended on the very day of his appearance 
with the men in the temple, I cannot but 
regard, notwithstanding his arguments in 
its favour, as inconsistent with the text of 
ch, xxi. 26, 27; as also his idea that the 
Apostle did not take the vow on himself : 
the expression σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁγνισθείς clearly 
negativing the latter supposition ; and τῶν 
ἡμερῶν τοῦ ἁγνισμοῦ, ver. 26, being mani- 
festly, unless to one warped by a hypothesis, 
identical with ai ἑπτὰ ἡμέραι of ver. 27. 
See note there. I mention this here, 
because these suppositions materially aflect 
his arrangement of the twelve days, 
which he gives thus: 2nd, from Cesarea 
to Jerusalem ; 3rd, interview with James; 
4th, (Pentecost) visit to the temple with 
the Nazarites, and apprehension ; 5th, 
before the Sanhedrim; 6th, departure 
from Jerusalem; 7th, arrival in Cesa- 
rea; then, five days from that (but see 
note on ver. 1), Ananias, &c., leave Jeru- 
salem (but how does this appear from 
ver. 1? κατέβη must surely denote their 
arrival at Cassarea, where the narrator, or, 
at all events, the locus of the history is) ; 
13th, arrival of Ananias, &c., at Caesarea, 
and hearing (improbable) of Paul. So that 
the above hypotheses are not the only rea- 
sons for rejecting Wieseler’s arrangement. 


904 ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ATOSTOAON. XXIV, 


whuke vii, “KaTa THY πόλιν; 13 οὔτε * παραστῆσαι δύνανταί σοι περὶ ABER 

a ere oy Υ ὧν νυνὶ *xatnyopodciy pov. 13 ὁμολογῶ δὲ τοῦτό σοι, ς ate h 
ὅτι ταύτην OTL κατὰ τὴν * ὁδὸν ἣν λέγουσιν ὃ αἵρεσιν οὕτως “ λατρεύω pi3 
ΤΟΝ τῷ ᾿ πατρῴῳ θεῷ, " πιστεύων πᾶσιν τοῖς ' κατὰ τὸν ὃ νόμον 


vill. 2. 5 

Xen. Ec. a ᾿ a ue , 2 RO / 

sil = καὶ [τοῖς ἐν] ἢ τοῖς ὃ προφήταις γεγραμμένοις, 15 } ἐλπίδα C -πιδα 
εχων 

8) Heb. ἢ ἱ εἰς τὸν θεὸν ἣν καὶ " αὐτοὶ * οὗτοι |! προςδέχονται, ABCEH 

xvii. 9. Heb. evap ‘els TOV σεον 7 ρ xX a tea a 

τὸ 7 ” ΄ ν ΣΟ. > 

ratdeonstr, ™ ἀνάστασιν ™ μέλλειν " ἔσεσθαι δικαίων τε καὶ ἀδίκων. cafe h 

ver, 8. 


᾿ κ . 9 16 ΠῚ > , Ν > ‘ p 3 “ 4 >’ ‘ Tt ὃ 13 
asee ch. ix. 2 εν TOUTW και αὐυτος acKw AT POSKOTTOV  GUVELONOW Pp 


reff. 


ver. ὁ. 
φὰς vii. 7 reff. d ch. xxii. 3 reff. e = dat., Luke i. 20 al. fr. 2 Chron. ix. 6. ha f ch. 
xxii. 12 reff. g ch. xiii. 15 reff. hconstr. (if dat. of agency), Matt. vi. 1. Luke xxiii. 15. xxiv. 
35. Gen. xxxi. 15. 11 Pet.i. 21. (John v.45. 2Cor. i. 10.) see 1 John iii, 3. (ch. xxvi. 18.) 
k ver. 20. ch xxv. 25. Rom. xiii. 6. 2 Cor. ii. 3. vii. 11, ἄς. 1=ch. xxiii. 21. Tit. ii. 13. Jude 
21. 2 Macc. viii. 11. m ch. xvii. 18 reff. see Dan. xii. 2. <n ch. xi. 28 reff. yn O= Matt. 
vi. 7. John xvi. 30 al. p here only +. 2 Macc. xv. 4 only. ασκει τοιαύτη vour δι᾿ αἰῶνος μένειν, 
Soph. Electr. 1024. q 1 Cor. x. 32. Phil. i. 10 only. P.t Sir. xxxv. (xxxii.) 21 only. r 2 Cor. 
i. 12 reff. 
18. ovde BN p. Steph aft παραστησαι (Tischdf (ed 7) is wrong) ins με, with 


e f g1 m 66!-9. 78. 96-7. 100-4-6-42 [copt eth(Treg) |]; μοι 2.18. 161; σοι 15. 133-80; 
με νυν HP 27-9. 98-9 Thl-sif ; wor νυν 177: [νυν Ὁ] o:}] om ABELN p 13(sic) rel [vulg 
syrr sah arm]. rec om σοι, with HLP rel syr sah eth Chr: ins ΑΒ ΕΝ a’ dg Καὶ m 
p 18. 40 vulg Syr copt arm. rec (for vu) νυν, with EHLP 18. 36 rel: om k 8. 
30: txt ABN ἃ τὸ p 137 Thl-fin. 
14. ins μου bef θεω 137: patri deo meo [am demid fuld, p. δέ d. m.] vulg[-clem]. 
om πασιν B. om tov B 56 Chr. Steph on τοῖς ev, with AHLP N3(ev 
ros) 13 rel vulg coptt «th [arm] Thl-sif: elz om τοις, with (syrr) Epiph, Chr,: txt 
LEX! b ck mo p 36. 40. 137 Thl-fin. 
15. for εἰς, προς CN a 68-9 Thl-fin. om toy C 180. om ovro δὲ [arm?P ]. 
rec aft εἐσεσθαι ins νεκρων (supplementary addition), with EHLP rel 36 syrr 
eth Thl-sif: om ΑΒΟΝ k p 138. 40 vulg coptt arm Chr Thl-fin. 
16. rec δε (και not being understood), with HP 13 rel copt: δὲ καὶ ὁ g 25. 80. 100- 
77 arm Chr, Thl-sif: τε καὶ m: txt ABCELN b dk o p 40. 137 vulg syrr sah [eth] 
Thl-fin. exov HLP rel 36.137 Chr: txt ABCEN ἃ p 13 vulg syrr coptt Thl Ge. 


12. kara τὴν πόλ.7 throughout out more clearly those πατέρες, in whom 
the city, ‘any where in the city ;) as we Felix had no interest further than the 
say, ‘up and down the streets.’ 14.] identification of Paul’s religion with that 
The δέ here has its peculiar force, of of his ancestors required. κατὰ τ. v. | 
taking off the attention from what hasim- See on κατ. τ. πόλιν, above. Then (if the 
mediately preceded,and raising a new point words in brackets be omitted : and it is not 
as more worthy of notice. But (‘if thou easy to imagine that St. Luke wrote them) 
wouldst truly know the reason why they the dat. is used of the personal agents, the 


aveuse me’), Shine ille lacryme.’ prophets. He avoids saying ‘by Moses,’ 
αἵρεσιν, in allusion to αἱρέσεως used by because the mention of the law would carry 
Tertullus, ver. 5. The word is capable ofan more weight. 15. αὐτοὶ οὗτοι] It 


indifferent or of a bad sense. Tertullushad would appear from this, that the High 
used it in the latter. Paul explains what Priest and the deputation were not of the 
it really was. οὕτως = κατὰ ταύτην. Sadducees. But perhaps this inference is 
Notice in the words πατρώῳ θεῷ the skill too hasty; Paul might regard them as 
of Paul. The term was one well known to representing the whole Jewish people, and 
the Greeks and Romans, and which would — speak generally, as he does of the same 
earry with it its own justification. ‘“In- «hope ch. xxvi. 7, where he assigns it to τὸ 
visum quippe erat gentibus, nominatim δωδεκάφυλον ἡμῶν. νεκρῶν, inserted 
etiam Romanis, si quis se peregrinis aut here in some mss. to fill up the meaning, 
diis aut deorum cultibus addiceret; pra- is not likely to have been spoken by the 
terea Judeis per multa imperatorum et Apostle. The juxtaposition of those words, 
magistratuum decreta et senatus consulta which excited mockery even when the Gos- 
sancita erat potestas, Deum patrium co- pel was being directly preached, would 
lendi, patriis ritibus et sacris utendi. Jos. hardly have been hazarded in this defence, 
Antt. xiv. 17; xvi. 4” (Kuinoel). In his where every expression is so carefully 
address to the Jews (ch. xxii. 14) thesimilar weighed. 16. ἐν τούτῳ] Accord- 
expression ὁ θ. τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν, brings ingly, i.e. ‘having and cherishing this 


15---90. ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ 


ΕΣ 5 \ \ θ Ἃ, \ \ , θ , t ὃ Ἀ , 
EYELVY “προς TOV €0V καὶ TOUS AVUPWTTOVUS ta TWavVToOS. 
p 


» τι a \ , 
174 δι’ ἐτῶν δὲ ἡ" πλειόνων δ 


e f 5 weve a 
με “ἡγνισμένον ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, οὐ 


᾿ \ rf 
8 ἐπὶ σοῦ ἢ 
ΓΙ. 
ἐμε. 
xvii. 10 reff. 
xxi. 24, 26 reff. 
xxi. 34 reff. Ezek. vii. 11. 


k Matt. v. 23. Mark xi. 28 al. 
n. 6, $ 41. ὃ. 4. ο. 


a ch. xxi. 26 reff. 
a= ch. v.20 al, 


aft προς ins τε L Ὁ 6 dh 1 0 137 syr Chr Thl-fin. 


ow δια παντος 32. 42. 571, 137. 


ἐλεημοσύνας * 
¢ 
ἔθνος μου ὃ παρεγενόμην καὶ ὃ προςφοράς, 18» ἐν * ais εὗρον 
ἃ μετὰ “ὄχλου οὐδὲ 
΄, \ NET ἃ ms ἢ a ὃ ear 
f θορύβου, τινὲς δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Ασίας ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, 19 ods ἔδει “re 
παρεῖναι καὶ ' κατηγορεῖν εἴ 
90 XA on > χη @ > ΄ / - 3 3 \ 
20% παὐτοὶ " οὗτοι εἰπάτωσαν τί εὗρον [ἐν ἐμοὶ] 
g ch. xxiii. 30 reff. 


1 opt. (subjective possibility), = ch. xvii. 27. 
m -Ξ- chs xxvolg. 


ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ. 265 


5τ-- Rom.v.1 
reff. 
ich. ii. 25 reff. 
ποιήσων. πε ΕΒ ἘΣ τα 
61. Gal. ii. 


d μετὰ Ὑ-ΞΞ ch. ii. 40 


k Kh Ψ m * 
TL EY OLE 
X ἀκ tps ἘΞ ch. ii. 22. 
"Tanke i ix. 13 


z absol., ee 
Ἢ she 


i ver. 2. 
Luke xxii. 23 al. Winer, 
n ver. 13, 


b = Mark vi. 48. 
e Luke xxii. 6. 


Luke xvi. 10 al, 
Ezek. XXili. 24, 
h see ch. x. 33. 


1 Cor. vid Te, Col! ii. /18; 


δια παντος bef προς Ec: 


17. rec παρεγενομην bef ελεημοσυνας κιτ.λ. (transposn for BEERS with HLP 


rel [syrr coptt eth] Chr,; καὶ mposp. bef πορεγ. EN* ο 187: om παρεγ. A 


m p 13. 40 vulg Thl-fin. 


: txt BCR! 


18. *rec ois, with HLP rel Chr, Thl-sif: αἷς (corrn to suit mpospopas ?) ABCEN b! 


co [p] 13. 36. 40. 137 Thi-fin. 


et dicentes tolle inimicum virum demid. 


ins ABCEN p 18 rel 36. 40. 137 vulg syr coptt Thl-sif. 
ιουδαιων E b c 0 36 syr. 

19. Steph de, with HL Ὁ t gk 1m 0 137 sah eth Chr: 
rec me, W ith HLP ‘el 36 Chr: 
rec ins εἰ bef τι (corrn from ver 19), with a ὁ 
vulg syr [ (th) ]: om ABCEHLPNR p 13. 36 rel Syr copt arm Chr). 
ins CEHLP rel 36 [vulg syrr copt arm] Chr. 


o 36. 40. 137 Thl. 


vulg syrr copt [arm } Chr, Thi. 
90. for n, εἰ (ttactsm ?) AC. 


ABN p 13. 40: 


hope ;’ see reff. καί] also, ‘as well as 
they.’ 17. | δέ refers back to the former 
δέ, νοῦ. 14. ‘But the matter of which they 
complain is this, that after an absence of 
many years,’ &c. See 1 Cor. xvi. 3, 4; 
2 Cor. viii. ix. notes, ch. xx. 4. 18.] 
De W. observes, that ἡγνισμ. can only 
refer to mposp., not to éAenu.: thus ats 
may have been altered to ois, to give a 
general neuter sense, amidst which occupa- 
tions: and the sense will be among or 
engaged in which offerings : it being in 
the temple. But this seems far-fetched 
and unlikely, and Meyer’s supposition, that 
ois has been altered to ais to suit mpos- 
φοράς, certainly has an air of probability. 
The use of a verb referring to two sub- 
stantives, to only one of which it is appli- 
cable, is too common to require illustra- 
tion. But, as so often in this book, we 
must follow the best Mss., our only fixed 
evidence, as against any questionable sub-* 
jective considerations. The construc- 
tion is irregular. A subject to εὗρον has 
to be supplied by a reference to some 
nominative case implied in ov μετὰ ὄχ. 
οὐδ. μ. Oop., thus: amidst which they 
found me purified in the temple, none 
who detected me in the act of raising a 
tumult . . but certain Asiatic Jews 
ον This ‘would leave it to be inferred 
that no legal officers had apprehended him, 


aft θορυβου ins et apprehenderunt me clamantes 


elz om δὲ», with HLP [eth arm] Thl-fin : 
ins των bef aro CE bet 


txt ABCEPR® p 18. 36 rel 
txt ABCERX p 19. 


om εν εἐμοι 


but certain private individuals, illegally ; 
who besides had not come forward to sub- 
stantiate any charge against him. Borne- 
mann would supply οὐχ οὗτοι μέν before 
τινες δέ; but the objection to this is, that 
the negative οὐ μετὰ ὄχ. 2... stands al- 
ready as the proper opponent clause to 
τινες δέ, and we should thus have two 
negative clauses together. ΟἿ this sense 
of δέ, see Viger, ed. Hermann, p. 16, note 
24; and Hermann’s note, p. 702.19. The 
latter remarks, “intelligitur in hac formula, 
quam malum, stultum est, vel simile quid.” 
19.] ἔχοιεν, not ἔχουσιν, implying 
the subjective possibility merely, and dis- 
claiming all knowledge of what the charge 
might be. The sentence is an anacoluthon: 
δεῖ is absolutely asserted in the present : 
then ἔχοιεν in the opt. follows, as if the 
hypothetical ἔδει had been used: and 
hence the correction to ἔδει. (So I wrote 
in former editions, and so I still believe : 
but the text must follow the evidence of 
the great mss. [1870.]) On the opt. 
after the hypothetical indicative, see Bern- 
hardy, Syntax, p. 386 ff This also 
is a skilful argument on the part of the 
Apostle :—it being the custom of the Ro- 
mans not to judge a prisoner without the 
accusers face to face, he deposes that his 
real accusers were the Asiatic Jews who 
first raised the cry against him i: the 


560 ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAOQN. XXIV. 


᾽ , A σ \ al int ’ ῶ x \ ’ 
och. xviii. 146° ἀδίκημα στάντος μοῦ ὃ ἐπὶ τοῦ P συνεδρίου, 31 ἢ περὶ pias 
ren. a ΄ ov \ 
. iv. 15 reff, i UR) aS ee sk > > . 

Pee aia? ταύτης 4 φωνῆς ‘Hs " ἐκέκραξα ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐστώξ, νον 
al. , a Beh , , a 
rattr,chiit ἡ ἀναστάσεως ‘vexpav ἐγὼ ἃ κρίνομαι σήμερον eb ὑμῶν. 
refi. 7 Ἢ \ . A ΄ ΩΝ \ 
saor-redupl, 22 ἡ ἀνεβάλετο δὲ αὐτοὺς ὁ Φῆλιξ, " ἀκριβέστερον εἰδὼς τὰ 

Num. xi. 2. ‘ a ς a ” “ , ς , 

LXX almost περὶ τῆς * ὁδοῦ, εἴπας “Ὅταν Λυσίας ὁ χιλίαρχος ¥ κατα- 

“ \ > id a 9 4 “ 
Bn, " διαγνώσομαι ὃ τὰ ἃ καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς, >>” διαταξάμενος τῷ 


always. 
t 1 Cor. xv. 12 


reff. 
wy - ΩΝ , " Mv \ 
“wi © ἑκατοντάρχῃ "“ τηρεῖσθαι αὐτόν, ἔχειν τε “ ἄνεσιν, καὶ 
v here only. ᾿Ν ; ΡΞ = See 
(Ps.lxxvii. μῃδένα “ κωλύειν τῶν ! ἰδίων αὐτοῦ § ὑπηρετεῖν αὐτῷ. - 


Schleusn. : : f diy de , , Δα ᾿ 
Lex. V. T. in voc.) τὸ πλουσιωτέραν τὴν πόλιν ποιεῖν ἀναβαλούμεθα, Xen. Mem. iii. 6. 6. (-BoAy, ~ 
i y absol., ver. 1. 


xxv. 17.) w ch. xviii. 26 reff. x — ch. ix. 2 reff. ol 

zch. xxiii. 15 only (reff.). ach. xxv. 14. Eph. vi. 21. Phil. i. 12. Col. iv. 7. ὃ Luke viii. 55. ch. 
xviii. 2 al. c = ch. xii. δ, 6 reff. d ~ here (2 Cor. ii. 13. vii. 5. viii. 13. 2 Thess. 1. 7) 
only. ΤΡ. 2 Chron. xxiii. 15. 6 — ch. xvi. 6 reff. f = ch. iv. 23. 1 Tim. v. 8. see John 
1.11. Titus i. 12. g — ch. xiii. 36 (reff.). xx. 34 only. 


21. φωνης bef ταυτης Ec k 137 syr Thi-sif. rec expata, with EHLP rel 36 Thl- 
fin: txt ABCN a bd mo p13. 40 Chr, Thl-sif. rec eotws bef ev αὐτοῖς (corrn to 
avoid ambig of reference of εν avt.?), with HLP rel syrr [arm} Chr: txt ABCEN ¢ k 
m p 13. 40. 137 vulg copt ΤῊ]. om eyw C. rec υφ (corrn, the foree of 
eo not being perceived), with EHLPN rel 36 vulg [copt] Chr: [ag e:] txt ABC πὶ p 
13. 40 Syr (eth). ' ; 

22. rec at beg ins axovoas δε ravra (omitting the δὲ following), with [H]LP rel 36 
Thl: om ABCEN ὁ p 13. 40. 137 vulg syrr copt (ath) arm Chr.—o φηλιξ aveBadeto 
avtous L &c as above: o φηλιὲ bef avrovs c Chr: avrots p. rece εἰπὼν (corrn to 
more usual form), with EHLP rel 36: txt ABCN p. for καθ, kateoe(but corrd) NX}, 

23. aft Siaratauevos ins τε, with H rel vulg[ jussitque (so E-lat) eth] Syr Chr,; δὲ 
L: om ABC E[{-gr] PX Ὁ] co p 18. 36. 40. 137 syr copt arm Thl-fin. temas 
τονταρχω E 13:] χιλιαρχη X!, but corrd by δὲ} or N-corr!. rec (for avrov) τον 
παυλον, with HLP rel Syr eth Chr [Thl-sif]: txt ABCEN c k p 13. 36. 40. 137 vulg 
syr copt arm Thl-fin. rec aft ὑπηρετεῖν adds ἡ προξερχεσθαι, with HLP rel 36 
Chr: om ABCEN p 13 vulg syrr copt arm. 


temple,—not the Sanhedrim, who merely 
received him at the hands of others,—and 
that these were not present. 20.1 Or 
let these persons themselves say, what 
fault they found in me while I stood 
before the Sanhedrim, other than in the 
matter of this one saying..... τί serves 
for τί ἄλλο. So in English: What fault 
but this: i. 6. ‘What other fault but this.’ 

21.) ἐφ᾽ tp., before you: less usual 
than ὑφ᾽ ὑμ., which is probably a correc- 
tion. 22. ἀνεβάλετο avr. | ‘ ampliavit 
605 :᾿ viz. both parties. ἀκρ. εἰδὼς 
τὰ π. τ. 68.) These words will bear ouly 
one philoiogically correct interpretation, 
having more accurate knowledge about 
the way: not, ‘till he should obtain more 
accurate knowledge’ (ungrammatical): nor, 
‘since he had now obtained’ (viz. by Paul’s 
speech: but εἰδώς cannot be rendered ‘cer- 
tior factus’). But this, the only right ren- 
dering, is variously understood. Chrys. 
Says: ἐπίτηδες ὑπερέθετο (he adjourned 
the case purposely), οὐ δεόμενος μαθεῖν, 
ἀλλὰ διακρούσασθαι βουλόμενος τοὺς Ἰου- 
δαίους. ἀφεῖναι οὐκ ἤθελε δι᾽ ἐκείνους. 
Luther and Wolf: “ἀἰδύα!ῦ, . . . non quod 
sect ignarus esset, aut pleniorem sibi no- 
titiam ejus comparare vellet, sed quia, cum 
satis illam jam cognitam haberet, Judzos 


amplius sibi molestos esse nolebat.” But 
these interpretations, as De W. observes, 
overlook the circumstance, that such a 
reason for adjournment would be as un- 
favourable to Paul, as to the Jews. Meyer 
explains it, that he adjourned the case, 
‘because,’ &e. But this (De W.) would 
imply that he was favourably disposed to 
Paul. The simplest explanation-is that 
given by De W.: He put them off to an- 
other time, not as requiring any more in- 
formation about ‘the way,’ for that matter 
he knew before,—but waiting for the ar- 
rival of Lysias. Whether Lysias was ex- 
pected, or summoned, or ever came to be 
heard, is very doubtful. The read motive 
of the ‘ampliatio’ appears in ver. 26. The 
comparative implies, “ more accurate than 
to need additional information.” διαγν. 
τὰ καθ᾽ ὑμ.}1 will adjudge your matters. 
So in reff. also. 28.) διαταξάμενος is 
in apposition with εἴπας, and both belong to 
ἀνεβάλετο. ἄνεσιν | De W. and Meyer 
explain this of ‘eustodia libera,’ φυλακὴ 
&eouos (Arrian, Exp. ii. 15). But this 
can hardly be. Lipsius (Excurs. II. on 
Tacit. Ann. iii. 22; vi. 3, cited by Wieseler, 
Chron. ἃ. Apost.-g. p. 880) says, ‘ Prater 
custodiam militarem alia duplex, apud mas 
gistratus, et apud vades. Apud magistratus, 


ABCEH 
LPR a Ὁ 
edfgh 
klmo 
p 13 


. ᾿ a 
Lee KK Ὅἕἐἐοὰ ΝΣ - 


“ναι a or 


21—26. TIPAZ EIS ATOSTOAON. 267 


\ ° , e lal 
1 τινὰς ‘i παραγενόμενος ὁ PANE nen. x. 48 ref, 
ἢ i absol., ch. 


\ ΄ , 
24 Μετὰ δὲ " ἡμέρας 
xvii. 10 reff. 


\ " Lal / ” » / k ΄ 
σὺν Δρουσίλλῃ τῇ γυναικί, οὔσῃ ᾿Ιουδαίᾳ, * μετεπέμψατο , x. 10 ref 


λ 4. S sf a a 
τὸν Παῦλον καὶ ἤκουσεν αὐτοῦ περὶ τῆς ‘els χριστὸν ' sani. 
Col. ii. 5. 


4 5 nw 
πίστεως. 2 ™" διαλεγομένου δὲ αὐτοῦ περὶ °° δικαιοσύνης Paul, or of 
- “ \ ΄“- , a , blir = ig hg 
καὶ ἐγκρατείας καὶ τοῦ “κρίματος τοῦ * μέλλοντος, “re” 
n Isa. Ixiii. 1, 


> ΄ Ὄ fal a 

"ἔμφοβος γενόμενος ὁ Φῆλιξ ἀπεκρίθη *To ‘viv * ἔχον oabsol..ch.- 
, \ Ἢ xvi. rent. 

πορεύου, " καιρὸν δὲ " μεταλαβὼν “ μετακαλέσομαί σε" ? SH." 


rs A ce 5 / ¢ ΄ ΄ 3 ΤΥ eas (bis) only t. 
20 ἅμα καὶ ἐλπίζων ὅτε *ypnuata δοθήσεται αὐτῷ ὑπὸ Six. xviii 
: 30 (title) 
only. (-τής, Tit. i. 8. -τεύεσθαι, 1 Cor. vii. 9. ix. 25.) q = Heb. vi.2. 1 Pet. iv.17. Rev. 
xx. 4. (Prov. xxi. 15 al.) r= Matt. xii. 32. Rom. v. 14 al. s ch. x. 4 reff. 
there only. Tobit vii. 11. Ὁ = Gal.vi. 10. Hagg. i. 2,4. v = («πὰ constr.) here 


(ch. ii. 46 reff.) only. μεταλ. καιρ. ἁρμόττοντα, Polyb. ii. 16. 15. w ch. vii. 14 reff. 


x ch. iv. 37 reff. 


24. τινας bef nuepas AE c 197 vulg Syr [Chr,]: txt BCHLPN 13. 36 rel [{syr Thl]. 
rec aft γυναικι ins αὐτου, with EX}? rel vulg [syrr copt arm] Thl-sif ic: pref 
ιδια BC? [a Ὁ k πὶ 0] 36 [syr-mg(appy) ] Amm-c, Thl-fin: ins both A [X&-corr!] p: om 
both C1HLP [ὁ ἔς ἃ 1] Chr. (Both ἰδια and αὐτου are additions to fix the sense of 
γυναικι.) aft sovdaia ins παρακαλουσὴ οπωξς ἰδη Toy παυλον και ἀκουσὴ TOY λογον ws 
ουν εβουλετο ἱκανον ποιησαι εἐποιῆσεν TOUTO Syr-mMg. ins καὶ bef μετεπεμψατο N'(R? 
disapproving). om αὐτου Οἱ. aft χριστον ins τἡσουν ELN' df ghlm p 36 
vulg [demid] syr copt Chr Thl-fin ; «(sic) B: pref, am(and fuld tol) eth [arm]: om 
A Cl-2(appy) HP &-corr!3 13 rel Syr Thi-sif. 

25. εγκρατειας και δικαιοσυνὴς &. μελλοντος bef κριματος (omg του) C m 40 
arm Chr-comm,. rec aft μελλοντος ins εἐσεσθαι (appy a corrn aft ver 15), with 
HLP rel Chr,: om ABCEN p 13. 36. 40. 137 [not exprd in vulg syrr copt eth arm]. 

aft eupoBos ins Se A[ H copt(Treg) }. εχων 1, 18: εχουν H. παρα- 
λαβων A: λαβὼν ἃ Ὁ ἀΚ ὁ 13. 40 Thi-sif. 

26. rec ins δε bef και, with copt Thl-fin: om ΑΒΟΒΗΠΓΡῚΝ p 18. 36 rel 187 vulg 
syr [arm] Chr, Thl-sif. om Ist avtw B: avtw bef δοθησεται c. 


quum reus Consuli, Pretori, Adili, inter- king of Emesa. Not long after, Felix, 


dum et Senatori, etiam non e magistratn, 
committebatur: quod nonnisi in reds zllus- 
trioribus usurpatum, eaque custodia libera 
dicta: vid. Tacit. Ann. vi. 3; Sall. Cat. 
xlvii.; Liv. vi. 36; Cic. Brut. xevi.; Dio 
lviii. 8, Custodia apud vades, quum eorum 
periculo fidejussoribus reus tradebatur: 
vid. Tacit. Ann. v. 8; Suet. Vitell. 2.’ 
Now, Wieseler argues, as Paul was not 
bailed,—and was not “ 6 reis illustrioribus,’ 
and besides was delivered to a centurion 
to keep, his cannot have been ‘ custodia 
libera, but ‘ militaris? relaxed however as 
much as was consistent with safe custody. 
He cites Josephus, who says (Antt. xviii. 
6. 10) of the custody of Agrippa, φυλακὴ 
μὲν yap καὶ τήρησις ἦν, μετὰ μέντοι 
ἀνέσεως τῆς εἰς τὴν δίαιταν. Remission, 
or relaxation, would be a better rendering 
than ‘liberty.’ 24. wapayev.| Into 
the hall or chamber where Paul was to 
speak. Δρουσίλλῃ | She was daughter 
of Hered Agrippa I. (see ch. xii.) and of 
Cypros,—and sister of Agrippa II. She 
was betrothed at six years old (Jos. Antt. 
xix. 9. 1) to Epiphanes, son of Antiochus, 
king of Commagene; but (Antt. xx. 7. 1) 
he declining the marriage, not wishing to 
be circumcised and become a Jew, she was 
married to the more obsequious Azizus, 


being enamoured of her beauty, persuaded 
her, by means of a certain Simon, a Cyprian 
magician (see note on ch. viii. 9), to leave 
her husband and live with him (Antt. xx. 
7.2). She bore him a son, Agrippa: and 
both mother and son perished in an erup- 
tion of Vesuvius, in the reign of Titus 
(ibid.). The Drusilla mentioned by 
Tacitus (Hist. v. 9), a granddaughter of 
Antony and Cleopatra, must have been 
another wife of Felix, who was thrice 
married, and each time to persons of royal 
birth ; ‘trium reginarum maritus,’ Suet. 
Claud. 28. 25.] It is remarkable 
that Tacitus uses of Felix (Ann. xii. 54) 
the expression ‘cuncta malefacta 510] 
impune ratus.’? The fear of Felix appears 
to have operated merely in his sending 
away Paul: no impression for good was 
made on him. 26.] ‘Lex Julia de 
repetundis precipit, ne quis ob hominem 
in vincula publica conjiciendum, vincien- 
dum, vincirive jubendum, exve vinculis 
dimittendum ; neve quis ob hominem con- 
demnandum absolvendumve .. . . aliquid 
acceperit.’? Digest. xl. 11. 3. Cited by 
Mr. Humphry, who observes: Albinus, 
who succeeded Festus, so much encouraged 
this kind of bribery, that no malefactors 
remained in prison, except those who did 


268 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ, 


XXIV. 27; 


- Η , ὃ \ \ y ’ 2. τῆν k , 
y here onlyt. TOU αὐλου, 010 Kal ¥ TuUKVOTEpOY αὐτὸν “ μεταπεμπόμενος 


2 Macc. viii. 
8 only. 
(-vos, Luke 
v.33. 1 Tim. 
νυν. 23 only. 
Ezek. xxxi. 
3A Ald. 
compl. only.) 
z Luke xx1v. 
14, 15. ch. 
xx. 11 only. 
w. dat., here 
only. Prov. 
xxiii. 30. 
ach. xxviii. 


΄ , > A 
2 wutheL QUT. 


ΤΓαῦλον "δεδεμένον. 
XXV. Ι᾿φΦῆστος 
'τρεῖς ἡμέρας } 


iy 
ουν 


274 Διετίας δὲ ὃ πληρωθείσης ἔλαβεν 
ς διάδοχον ὁ PANE Πόρκιον Φῆστον, θέλων τε * χάριτα 
εἴ καταθέσθαι τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις ὁ Φῆλιξ ἐ κατέλιπεν τὸν 


᾿ΕΝ Wn / \ 
ἐπιβὰς τῇ ὃ" ἐπαρχίᾳ μετὰ 


> , ’ Ὁ U \ > 2 

ἀνέβη εἰς Ιεροσόλυμα ἀπὸ Kaicapeias, 
" , ΕῚ a e . id A lal 
2m" ἐνεφάνισάν TE αὐτῷ οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ 5 πρῶτοι TOV 


. .9 , \ lal ΄ ‘ , 
x. 3.) see ch. Ἰουδαίων “xata τοῦ Παύλου, καὶ 4 παρεκάλουν αὐτὸν 


xx. 31. 
ch. vii. 23 reff. 


= c here only. 
= 2 Cor. viii. 4 reff. 


ech. xxv. 9. 


xv. 4. dea. πῆ, Ἴ. 
v. 3.) 


7. 3. =ch.xv.2. Matt. xx. 18. 
o ch. xiii. 50 reff. 


p — Matt. xviti. 29. 


1 Chron, xviii. 17. 
f = as above [6] (Mark xv. 46) only. 

(not ABN: ἄς. εὐεργεσίαν καταθεσθαι, Demosth. 193. 22. 

i = here only. see ch. xx. 18. xxi. 4. 

Ezra vii. 6,7. 


50 successorem accepit, Plin. Epist ix. 13 end. 
1 Macc. x. 23 Ed-vat F 
g = ch. xviii. 19 reff. ᾿γ Mark 

_k ch. xxiii. 34 only+. (-xos, Ezra 
m ch. xxiii. 15 reff. n ch. xxiv. 1. 
q Matt. viii. 34 only. Plut. vit. Demetr. ᾧ 38. 


rec aft mavAov ins omws Avon avtov (a gloss from the marg), with HLP rel 36 copt 


zeth-pl Chr Thi: om ABCEN p [13] 40 vulg syrr [eth-rom]} arm. 


dieAeyero C 15-8. 36. 180. 

27. φαιστον P(so elsw). 
δρουσιλλαν 137 syr-ing. 
[501] copt Chr, Thl. 


for wurde, 


aft φηστον ins τὸν δε παυλον εἰασεν ev τηρήσει δια 
for τε, δε NF Ὁ. ἀ6σ ἢ Καὶ 130 p? 18. 40. 137 vulg Syr 
rec χαριτας, with HP rel 36 [arm] Aimm-e, Thl-sif: χαριν 


(see ch xxv. 9) ELN3 c Καὶ 40. 187 vulg (syrr copt) Chr Thl-tin: txt ABCN? p 18. 


Cuap. XXV. 1. τη ἐπαρχειω A N}(-xuw): τὴν ἐπαρχίαν p. 


15). 


2. ἐενεφανησαν [L m(aveg.) | 25-6. 68. 105 Thi-fin (so also [some in] ch xxiv. 1; xxv. 
rec δε (alteration of characteristic te), with EHLP rel syr copt [arm] Thl- 
sif: txt ABCN k p 13. 40 vulg Syr eth Chr, Thl-fin. 


rec ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς, with HP 


rel Thl-sif: txt ABCELN ec d p 36. 40. 187 vulg syrr copt eth arm [Chr, Thl-fin]. 


not offer money for their liberation (Jos. 
B. J. ii. 14. 1). St. Paul did not resort to 
this mode of shortening his tedious and 
unjust imprisonment, and Tertullian (‘de 
Fuga in Persecutione,’ 12, p. 116) quotes 
his conduct in this respect against those 
who were disposed to purchase escape from 
persecution: a practice which prevailed 
and becaine a great evil in the time of 
Cyprian. See his Epistles, 11. and Ixviii., 
denouncing the Libellatici. 27. 
Stetias | viz. of Paul’s imprisonment. 

Ildpxtov Φῆστον) Festus appears to have 
succeeded Felix in the summer or autumn 
of the year 60 A.D.: but the question is 
one of much chronological difficulty. It 
is fully discussed in Wieseler, Chron. ἃ. 
Apost.-g. pp. 91—99. He found the pro- 
vince (Jos. Antt. xx. 8. 10) wasted and 
harassed by bands of robbers and sicarii, 
aud the people the prey of fulse prophets. 
He died, after being procurator a very 
short time,—from one to two years. 
Josephus |B. J. ii. 14. 1) contrasts him, 
as a putter down of robbers, favourably 
with his successor Albinus. On the 
deposition, &c., of Felix, see note, ch. xxiii. 
24. χάριτα καταθέσθαι) See reff. 
‘Est Jocutio bene Greca, Demostheni 
quoque usitata et Xenophonti: quales locu- 
tiones non paucas habet Lucas, ubi non 
alios inducit loquentes, sed ipse loquitur, 


et quidem de rebus ad religionem non per- 
tinentibus.’ Grot. The reading χάριτα, 
brought into the text by the evidence of 
the best Mss., has apparently been a cor- 
rection to suit the context, only one such 
act being spoken of. The plural would 
describe the wish of Felix to confer obliga- 
tions on the Jews, who were sending to 
complain of him at Rome,—and so win 
their favour. δεδεμένον] There was 
no change in the method of custody, see 
note on ver. 23. He left him in the ‘ cus- 
todia militaris’ in which he was. 

XXV. 1.) The term ἐπαρχία is properly 
used of a province, whether imperial or 
senatorial (see note on ch. xiii. 7),—but is 
here loosely applied to Judaa, which was 
only a procuratorship, attached to the pro- 
vince of Syria. So also Josephus. calls 
Festus ἔπαρχος, Antt. xx. 8. 11; as also 
Albinus, ib. 9. 1. 2. οἱ ἀρχ.] It has 
been inagined, that ὁ apx. of the rec. has 
been a correction to suit the former part 
of the nurrative. But it may be that 
οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς has been substituted for it, to 
suit the assertion of Festus, ver. 15. So 
Meyer and De Wette. The High Priest 
now was Ishmael the son of Phabi, Jos. 
Antt. xx. 8. 11 [see chronological table in 
Prolegg.]. πρῶτοι 15 more general than 
πρεσβύτεροι, though most of the first men 
must Lave been members of the Sanhedrime 


ABCEH 
LPN ab 
cdfgh 
klmo 
p ls 


ΧΧΥ, 1—8. ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ AIOSTOAON. 909 


ὃ τ αἰτούμενοι "χάριν Kat αὐτοῦ, « ὅπως * μεταπέμψηται τ =ch. xii. 20 
£0 r = ch. xii. 20. 
ryt i Ree XP 2 ARS 7 Ν κὸν G Ἵ ῇ Matt. vii. 9 ||. 
αὐτὸν εἰς ἱΙερουσαλήμ, " ἐνέδραν ποιοῦντες " ἀνελεῖν αὐτὸν 
τ 
Ὑ κατὰ τὴν ὁδόν. 


3 Kings xix. 4. 
8 = 2 Cor. viii. 
Aine < \ 5 a ? / x A 4 reff. 
ὁ μὲν οὖν Φῆστος ἀπεκρίθη * τηρεῖ- teh. x. 5 reff. 
u ch. xxiii. 16 
only (reff.). 
v = ch. v. 33 


σθαι tov Ἰ]αῦλον ¥ εἰς Καισάρειαν, ἑαυτὸν δὲ μέλλειν * ἐν 

5 τάχει " ἐκπορεύεσθαι: ὃ Οἱ οὖν ἐν ὑμῖν, φησίν, ” δυνατοὶ w cu vii. 36 

° συγκαταβάντες, εἴ τι ἐστὶν ἐν τῷ ἀνδρὶ 4 ἄτοπον “ κατ- x Sth, ai 5, 
6 Γδιατρίψας δὲ 8 ἐν αὐτοῖς ἡμέρας "τι 


z Rom. xvi. 20 


ηγορείτωσαν αὐτοῦ. 
᾽ , > \ 3 7 - ; os 4 

οὐ πλείους ὀκτὼ ἢ δέκα, " καταβὰς “eis Καισάρειαν, 1TH το. 

Β 4 ἃ absol., Luke 
» , \ A / a 550 ° 

‘érravptov " καθίσας ἐπὶ τοῦ ' βήματος ἐκέλευσεν τὸν Lad- τι τὰν. 


Josh. 


> m2 θῇ Tn f δὲ ? A oO / xy. 18 B ἅς. 
ov ἀχθῆναι. παραγενομένου δὲ αὐτοῦ ° περιέστησαν b= 1 Cori. 
LN : SAAS Ve ΄ τι 6. 2 Chron. 
αὐτὸν οἱ Ὁ ἀπὸ ‘lepocodvpwv  καταβεβηκότες ᾿Ιουδαῖοι,͵ νιν. 
\ Σ q / ΟΞ ΄ 8 , ἃ ? Ps. xviii. 17, 
πολλὰ καὶ “4 βαρέα : αἰτιώματα " καταφέροντες, ἃ οὐκ Cant. tr. pu. 


ty itis τ ait is i Sag 3 Ἐν 26. | Wisd. 
ἴσχυον ἅ ἀποδεῖξαι, Stov ἸΠαύλου " ἀπολογουμένου ort κα. Bony. 
ch. xxviil. 
f ch. xii. 19 reff. > »g@' = ch: xxiv. 21.3]. fr; 
k = ch. xii. 21. ver. 17, Matt. xxiii.2. 3 Kings 
m = ch. viii. 32 reff. n = absol., ch. xvii. 10 reff. 
2 Kings xiii. 31. 


Σ p Mark iii. 22. Luke 
x. 30 al. q Matt. xxiii. 4, 23. ch. xx. 29. 2 Cor. σ. 10. 1 John v. 3 only. 


Exod. xviii. 18. 
r here only +. s = ch. xxvi. 10 (xx. 9 bis) only. Gen. xxxvii. 2. τ = chi vi. 10 refia 
u ch. ii. 22 reff. v ch. xix. 33 reff. 


6 reff. e and constr., ch. xxiv. 8 reff. 
h ch. xviii. 22 reff. ich. x. 9 reff. 
viii. 20. lch. xii. 21 reff. 
o = John xi. 42 (2 Tim. ii. 16, Tit. iii. 9) only. 


3. for κατ, map C e 18. 36. 105-80 tol Syr [arm] Chr-txt,. ιεροσολυμα E k 96. 
evedpov ὁ 137 Chr). at end ins ot τὴν evxny πεποιήκοτες κατα TO δυνατον 
4yva@ εν Tals χερσιν αὐτῶν ὝὙΕΡΉΤαι syr-mg. 

4, rec ev καισαρεια, with HLP rel 36 Chr,: txt ABCE® p13. 40. 

εκπορευεσθαι bef ev ταχει δὲϑ. 

5. [for οι, εἰ L mo. rec δυνατοι bef ev up φησι (transposition for perspicuity), 
with HLP rel syr eth: txt ABCE X(but quw for υμιν) m [p] 18] δυνατος ] 40 vulg 
arm Chr-comm,. καταβαντες &. rec (for ατοπον)ὴ τουτω, with HLP rel [eth] 
Chr, Thl: tovrw aromwov ac g? m 187 [(Syr)] syr [Thl-fin,]: om 105-33: ατοπον bef 
ev tw ανδρι be o: txt ABCER d p 13. 40 vulg [copt] arm Lucif). 

6. rec om ov, with E-gr HLP a! ¢ f bh k 1] syr(ins πλείους above the line) [copt] Thl- 
sif: om ov mActovs 187 Syr syr-txt sah: ins ABCR p 18. 36 rel vulg E-lat copt arm Thl- 
tin [ Lucif, ].— ov πλειους bef nuepas &. πλειονας B: πλείονες 38. rec 0M oKT®, 
with HLP rel Thl-sif: txt ABCEX ἃ m p 18 vulg syrr coptt [eth] arm Thl-fin. 
ins καὶ bef τὴ εἐπαυριον Ac, so (but κατεβη above) 180 vulg syr Lucif. αχθηναι 
bef tov παυλον L copt [arm(Tischdf) | Lucif,. προαχθηναι X!(83 disapproving ). 

7. rec om avtov, with HP rel copt Chr, Thi-sif: ins ABCLX bo 36. 40 [vulg syrr 
arm] Lucif,: avtw E p 13 Thl-fin. rec αἰτιαματα, with rel 36 Thl-sif: [αἰτηματαὰ 
h13:] txt ABCEHLPR® a? df m p Chr Thl-fin. rec (for kata.) φεροντες, with 
HLP rel 36 coptt 2th Chr, Thl: επιφεροντες E: txt ABCN p 18. 40 [arm-zoh, οὐ)ὲ- 
cientes K-lat | vulg Lucif. rec adds κατα Tov παυλου (omg Tov παυλου next ver), 
with [H]P rel 36 syr Chr Thl He: τω παυλω E: κατ᾽ αὐτου L 17-8.68 Syr copt (eth) 
[arm-mss]: om ABCN p vulg arm[-zoh] Lucif. toxvoay R!. 

8. rec aft amodvy. ins αὐτου (corrn following on the insertion of κατα του παυλου 


om μελλειν E. 


Festus, relating this application, ver. 15, 
calls them πρεσβύτεροι. 8.1] χάριν 
= καταδίκην, ver. 15. ποιοῦντες, 
not for ποιήσοντεξ : they were muking, 
contriving, the ambush already. The 
country was at this time, as may be seen 
abundantly in Jos. Antt. xx., full of sicarii ; 
who were hired by the various parties to 
take off their adversaries. 5. ot 
δυνατοί] not, as in E. V., those among 
you that are able (to go down ?): but, the 
powerful among you: those who from 
their position and influence are best cal- 
culated to represent the public interests. 
See Meyer and Wordsworth. 6.} The 


number of days is variously read: which 
has probably arisen from the later Mss., 
which have ἡ for the ὀκτώ of the more 
ancient ones: thus 7 has been omitted on 
account of the 7 following. Itis possible, 
as Meyer also observes, that a perverted 
notion of the necessity of an absolute pre- 
cision in details in the inspired text, may 
have occasioned the erasure of one of the 
nuinbers. 7. περιέστησαν! Without 
the αὐτόν, asin rec., this might mean round 
the βῆμα, or round Festus: and perhaps 
the insertion has been made to clear this up. 
i καταφέροντες, bringing against 


him: see var, readd. and. ref. 


270 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ἈΠΟΣΤΌΛΩΝ: ΧΧΥ: 
ν Ν lal / U ’ Ν e \ ” 
w 1 or. vi. 18 οὔτε “ εἰς τὸν νύμον τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων οὔτε εἰς TO ἱερὸν οὔτε ABCEH 
- » a a / -“ 
x ch. xiv. 57 εἰς Καίσαρα τὶ “ ἥμαρτον. ὁ Φῆστος δὲ θέλων τοῖς cdfg h 
reff.). : Ἶ 3 7 
yon eroo. Ἰουδαίοις * yapw “ καταθέσθαι, ἀποκριθεὶς τῷ Ilavd@ pis 
Rom. iii. 4, 
from Ps. 1.4 


᾽ Ν -“ \ 9 
τ εἶπεν Θέλεις Y εἰς ἱΙΓεροσόλυμα " ἀναβὰς ἐκεῖ περὶ τούτων 
) eee A A e al 9 \ fal ΄ 
ach xxii 80. 2 ριθῇναι ὃ ἐπ᾽ ἐμοῦ; 10 εἶπεν δὲ ὁ ἸΤαῦλος * Ext τοῦ | βή- 


reff. 
Ὁ constr., Matt. 


K im e “ b > e ὃ A 7 / θ Ἶ 
x26. Luke μᾶτος Καίσαρος ἑστώς ὃ εἰμι, οὗ με δεῖ * κρίνεσθαι. ᾿Ιου- 
xii, 6. John \ } : , 

ii δ], ὁ. δαᾳίους οὐδὲν ἠδίκησα, ὡς καὶ σὺ “ κάλλιον 4 ἐπιγινώσκεις. 

. i, 10. a f ΄ / , > 

vos. ll εἰ μὲν οὖν ἀδικῶ καὶ © ἄξιον © θανάτου πέπραχά τι, οὐ 
© compar. = 


ch. xxvii. 13. 2 Cor. vii. 7. viii. 17. 


2 Tim. i. 17, 18 al. 
ech. xxiii. 29 reff. 


Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 35. 4. d ch. xxiii. 28 reff. 


above), with HP rel 36 Chr, Thl-sif: tov παυλου απολογουμενου αὐτου L: txt ABCEN 
em p 18. 40. 187 vulg syrr copt eth [arm] Thl-fin Lucif,.—add de (aft the first word) 
E 36 am(and demid fuld [tol ]) Thl-sif Lucif,, re Syr. om 7157. 80. 105: τινα 137. 

9. for δε, ουν A (k 40[ omg o]). rec τοῖς ιουδαιοις bef θελων, with HLP rel Chr, 
Thl-sif : txt ABCEX c Καὶ m p 18. 40. 137 vulg[-clem(after καταθεσθαι) am fuld demid 
tol syrr copt] arm Thl-fin. apira A. rec κρινεσθαι, with HLP rel 
36 Chr [Thl-sif]: txt ABCEN dk p 13. 40 Thl-fin. 

10. om o Af. eotws bef em: του Bnuatos καισαρος N! m {[(copt)]: B has it in 
both places. ἡδικηκα BX (p). γινωσκεις C α αἱ 2. 30. 137. 

11. rec (for ovv) yap (corrn, as Meyer, because εἰ μὲν ovy seemed contradictory to 
ovdev ἡδικησα), with HLP rel {vulg syr eth] Thi-sif: om 40 E-lat: txt ABC E-er 
X dk p36 copt [arm] Chr-comm, ‘Thl-fin. (13 def.) for και, ἡ E 29 vulg [Syr] 


Chr-comm,. 


8.] These were the three principal charges 
to which the πολ. x. Bap. ait. of the Jews 
referred (Meyer). 9.] κριθῆναι, the 
aor., refers to the one act, ot deciding 
jinally concerning these charges. This not 
having been seen, the later Mss. have sub- 
stituted κρίνεσθαι, which is more ‘ going to 
law, “ being involved in a trial.’ The 
question is asked of Paul as a Roman 
citizen, having a right to be tried by Ro- 
man law: and more is contained in it, 
than αὖ first meets the eye. It seems to 
propose only a change of place; but 
doubtless in the ἐκεῖ κριθῆναι was con- 
tained by implication a sentence pro- 
nounced by the Sanhedrim. ἐπ᾽ ἐμοῦ 
may mean no more than ἐπὶ σοῦ, ch. 
xxvi. 2, viz., that the procurator would 
be present and sanction the trial: so 
Grot., “visne a synedrio judicari me 
presente ?” Otherwise, a journey to Je- 
rusalem would be superfluous. Festus 
may very probably have anticipated the 
rejection of this proposal by Paul, and 
have wished to make it appear that the 
obstacle in the way of Paul being tried by 
the Sanhedrim arose not from him, but 
from the prisoner himself. 10. } Paul’s 
refusal has a positive and a negative ground 
—1. ‘ Cesar’s tribunal is my proper place 
of judgment : 2. To the Jews I have done 
no harm, and they have therefore no claim 
to judge me’ (De W.). ἐπ. τ. B. 
Kato.] Meyer quotes from Ulpian, “ Que 
acta gestaque sunt a procuratore Cesaris 
gic ab eo comprobantur, atque si a Cwsare 


ipso gesta sint.” In οὗ pe Set κρίνεσθαι, 
Wordsworth has again fallen into the 
mistake of supposing pe (and again in 
ver. 11) to be emphatie (see note, Matt. 
xvi. 18), which it cannot possibly be under 
any circumstances. The form of the sen- 
tence which would express the sense built 
by him on this error, would be, οὗ δεῖ ἐμὲ 
κριθῆναι, or οὗ ἐμὲ δεῖ κριθῆναι. But the 
sense, when thus given, surely is wholly 
alien from the person speaking and from 
the situation : as is also the understanding 
δεῖ as alluding to divine intimation made 
to him. The de7is simply of his right as a 
Roman citizen: the με simply enclitic, and 
of no rhetorical force at all. κάλλιον] 


Not ‘for the superlative,’ here or any’ 


where else :—the comparative is elliptical, 
requiring ‘than... . to be supplied by 
the hearer: so also in reff. Here, the 
ellipsis would be readily supplied from 
Festus’s own speech, which appeared to 
assume that there was some ground of trial 
before the Sanhedrim. κάλλιον will there- 
fore mean, better than thou choosest to 
confess. We have an ellipsis of the same 
kind in our phrase “ἕο know better.’ Or 
it may be in this case as in 2 Tim. i. 18, 
‘ better, than that I need say more on it :’ 
but I prefer the other interpretation. 

11.1 Both readings, εἰ μὲν γάρ, and εἰ μὲν 
οὖν, will suit the sense. In the former 
case, it is, ‘ Hor if I am an offender,....2 
in the latter, If, now, 1 am an offender 
. . . . ,—taking up the supposition gene- 
rally, after having denied the particular 


g— De 


Lal \ > “ 
ἱ παραιτοῦμαι τὸ ἀποθανεῖν" εἰ 


ΤΕΡΑΞΈΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΟΝΟΝ, 271 


δὲ δοὐδέν ἐστιν 8 ὧν Luke xiv. 18, 


19, 1 Τί, 


ι κα h H 
οὗτοι ἃ κατηγοροῦσίν μου, οὐδείς με δύναται αὐτοῖς ee ΜΞ ερν 
7 L.P.H. Esth. 
ρίσασθαι. Katoapa * ἐπικαλοῦμαι. 13 τότε ὁ Φῆστος Ke ΠΤ 
7 A g ch. xxi. 24. 
ἱσυλλαλήσας μετὰ τοῦ ™ συμβουλίου ἀπεκρίθη Kaicapa, ὃ a4 constr, 
k2 ΓΙ y=} KK oni n , hy a 
ἐπικέκλησαι, " ἐπὶ Kaicapa " πορεύσῃ. ἘΣ 


13 ο“Ημερῶν δὲ Ρ διαγενομένων ὃ τινῶν ᾿Αγρίππας ὁ βα- | ref 


4 times. 


xii. 14 al.) Prov. xv. 22 Theod. 


p Mark xvi. 1. ch. xxvii. 9 only τ. 


for ro, του H f1 mo Thi. 
txt ABEHPX p rel Chr. 


ch. xxvi. 32. xxviii. 19 only. see ch. ii. 21. 
Luke iv. 36. dat., Luke ix. 30} Mk. xxii. 4 only. 


for μου, μοι L 781]. 


see ch. iil. 14 


k = here, &c. - 


νὰ "χὰ lw. μετά, Matt. χνῖϊ. 8, πρός, 
Exod. xxxiv. 35. m = here ont: (Matt. 
n ch, ix. 11, xvii. 14. o ch. x. 48 reff. 


2 Macc. xi. 26 only. 


for avro.s, τουτοις CL 36: 


12. συμβουλου L 18: συνεδριον C: cuved. x. συμβ. 68. 


13. om τινων ck 1. 36. 137 Chr: 


ease of his having offended the Jews. 
Meyer and De Wette are at issue about the 
internal probability of these readings: I 
am disposed to agree with Meyer that a 
difficulty was felt in the οὖν (no expression 
is more frequently misunderstood and al- 
tered than μὲν οὖν) and it was corrected 
into γάρ. This εἰ assumes the conviction 
after proof ; as the following et does the 
acquittal. ov. pe Suv. | ‘Said of legal 
possibility : ‘non fas est aliquem..... 

The dilemma here put by Paul is, “1.1 
am guilty, it is not by them, but by Cesar, 
that I must be (and am willing to be) tried, 
sentenced, and punished. If I am innocent, 
and Cesar acquits me, then clearly none 
will be empowered to give me up to them: 
therefore, at all events, guilty or innocent, 
I am not to be made their victim.” 

Καίσ. émuxad. | I call upon, i. 6. appeal to 
(provoco ad) Cesar. This power (of ‘ pro- 
vocatio ad populum’) having existed in 
very early times (e. g. the case of Horatius, 
Livy i. 26), was ensured to Roman citizens 
by the Lex Valeria (see Livy ii. 8, U.c. 
245), suspended by the Decemviri, but 
solemnly re-established after their deposi- 
tion (Liv. iii. 55, U.c. 305), when it was 
decreed that it should be unlawful to make 
any magistrate from whom there did not 
lie an appeal. When the emperors ab- 
sorbed the power of the populus and the 
tribunitial veto in themselves, the ‘ provo- 
catio ad populum ’ and ‘appellatio ad tri- 
bunos’ were both made to the princeps. 
See Smith’s Dict. of Antt. art. Appellatio. 
In Pliny’s celebrated Epistle respecting the 
Bithynian Christians (x. 97), we read, 
“ Fuerunt alii similis amentiz : quos, quia 
cives Romani erant, adnotavi in urbeni re- 
mittendos.” 12. συμβουλίου] The 
* conventus,’ or σύνοδος of citizens in the 
provinces, assembled to try causes on the 
a-vopaior (ἡμέραι), see ch. xix. 38. A certain 
number of these were chosen as judices, for 
tne particular causes, by the proconsul, 


τριων ὃ. 95. 108. 


and these were called lis “ consiliarit * 
(Suet. Tib. 33), or ‘ assessores ἢ (πόροῦεσι 
Suet. Galba 19). So in Jos. (Β. J. 

16. 1), Cestius, on receiving an 1 or 
from Jerusalem respecting the conduct of 
Florus, μετὰ ἡγεμόνων ἐβουλεύετο, i. 6. 
with his assessors, or συμβούλιον. Hecon- 
sulted them to decide whether the appeal 
was to be conceded, or if conceded, to be 
at once acted on. (Mr. Lewin cites from 
the Digests, xlix. 5.7: ‘Si res dilationem 
non recipiat, non permittitur appellare.’) 
The sense is stronger and better without a 
question at ἐπικέκλησαι. Thus were the 
two—the design of Paul (ch. xix. 21), and 
the promise of our Lord to him (ch. xxiii. 
11) —brought to their fulfilment, by a 
combination of providential circumstances. 
We can hardly say, with De W. and Meyer, 
that these must have influenced Paul in 
making his appeal ; that step is naturally 
accounted for, and was rendered necessary 
by the difficulties which now beset him; 
but we may be sure that the prospect at 
length, after his long and tedious imprison- 
ment, of seezng Rome, must at this time 
have cheered him, and caused him to hear 
the ἐπὶ Καίσαρα πορεύσῃ of Festus with no 
small emotion. 13.] ΗΈΒΟΡ AGRIPPA 
IL., son of the Herod of ch. xii. (see note 
on ver. 1 there), was at Rome, and seven- 
teen only, when his father died (Jos. Antt. 
xix. 9.1). Claudius (ib. 9. 2) was about 
to send him to succeed to the kingdom, 
but was dissuaded by his freedmen and 
favourites, and sent Cuspius Fadus as pro- 
curator instead. Soon after, Claudius gave 
him the principality of Chalcis, which had 
been held by his uncle Herod (Antt. xx, 
5. 2),—the presidency of the temple at Je- 
rusalem and its treasures (Antt. xx. 1. 3), 
—and the appointment of the High Priest. 
Some years after the same emperor added 
to his jurisdiction the former tetrarchy of 
Philip, and Batanza, Trachonitis, and Abi- 
lene (Antt. xx. 7. 1), with the title of King 


212 


q ch. xvi. 1 reff. 

rch. xviii. 22. 
St ἡ. 

Exod. xviii. 7. 

ὁ ch. ii. 40 reff. 

t ver. 6. 

u Gal. ii. 2 
only. 2 Macc. 
iii. 9 f. 

v ch. xxiv. 22 
reff. 

w ch. xxiv. 27. 

x ch. xvi. 25, 
27 reff. 

y here only. 

2 Mace. iii. 7. 

z= ch. xx.:16 
reff. 


ach. xxiii. 15 


/ οὐ A 
σάμενοι τὸν Φῆστον. 


reff. 
Ὁ = ch. iv. 8 


reff. 
ς ch. xii. 20 reff. 
ver. 3 


x. 25. (ch. vi. 14 reff.) fevers ΗΕ 
x. 1 reff. ich. xxiii. 30 reff. 
lch. xxii. 1. 


TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


g absol., ch. xxiv. 2 reff. pass., ch. xxii. 30 reff. 


wT 
γ. 


Χ 


Ἁ \ / q td 3 U r > 
σιλεὺς Kat Βερνίκη 4 κατήντησαν eis Καισάρειαν ' ἀσπα- 
14 ὡς δὲ ὃ" πλείους ἡμέρας " διέτριβον 
ἐκεῖ ὁ Φῆστος τῷ βασιλεῖ " ἀνέθετο " τὰ " κατὰ τὸν Παῦλον, 

, , , Ν ΄, 
λέγων ᾿Ανήρ τις ἐστὶν “ καταλελειμμένος ὑπὸ Φήλιεκος 
* δέσμιος, 15} περὶ οὗ ὅ γενομένου μου “eis ἹἹεροσόλυμα 

, ς ~ “ ’ 
ἃ ἐνεφάνισαν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς Kal οἱ ἢ πρεσβύτεροι τῶν Ιου- 
δαιων, “ αἰτούμενοι κατ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἃ καταδίκην: 16 πρὸς οὺς 
> 6 “ > μ᾿ e “0 ‘p ! f / θ, / 
ἀπεκρίθην ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν “ ἔθος “Ρωμαίοις ἴ χαρίζεσθαί τινα 
fv \ e 
ἄνθρωπον πρὶν ἢ ὁ 8 κατηγορούμενος ἢ κατὰ © πρόςωπον 
” \ i / k / l » / ΄ 
ἔχοι τοὺς ἱ κατηγόρους, " τόπον te ''ὶ ἀπολογίας λάβοι 


d here only +. Wisd. xii. 27 only. lian, Var. Hist. v.18. Herodian, vii. 4. 


e = John xix. 40. Heb. 
5 h 2 Cor. 
Wisd. xii. 10, 


k = Rom. xv. 29, Heb. viii. 7. xu. 17. 


1 Cor. ix. 3. 2 Cor. vii. 11. Phil. i. 7,16. 2 Tim. iv. 16. 1 Pet. iii. 15 only +. Wisd. vi. 10 only. 


βερενικη ΟΣ arm: βερηνικὴ (appy) ΟἹ, but ver 23, C has βερονικης, and so here E-lat 


demid tol Cassiod,. 


[κατηντησεν C. | 


rec ασπασομενοι, with p rel 36 vulg 


E-lat syrr farm] Chr, Thl-fin: txt AB E-gr HLPX [k! l'(appy) m(Ser)] copt eth 


Thi-sif. (Ὁ is uncertain.) 


14. διετριβεν HP df gk 1 eth-rom Thl-sif. 
15. ενεφανισθησαν B1(txt B*:3, Tischdf). 


jom τὰ A! k!(appy). ] 
aft evepavioay ins wo E-gr vulg arm. 


rec δικὴν (see note), with EHLP p rel 36 Chr,: txt ABCN 18. 40 Bas,, 


damnationem vulg. 
16. pwuaovs P m 101. 


τινι C o 27-9. 105. 


rec aft av@pwmroy ins εἰς 


απωλειαν, with HLP rel 36 Syr syr-w-ast Chr, Thl: om ABCEX ὁ p 13. 40 am fuld 


coptt [eth] arm Ath, Thdrt, Bas,; damnare (= χαριζ. .. 
exo. bef kata mposwmov N. 


[demid tol]: donare am fuld. 


(B. J. ii. 12.8). Nero afterwards annexed 
Tiberias, Tarichea, Julias, and fourteen 
neighbouring villages to his kingdom 
(Antt. xx. 8.4). He builta large palace at 
Jerusalem (ib. 8. 11); but offended the 
- Jews by constructing itso as to overlook the 
temple (ib.), und by his capricious changes 
in the high priesthood,—and was not much 
esteemed by them (B. J.ii.17. 1). When 
the last war broke out, he attached himself 
throughout to the Romans. He died in 
the third year of Trajan, and fifty-first 
of his reign, aged about seventy (Winer, 
Realw.). Bepvixy | The Macedouian 
form (Βερενίκη or Bepovixn) for Φερενίκη. 
She was the eldest daughter of Herod 
Agrippa 1., and first married to her uncle 
Herod, prince of Chalcis (Antt. xix. 5. 1). 
After his death she lived with Agrippa her 
brother, but not without suspicion (φήμης 
ἐπισχυούσης, ὅτι TH ἀδελφῷ συνήει, Antt. 
xx. 7.3; see also Juv. Sat. vi. 156 ff.) ; in 
consequence of which (οὕτως yap ἐλέγξειν 
Geto ψευδεῖς τὰς διαβολάς, Antt. ib.) she 
married Polemo, king of Cilicia. The mar- 
riage was, however, soon dissolved (ib.), 
and she returned to her brother. © She was 
afterwards the mistress of Vespasian (Tac. 
Hist. ii. 81), and of Titus (Suet. Tit. 7; 
Winer, Realw.). ἀσπασάμενοι} on 


eis απωλειανὴ vulg-ed 
for τε, δε B E-gr. 


his accession to the procuratorship, to gain 
his favour. 14. ἀνέθετο] laid be- 
fore, so reff. He did this, not only because 
Agrippa was a Jew, but because he was 
(see above) governor of the temple. 

15.] It seems more probable that the un- 
usual word καταδίκη should have becn 
changed to δίκην, especially as κατά pre- 
cedes, than the converse. Luke never uses 
δίκη, except as personified, ch. xxviii. 4 ; 
and in the only two places besides where it 
occurs in the N. Τ᾿. (2 Thess. i.9; Jude 7), 
it has the sense of condemnation or pun- 
ishment ; and in neither place is there any 
various reading. 16. χαρίζεσθαι Thie 
words inserted in the rec., εἰς ἀπώλειαν, are 
a correct supplement of the sense; to give 
up, i.e. to his enemies, and for destruc- 
tion. De W. remarks, that the con- 
struction of πρίν with an opt. without ἄν, 
is only found here in the N. T. (not that 
it occurs with ἄν). Hermann, on Viger, 
Ῥ. 442, restricts the opt. with πρὶν ἤ to 
cases where ‘res narratur ut cogitatio ali- 
cujus:’? so Paus., μὴ πρότερον φάναι (η- 
τοῦντι μηνύσειν πρὶν ἢ οἱ καὶ ἐν ᾿Ακρο- 
κορίνθῳ γένοιτο ὕδωρ. On the practice 
ot the Romans, here nobly and truly al- 
leged, see citations in Grot. and Wetst. 
in loc. τόπον] This use of τόπος 


ABCEH 
LPx ab 
cedfgh 
klmo 
p 13 


14.---5], ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΏΝ. 273 


\ 3 , 
περὶ τοῦ “éykrAnpatos. 17 συνελθόντων οὖν [αὐτῶν] m ch. xxiii 29 
only 


ο ἐνθάδε PavaBornv μηδεμίαν ποιησάμενος, 4 τῇ 4 ἑξῆς 25 chi θτοῦ, 


ο ch. xvi. 28 


7 S19 a , Maes, A ff. 

᾿ καθίσας ἐπὶ τοῦ "βήματος ἐκέλευσα *ayOnvat τὸν ἄνδρα" phere onlys. 
rf ε , (Neh. v. 13.) 

18 περὶ οὗ "σταθέντες ot ἱ κατήγοροι οὐδεμίαν "αἰτίαν Y ἔφερον ἀναβολὴν. 
᾿ ; - Tov δεινοῦ 

ὧν ἐγὼ “utevoouy [πονηράν], 19 * ζητήματα δέ τινα περὶ ἐποιήσατο, 


Thucyd. ii. 


in 307 y χ 8 ͵ 9 Ζ \ Sige \ / ΄ 
τῆς ἰδίας ¥ δεισιδαιμονίας εἶχον * πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ περί τινος Acree ae 
εσσαι, ch. 
> a , ΔΈ Ὁ - αὶ . 20 b 7 iv. 22. 
Ἰησοῦ τεθνηκότος, ὃν * ἔφασκεν ὁ Ἰαῦλος ζῇν. πΟ- ς ch. xxi. 1 τοῖς 


΄ Ny ya ΟΝ ? \ \ f 6 ff. 
povpevos δὲ ἐγὼ [° εἰς] τὴν περὶ τούτων ἃ ζήτησιν, © ἔλεγον sch αἱ. 18 Tee 
δ᾽. Ὁ / ΄ 3. ὁ Ui 3. ne ͵ t ver. 16. 
εἰ βούλοιτο πορεύεσθαι εἰς “lepooodupa κἀκεῖ ἴ κρίνεσθαι » = Matt. 


xxvii. 37 al. 


an \ / , s iv 
περὶ τούτων, “31 τοῦ δὲ ]Ταύλου ὃ ἐπικαλεσαμένου ' τηρη- , oFahm xvi 
n ° ON, \ A a 9. 2 Pet. ii. 
gee αὑτὸν } εἰς τὴν τοῦ Κσεβαστοῦ ! διάγνωσιν, ἐκέλευσα 1 only. see 


" τηρείσθαι αὐτὸν ἕως οὗ ™ ἀναπέμψω αὐτὸν πρὸς Καίσαρα. * es 


δ᾽ τ χν. ἢ ΤΟΙ͂- 
= Jos. Antt. xix. 5. 3. (-μων, ch. xvii. 22.) z = ch. xxiv. 19 reff. 


y here only rt. ch. 
2 Cor. iv. 8. Gal. iv. 20 only. een, 


xxiv. 9 reff. b Mark vi. 20 v.r. Luke xxiv. 4. John xiii. 22. 

Xxxii. 7. w. εἰς, here only. see Matthie, $ 578. (- -ρία, Luke xxi. 25.) c = Rom. iv. 20. 
d=1Tim.vi.4. 2 Tim. ii. 23. Tit. iii. y (John i iii. 25. ch. xv. 2. 1 Tim. i. 4) only t. e constr., 

here only. fxer.9: g ver. 11. h ch. xii. 5, 6 reff. i 2 Pet. ii. 4. 
k = ver. 25 only +. see ch. a 1. lhere only +. Wisd. iii. 18 only. (-γινώσκειν, ch. xxiii. 15. 

xxir, 22.) = Luke xxiii. 7 (11), 15 (Philem. 11) only +. Polyb. i. 7. 12., 


17. rec ins avtwy, with AEHLPN p 13(sic) rel Chr, : 
evOade bef avtwy C ο (137 [? ]). 
18. rec ἐπέφερον, with HP rel Chr,: 


om B 40-2. 57. 81. 951-7: 
μηδεμιαν bef αναβολην Ek. ποιησαμενοι RN}, 
urepepov 80 lect-5: txt ABCELN ec p 13. 36. 
40. 137. rec umevoouv bef eyw, with ΕΗ ΠΡ rel 36 Chr Thl-sif: txt ABCX m p 
13 vulg Thl-fin. rec om πονηραν, with HLP rel [copt] Chr Thl-sif: ins πονηρων 
BEX? p; malum vulg ; πονηρὰ ΟΝ; movnpias arm; πονηραν AC! ck m 138(sic) 36. 
40. 137 am(malam) syrr eth Thl-fin. 

19. avrovs A. for εφασκεν, ελεγεν c 187. 

20. rec ins es, with CEL rel [Thl-fin]}: on ABHPX bd fhk1lo p Thl-sif.—om 
περι cm 137: aft περι 18 τὴν hk. rec τουτου (corrn to suit παυλος, or τησου Ὁ), 
with HP rel Chr,[-txt Thl-sif]: txt ABCELX ¢ ἢ k m p 18. 36. 40 syrr copt eth 
[(arm)] Chr, Thl-fin. for πορευεσθαι, κρινεσθαι X}. rec .epovoaAnu, with LP 
13[e sil] rel ['Thl- sif]: txt ABCEHN ck m p 36. 137 Thl-fin. κριθηναι L, 

21. for tnpnOnvat, τηρεισθαι C. αὐτὸν bef τηρεισθαι ὁ 18. 68. 1387 ['Thl-sif ]. 

rec πέμψω (neglect of force of compound), with HLP rel Chr, [Thl-sif]: txt 
ABCEN c Καὶ m p 13. 36. 40. 137 Thl-fin. 


as the Lat. ‘locus,’ is ποῦ found in good 
Greek. 18. περὶ οὗ oad. | See ver. 7: 
Ee Vi ‘against whom,’ supposing περὶ οὗ 
to refer to (ἐπ)έφερον, is wrong. The word 
πονηράν ΟΥ̓ πονηρῶν, added in the best 
Mss. at the end of this verse, looks very 
like a gloss to explain ὧν or αἰτίαν, and 
this suspicion is strengthened by the varia- 
tions in its form and place. ‘Hine iterum 
conjicere licet, imo aperte cognoscere, adeo 
futiles fuisse calumnias ut in judicii ra- 
tionem venire non debuerint, perinde ac 51 
quis convicium temere jactet.’ Calv. 
.19.] δεισιδαιμ.. isused by Festus in a middle 
sense, certainly not as = ‘ superstition,’ 
E. V., speaking as he was to Agrippa, a 
Jew. 20.| See the real reason why 
he proposed this, ver. 9. This he now 
conceals, and alleges his modesty in re- 
ferring such matters to the judgment of 
the Jews themselves. This would be pleas- 
ing to his guest Agrippa. ἀπορ. εἰς] 
Vor, II. 


so σὺ δ᾽ εἰς τὰ μητρὸς μὴ φοβοῦ νυμφεύ- 
ματα, Soph. Hd. Tyr. 980; and ἀμφινοῶ 
és τέρας, Antig. 372. ἔλεγον) There 
is a mixed construction between ‘JZ said, 
wilt thou 2?’ as in ver. 9, and‘ I asked him 
whether he would.... "ἢ 2i.] τηρη- 
θῆναι is not for eis τὸ τηρ. (as Grot. and 
De W.), but follows directly on ἐπικαλεσα- 
μένου. The construction is again a mixed 
one between ‘ appealing so as to be kept,’ 
and ‘ demanding to be kept. σεβασ- 
τοῦ This title, = Augustus, was first con- 
ferred by the senate on Octavianus (αὐτὸς 
γενόμενος ἀρχὴ σεβασμοῦ καὶ τοῖς ἔπειτα, 
Philo de Legat.ad Caium, 21, vol. ii. p. 566), 
and borne by all succeeding emperors. 
Dio Cassius (111, 16) says: Αὔγουστος, ὡς 
καὶ πλεῖόν τι ἢ κατὰ ἀνθρώπους ὦν, ἐπε- 
κλήθη. πάντα γὰρ τὰ ἐντιμότατα καὶ τὰ 
ἱερώτατα αὔγουστα TposayopeveT au. ἐὲ ov- 
περ καὶ σεβαστὸν αὐτὸν καὶ ἑλληνίζοντές 
πως, ὥφςπεο τινὰ σεπτόν, ἀπὸ τοῦ σεβά- 


- T 


274 TIPASEIS, ATIOSTOAON, XXV.22=87) 

pimpert, = - 22 Α γρίππας δὲ πρὸς tov Φῆστον ™’EBovAouny καὶ αὐτὸς 
om. 1X. ὕ. = ‘ ᾿ = 
(ch. x22) toy ἀνθρώπου ἀκοῦσαι. ° Αὔριον φησὶν ἀκούσῃ αὐτοῦ. 

edn 6a. 22TH οὖν Ρέπαύριον ἐλθόντος τοῦ ᾿Αγρίππα καὶ τῆς 


a. ὦ. ‘ 
01 Cor. xv. 82 καὶ εἰςελθόντων 


Βερνίκης 4 μετὰ πολλῆς φαντασίας 


reff. 
ponies, εἰς TO " ἀκροατήριον σύν τε χιλιάρχοις καὶ ἀνδράσιν τοῖς 
fe 1 Mace κατ᾽ ' ἐξοχὴν τῆς πόλεως, Kal κελεύσαντος τοῦ Φηστου 
ibe, ὃ ἤχθη ὁ Παῦλος. 25: καί φησιν ὁ Φῆστος ᾿Αγρίππα 
1 Wind. βασιλεῦ καὶ πάντες οἱ Y συμπαρόντες ἡμῖν ἄνδρες, θεωρεῖτε 
ae’ * σρῦτον περὶ οὗ ἅπαν τὸ πλῆθος τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων * ἐνέτυχον 
“(ays Rom. μοι ἔν τε Ἱεροσολύμοις καὶ * ἐνθάδε [" ἐπι] βοῶντες μὴ δεῖν 


u ver. 6. v here only. Prov. viil. 27, Wisd. ix. 10 only. 


x ch. xvi. 28 reff. y here 
only t+. Wisd. xiv. lonly. θεοὺς ἐπιβοώμενοι, Thucyd. iii. 59, Polyb. xviii. 8.1. βοᾷν, ch. viii. 7 reff. 


22. rec aft pyoror ins edn, with CEHLP p rel 36 [demid: pref dixit vulg-ed:] ecrev 
a: om ABN 13 am [fuld]. (ει was written and rubbed out by &%.) rec ins ὁ δὲ bet 
αυριον, With CEHLP p 18 rel (36) [(Syr) syr]: om ABN vulg copt. (Zhe account of 
both these insertions I take to have been, that as the words stood, aypirnas appeared 
to be the subj of pnow,—and edn and o δε were inserted to distinguish the speakers. 

23. erseAGovtos E[-gr]. ακρωτηριον δὲ! [axpor. H}. rec ins tots bef χιλιαρ- 
χοις (the usage of omg art aft a preposition not being recognized), with HLP rel 36 
Chr,: om ABCEN ck p 18. 40. 187. [aft avdp. ins καὶ E-gr: τοις e. | rec 
aft κατ᾽ efoxnv ins ουσι (supplementary interpoln), with EHLP rel 86: om ABCR p 


13. 40 Chr-comm,. 


24. (aay, so ABCEN [not L] ck p 13. 36. 40. 137 Thl-fin.) 
for Kat ev@ade to ove exw ver 26] syr-mg has ut traderem eum iis ad 
Non potut autem tradere eum propter mandata que 
Si autem quis eum accusaturus esset, dicebam ut sequeretur me 
Qui quum venissent, clamaverunt ut tolleretur e 
Quum autem hance et alteram partem audivissem, comperi quod in nullo reus 

Quum autem dicerem: Vis judicari cum iis Hierosolyme? Cesarem 
De quo nihil certum scribere domino meo habeo. 
[Chr,, acclamantes vulg-ed demid]: βοωντες ABN p [clamantes 


40 [vulg syrr. 
tormentum sine defensione. 
habemus ab Augusto. 
in Cesaream, ubi custodiebatur. 
vita. 
esset mortis. 
appellavit. 
with CEHLP rel 
am fuld tol]. 


ζεσθαι, mposetmov. On ἀναπέμψω, Borne- 
mann cites Lucian, Tox. ὃ 17: ὁ δὲ βασιλεῖ 
τῷ μεγάλῳ ἀναπέμπει αὐτόν. 22.] ἐβου- 
λόμην does not (as Calv.) imply any former 
wish of Agrippa to hear Paul. It is, as 
Meyer explains it, a modest way of express- 
ing a wish, formed in this case while the 
procurator was speaking, but spoken of by 
Agrippa as if now past by, and therefore 
not pressed. We say somewhat similarly, 
‘Iwas wishing” See ref. Rom. and note 
there. Cf. Aristoph. Av. 1027: ἐκκλη- 
σιάσαι δ᾽ οὖν ἐδεόμην οἴκοι μένων : and see 
other examples in Bernhardy, Syntax, 
p. 373 ff. Agrippa, as a Jew, is anxious 
to hear Paul’s defence, as a matter of na- 
tional interest. The procurator’s ready 
consent is explained, ver. 26. 23. | 
φαντασία is of frequent use in this sense 
in Polybius and later Greek writers. He- 
rodotus uses the verb φαντάζεσθαι for 
‘superbire,’ vii. 201: ὁρᾷς ὡς τὰ tbrep- 
έχοντα ζῶα κεραυνοῖ ὁ θεός, οὐδ᾽ ἐᾷ φαν- 
τάζεσθαι. See Wetst., who finely remarks 
on the words, ‘In eadem urbe, in qua 


everuxev B 25. 


rec er:BowvTes, 


pater ipsorum a vermibus corrosus ob su- 
perbiam perierat.’ ἀκροατήριον | after 
the Latin ‘ auditerium : perhaps no fixed 
hall of audience, but the chamber or saloon 
set apart for this occasion. χιλιάρ- 
χοις]} Jos. (Β. J. iii. 4. 2), speaking of 
Titus’s army, says, προφεγένοντο δὲ καὶ 
ἀπὸ Καισαρείας πέντε (σπεῖραι). These, 
then, were the tribunes of the cohorts sta- 
tioned at Caesarea. Stier remarks (Red. 
der Apostel, ii. 397), “ Yet more and more 
complete must the giving of the testimony 
in these parts be, before the witness de- 
parts for Rome. In Jerusalem, the long- 
suffering of the Lord towards the rejectors 
of the Gospel was now exhausted. In 
Antioch, the residence of the Preses of 
Syria, the new mother church of Jewish 
and Gentile Christians was flourishing ; 
here, in Caesarea, the residence of the pro- 
curator, the testimony which had begun 
in the house of Cornelius the centurion, 
had now risen upward, till it comes before 
this brilliant assembly of all the local 
authorities, in the presence of the last 


ABCEH 
LPR ab 
edfgh 
klmo 
p13 


ΧΧΥΓ 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ ATIOSTOAON. 


275 


aa ΜᾺ Ie oe) \ , \ 7 
αὐτὸν ζῆν μηκέτι. % ἐγὼ δὲ 5 κατελαβόμην μηδὲν * ἄξιον : = τὰν, 13 
> \ s a rel x sen 
αὐτὸν ὃ θανάτου πεπραχέναι, ὃ αὐτοῦ δὲ ὃ τούτου ° ἐπι- 25, ch Hill 


δ f \ d f e ” , 
καλεσαμένου τὸν “ σεβαστόν, * ἔκρινα πέμπειν. 


b ch. xxiv. 15 
26 περὶ ° ret 


c ver. ll. 


ov ᾿ ἀσφαλές τι γράψαι τῷ ὅ κυρίῳ οὐκ ὃ" ἔχω, διὸ ἱ προ- 4 ver.21. 


e -Ξ- ch. xv. 19 


ef > ar + Sp 39 6 a \ , ; a ., 
ἤγαγον αὐτὸν ἐφ᾽ ὑμῶν καὶ μάλιστα 1 ἐπὶ σοῦ, βασιλεῦ rch, xxi. 34 
; f 5 y) , n i 
Αγρίππα, ὅπως τῆς * ἀνακρίσεως γενομένης ᾿' σχῶ τί g = 1 Cor. viii 
4 4 ; Ln a. eee 
γράψω" “1: ἄλογον yap μοι δοκεῖ πέμποντα δ" δέσμιον Ὁ sh. xsi. 


\ \ \ ’ > lal Oo > / a 
μὴ καὶ TAS KAT avTov 5 αἰτίας P σημᾶναι. 


&c. reff. 
i — ch. xii. 6 


ren. 
j ch. xxiii. 30 


ΧΧΥῚ. 1᾿Αγρίππας δὲ πρὸς τὸν ἸΤαῦλον ἔφη 9’ Eare- , τῆ. 


,ὔ / A 
τρέπεταί σοι περὶ σεαυτοῦ λέγειν. 


ch. xxiv. 8 al.) 
only}. (Exod. vi. 12, Numb. vi. 12, 
Ὁ ver. 18. p ch. xi. 28 reff. 
12. Xen. Cyr. viii. 4. 29. 


1 see ch. iv. 14 reff. 
Wisd. xi. 15 only.) 


w. aor., ch, xxi. 39, 40 reff. 


k here only +. 
3 Mace. vii. 5. 
Polyb. viii. 
19.8, (-νειν, 
m = here (2 Pet. ii. 12. Jude 10) 
n ch. xvi. 25, 27 reff. 
1 Cor. xiv. 34. 1 Tim. Ee 
Gen. xiy. 22. ἀνέτεινε 


, Le lal 
τότε ὁ IlavaAos  ἐκ- 


q and constr., ch. xxviii. 16. 
r Matt. viii. 3 al. 


τὴν δεξιὰν ws δημιηγορήσων, Polyen. iv. p. 317. (Wahl.) 


rec (nv bef avtov, with HLP rel Chr, Thl-sif: om ζην B'(Tischdf): txt A B-corr! 
CEN al bk mo p 18. 40 vulg [Syr] arm Chr-comm, Thl-fin. 
25. rec καταλαβομενος and ins καὶ aft πεπραχεναι, with HLP X1(but om καὶ) rel 36 


syr ΤῊ] (13 Thl-fin retain καὶ) : txt ABCEX® p 40 vulg syr copt [arm]. 


rec 


θανατου bef αὐτον (transp of characteristic order), with HLPR rel 36 [vulg-ed] Chr,: 
om αὑτὸν Ὁ 78: avtov bef atiov g 68 Thi-fin: [πεπρ. av. bef 0. ὁ :7θ. πεπραχεναι bef 


avrov 105-37: txt ABCE 13. 40 am(and demid fuld tol). 


for τουτου, Tov παυλου 


B}(but mavaov has dots placed over it by the original scribe, see table: txt B?). 
rec aft πεμπειν ins avrov, with EHLP rel [syr copt] Chr ΤῊ] : om ABCN p 13. 36. 40 


vulg [Syr] arm. 
26. ασφαλως- C. 


X-corr! 3), κρισεως [for avakp.| EK. 


προςηγαγον E-gr 116-7: exnyay. A. 


om gov N'(ins 


for oxw, exw AE p 137 Thi-fin. rec 


(for γραψω) γραψαι, with EHLP rel 36 Chr,: txt ABC p 18 (syrr). 


27. πεμποντι L 37. 43. 133. 
παρ. XXVI. 1. επιτετρεπται L: 


επιτετραπται b co p 137 Thi-fin. 


E vulg place μη att atias. 


rec (for 


περι) ὑπερ, with BLP rel Chr,: txt ACE H[Aey. π. oe.] δὲ ὁ p 13. 36.—Aadrew περι o. 6 


137. 


king of the Jews.” 24. ἅπαν τὸ TA. | 
At Jerusalem (ver. 1) literally, by the po- 
pular voice (probably) of some tumultuous 
outcry :—here, by their deputation. 
25. αὐτοῦ δὲ τούτου] he himself more- 
over. These reasons did really coexist as 
influencing his determination. Mr. Lewin 
cites, on ver. 12, Dig. xlix. 1. 16: ‘Con- 
stitutiones que de recipiendis, necnon, ap- 
pellationibus loquuntur, ut nihil novi fiat, 
locum non habent in eorum persona quos 
damnatos statim puniri publici interest, 
ut sunt insignes latrones, vel seditionum 
concitatores, vel duces factionum.’ 
26. ἀσφαλές] fixed, definite. The whole 
matter had been hitherto obscured by the 
exaggerations and fictions of the Jews. 
τῷ κυρίῳ] viz. Nero. Augustus 
and Tiberius refused this title; Caligula 
and (apparently) all following bore it. 
“Thus Tertullian, Apol. xxxiv. vol. i. p. 
450: ‘Augustus imperii formator ne domi- 
num quidem dici se volebat;’ and Suet. 
Aug. 53: ‘Dominum se appellari ne a 
liberis quidem aut nepotibus vel serio vel 
joco passus est;’ and Tib. 27 : ‘ Dominus 


aft παυλος ins πεποιθως καὶ εν πνευματι αγιω παρακλήθει5 Syr-mMg. 


appellatus a quodam denuntiavit ne se 
amplius contumeliz causa nominaret.’ 
Caligula accepted the title, according to 
Victor, ap. Eckhel, viii. 364. Herod 
Agrippa had applied it to Claudius (Philo 
ap. Spanheim. Numism. ii. 482); but it 
was not a recognized title of any emperor 
before Domitian. Suet. Dom. 13: ‘ Mar- 
tial,—Edictum Domini Deique nostri.’” 
Mr. Humphry. γράψω has appa- 
rently been altered to γράψαι to suit the 
τί γράψαι above. Olsh. remarks, 
that now first was our Lord’s prophecy 
Matt. x. 18, Mark xiii. 9 fulfilled. But 
Meyer answers well, that we do not know 
enough of the history of the other Apostles 
to be able to say this with any certainty, 
James the greater, and Peter, had in all 
probability stood before Agrippa I. See 
ch. xii. 2, 3. XXVI. 1.7 The stretching 
out of the hand by a speaker was not, as 
Hammond supposes, the same as the κατα- 
σείειν τῇ χειρί of ch. xii. 17; xiii. 16. 
The latter was to ensure silence; but this, 
a formal attitude usual with orators. Apu- 
leius, Met. ii. p. 54 (Meyer), describes it 


T 2 


276 


Β U ‘ r a 
sch. xix. 33 TELVa THV ELOa 
reff ΟΥ̓͂Ν xp 

tech. xix. 38 
reff. 

Ὁ = 2 Cor. 1x. 
5. Phil. ii. 3. 
Heb. x. 29 al. 
Job xlii. 6. 

νυ ch. xxiii. 30 
reff. 


΄ὔ > “ / 
θύμως ἀκοῦσαί pov. 


Gol. iii. 16 al. 
Paul chiefly. 
see Winer, 
edn, 6, ἢ 63. i. 
2. ἃ. 
ch. xviii. 
15 τοῦ, 
z ch, vi. 14 reff. 
ach, xv. 2 reff. 


" ἔζησα © Φαρισαῖος. 


e as above (4). 1 Tim. iv. 12 only. 
v.5. Heb. xii. 17. Jamesi. 19 onlyt. 


i. 35. (Wisd. xix. 6.) j= ch. xxii. 5. 


25. xxxiv. (xxxi.) 24. xxxv. (xxxii.) 3 only. (-βῶς, ch. xviii. 25.) 
Wisd. xiv. 18, 27 only. ς : 
o=ch.iv.9 only, ἐγκληθεῖσαν ἐπὶ φαρμακείᾳ, Diod. Sic. iv. 55. (so περί, 


i. 26, 27. Col. ii. 18 only t. 
n constr., here only. 
ch, xxiii, 6, xxiv. 21.) 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, 


5. ἀπελογεῖτο 3 Περὶ 
t 4 ΄ id 4 Ἶ ὃ ~ ? / u isd 
ἐγκαλοῦμαι ὑπὸ Ιουδαίων, βασιλεῦ ᾿Αγρίππα, " ἥγημαι 
ἐμαυτὸν μακάριον ‘ ἐπὶ σοῦ μέλλων σήμερον * ἀπολο- 
γεῖσθαι, ὅ μάλιστα ¥ γνώστην * ὄντα σε πάντων τῶν Y κατὰ 
Ἧ ὃ / Z 2063 \ a / ὃ Ν δέ b 
ουδαίους * ἐθῶν τε καὶ * ζητημάτων. διὸ δέομαι ἢ μακρο- 
1 τὴν μὲν οὖν ° βίωσίν μου [τὴν] 
ἃ ἐκ ἀθ γεῤτητος, THY! ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς γενομένην ἐν τῷ ἔθνει μου 
” | / g ” ΄ ἢ ὃ - 5 h / 
ἔν te ἱἹεροσολύμοις, ὃ ἴσασι πάντες ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ὃ "ἢ προγινώ- 
σκοντές με ἷ ἄνωθεν, ἐὰν θέλωσιν J μαρτυρεῖν, ὅτι κατὰ 
‘ t) an ΄ 
τὴν * ἀκριβεστάτην | αἵρεσιν τῆς ἡμετέρας ™ θρησκείας 
—_ 
6 καὶ νῦν ° ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι τῆς εἰς τοὺς 


XXVI. 


πάντων ὧν 


Ὁ here only +. -μος, Exod. xxxiv. 6, -μέα, Rom. ii. 4. -μεῖν, 1 Cor. xiii. 4.) 
c here only +. Prol. Sir. only. Ps. xxxviii. 6 Symm. (-ovuy, 1 Pet. iv. 2.) 
; f Matt. xix. 4, 8. 


Lake i. 2 αἱ, Isa, Ixiii. 19, g Eph. 

h == 2 Pet. iii. 17 only. (Rom. viii. 29 reff.) i -- Luke 
John iii. 28. k here only, Sir, xviii. 29. xix, 

1 ch. vy. 17 reff. m James 


(-Kos, James i. 26, -κεύειν, Wisd. xi. 15. xiv. 16.) 


rec ameAoyeto bef ext. τὴν xeipa, with HLP rel syr Chr, Thi-sif: txt ABCENk m p 13, 
40 vulg Syr copt [zth] arm Thl-fin.—ras χειρας ὁ 137. 
2. for περι παντων to (ἡτηματων, 137 has περι παντων τῶν κατα ιουδαιους εθνη TE Kon 


ζηγτηματων επισταμενος. 


rec μελλων απολογεισθαι ert σου σημερον (simplifn of 


order), with [(copt)]: emt σ. μ. ἀαπολογ. σημερον ΕῊ ΠΡ rel vulg syr Chr, Thi-sif: txt 
ΑΒΟΝ m (p) 13 [Syr (eth) arm] Thl-fin.—for wedAdrwy, μελλω p. 


8. σε bef ovra CR! m? 73: om σε 180. 
tovdaiwv AE ἃ f. 


nooyv HLPadfgm Thi-fin: εθνων A 15. 27. 105. 


om παντων A 17. 25 copt eth. ' 
aft 


ζητηματων ins επισταμενος ACN? 13: aft μαλιστα (above), 15-8. 36 Syr: aft σε, 7: aft 


σε ins εἰδως 6. 29 [aft παντων m}, aft ovra τη3]. 


rec aft δεομαι ins σου, with CHLP 


rel Syr copt Cbr,;: om ABEN k p 18. 36. 40 vulg syrr th arm. 
4. rec ins τὴν, with AC?7ELPN p 13 [rel] Chr: om BC!H m.—rnyv aw apyns bef την 


ex veotntos EK. 


txt ΑΒΓ HL JN rel. 


rec om Te (misapprehension), with CHLP p 13. 36(sic) rel yulg 
[ E-lat syr copt eth arm] Chr: ins AB E-gr δὲ 40 Syr. 


ισασιν CEP [p(Ser) | : 


rec ins οἱ bef ιουδ. (more usual exprn), with AC’HLPR rei 36 


[Chr, Thl}: om BC’E dk m p 13 Chr-comm,, 


5. προςγινωσκοντες C}, 


om με c 137 [arm]. 


6. rec (for es) pos (corrn, see note), with CHLP rel 36 Chr: txt ABE[N] dp 


very precisely: ‘ Porrigit dextram et ad 
instar oratorum conformat articulum, duo- 
busque infimis conclusis digitis ceteros emi- 
nentes porrigit.’ The hand was chained— 
τούτων τ. δεσμ., ver. 29. 2.) There 
is no force in Meyer’s observation, that by 
the omission of the art. before ᾿Ιουδαίων, 
Paul wishes to express that the charges 
were made by some, not by all of the Jews. 
That omission is the one so often over- 
looked by the German critics (e.g. Stier 
also here), after a preposition. See Middl. 
ch. vi. § 1, and compare κατὰ ᾿Ιουδαίους in 
the next verse, of which the above cannot 
be said. μέλλων contains the ground 
of ἥγημαι, in that I am to defend myself. 

3. yv. ὄντα σε] For the construc- 
tion see reff.; and cf. Viger (ed. Hermann), 
p. 337, where many examples are given — 
e.g. Herod. vi. 109: ἐν σοὶ viv ἔστιν ἢ 
'«καταδουλῶσαι ᾿Αθήνας, ἢ ἐλευθέρας ποι- 


hoavTa μνημόσυνον λιπέσθαι K.T.A. 
4,7] The μὲν οὖν takes up ἀπολογεῖσθαι : 
4: d. ‘well, then, to begin my apology.’ 
5. ἀκριβεστάτην] See ch. xxii. 3: 
κατὰ ἀκρίβειαν τοῦ πατρῴου νόμου. Jos. 
(B. J. i. 5. 2) calls the Pharisees σύνταγμά 
τι ᾿Ιουδαίων δοκοῦν εὐσεβέστερον εἶναι τῶν 
ἄλλων, καὶ τοὺς νόμους ἀκριβέστερον ἀφ- 
ἡγεῖσθαι. The use of the term finds an- 
other example in Eph. v. 15, βλέπετε πῶς 
ἀκριβῶς περιπατεῖτε, which command it 
illustrates. θρησκεία] ἡ λατρεία’ ὅθεν 
καὶ ἑτερόθρησκος, érepddokos. Suidas. 
We have an instance here οὗ αἵρεσις used 
in an indifferent sense. 6.| The rec. 
text has apparently been corrected after 
ch. xiii, 32; for there we have πρός, and 
no ἡμῶν. The εἰς has its propriety here, 
combining the ideas of address towards, 
and of ethical relation to, its object: so 
és δ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἐρῶ μῦθον, Asch. Pers, 159: 


ABCEH 
LPR ab 
cdfgh 
kimo 
p 13 











T eyxa- 
λουμαι... 
ABCEH 
ILPRa 
bedfg 
) kim 
op 13 


2—S. TIPAR EIS ATIOZTOAON. ay 


P πατέρας ἢ ἡμῶν ἐπαγγελίας γενομένης ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ph. τ. 30 ref. 
q ch. xxiii. 
4 > A \ / [2 ΄σ. 
ἕστηκα 3 κρινόμενος, 7 εἰς ἣν τὸ " δωδεκάφυλον ἡμῶν ἐν cere οαὶν τ. 
s here only +. 


\ e a lal 
8 ἐκτενείᾳ " νύκτα Kal ἡμέραν ἃ λατρεῦον ἐλπίζει Y καταντῆ- ᾿ Jusithiv. 9 


\@ > / “ ὃ a δ 70 ͵ με bis. τ Mace. 
σαι, περὶ ἧς ἐλπίδος ἡ ἐγκαλοῦμαι ὑπὸ ᾿Ιουδαίων, βασιλεῦ. aie? 
-νής, ἐ 
Sri χὰ Y Kol Ζ > ὑμῖν ἃ εἰ ὁ Ged Ne iv. 8. -νῶς, 
τι αἼΤιστον KPLWETAL Tap υμιν €l O θεὸς νεκροὺς 1 Ῥεῖ, i. 25) 
, t ch. χχ. 31 reff 
u Acts vii. 7 reff. v = Paul (1 Cor. x. 11. xiv. 36. Eph. iv. 13. Phil. iii. 11) only. (ch. xvi. 1 reff. 
w ch, xix. 38 reff. see above (o). x = here only (1 Cor. vi. 6 al.)t{. Demosth., p. 15, ult., καὶ μὸ 
A’ οὐδὲν ἄπιστον tows. = ch. xiii. 46 reff. z= Matt. vi.1. Rom. ii. 13, Eph 


yi. 9. a Rom. viii. 13, 17. Gol. iii. 1. 
13. 40. rec om nuwy, with HLP 13 [arm, Treg] Thl-sif: ins ABCEX Ὁ ec dmo p 
36. 40. 137 vulg syrr copt eth arm[ Gb] Chr, Thl-fin. om tov L 142. 

7. Aatpevwy H [13] 73. καταντησειν B. rec ins τῶν bef tovdarwy [with 
arm-edd |: om ABCEHILPR® rel [arm-mss Chr, ]. rec aft BaciAev ins aypirra, 
with HLP rel 40 syrr [eth Chr, |]: om BCEIRN p 13 vulg [copt arm] Chron, Thlf-fin]. 
—rec Bao. αγρ. bef ὑπο (των) ιουδαιων, with HLP rel syr [arm] Chr: om βασιλευ 
(αγριππα) A 18. 36: βασιλεὺ (with or without ayp.) aft vo ιουδ, BCEIN a? ἃ k mp 


13. 40 vulg Syr eth Chron, Thi-fin. 


ψόγος és Ἕλληνας μέγας, Eur. Bacch. 778 
(735): δημοκρατίας κατίστα εἰς Tas πόλιας, 
Herod. vi. 48. See Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 
217, where many more examples are given. 

The promise spoken of is not that of 
the resurrection merely, but that of a 
Messiah and His kingdom, énvolving (ver. 
8) the resurrection. This is evident from 
the way in which he brings in the mention 
of Jesus of Nazareth, and connects His 
exaltation (ver. 18) with the universal 
preaching of repentance and remission of 
sins. But he hints merely at this hope, 
and does not explain it fully; for Agrippa 
knew well what was intended, and the 
mention of any king but Cesar would 
have misled and prejudiced the Roman 
procurator. There is great skill in bind- 
ing on his former Pharisaic life of ortho- 
doxy (in externals), to his now real and 
living defence of the hope of Israel. But 
though he thus far identifies them, he 
makes no concealment of the difference 
between them, ver. 9 ff. 7. τὸ δω- 
δεκάφυλ. The Jews in Judea and those 
of the dispersion also. See James i. 1. 
There was a difference between Paul and 
the Jews, which lies beneath the surface 
of this verse, but is yet not brought out: 
he had already arrived at the accomplish- 
ment of this hope, to which they, with all 
their sacrifices and zeal, were as yet only 
earnestly tending, having it yet in the 
future only (so Rom. x. 2: ζῆλον θεοῦ 
ἔχουσιν, ἀλλ᾽ ov κατ᾽ ἐπίγνωσιν). It 
was concerning this hope (in what sense 
appears not yet) that he was accused by the 
Jews. The adverb ἐκτενῶς and subst. 
ἐκτένεια are disapproved by the philolo- 
gists, as belonging to later Greek.. See 
Lobeck on Phrynichus, p. 311. We have 
the adj.. Aisch. Suppl. 990: ἐκτενὴς 
φίλος. 8.1 Having impressed on his 
hearers the injustice of this charge from 


the Jews, with reference to his holding that 
hope which they themselves held, he now 
leaves much to be filled up, not giving a 
confession of his own faith, but proceeding 
as if it were well understood. ‘You as- 
sume rightly, that I mean by this hope, in 
my own case, my believing it accomplished 
in the crucified and risen Jesus of Naza- 
reth. Then, this being acknowledged, he 
goes on to shew how his own. view became 
so changed with regard to Jesus; drawing, 
by the μὲν οὖν (ver. 9), a contrast in some 
respects between himself, who was super- 
naturally brought to the faith, and them, 
who yet could not refuse to believe that 
God could and might raise the dead. All 
this he mainly addresses to Agrippa (ver, 
26), as being the best acquainted with the 
circumstances, and, from his position, best 
qualified to judge of them. It may be, as 
Stier suggests, that if not open, yet prac. 
tical Sadduceism had tainted the Herodian, 
family. Paul knew, at all events, how 
generally the highly cultivated, and those 
in power and wealth, despised and thought 
ἄπιστον the doctrine of the resurrection. 

el... ἐγείρει not, as commonly ren- 
dered, ‘that God should raise the dead” 
(E. V.): but the question is far stronger 
than this, if the conjunction be taken in 
its literal meaning: why is it judged by 
you a thing past belief, if God raises the 
dead? i.e. ‘if God, in His exercise of 
power, sees fit to raise the dead (the word 
implying that such a fact has veritably 
taken place), is it for you to refuse to be- 
lieve it ?? Compare the declaration of our 
Lord, Luke xvi. 31: οὐδ᾽ ἐάν τις ἐκ νεκρῶν 
ἀναστῇ πεισθήσονται. We have many in- 
stances of this use of ei:—Xen. Mem. i. 1. 
13, ἐθαύμαζε δὲ εἰ μὴ φανερὸν αὐτοῖς ἐστίν: 
ib. 18, ὅσα δὲ πάντες ἤδεσαν, θαυμαστὸν 
εἰ μὴ τούτων ἐνεθυμήθησαν : ib. i. 2. 13, 
ἐγὼ δ᾽ εἰ μέν τι κακὸν. ἐκείνῳ τὴν πόλιν 


278 


b = ch. x. 40 
reff. 

c w. dat., 
= here only. 
δοκῶ μοι, 
Xen. Hier. 1. 
6. see 1 Cor. 
iii. 18 reff. 
Herod. ii. 93, 
and exx. in 
Wetst. 

ἃ — ch. xxiv. 
19 reff. 

e = ch. (xxvii. 
4) xxviii. 17. 
1 Thess. ii. 15. 
Tit. ii. 8. 
(Ezek. xviii. 
18 


:) 

f= ch. ix. 13 
reff. 

g Luke iii. 20 
only. Jer. 
XXXix. 
(xxxii.) 3. 

h ch. ix. 14. 


7 / 
εἰς τὰς " ἔξω πόλεις. 


i ch. ii. 33 reff. 
XxXvii. 2. t 
nch. xxii. 5 only (Paul). Ezek. v.17. (-pta, Heb. x. 29.) 
7 only.) 2 Macc. vi. 1 al. 
x. 26. xv. 14 only. Ps. xxx. 23. 
s = Matt. xxiii. 34. 1 Macc. v. 22. 
18. 5661 Cor. y. 12 reff. 
13 Theod. 
xxv. 6. 


(Rom. iii. 1. 


zch, viii. 36 al. Ezek. xliii. 2. 
9. om μεν B. 
10. for o, διο B. 

ins δε 36. 180: txt ACEIN p 13. 


E-lat syr copt Thl-fin. om avtwy EK. 
11. om re B: δε E-gr copt [eth-pl]. 


TIPAZEIS, ATIOSTOAQN. 


j ch. v. 33 reff. 
1 — here (Rev. ii. 17 bis) only . 


p = Luke xxii. 65. 
2 Cor. i. 12 reff.) 

t w. prep., ch. xxi. 5 reff. 

vch. xxiv. 18 (v. r ). 

x here only+. 2 Macc. xiii. 14 only. (-7r0s, Matt. xx. 8.) 


ins του bef ino. &1(&3 disapproving) [o]. 
ἐποίησαν N}(but corrd). 


XXVI. 


b ἐγείρει ; 9 ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν “ ἔδοξα ἐμαυτῷ “mpos TO ὄνομα 
Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου δεῖν πολλὰ “ ἐναντία πρᾶξαι, 
10 ὃ καὶ ἐποίησα ἐν ἹἹεροσολύμοις, καὶ πολλούς τε τῶν 
[ ἁγίων ἐγὼ ἐν φυλακαῖς 8 κατέκλεισα, τὴν παρὰ τῶν 
ἀρχιερέων ὃ ἐξουσίαν ' λαβών, 1 ἀναιρουμένων τε αὐτῶν 
k κατήνεγκα ' ψῆφον, 11 καὶ τὶ κατὰ πάσας τὰς συναγωγὰς 
πολλάκις ἃ τιμωρῶν αὐτοὺς ο ἠνάγκαζον Ῥ βλασφημεῖν, 
4 περισσῶς τε ἴ ἐμμαινόμενος αὐτοῖς " ἐδίωκον ἕως καὶ 


W2v2 τ , > \ 
εν OlS TTOPEVOLEVOS ELS Τὴν 


Δαμασκὸν “per ἐξουσίας καὶ * ἐπιτροπῆς τῆς παρὰ 
aA > , 13 y e / y ’ Ζ \ \ O00 Τὸ 
τῶν ἀρχίερέων, ἡμέρας Y μέσης 7 κατὰ τὴν οδὸν εἶδον, 


C k — ch. xxy. 7 (xx. 9 bis) only. Gen. 
(Exod. iy. 25.) m = ch. xxii. 19 reff. 
o = ch. xxviii. 19. Gal. ii. 3, 14f. 


(Prov. vi. 
4 Kings xix. 4, 6, 22. q 


Matt. xxvii. 23. Mark 
rhere only+. (-μανής, Wisd. xiv. 23.) 

_ u=here only. 4 Kings xvi. 
w = Luke xxi. 27. Isa. xxxili. 17. Dan. vii. 


y here only. see Matt. 


vaCopaiov &. 
rec om Ist τε, with BHLP rel: 


rec om 2nd εν (as unnecessary), with HP rel 
Chr: ins ABCEILN b k mo p 18. 36. 40. 137 vulg. 


for 2nd τε, δε H a? c 137 


KkaTnveykav &. 


12. rec ins καὶ bef wopevowevos, with HLP rel Syr Chr, Thl-sif: om ABCEIN ¢ 


p(Tischdf [Treg(expr) ]) 18. 36. 40 vulg syr copt εὐ arm Thl-fin. 


abchko1387 


om Τὴν [A]E 


om τῆς παρα (as unnecessary) AKI 40 vulg Syr [copt arm]: om 


παρα BN ον 137: om της 80 Thl-fin: txt CHLP 18 rel syr [eth] Chr, Thl-sif 


13. om ἡμεραϑ XN}. 


ἐποιησάτην οὐκ ἀπολογήσομαι : on which 
examples Hermann remarks, ad Viger. 
Ρ. 504, “in his locis omnibus rem non 
dubiam et incertam indicat εἰ, sed plane 
certam et perspicuam.” 9.] Hence- 
forward he passes to his own history,—how 
he once refused, like them, to believe in 
Jesus: and shews them both the process 
of his conversion, and the ministry with 
which he was entrusted to others. 

μὲν οὖν, well then, resuming the character 
described vv. 4, 5. 10, 11.] This is 
the διωγμὸς μέγας of ch. villi. 1. We are 
surprised here by the unexpected word 
ἁγίων, which it might have been thought 
he would have rather in this presence 
avoided. But, as Stier remarks, it belongs 
to the more confident tone of this speech, 
which he delivers, not as a prisoner defend- 
ing himself, but as one being heard before 
those who were his audience, not his judges. 
κατήνεγκα ψῆφον can hardly be taken 
figuratively, as many Commentators, 
trying to escape from the inference that 
the νεανίας Saul was a member of the 
Sanhedrim ; but must be understood as 
testifying to this very fact, however 


for kata την, KaTny(sic) RN. 


strange it may seem. He can hardly 
have been less than thirty when sent on 
his errand of persecution to- Damascus. 
The genitive is supposed by Elsner and 
Kypke to be dependent on κατήνεγκα ; 
but this is harsh, and it is better to take 
(as most Commentators, and Meyer, and 
De W.) it as absolute, and κατήνεγκα 
as local, “ detuli sententiam ’ when their 
deaths were being compassed, I gave 
in my vote (scil. against them, as in 
το). On the fact, ef. συνευδοκῶν τῇ 
ἀναιρέσει αὐτοῦ, ch. viii. 1. il. 
τιμωρῶν) viz. by scourging; compare 
Matt. x. 17. ἠνάγκαζον does not imply 
that any did blaspheme (Christ: so Pliny, 
Ep. n. 97, speaks of ordering the Bithy- 
nian Christians ‘ maledicere Christo,’ and 
adds, ‘quorum nihil cogi posse dicun- 
tur qui sunt revera Christiani’): the im- 
perf. only relates the attempt. The per- 
secuting the Christians even to foreign 
cities, forms the transition to the narrative 
following. 12. ἐν οἷς] In which 
things (being engaged). 13.] See 
notes on ch. ix. 3—8, where I have treated 
of the discrepancies, real or only apparent, 


ABCEH 
ILPR a 
bedfg 
hklm 
opl3 


9—16. HPAZEIY ATOSTOAON. 279 


la) / \ 4 ΄ a ΄ 
βασιλεῦ, ἃ οὐρανόθεν ὑπὲρ τὴν “λαμπρότητα τοῦ ἡλίου ach. xiv.17 
ἃ , A ‘ Ki 4 9 \ ; only t. " 
περιλάμψαν με φῶς και TOUS σὺν ἐμοὶ πορευομένους, ὃ 7? ois 
Ἷ “ is “ , \ A > her 
14 πάντων τε " καταπεσόντων ἡμῶν εἰς THY γῆν ἴ ἤκουσα °'Ps ices 


Ps. lxxxix. 


/ Ae A : ξ 17. Dan. xii. 
φωνὴν λέγουσαν πρός με τῇ δ΄ Εβραΐδι ἃ διαλέκτῳ Σαοὺλ 3 Theos, 


page : : ἱ 

Σαούλ, τί μὲ ᾿ἰ διώκεις; Ἐσκληρόν σοι πρὸς | κέντρα. faves... 
? \ 5 / 3 ΄,ὔ - ΄ 

τ λακτίζειν. 15 γὼ δὲ εἶπα Tis εἶ, κύριε; ὁ δὲ κύριος 


eh. xxviii. 6 


only. Ps 
= ’ , ? ΟῚ A ἃ \ is , 16 2 waded ΜΝ Poop ob: 
εἶπεν “Eyo εἰμι ᾿Ιησοῦς ὃν σὺ } διώκεις. ahha ™ ava- pea 
ἣν Ὁ ὴ0 Οὗ. τὺ \ ‘5 Pe? na \  gch. xxi. 40. 
στηθι Kab “στῆσι €77L Τοὺυς ποοας σου" €LS τοῦτο yap τ το 
ch. i. 19 reff. 


4 ὥφθην σοι, * προχειρίσασθαί σε ὃ ὑπηρέτην καὶ * μάρτυρα ‘= vi % 
k = here (Matt. 


xxv. 24. John vi.60. James iii. 4, Jude 15) only. Gen. xxi. 12. 11 Cor. xv, 55 (from Hos. 
xiii. 14), 56. Rev. ix. 10 only. m here only +. (a7oAak., Deut. xxxii. 15.) n ch. 
ix. 6 reff. o Rey. xi. 11. Ezek. ii. 1. p Mark i. 38. ch. ix. 21 al. q ch. 
ii. 3 reff, rch. iii. 20. xxii. 14 (reff.) only. s — ch. xiii. 5 reff. t ch. x. 39 reff. 


βασιλευς B'(Tischdf). 

14. rec δε (altern of characteristic re), with [C]HLP rel copt Chr, [Thl-sif]: txt 
ABEI® ον 18. 36. 40. 1387 vulg syrr Thl- fin. om ἡμων Bd. aft yny ins δια 
Tov φοβον eyw povos 137, simly syr-mg. rec (for Aeyoucay προς με) λαλουσαν προς 
με Kat λέγουσαν, with LP rel | λαλουσης and λεγουσης a] eth Chr, Thl-sif: om 18 : so 
also, omg και λεγουσαν, Hbo[arm!: φωνης λεγουσης mpos με E-gr m, vocem loquentem 
ad me E-lat, simly vulg: txt ABCIX p 36. 40 syrr. (The shorter reading rey. mp. με 
may perhaps have been adopted from ch ix. 4, xxii. 7, or, as also Aad. mp. με, to avoid 
what seemed, but is not, a tautology; λαλ. and dey. not being equivalent.) 

15. om de 1}. (ειπα, so ABCEH k1 p [13] Thl-fin.) rec om κύριος, with 
HP rel eth-pl Chr Thl-sif: ins ABCEILN k m p 36 [137] vulg syrr copt arm Thl-fin. 


(13 def.) 
[m] 40. 137 [demid] Syr syr-w-ast. 
16. om καὶ στηθι B'(ins B?’3, Tischdf). 


between the three accounts of Saul’s con- 
version. See also ch. xxii. 6—10. 

14. τῇ Ἕβρ. διαλ. These words are ex- 
pressed here only. In ch. ix. (see note) 
we have the fact remarkably preserved 
by the Hebrew form Σαούλ ; in ch. xxii. 
he was speaking in Hebrew (Syro-Chald.), 
and the notice was not required. (Beware 
again of the supposed emphatic μὲ of 
Wordsworth.) σκληρ. σοι mp. κ. A. ] 
This is found here only; in ch. ix. the 
words are spurious, having been inserted 
from this place. The metaphor is derived 
from oxen at plough or drawing a burden, 
who, on being pricked with the goad, kick 
against it, and so cause it to pierce deeper. 
(See Schol. on Pind. 1. c. below.) It is 
a Greek, and not (apparently) a Hebrew 
proverb; but*this is no reason why it 
should not be used in Hebrew, just as it 
is in Latin. Instances of its use are 
Pind. Pyth. ii, 173: χρὴ δὲ πρὸς θεὸν 
οὐκ ἐρίζειν. . . . φέρειν δ' ἐλαφρῶς ἐπαυ- 
χένιον λαβόντα (ζυγὸν ἀρήγει. ποτὲ κέν- 
τρον δέ τοι λακτιζέμεν τελέθει ὀλισθηρὸς 
οἶμος. βου]. Agam. 1633: πρὸς κέν- 
Tpa μὴ λάκτιζε, μὴ πήσας μογῇς. LEurip. 
Bacch. 791 : θυμούμενος πρὸς κέντρα λακτί- 
ζοιμι, θνητὸς dv θεῷ. See also Asch. 
Prom. 323, and other examples in Wetst.; 
Plautus (Truc. iv. 2. 59); and Terence, 


aft εἰπεν ins προς με Εἰ Syr copt eth-pl. 


aft ino. ins o ναζωραιος 


προχειρασθαι A, for σε, σοι N81 [es τη]. 
Phorm. i. 2. 27: ‘Nam que inscitia est 
advorsum stimulum calces ?’ 15— 
18.] There can be no question that Paul 
here condenses into one, various sayings 
of our Lord to him at different times, in 
visions, see ch. xxii. 18—21; and by 
Ananias, ch. ix. 15; see also ch. xxii. 15, 
16. Nor can this, on the strictest view, 
be considered any deviation from truth. 
It is what all must more or less do who 
are abridging a narrative, or giving the 
general sense of things said at various 
times. There were reasons for its being 
minute and particular in the details of 
his conversion; that once related, the 
commission which he thereupon received is 
not followed into its details, but swmmed 
up as committed to him by the Lord him- 
self. It would be not only irreverent, but 


‘false, to imagine that he put his own 


thoughts into the mouth of our Lord ; but 
I do not see, with Stier, the necessity of 
maintaining that all these words were ac- 
tually spoken to him at some time by the 
Lord. ‘The message delivered by Ananias 
certainly furnished some of them; and the 
unmistakeable utterings of God’s Spirit 
(τὸ πνεῦμα Ἰησοῦ, ch. xvi. 7) which su- 
pernaturally led him, may have furnished 
more, all within the limits of truth. 

16.] εἰς τοῦτο refers to what follows, 


I 


280 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


- 2 
uconstr.,see ὧν TE εἶδες "ὧν τε 4“ ὀφθήσομαί σοι, 17 " ἐξαιρούμενός 
note. 
ass fal a \ lal a 
y=ch.viil0 ge ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ Kal ἐκ τῶν ἐθνῶν, εἰς οὺς ἐγὼ * ἀπο- 


w constr., Mark , 


ere Cor. στέλλω σε 18 ἀνοῖξαι ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν, * τοῦ %* ἐπιστρέψαι 


1.11. 4 Kings 
xix. 16. see 
ch. v. 21. 

x 1 Cor. x. 13 


reff. 
y ch. xiv. 15 
re 


+s επι- 
στρεψαι 


y ? \ a , > a a \ a Ὁ ὃ , a a [ 

ἀπὸ δ σκότους εἰς ὃ φῶς καὶ τῆς ὃ ἐξουσίας τοῦ σατανᾶ * 

: 2 \ \ θ , x a -» > \ c ΓΝ ο ΧΑ lal \ 

ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν, * τοῦ λαβεῖν αὐτοὺς “ ἄφεσιν ° ἁμαρτιῶν καὶ 

de κλῆρον ἐν τοῖς “ ἡγιασμένοις ἴ πίστει TH ἰ εἰς ἐμέ. 
a ? / \ 

19 ε ὅθεν, βασιλεῦ ᾿Αγρίππα, οὐκ ἐγενόμην ™ ἀπειθὴς τῇ 


απ. 


ἘΞ Ts eee 
b= bukexxs = ͵ 3 Bie seat ἐν ‘ oes he fe | ee εἰθης τῇ 
20. xxii.53. 1 k a. 20 C. 
Coli ουρανιῳ ΟπΤαᾶσι “ ἀλλὰ τοις ἐν Δαμασκῷ TRO Te ABEH 
ς ch. y. 31 reff. ᾿ ; . LPR ab 
d ch. i. 17 reff. eseech. xx. 32. Eph. i. 18. f ch. xxiv. 24 reff. g=M +. xiv. 7 Heb; ὃ 
ii. 17. iii. 1. vii. 25. Vili. 3. ix. 18. xi. 19, Judith viii. 20. h Rom. i. 13 reff. ifem., Caf gh 
Luke ii. 13. (Matt. v. 48. vi. 14, 26, 32. xv. 13. xxiii. 9 only. Esdr. vi. 15. 2 Macc. vii. 34 AB(not Ed vat.) ἄς. ix. klmo 
10 only.) Dan. iv. 23 (26) Theod. k 2 Cor. xii. 1 reff. p13 


aft evdes ins με BC'(appy) 137 syr [Syr arm] Ambr, Aug). 
17. rec om 2nd ex, with CHLP rel 36 vulg E-lat Chr, Thi-sif: ins AB E-gr IN k lp 


13. 40 fuld Thl-fin. 


rec for eyw, νυν (marginal gloss, which has overborne the 


eyw): om ce: vulg Thi-fin have both: txt ABCEHILP® rel [Syr] syr copt eth-pl 


arm Chr, Thl-sif Aug). 


rec oe bef αποστελλω, with HLP rel Chr: txt ABCEIN 


edfkm 18 vulg [arm] Thl.—amooreAw HIP! a cd g Καὶ demid copt Thi-sif: εξ- 


αποστελλω C m p 13. 36 Thi-fin. 
18. for avtwy, τυφλων EI tol Aug). 
Aug, : 


υποστρ. P 27.78: txt BCEILN 13. 36 vulg (Clem, Thl-fin}. 


αποστρεψαι AH Ὁ ὁ mo pp Chr, Thi-sif 


ins απὸ bef 


rns εξουσιας CEL ac 36. 137 (vulg) Thi-fin: om ABHPN p 13 [Clem,] Chr Thl-sif 


(Ec. 


mpoxeip. &c..—yap gives the reason for 
ἀνάστηθι, ἄς. (Meyer.) προχειρ.] 
See reff. μάρτυρα ὧν τε εἶδες | Stier 
remarks, that Paul was the witness of the 
glory of Christ: whereas Peter, the first 
of the former twelve, describes himself 
(1 Pet. v. 1) as ‘a witness of the sufferings 
of Christ, and a partaker of the glory that 
shall be revealed.’ So true it was that this 
ἔκτρωμα among the Apostles, became, by 
divine grace, more than they all (1 Cor. 
xv.8—10). The expression ὑπηρέτην ὧν 
εἶδες may be compared with ὑπηρέται τοῦ 
λόγου, which Luke calls the αὐτόπται, 
Luke i. 2. ὧν τε ὀφθήσομαί σοι] 
(1) ὁφθ. must be passive, not (as Borne- 
mann, Winer (not in edn. 6, § 39. 3, 
remark 1), Wahl, al.) causative (‘ videre 
faciam’),—but as E. V., I will appear 
unto thee. (2) the gen. is exactly paral- 
leled (Meyer) by Soph. (id. Tyr. 788, 
ὧν μὲν ἱκόμην = τούτων (rather ἐκείνων) 
δι᾽ ἃ ἱκόμην. So here ὧν = τούτων 
(ἐκείνων) 5 ἃ ὀφθ., the things in (or on 
account of) which I will appear to thee. 
That such visions did take place, we know, 
from ch. xviii. 9; xxii. 18 ; xxiii. 11; 2 Cor. 
xii. 1 ; Gal. i. 12. 17. ἐξαιρούμενός ce | 
delivering thee from, as E. V.: not, as 
Kuin., al., and Conyb., ‘choosing thee 
out of: see reff. τοῦ λαοῦ] as 
elsewhere, the Jewish people. ‘Hic ar- 
matur contra omnes metus qui eum ma- 
nebant, et simul preparatur ad crucis to- 


aft ηγιασμ. ins πασιν (see ch xx. 32) E. 


lerantiam.’ Calvin. εἰς ots] to both, 
the people, and the Gentiles; not the 
Gentiles only. 18. τοῦ émor. | 
not, as Beza, and E. V., ‘to turn them ? 
but, that they may turn; see ἐπιστρέ- 
φειν, ver. 20. The general reference 
of οὕς becomes tacitly modified (not ex- 
pressly, speaking as he was to the Jew 
Agrippa) by the expression σκότος and 
ἐξουσία τοῦ σατανᾶ, both, in the common 
language of the Jews, applicable only to 
the Gentiles. But in reality, and in Paul’s 
mind, they had their sense as applied to 
Jews, —who were in spiritual darkness and 
under Satan’s power, however little they 
thought it. See Col. i. 13. τοῦ 
haB.| A third step: first the opening of 
the eyes—next, the turning to God—next, 
the receiving remission of sins and a place 
among the sanctified ; see ch. xx. 32. 

This last reference determines πίστει τῇ 
eis ἐμέ to belong not to ἡγιασμένοις but to 
λαβεῖν. Thus the great object of Paul’s 
preaching was to awaken and shew the 
necessity and efficacy of πίστις 7 εἰς ἐμέ. 
And fully, long ere this, had he recognized 
and acted on this his great mission. The 
epistles to the Galatians and Romans are 
two noble monuments of the APOSTLE OF 


Fair. 19. ἀπειθής } See Isa. 1. 5 in 
LXX. 20. τοῖς ἐν Aap. πρ.} See ch. 
ix. 20. eis belongs to ἀπήγγελ. (De 


W.), not to τοῖς (ἐν Aau.) as Meyer; sce 
Luke viii. 34; and on this sense of eis, 





17—23. 


IIPAZEIS ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, 28) 


AWE i 7 rn ΄ , rn 
καὶ ἱἱεροσολύμοις, [᾿ εἰς] πᾶσάν τε THY χώραν τῆς lovdalag 1 = anaconstr. 


\ n ἔθ ] 
Kal τοις EVVECLV 


> 7 an \ > / 

ἀπήγγελλον μετανοεῖν καὶ " ἐπιστρέφειν 
> \ Ν ΄ A lal 7 2 ΄, 

" ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν, Ὁ ἄξια τῆς ο μετανοίας ἔργα πράσσοντας. 


here only. 
(ch. xii. 14.) 
w. εἰς, Luke 
viii. 34, 

m absol., ch. 
xvii. 30 reff. 


9° / 7 ec “ « , A - 
51 ἕνεκα τούτων με οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι 4 συλλκαβόμενοι ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ nLukei.16 


᾿ ἐπειρῶντο ὃ διαχειρίσασθαι. 


τῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἄχρι THs ἡμέρας ταύτης " ἕστηκα, 
, a \ ΄ +Q\ > \ 
Ὗ μαρτυρόμενος * μικρῷ τε Kal * μεγάλῳ, οὐδὲν Y ἐκτὸς 


λέγων *@v TE οἱ προφῆται 


22 t 


(act.), ch. ix. 
25. xi. 21. 
Xiv. 15. αν: 
19. ver. 18. 


» / > 
ἐπικουρίας οὖν " τυχὼν 
1 Pet. ii. 25. 
Deut. xxx. 2. 


see 2 Cor. iii. 


16. 
o Matt. iii. 8 |! L. 


b] / / 
ἐλάλησαν * μελλοντων 5 Lake xxiit 


\ a \ e ΄ 41, 
γίνεσθαι καὶ Μωυσῆς, 3 εἰ “ παθητὸς ὁ χριστός, ὃ εἰ « -- ιν... τὸ 
ren. 


only. Proy. xxvi. 18 834 F(not A) Ald. only. 
xiii. 18 only. 


z constr., ver. 16 a. 
c here only +. 


20. rec om Ist re, with EHLP 13. 36 rel Chr: ins ABN p. 


u = ch, xxiv. 2 reff. 
x ch. viii. 10. Heb. viii. 11. Rev. xi. 18. xiii. l6al, Isa. ix. 14. 
ach. xiii. 34 reff. Isa. xlviii. 6. 


r ch. ix. 26 
s ch. vy. 30 only t. there only +. Wisd. 
v = here only. w ch. xx. 26 reff. 
¥ = l Cor. πτ᾿ 27. isa. χανε ics 
b=ver.8. ὃ Kingsi. 81 al. 


ins ev bef sep. AE k 


36. 40 (Syr) Thl[-sif|] : τοῖς ev ὁ 1387 lect-12 : om BHLPX p rel Chr [Thl-fin]. 


om εἰς ABN [tol] (on acct of -οις preceding 7). 


96. 142. 


[om 2nd τε L. | om τὴν H} 


Steph amayyeAAwy, with HLP g m: απαγγελλω [rel] 14. 38. 65. 76. 


95-7-9. 104-13-33-77 Chr,: amnyeAAw 13: mapnyeAdov 96: txt ABEN p 36 vulg 


[(syrr) copt eth arm]. 


ins (wyta bef θεον m 36. 40 arm. 


aft afia ins τε Εἰ. 


21. ot ιουδ, συλλαβ. bef we A a? ὁ 137 [copt arm(Tischdf)]: οἱ sovd. bef we EL m p 


Chr, Thl-fin: om με 180. 
μενοι NX [συλλαμβανομενοι ῬΊ. 
vulg syr Chron: ovta με δὲ}. 


om οἱ BLN! m p 13 Chron, Thl-fin. 
ins ovta bef ev τω EX? [6] τὰ p 13. 36. 40. 137 
διαχερωσασθαι RN}. 


συλλαβου- 


22. rec for απο, παρα (more usual), with HLP rel Chr, [Thl-sif: ὑπο 67] : txt ABER 


p 18. 36. 40 Chron, Thl-fin. 


rec paptupoumevos (see notes), with E af g Thl-fin: 


μαρτυρωμενος 138: txt ABHLPN p rel 36. 40 vulg Chr Chron Thl-sif. 


note on ver. 6 above. 22.| The οὖν 
refers to the whole course of deliverances 
which he had had from God, not merely to 
the last. It serves to close the narrative, by 
shewing how it was that he was there that 
day,—after such repeated persecutions, 
crowned by this last attempt to destroy 
him. μαρτυρόμενος) The mere love 
of paradox and difficulty, as it seems to me, 
has led De Wette and Meyer to prefer the 
ordinary reading -ρούμενος, although very 
weakly supported by Mss., and yielding 
hardly any appropriate sense. μαρτυρού- 
μενος must be passive, and signify (see 
reff. below) ‘ testified to, ‘borne witness 
of: the datives μικρῷ and μεγάλῳ must 
be the agents, ‘dy small and great’ (to 
which there is no objection grammatically, 
but every objection analogically, see ch. x. 
22; xvi. 2; xxii. 12, in all which μαρτύ- 
pouuat is followed by ὑπό), and λέγων 
must be predicative, ‘as saying:’ i.e., ‘ that 
I say” But this would be contrary to the 
fact: Paul was not thus borne witness 
of by all, but on the contrary accused of 
being a despiser of the law by a great 
majority of his own countrymen. There 
can, I think, be no question either critically 
or exegetically of the correctness of the 
other reading μαρτυρόμενος, bearing wit- 


ness, as directly appropriate to the office 
to which Paul was appointed,—that of a 
witness (ver. 16); and then μικρῷ τε καὶ 
μεγάλῳ, to small and great, so flat and 
meaningless on the other interpretation, 
admirably suits the occasion,—standing as 
he was before an assembly of the greatest 
of the land. 23. εἰ not for éri—but 
just asin ver. 8,—if—if at least: mean- 
ing, that the things following were patent 
facts to those who knew the prophets. 
See Heb. vii. 15, where εἰ has the same 
sense. παθητός) not, as Beza, 
‘ Christum fuisse passurum’ (so E. V., 
‘should suffer’): but as Vulg., " δὲ passt- 
bilis Christus.’ Paul does not refer to the 
prophetic announcement, or the historical 
reality, of the fact of Christ’s suffering, but 
to the idea of the Messiah as passible and 
suffering being in accordance with the tes- 
timony of the prophets. That the fact of 
His having suffered on the cross was in the 
Apostle’s mind, can hardly be doubted: 
but that the words do not assert it, is evi- 
dent from the change of construction in the 
next clause, where the fact of the bringing 
life and immortality to light by the resur- 
rection is spoken of,—ei παθητὸς 6 xp.,— 
ei....péAder katayyéAAew. In Justin 
Martyr, ‘I'rypho c. 89, p. 187, the follow- 


282 


Γ᾿ 
ἃ = Col. i. 18. T PWTOS 


e 1 Cor. xv. 12 


reff. 
τὰ xiii. 5 reff. 


5 , « lal / 

6 Take xii 1 © ἀπολογουμένου ὁ Φῆστος * ΔΎ εἰν} / aie rare φησιν ¢ ae te i 
ch. xxiv. 10. i M Tl Pa \ ΄ kl 
(xix. 88 reff.) * J aivn, Παῦλε' τὰ πολλά σε * τς ἀραὶ ς εἰς | μανίαν 

h oniy. | Pro on δὲ O ἘΝ: ᾿ φ oP 
only rov. m 1 

περιτρέπει. “00 0€ Ov μαίνομαί ησιν, "κράτιστε NOTE, 
gare 1 ra ἫΝ θ , \ oOo ΄ es PZ θέ 

rt" ἄλλα ἀληθείας Kat σωφροσύνης ῥήματα ? ἀποφθέγγομαι. 
18. Ἐν: - 96 > Γ \ \ / e , \ A \ 
Bea i. ἐπίσταται Yap περὶ τούτων O βασιλεύς, προς ὃν καὶ 

Mee χαὶὶς, 4, 4 παῤῥησιαζόμενος λαλῶ. 1 λανθάνειν γὰρ αὐτόν TL τού- 
——— 4, PP” μ Ἀ Ὗ ρ 
Β F(not A) &c.,8. Wisd. v. 4 only. m here only +. Wisd. v. 24 only. τὸ θεῖον---εἰς ὁ ὀργὴν περιτραπέν, 


Jos. Antt. ii. 14: ib 
only +. 2 Macc. iv. 37 only. 
q ch. ix. 27 reff, 


28. μελλειν HPN! m! p 40. 


TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


ἃ ἐξ ε ἀναστάσεως © νεκρῶν φῶς 
γέλλειν τῷ τε λαῷ καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν. 


n = Lukei. 3. ch. xxiii. 
ch. ii. 4, 14 only. 
r and constr., 2 Pet. iii. 5, 8 (Mark vii, 24. Luke viii, 47. 


XXVL 


ἃ μέλλει f καταγ- 


26. xxiv. 3 only ζ. 
1 Chron. xxv. 1. 


ΟἹ Tim. ii. 9, 15 
(-γμα, Deut. xxxii. 2.) 
Heb. xiii. 2) only. Lev. ν. 3. 


rec om Te (as unnecessary), with LP rel 36 Chron, 


Thi-sif: ins AB E-gr HN bh k 1o p 138. 40 Chr, Thl-fin. 


24. λαλουντος aut. Kk. απολ. E vulg eth-pl [αὐτου απολ. H}. 


historical tense), with HUP rel: 
Thi. 


ree edn (corrn to 


εφωνησε 39; εἰπε c 64. 137: txt ABEN Καὶ p 18. 40 


25. aft o δε ins παυλος ABEN ἃ p 18 (36) 40 vulg [Syr copt eth-pl arm] Thl-fin: 


om HLP rel syr Thl-sif. 
26. om και B 25 [copt arm. 


ing words are put into the mouth of 
Trypho the Jew: παθητὸν τὸν χριστόν, ὅτι 
αἱ γραφαὶ κηρύσσουσι, φανερόν ἐστι. See 
also the same, Trypho ec. 36, p. 133, and 
c. 76, p. 173. πρῶτος ἐξ ἀναστάσεως 
= πρῶτος ἄναστάς, OY πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν 
νεκρῶν, Col. i. 18, but implying that this 
light, to be preached to the Jews (6 λαός) 
and Gentiles, must arise from the resurrec- 
tion of the dead, and that Christ, the first 
ἐξ ἀναστάσεως, was to announce it. See 
Isa. xlii. 6; xlix. 6; lx. 1, 2,3; Luke ii. 
32; ch. xiii. 47. 24.1 The words 
ταῦτα ἀπολογουμένου must refer, on ac- 
count of the present part., to the last 
words spoken by Paul: but it is not 
necessary to suppose that these only pro- 
duced the effect described on Festus. 
Mr. Humphry remarks, “ Festus was pro- 
bably not so well acquainted as his pre- 
decessor (ch. xxiv. 10) with the character 
of the nation over which he had recently 
been called to preside. Hence he avails 
himself of Agrippa’s assistance (xxv. 26). 
Hence also he is unable to comprehend the 
earnestness of St. Paul, so unlike the indif- 
ference with which religious and moral sub- 
jects were regarded by the upper classes at 
Rome. His self-love suggests to him, that 
one who presents such a contrast to his own 
apathy, must be mad: the convenient hy- 
pothesis that much learning had produced 
this result, may have occurred to him on 
hearing Paul quote prophecies in proof of 
his assertions.” μαίνῃ] Thou art 
mad, not merely, ἐπῶν ravest,’ nor “ thou 
art an enthusiast: nor are the words 
spoken in jest (Olsh.),—but in earnest 


(adda, so AELPR rel(not h) Chr,.) 
for λαλω, λέγω 13. ] 


pe τι Βα 36. 187. 


(θυμοῦ ἦν κ. ὀργῆς 7 φωνή, Chrys.). Fes- 
tus finds himself by this speech of Paul yet 
more‘ bewildered than before (De W.). 
τὰ πολλὰ γράμμ.} Meyer under- 
stands Festus to allude to the many rolls 
which Paul had with him in his imprison- 
ment (we might compare τὰ βιβλία, μά- 
λιστα Tas weuBpavas of 2 Tim. iv. 13) and 
studied (so also Heinrichs and Kuinoel), 
—but the ordinary interpretation, thy 
much learning, seems more natural, and 
so De W. εἰς μ. περιτρέπει] Is turn- 
ing thy brain. 25.| ἀλήθεια may 
be spoken warmly and enthusiastically, 
but cannot be predicated of a madman’s 
words : σωφροσύνη is directly opposed to 
μανία. So Xen. Mem. i. 16, recounting 
the subjects of Socrates’ discourses, τί 
δίκαιον, τί ἄδικον: τί σωφροσύνη, τί 
μανία: τί ἀνδρία, τί δειλία. ‘The expres- 
sion ἀληθείας &e. ῥήματα, though of 
course in sense = ῥήματα ἀληθῆ, Xe., 
yet has a distinctive force of its own, and 
is never to be confounded with, or sup- 
posed to be put by a Hebraism for the other. 
Such forms oecur in classic as well as 
Hellenistic writers, and indeed in all lan- 
guages: the idea expressed by them being, 
the derivation of the quality predicated, 
Jrom its source :—so here, words (not 
merely true and sober, but) of truth and 
soberness,—springing from, and indicative 
of, subjective truth and soberness. 
26.] Agrippa is doubly his witness, (1) 
as cognizant of the facts respecting Jesus, 
(2) as believing the prophets. This latter 
he does not only assert, but appeals to the 
faith of the king as a Jew for its establish- 


24 ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ABEH 


+o 


24—28. ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON. 283 


τ aig ‘0 θέ Ἔ ᾽ ΒΩ τε, Ψ πῃ / 
ων οὐ " πείθομαι οὐθέν" ov yap‘ ἐστιν ἐν yovia πεπρα- «- Lure x. 
6. 
9 ΄ ᾿ τ, 
"Ἴ πιστεύεις, βασιλεῦ ᾿Αγρίππα, τοῖς teonstr.. ch. 


xxv. 10 reff. 


γμένον τοῦτο. 


Ἅ 5 “ ’ 9 e \ Ss / \ Matt. vi. 5. 
προφήταις ; οἶδα ὅτι πιστεύεις. 38 ὁ δὲ Αγρίππας πρὸς * ταὶ. 42}. ch 
\ A v? ans , w \ oa iv. 11, and 

τὸν IlavAov " Ev ολύγῳ με πείθῃ χριστιανον ποιῆσαι. 1} Ῥεῖ 1.1, 
exvii. 22. Rev. vii. 1. xx. 8 only. vhere bis. Eph. iii. 3only. see 1 Pet. v. 12. aa ΝΣ ch. 


xi. 26. 1 Pet. iv. 16 only. 

rec οὐδεν, with HLP rel [οὐδὲν πειθ. τη} Chr: om A E(but see below) 13. 40: txt 
B §&1(8° disapproving) p: om Ist ova Ὁ 6 ΟΡ. for 2nd ov, ovde E? m 36. 40: 
οὐδεν E}(and lat). om ἐστιν H[L)P fg ἢ 1 [ins aft γων. m 40, aft τουτο a]. 

28. rec aft προς Tov mavAoy ins epy, with EHLP rel 36 Chr [ait tol]: om ABN Ρ 
13. 40. 137 vulg. ree πειθεις xp. γενεσθαι, with EHLP rel 36 [vulg Syr syr-txt } 
(tntroire wxth-pl) Cyr-jer, Chr,: wees xp. ποιησαι BR p 13. 40 syr-mg copt: txt A. 
(The reading of BX has apparently been the result of some confusion. I have pre- 


ferred therefore that of A: see note.)—xpyortiavor(but corrd) δὲ, 


ment. ἐν γωνίᾳ... . . τοῦτο] This, 
the act done to Jesus by the Jews, and its 
sequel, was not done in an obscure corner 
of Judza, but in the metropolis, at a time 
of more than common publicity. 

28. ἐν ὀλίγῳ] These words of Agrippa 
have been very variously explained. (1) 
The rendering ‘ propemodum,’ ‘ parum 
abest, quin,’ (‘ almost,’ E. V.,) adopted by 
Chrys., Beza, Grot., Valla, Luther, Pis- 
cator, Calov., &c. is inadmissible, for want 
of any example of ἐν ὀλίγῳ having this 
meaning, which would require ὀλίγου 
(ὀλίγου μ᾽ ἀπωλέσας, Aristoph. Vesp. 829, 
and al.), or ὀλίγου δεῖ, or παρ᾽ ὀλίγον. 
(2) Calvin, Kuinoel, Schittg., Olsh., Nean- 
der, take it for ἐν ὀλίγῳ χρόνῳ, which cer- 
tainly is allowable, but does not correspond 
to μεγάλῳ below, nor, as I believe, does it 
come up to the general sense of the expres- 
sion. (3) The phrase ἐν ὀλίγῳ occurs in 
Greek writers with various nouns under- 
stood according to the nature of the case,— 
and sometimes it will bear any of several 
supplements with equal propriety. Thus 
in Demosth. p. 33. 18, ῥάδιον εἰς ταὐτὸ 
mav? ὅσα βούλεταί τις ἀθροίσαντα ἐν 
ὀλίγῳ, where Schaefer in his Index Greci- 
tatis says, scil. χρόνῳ, aut χώρῳ, aut λόγῳ, 
aut πόνῳ. Soalso here we may understand 
λόγῳ or πόνῳ (or χρόνῳ ?)—or still better 
as it seems to me, leave the ellipsis unsup- 
plied (see Eph. iii. 3). We have a word 
in English which exactly expresses it,— 
one which has fallen into disuse, but has 
no equivalent; lightly: i.e. with little 
pains, few words, small hesitation. Then 
next as to the reading, I have followed the 
most ancient MSS., in editing ποιῆσαι and 
not γενέσθαι. This being so, we have to 
choose between πείθεις of BX and πείθῃ of 
A. It is almost impossible to give any 
assignable meaning to the former; and I 
suspect it has come in by a confusion of 
the two readings. Whereas πείθῃ seems 
to take up the πείθομαι of ver. 26. The 


received reading has probably found its 
way in from first imagining that πειθ- had 
to do with Paul’s persuading Agrippa, 
and then the ποιῆσαι having no sense, 
became conformed to the γενέσθαι in the 
Apostle’s speech below. And now, as to 
the sense of Agrippa’s saying. In deter- 
mining this, enough attention has not been 
paid to two points: (1) the present tense, 
πείθῃ, thou art persuading thyself, art 
imagining ; and (2) the use, zn the mouth 
of a Jew, and that Jew a king, of the 
Gentile and offensive appellation χρισ- 
través. To my mind, the first of these 
considerations decides that Agrippa is cha- 
racterizing no effect on himself, but what 
Paul was fancying in his mind, reckoning 
the πείθομαι which he had expressed 
above : the second, that he speaks of some- 
thing not that he is likely to become, but 
that contrasts strangely with his present 
worldly position and intentions. I would 
therefore render the words thus: Lightly 
(with small trouble) art thou persuading 
thyself that thou canst make me a 
Christian : and understand them, in con- 
nexion with Paul’s having attempted to 
make Agrippa a witness on his side,—‘ Jam 
not so easily to be made a Christian of, as 
thou supposest.’ Most of the ancient Com- 
mentators (especially as reading 7rei@es) 
take the words as implying some effect on 
Agrippa’s mind, and as spoken in earnest : 
but this I think is hardly possible, philo- 
logically or exegetically. I may add that 
the emphatic position of both ἐν ὀλίγῳ 
and χριστιανόν, before their respective 
verbs, strongly confirms the view taken 
above. I must again caution the reader 
against the mistake committed by Words- 
worth, in supposing the enclitic ue to 
be emphatic, which it cannot be, ἐμέ 
being required in such a case. Indeed, a 
more insignificant position than it here 
holds, next to the most emphatic word of 
the sentence, cannot be conceived. 


284 TPAZEIS ATIOSTOAQN, XXVI. 29—82: 
a“ »" a ‘ ’ ’ 

x dat. and, 296 δὲ Παῦλος * Εὐξαίμην Υ ἂν td θεῷ Kai * ἐν ὀλίγῳ 
tr., / \ > \ ΄ 

only. see Καὺ ἐν μεγάλῳ οὐ μόνον σὲ ἀλλὰ καὶ πάντας τοὺς 
en. Mem Ξ c = 

ἡ ἀν... ἀκούοντάς μου σήμερον γενέσθαι τοιούτους 2 ὁποῖος 
ἧς 2 \ a tal / , 

zit (eh κἀγὼ εἰμὶ ὃ παρεκτὸς τῶν ὃ δεσμῶν τούτων. “Ὁ ἀνέστη 

xxvii. 29 re 


y = here only. 
Xen. Mem. 
ii. 5. 1. 

z 1 Cor. iii. 13. 
Gal. ii. 6. 

1 Thess. i. 9. 
James i. 24 
only τ. 

a Matt. v. 32. 
2 Cor. xi. 28 
only τ. Deut. 
i. 36 Aq. 


τε ὁ βασιλεὺς. Kal ὁ “ ἡγεμὼν ἥ τε Βερνίκη καὶ οἱ ἃ ovy- 
καθήμενοι αὐτοῖς, 31 καὶ “ ἀναχωρήσαντες ἐλάλουν πρὸς 
ἀλλήλους λέγοντες ὅτι οὐδὲν ᾿ θανάτου ' ἄξιον ἢ ἶ δεσμῶν 
πράσσει ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος. 339 ᾿Αγρίππας δὲ τῷ Φήστῳ 
ἔφη ξ᾿Απολελύσθαι ἐδύνατο ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος, εἰ μὴ 


beh. χχῖι. 39. ἢ ἐγχγεκέκλητο Καίσαρα. 

ge iii. 24 ¢ Ve pies / k A ? a ae > 
ech. χα, XX XVII. 1 Ὡς δὲ ἴ ἐκρίθη Ἐπτοῦ 1 ἀποπλεῖν ἡμᾶς εἰς 
ἃ Mark xiv. 54 


only. Exod xxiii. 33 Ald.(Tromm ) Ps. c. 6 only. e ch. xxiii. 19 reff. 
g = Matt. xxvii. 15, ἄς. ch. iil. 13. iv. 21, 23. v. 40. xvi. 35, 36. xxviii. 18. 
xxv. 11] reff. i= ch. xv. 19 reff. 

15 only t. 


ἢ ch. xxiii. 29 (reff.). 
Heb. xiii. 23, 2 Macc. xii. 25. h ch. 
k constr., ch. iii. 12 retf, lech. xiii. 4. xiv. 26. xx. 


29. rec aft δὲ παυλος ins εἰπεν, with HLP rel [Syr copt eth arm] Chr, egy 36: 
om ABN p 13. 40. 137 vulg syr. evtaunv [HILN! cll p [ηυξ. Pf]. rec (for 
μεγαλω) πολλω (see notes), with HLP rel 36 wth Chr,: [ev πολλω κ. εν oA. m:] txt 
AB® k p 18. 40 vulg syr-mg-gr copt arm. 

30. rec ins καὶ ταυτᾶ evrovtos αὐτου bef avertn (addn for perspicuity), with HLP 
rel syr-w-ast Thl: καὶ ταυτα evrovros 137 eth-rom: om ABN ὁ p 18 vulg Syr eth-pl 
arm.—rec om re: txt as above, but c 13. 40 syr copt Chr, have δε. 

81. αξιον bef θανατου Α ὃ copt: ἡ δεσμων bef αξιον BX Καὶ m p 18. 40 vulg[exc tol]. 

ins τι bef πρασσει AN Καὶ m p 18 vulg{not demid (copt) 1. 
$2. επικεκλ. AL 40 Thl: txt ΒΗΓΡῚΝ p 18. 36 rel Chr. 


Cuap. XXVII. 1. καὶ ovtws εκρινεν ὁ ἤγεμων αναπεμψαι καισαρα 64: καὶ ovTws 
expivey αὑτὸν ὁ ny. ἀναπεμψαι καισαρι 97: ws οὐν εκρινεν Ο ny. του πεμπεσθαι avTov 
προς καισαρα τὴ ETLOVTN εκαλεσεν εκατονταρχον τινὰ OVOMATL ιουλιανον σπειρη5 σεβαστης 
παρεδιδου avTw τον παυλον συν ετεροι5 δεσμωταις SYI-Mg: και εκρινε περι αὐτου O PHTTUS 


πεμπεσθαι avTov προς καισαρα εἰς τὴν ιταλ. K.T.A. Syr. 


for μας, τους περι παυλυυ 


(ws begins an ecel lection, see ch xxi. 8 rec) Pla. τον mavAov] m lectt: eum vulg. 


29.| I could wish to God, that whether 
with ease or with difficulty (on my part), 
not only thou, but all who hear me to- 
day, might become such as I am, except 
only these bonds. He understands ἐν 
ὀλίγῳ just as Agrippa had used it, easily, 
‘with little trouble, “ with slight exertion ? 
and contrasts with it ἐν μεγάλῳ (πολλῷ 
has been an alteration to suit the imagined 
supplement χρόνῳ), With difficulty, ‘ with 
great trouble, ‘ with much labour?’ Those 
interpreters who understand χρόνῳ above, 
render this ‘seu tempore exiguo opus 
fuerit, seu multo’ (Schétt.); those who 
take ἐν oA. for ‘ almost,’ ‘non propemoduin 
tantum, sed plane’ (Grot.): ‘not only 
almost, but altogether, E.V. In εὔχεσθαι 
θεῷ the dative implies the direction of 
the wish or request to God: so Aisch. 
Agam. 852, θεοῖσι πρῶτα δεξιώσομαι : 1]. 
γ. 818, θεοῖσι δὲ χεῖρας ἀνέσχον, and freq. 
See examples in Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 86. 

δεσμῶν] He shews the chain, which 
being in ‘ eustodia militaris, he bore on 
his arm, to connect him with the soldier 
who had charge of him. [This exception 
may be regarded as a proof of the perfect 


courtesy of the great Apostle. | ΘΙ. 
πράσσει} generally, of his life and habits. 
No definite act was alleged against him: 
and his apologetic speech was in fact a 
sample of the acts of which he was ac- 
cused, 32.] Agrippa in these words 
delivers his judgment as a Jew: ‘ For 
aught I see, as regards our belief and 
practices, he might have been set at liberty.’ 
But now he could not: ‘nam appellatione 
potestas judicis, a quo appellatum est, 
cessare incipit ad absolvendum non minus 
quam ad condemnandum. Crimina enim 
integra servanda sunt cognitioni superi- 
oris. Grot. 

Cuap. XXVII. 1—XXVIII. 31.] 
PAUL’S VOYAGE TO ROME AND SOJOURN 
THERE. I cannot but express the benefit 
I have derived in my commentary on this 
section, from Mr. Smith’s now well-known 
treatise on the voyage and shipwreck of St. 
Paul : as also from various letters which he 
has from time to time put into my hands, 
tending further to elucidate the subject. 
The substance of these will be found em- 


bodied in an excursus following the chro+ 


nological table in the prolegomena. 


+. Tau- 

Aos kt. 

ABHL 

Prabe 

df g i k 

lmop 
13 


eee 


XXVIII. I, 2. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAQN. 


285 


τὴν ᾿Ιταλίαν, ™ παρεδίδουν tov τε Ἰ]αῦλον καί τινας τὸ -- οι. xii.t. 


ΧΧΥΪ 16 v.r. 


, ΄ ’ 5 , 3 / / 5 ᾿Ξ 
ἑτέρους " δεσμώτας ἑκατοντάρχῃ ὀνόματι ᾿Τουλίῳ ° σπείρης ® ret, 43 only: 


P σεβαστῆς. 


5 «ἐπιβάντες δὲ πλοίῳ ᾿Αδραμυττηνῷ μέλ- 


20. (-τήριον, 
ch. v. 21, 23.) 
᾿ o (ἢ, x. 1 reff. 


a \ \ \ ~ / ΄ 
λοντι ᾿ πλεῖν [εἰς] τοὺς κατὰ τὴν ᾿Ασίαν τόπους, " ἀνήχ- P= here only. 


21, 25. ΙΧ 

only. r Luke viii. 23. 

only. Isa. xlii. 10. 
sch, xiii. 13 reff. 


παρεδιδου A a 40 demid Syr copt Thl-sif. 
L 


TA. τ. θάλασσαν, Sir. xliii. 24. 


see ch. xxv. 


= ch. xxi. 2 (Matt. xxi. 5, from Zech. ix. 9. ch. xx. 18. xxi. 4. xxy.1) only. dat., here 
ch, xxi. 3. vv. 6,24. Luke only, exc. Rev. xviii. 17. 


constr. (accus.) here 


1 Mace. xiii. 29. mA, τὰ πελάγη, Polyb. iii. 4. 10. 


om erepous ¢ Ὁ] 137 syr: Secu. bef er. 


ins tovAtw bef as well as after ονοματι &?}. 


2. aft emi. ins ev c 137. 


αδραμυντηνω AB! (13 copt arm), al vary. 


rec μελλοντες (corrn to suit ἐπιβαντε5), with HLP rel vulg[with fuld demid tol] Chr: 


txt ABNa bed op 13. 36. 40. 197 am syrr copt eth-pl arm. 


rec om εἰς, with HLP 


rel Chr, Thl-sif [ezrca vulg]: ins em ὁ 36. 137 syr: ins εἰς ABN p 13. 40 Thl-fin. 


1.] τοῦ (see reff.) contains the purpose of 
ἐκρίθη. The matter of the decision im- 
plied in ἐκρίθη is expressed in this form 
as if governed by the substantive κρίσις, 
as in ch. xx. 3, ἐγένετο γνώμης τοῦ 
ὑποστρέφειν. Meyer remarks that the ex- 
pressions κελεύει ἵνα, εἰπεῖν ἵνα, θέλειν 
ἵνα, ἄο. are analogous. ἡμᾶς} Here 
we have again the first person, the nar- 
rator having, in all probability, remained 
in Palestine, and in the neighbourhood of 
Paul, during the interval since ch. xxi. 18. 
παρεδίδουν) Who? perhaps the as- 
sessors with whom Festus took counsel on 
the appeal, ch. xxv. 12: but more likely the 
plural is used indefinitely, the subject being 
‘they,’ = ‘on’ (Fr.), or ‘man’ (Germ.). 
ἑτέρους 8.] This expression, says 
Meyer, is purposely chosen, to intimate, 
that they were prisoners of another sort 
. (not also Christians under arrest). But De 
W. shews this to be a mistake, by ἕτεραι 
πολλαί, Luke viii. 8, = ἄλλαι πολλαί, 
Mark xv. 41, in both places meaning ‘ many 
others of the same sort.’ Here also they 
are of the same class, as far as δεσμῶται is 
concerned: further, nothing is implied in 
the narrative, one way or the other. 
σπείρης σεβαστῆς) There is some diffi- 
culty in determining what this cohort was. 
We must not fall into the mistake of several 
of the Commentators, that of confounding 
this om. σεβαστή with an ἵλη ἱππέων 
καλουμένη Σεβαστηνῶν, mentioned by Jo- 
sephus, B. J. ii. 12. 5, and Antt. xx. 6. 1, 
this latter implying ‘ xatives of Samaria’ 
(«Baorh),—whereas our word is the same 
adjective as that name itself, and cannot 
by any analogy have reference to it. More 
than one of the legions at different times 
bore the honorary title ‘Augusta.’ Wetst. 
quotes from Claudian de Bell. Gild. ‘ Dic- 
taque ab Augusto legio:’ from inscriptions 
in Mauritania, Legio III. Aug., II. Aug., 
VIII. Aug.: from Ptolemy, ii. 3, λεγεὼν 
δευτέρα σεβαστή (in Britain); iv. 3, Ae- 
γεὼν y. σεβαστή; but of a ‘cohors Au- 
gusta,’ or ‘ Augustana,’ we never hear. De 


Wette and Meyer suggest (but we have no 
historical proof of the supposition) that it 
was one among the five cohorts stationed 
at Caesarea (see note, ch. xxv. 23) thus 
distinguished as the body-guard of the em- 
peror (?), and therefore chosen for any ser- 
vices immediately concerning him, as in this 
case. Meyer thinks it may be the same 
(but then would the appellations be differ- 
ent ?) with the σπεῖρα ᾿Ιταλική of ch. x. 1. 
It is remarkable that almost all the Com- 
mentators have assumed, without any rea- 
son, that this or. σεβαστή must have been 
stationed at Cesarea, whereas it may well 
have been a cohort, or body of men so 
called, at Rome. Wieseler is the only one 
that I have seen who has not fallen into 
this error. He controverts the other inter- 
pretations (Chron. d. Apost.-g. note, p. 
391), and infers that Julius belonged to the 
Augustani, mentioned Tacitus xiv. 15, and 
Suet. Nero, 20 and 25 (see also Dio Cass. 
Ixi. 20: ἦν μὲν γάρ τι καὶ ἴδιον αὐτῷ 
σύστημα ἐς πεντακιςχιλίους στρατιώτας 
παρεσκευασμένον: Αὐγούστειοί τε ὠνο- 
μάζοντο' καὶ ἐξῆρχον τῶν ἐπαίνων, and 
Ixiii. 8), who appear to have been identical 
with the evocati (veterans specially sum- 
moned to service by the emperors), and to 
have formed Nero’s body-guard on his 
journey to Greece. The first levying of this 
band by Augustus, Dio relates, xlv.12. To 
this Julius seems to have belonged,—to 
have been sent on some service into Asia, 
and now to have been returning to Rome. 

We read ofa Julius Priscus, Prefect of 
the Preetorian guards under Vitellius, who 
killed himself ‘pudore magis. quam neces- 
sitate,’ after the military murder by Mu- 
cianus of Calpurnius Galerianus. This was 
ten years after the date of our narrative ; 
but the identity of the two must be only 
conjectural. 2. ᾿Αδραμυττηνῷ) Adra- 
myttium (Αδραμύττιον, -εἰον, or *ATpa- 
μύττιον, and in Plin. v. 32, Adramytteos) 
was a seaport with a harbour in Mysia, an 
Athenian colony. It is now a village called 
Endramit. Grotius, Drusius, and others 


286 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ATIOSTOAON. 


XXVIT. 


teen axis. θημεν, ὄντος σὺν ἡμῖν ᾿Αριστάρχου Μακεδόνος Θεσσαλο- 


Xen. Cyr. iv. 
6. 10. 
u pass., = 


νικέως, 8 τῇ τε " ἑτέρᾳ ἃ κατήχθημεν εἰς Σιδῶνα, ἡ φιλαν- 


πολλῆς θρώπως τε ὁ lovAuos τῷ Παύλῳ * χρησάμενος x ἐπέτρεψεν 


only. (act., 
ch. xxiii. 15 
reff.) 

y here only t. 
2 Macc. ix. 
27 only. 
dia. δια- 


κεῖσθαι πρὸς Polyb. i. 68, 13. 


xxvi. 1 reff. y = 3 John 15, 
xy.8. -«λεῖσθαι, Luke x. 34.) 


αρισταρχος N}. 
(see ch xx. 4). 


3. for τε, δε LX? k m p 40 vulg copt Chr. 
Steph om τοὺς, with c o: ins ABHLPN p 18 rel Chr ΤῊ] ec. 


(-7os, Wisd. i. 6. 

w = (see 2 Cor. xiii. 10.) Gen. xxvi. 29. Xen. Mem. iv. 6. 5 (often). , P 
zhere only. Prov. iii.8. (-λής, Prov. xi.2 Sym. -A@s, Luke 

a = ch. xxiv. 2 reff. 


/ “ > 
πρὸς τοὺς ¥ φίλους πορευθέντι * ἐπιμελείας * τυχεῖν. * κἀ- 
“- “4 » 
κεῖθεν " ἀναχθέντες ἡ ὑπεπλεύσαμεν THY Κύπρον διὰ τὸ 


~mia, ch. xxviii. 2. -πεῖν, 2 Mace. xiii. 23.) 
x inf. aor., ch. xxi. 39 reff. pres., ch. 


Ὁ ver. 7 only t. 


θεσσαλονικεων, adding de [re 67 αρισταρχ. x. vex. [6] 137 syr 


tovAvavos A. 
rec 


σιδονα XN. 


πορευθεντα, with HLP rel Chr, Thl-sif: txt ABN p 13. 86 Thl-fin. 


erroneously suppose Adrumetum to be 
meant, on the north coast of Africa (Winer, 
Realw.). πλεῖν [eis] Tots... .] 
The bracketed eis is in all probability a 

insertion to help off the harshness of the 
construction. But the accusative is indi- 
cative of the direction. We have ἦλθε 
Πολυνείκης χθόνα, Eur. Pheeniss. 110. 
See Winer, edn. 6, § 32. 1, on the accus. 
after neuter verbs, and Bernhardy, Syn- 
tax, pp. 114 ff., and other instances in 
Wetstein. ᾿Αριστάρχ.] See ch. xix. 
29; xx. 4; Col. iv. 10; Philem. 24. In 
Col. iv. 10, Paul calls him his συναιχμά- 
Awtos, but perhaps only figuratively: the 
same term is applied to Epaphras, Philem. 
23, where follows ’Apiorapxos, Anuas, 
Λουκᾶς, of σύνεργοί μου. 3. Σιδῶνα] 
This celebrated city is generally joined in 
the N. T. with Tyre, from-which it was 
distant 200 stadia (Strabo, xvi. 756 ff.), 
and of which it was probably the mother 
city. It was within the lot of the tribe of 
Asher (Josh. xix. 28), but never conquered 
by the Israelites (Judg. i. 31; iii.3). From 
the earliest times the Sidonians were re- 
nowned for their manufactures of glass 
(‘ Sidon artifex vitri,’ Plin. v. 19), linen 
(πέπλοι παμποίκιλοι ἔργα γυναικῶν Σι- 
δονίων, Il. ¢. 290), silversmith’s work (II. 
ψ. 743, and Od. o. 115, &c.), and for 
the hewing of timber (1 Kings v.6; Ezra 
iii. 7). In ancient times, Sidon seems to 
have been under Tyre, and to have fur- 
aished her with mariners (see Ezek. xxvii. 
8). It went over to Shalmaneser, king of 
Assyria (Jos. Antt. ix. 14. 2); but seems 
under him, and afterwards under the Chal- 
deans and Persians, to have had tributary 
kings of its own (Jer. xxv. 22; xxvii. 3; 
Herod. viii. 67). The Sidonians furnished 
the best ships in Xerxes’ navy, Herod. vii. 
96, 99. Under Artaxerxes Ochus Sidon 
freed itself, but was by him, after a severe 
siege, taken and destroyed (Diod. Sic. xvi. 
43 ff.). It was rebuilt, and soon after went 


over to Alexander, keeping its own vassal 
kings. After his death it was alternately 
under Syrian and Egyptian rule, till it fell 
under the Romans. The present Saida is 
west of ancient Sidon, and is a port of some 
commerce, but insecure, from the sanding 
up of the harbour (Winer, Realw. See also 
Robinson, vol. iii. pp. 415 ff., who gives an 
account of the history of Sidon during the 
middle ages). tmropev0evtt| This dat. 
looks very like a grammatical correction : 
the πορευθέντα of the rec. would be an 
instance of an acc. with inf. after a dat. 
preceding, as ch. xxvi. 20; xxii. 17. The 
φίλοι here mentioned were probably Chris- 
tian brethren (see ch. xi. 19, where the Gos- 
pel is said to have been preached in Phceni- 
cia; and ch. xxi. 3, where we find brethren 
at Tyre); but it is usual in that case for 
ἀδελφοί or μαθηταί to be specified: cf. 
ch. xxi. 4, 7. The ἐπιμελείας τυχεῖν was 
perhaps to obtain from them that outfit for 
the voyage which, on account of the official 
precision of his custody at Cesarea, he 
could not there be provided with. 

4. ὑπεπλεύσαμεν]) sailed under, i.e. ‘in 
the lee of, Cyprus. “Ubi navis vento 
contrario cogitur a recto cursu decedere, ita 
ut tunc insula sit interposita inter ventum 
et navem, dicitur ferri infra insulam.” 
Wetst., who also says, “ Si ventus favisset, 
alto se commisissent, et Cyprum ad dex- 
teram partem reliquissent, ut Act. xxi. 3, 
nune autem coguntur legere littus Ciliciz, 
inter Cyprum et Asiam.” With this ex- 
planation Mr. Smith agrees; and there can 
hardly be a doubt that it is the right one. 
The κατὰ τὴν ᾿Ασίαν τόποι of ver. 2 being 
to the west of Pamphylia (which was not in 
Asia, ch. ii. 10), the direct course thither 
would have been S. of Cyprus; but having 
the wind contrary, i.e. from the W. or 
N.W. (“the very wind which might have 
been expected in this part of the Mediter- 
ranean at this season (summer). Admiral 
de Saumarez writes, Aug. 19, 1798, ‘ We 


«+s TUXELV 
i xX 


ABLPN 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mop 13 

[Η is 
con- 
tinued 
in an 
uncial 
writing 
of about 
the xith 
cent. ] 





ὌΞ ἢ. 


ΠΡΆΞΕΙΣ AMOSTOAON, 


287 


τοὺς ἀνέμους εἶναι ° ἐναντίους, 5 τό τε ἃ πέλαγος TO " κατὰ c = Mark vi. 


τὴν Κιλικίαν καὶ Παμφυλίαν ' διαπλεύσαντες 8 κατήλθομεν 
6 κἀκεῖ εὑρὼν ὁ ἑκατοντάρχης 


εἰς Μύῤῥα τῆς Λυκίας. 
πλοῖον ᾿Αλεξανδρῖνον 
βασεν ἡμᾶς εἰς αὐτό. 


nr \ 
πλοοῦντες καὶ } 


δ᾽ — chixxi. 5; ὯΝ ii. 5 reff.) 
j = ch. ix. 23 reff k here only +. 


δ. om τὴν a 197. 
syr-w-ast. κατηλθαμεν AN: 
113 lect-5 : nA@ouey 25 vulg Syr. 
Bede, : λυστραν N: μοιρων Hr: 


h ver, 2 reff. 


πλευσαντες HI, 
κατηχθημεν Ὁ ἃ ἢ ο 14. 38. 57. 66. 76. 93-7-8-marg 
for μυρρα, λυστρα A vulg copt arm-mg Cassiod, 
σμυρναν m Bede-gr [Jer,]: 


48 || Mt. (xv 

39. ch. xxvi. 

9 reff.) only. 
d Matt. xviii. 6 


> \ ’ ͵ - 2 
" πλέον εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιταλίαν, ἱ ἐνεβί- 51 οεἱγ, 


e = ver. 2 
Ae Lal \ ιν 7 
7 ἐν 1 ἱκαναῖς δὲ 1 ἡμέραις  βραδυ- [δλθα, 85. 
, fh ly +. 
μόλις ™ γενόμενοι ἃ κατὰ τὴν Κνίδον, Xen, Anab, 
vil 


ihere only. Prov. iy. 11 only. 


1 ch. xiv. 18 reff, m = ch, xx. l6al. 


add δὶ ἡμερων Sexarevte c 137 


σμυρα arm[-ed]: txt B 


[syr-mg-gr Jer], and μυρα LP 18 rel syrr Chr ΤῊ]. 


6. κακειθεν Al 24: κακεισε m 15. 25. 36. 40, 180. 


om τὴν H¥bchklo. 


aft αὐτο ins τουτο &1(88 disapproving). 


have just gained sight of Cyprus, so invari- 
ably do the westerly winds prevail at this 
season.’” Smith, p. 27), they kept under 
shelter of Cyprus, 1. 6. between Cyprus and 
Cilicia; and so διαπλεύσαντες, having 
sailed ‘the whole length of the sea off 
Cilicia and Pamphylia, they came to Myra. 
See the account of the reverse voyage, ch. 
xxi. 3, where, the wind being nearly in the 
same quarter (see ver. 1, εὐθυδρομήσαντες 
eis τ. K@), the direct course was taken, 
and they left Cyprus at a distance (for so 
avap. seems to imply) on their left, in going 
to Tyre. On the διαπλεύσαντες, &e., it 
may be well to quote (from Smith) the 
testimony of M. de Pagés, a French navi- 
gator, who, on his voyage from Syria to 
Marseilles, informs us that after making 
Cyprus, “the winds from the west, and 
consequently contrary, which prevail in 
these places during the summer, forced us 
to run to the north. We made for the coast 
of Caramania (Cilicia), in order to meet the 
northerly winds, which we found accord- 
ingly.” 5. Muppa} εἶτα Mupa ἐν 
εἴκοσι σταδίοις ὑπὲρ τῆς θαλάττης ἐπὶ 
μετεώρου λόφου, Strabo xiv. 8,---Λέντλος 
ἐπιπεμφθεὶς ᾿Ανδριάκ Μυρέων ἐπινείῳ, 
τήν τε ἅλυσιν ἔῤῥηξε τοῦ λιμένος, καὶ εἰς 
Μύρα ἀνήει. The neighbourhood is full 
of magnificent ruins; see Sir C. Fellows’s 
Lycia, ch. ix. The name still remains. 
The various readings merely shew that the 
copyists were unacquainted with the place. 
6.1 The Alexandrian ship may have 
been laden with corn for Rome; but this 
cannot be inferred from ver. 38, for the 
ship had been lightened before, ver. 18. 
On her size, see below, ver. 37. Most 
probably this ship had been prevented 
taking the direct course to Italy, which was 
by the south of Crete, by the prevailing 
westerly winds. Under such circumstances, 
says Mr. Smith (p. 32), ‘ ships, particularly 


those of the ancients, unprovided with a 
compass, and ill caleulated to work to wind- 
ward, would naturally stand to the N. till 
they made the land of Asia Minor, which 
is peculiarly favourable for such a mode of 
navigation, because the coast is bold and 
safe, and the elevation of the mountains 
makes it visible at a great distance; it 
abounds in harbours, while the sinuosities 
of its shores and the westerly current would 
enable them, if the wind was at all off the 
land, to work to windward, at least as far 
as Cnidus, where these advantages ceased. 
Myra lies due N. from Alexandria, and its 
bay is well calculated to shelter a wind- 
bound ship. The Alexandrian ship was 
not, therefore, out of her course at Myra, 
even if she had no call to touch there for 
the purposes of commerce.” πλέον, 
the present, should be rendered on her 
voyage. 7. Bpadumd.] It is evident 
that the ship was encountering an adverse 
wind. The distance from Myra to Cnidus 
is only 130 geogr. miles, which, with a fair 
wind, would not take more than one day. 
Mr. Smith shews that the wind was N.W., 
or within a few points of it. “ We learn 
from the sailing directions for the Mediter- 
ranean, that, throughout the whole of that 
sea, but mostly in the eastern half, includ- 
ing the Adriatic and Archipelago, N.W. 
winds prevail in the summer months;... 
πε summer Etesize come from the N.W. 
(p. 197); which agrees with Aristotle’s ac- 

count of these winds, —oi ἐτησίαι λεγό- 
μενοι μίξιν ἔχοντες τῶν τε ἀπὸ τῆς 
ἄρκτου φερομένων κ. ζεφύρου, de Mundo, 
ch. iv. According to Pliny (ii. 47), they 
begin in August, and blow for forty days.” 
μόλις} with difficulty: not as 

E. V., ‘scarce, which being also an adv. 
of time, gives the erroneous idea to the 
English reader that the ship had scarcely 
reached Cnidus when the wind became un- 


288 TIPAZEIS ATIOSTOAON. XXVIL. 


4 nw ΄ς nw , , 
m here onlyt. [477 ™ προςφεῶντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ ἀνέμου, " ὑπεπλεύσαμεν τὴν ΑΒΓΡΝ 


n ver. 4 only τ. Ἀ , , ΄ abcdf 
over sonlyt. Κρήτην κατὰ Σαλμώνην, δ᾽ μόλις τε ° παραλεγόμενοι gx) 
Any 5 1c. ἘΞ Ἀ rE 5 \ > 7 Κ iN \ mop 13 
nv ἤλθομεν εἰς τινὰ καλούμενον Ἰζαλοὺς 
/ 
Λιμένας, 


πόλις Λασέα. 


τόπον 


e 5 \ ψ ral 
p ch, vil 1 @ ἐγγὺς ἣν 29 P ἱκανοῦ δὲ 
ren. 


7. προΞξεεωντος XN. 
8. om τινα A133 Syr [eth-pl]. 


modus bef nv AN a? 13. 


for λασεα, αλασσα A 


40. 96. 109 syr-mg (Alasa): Thalassa vulg τοῦ ἢ and mss mentd by Jer: Thessala al: 
Aaooa N83: txt BHTLP p 13 rel syr copt eth-pl Chr Th] (ἔς Jer, (of these, H™LP rel 
(exe m) Cbr ΤῺ] have (through common confusion of vowels) λασαια), λασσαια Ri. 


favourable. yev. kata | having come 
over against, as E. V. Κνίδον] 
Cnidus is a peninsula at the entrance of 
the Hgean Sea, between the islands of Cos 
and Rhodes, having a lofty promontory 
ana two harbours, Strabo, xiv. 2. ‘ With 
N.W. winds the ship could work up from 
Myra to Cnidus ; because, until she reached 
that point, she had the advantage of a 
weather shore, under the lee of which she 
would have smooth water, and, as formerly 
mentioned, a westerly current; but it 
would be slowly and with difficulty. At 
Cnidus that advantage ceased.” Smith, 
p. 37. χὴ Tposeavt.| The common 
ide. has been that the prep. in composition 
implies that the wind would not suffer 
them to put in at Cnidus. But this would 
jiardly be reconcileable with the fact ; for 
when off Cnidus they would be in shelter 
under the high land, and there would be 
no difficulty in putting in. I should be 
rather inclined to regard this clause as 
explaining the μόλις above, and the πρός 
in composition as implying contribution, 
or direction: ‘with difficulty, the wind 
not permitting us hy favouring our course.’ 

trem. [xee above on ver. 4] τ. Kp. 
k. Σαλμύνην] “ Unless she had put into 
that harbour (Cnidus), and waited for a fair 
wind, her only course was to run under the 
lee of Crete, in the direction of Salmone, 
which is the eastern extremity of that is- 
land.” Salmone (Capo Salomon) is de- 
scribed by Strabo (x. 4) as ὀξὺ ἀκρωτήριον 
τὺ Σαμώνιον, ἐπὶ τὴν Αἴγυπτον νεῦον, καὶ 
τὰς Ῥοδίων νήσους. Pliny (iv. 12) calls it 
Sammonium. 8. μόλις tap. | “ After 
passing this point (Saimone), the difficulty 
they experienced in navigating to the 
westward along the coasts of Asia, would 
recur ; but as the south side of Crete is also 
a weather shore with N.W. winds, they 
would be able to work up as far as Cape 
Matala. Here the land trends suddenty 
to the N., and the advantages of a weather 
shore cease, and their only resource was to 
make for a harbour. Now Fair Havens is 
the harbour nearest to Cape Matala, the 
farthest point to which an ancient ship 
could have attained with N.W.-ly winds.” 


Smith, ib. παραλεγ. does not, as 
Servius on Mn. iii. 127 supposes, imply that 
the ship was towed (“funem legendo, i. e. 
colligendo, aspera loca przetereunt”’), but, 
as Meyer explains it, that, the places on the 
coast being touched (or perhaps, rather, ap- 
pearing) one after another, are, as it were, 
gathered up by the navigators. Mr. 
Smith (p. 42) exposes the mistake of Eus- 
tathius (adopted by Valpy, from Dr. Fal- 
coner), by which the ship taking the S. 
coast of Crete is attempted to be explained: 
viz. SusAluevos ἣ Κρήτη πρὸς τὴν βόῤῥαν : 
whereas there are, in fact, excellent har- 
bours on the N. side of Crete,—Souda and 
Spina Longa. Καλοὺς Atpévas] The 
situation of this anchorage was ascertained 
by Pococke, from the fact of the name still 
remaining. ‘In searching after Lebena 
farther to the west, I found out a place 
which I thought to be of greater conse- 
quence, because mentioned in Holy Scrip- 
ture, and also honoured by the presence of 
St. Paul, that is, ‘the Fair Havens, near 
unto the city of Lasea ;? for there is an- 
other small bay about two leagues to the 
E. of Matala, which is now called by the 
Greeks good or fair havens (λιμέονες 
καλού) :” (Calolimounias of Mr. Brown’s 
letter: see excursus as above.) Travels 
in the East, ii. p. 250: cited by Mr. Smith, 
who adds: “ The most conclusive evidence 
that this is the Fair Havens of Scripture, 
is, that its position is precisely that where 
a ship circumstanced as St. Paul’s was, 
must have putin. I have already shewn 
that the wind must have been about 
N.W. ;—but with such a wind she could 
not pass Cape Matala: we must therefore 
look near, but to the Εἰ. of this promon- 
tory, for an anchorage well calculated to 
shelter a vessel in N.W. winds, but not 
frown all winds, otherwise it would not 
have been, in the opinion of seamen (ver. 
12), an unsafe winter harbour. Now here 
we have a harbour which not only fulfils 
every one of the conditions, but still retains 
the name given to it by St. Luke.” Smith, 
p- 45. He also gives an engraving of the 
place from a sketch by Signr. Schranz, the 


artist who accompanied Mr. Pashley in his — 


8—1l1. 


, / \ ” ” 
P χρόνου “4 διαγενομένου καὶ ὄντος ἤδη 
a \ \ > , 
δ πλοὸς διὰ TO καὶ THY ᾿νηστείαν ἤδη ἃ" παρεληλυθέναι. 


TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


289 


r - a A 
ἐπισφαλοῦς TOV « εν. xxv. 13. 

Mark xvi. 1 

only +. 

2 Mace. xi. 

26 only. 


ἡ παρήνει ὁ Ἰ]αῦλος 10 λέγων αὐτοῖς "Avdpes, Υ θεωρῶ + tere οἱ τ. 


ὅτι * μετὰ ὕβρεως καὶ πολλῆς 5 ζημίας οὐ μόνον τοῦ 


Wisd. 1x. 14 
only. (-λῶς, 
Wisd. iv. 4.) 


/ \ a / >? Ν \ “ “ A ᾿ 
ἃ φορτίου καὶ τοῦ πλοιου αλλὰ καὶ τῶν ψυχῶν ἡμῶν " bere ὉΪ5.. ch. 


\ a 
© μέλλειν “ ἔσεσθαι τὸν " πλοῦν. 


\ A / A Ps 
ἃ κυβερνήτῃ Kal τῷ “ναυκλήρῳ μᾶλλον fémeiHeTo ἢ τοῖς 


αν. 15. 1 Βρὲ. τ. 8. Jer. viii. 20, Dan. ii. 9 Theod. 
only. (-νεσις, Wisd. viii. 9.) 
ine 9.7. 


end. (-ίζειν, ch. xiv. 5. -ἰστής, Rom. i. 30.) 


26. (-ovv, 1 Cor. iii. 15.) 
only}. (Sir. xxi. 16. -τίζειν, Matt. xi. 28.) 


ἃ Rey. xviii. 17 only. Prov. xxiii. 84, Ezek, xxvii. 8, 27, 28 only. 


e here only t+. f = ch. v. 36, &c. reff. 


10. θεορω δὲ]. [μεθ m. ] 
p 13 rel 36. 40. 137 Chr, Thl-sif. 


w ch. xix. 26 reff. 
y = ver. 21 (2 Cor. xii. 10) only. τὴν ἀπὸ τῶν ὄμβρων ὕβριν, Jos. Antt. iii. 6. 4, 


ἃ = here (Matt. xi. 30. xxiii. 4. Luke xi. 46 bis. 


xxi. 7 only +. 


ΠῚ ὃ δὲ ἑκατοντά ς τῷ Stud xiv. l 
only. 

PX” et nee only. 

(2 Cor. vi. 5 
reff.) 


u =. Matt. 
v ver. 22 only +. 2 Macc. vii. 25, 26 
x= ch.v. 26. xxv. 23 al.fr. 1 Mace. 


Ezra vil. 
Gal. vi. 5) 
6 ch. xi. 28 reff. 
-vyots, 1 Cor. xii. 28.) 


z ver. 21. Phil. iii. 7, 8 only. 


Ὁ = ch. xv. 26 reff. 
(-vayv, Prov. xii. 5. 


rec φορτου, with Ὁ οἷ o Thl-fin: txt ABHTLPR 
υμων L2[Tischdf] &% lect-12 [copt]. 


11. rec επειθετο bef μαλλον, with HTLP rel syrr [arm, Treg] Thl-sif: txt ΑΒΝ Καὶ m 


travels. There is no ground for identi- 
fying this anchorage with καλὴ ἀκτή men- 
tioned as a city in Crete by Steph. Byzant. 
For this is clearly not the name of a city, 
by the subjoined notice, ᾧ ἐγγὺς ἦν πόλις 
Λασέα. Nor is there any reason to sup- 
pose, with Meyer, that the name καλοὶ 
λιμ. was euphemistically given,—because 
the harbour was not one to winter in: this 
(see above) it may not have been, and yet 
may have been an excellent refuge at parti- 
cular times, as now, from prevailing westerly 
winds. Aagéa] This place was, until 
recently, altogether unknown; and from 
the variety of readings, the very name was 
uncertain. Pliny (iv. 12) mentions Lasos 
among the cities of Crete, but does not 
indicate its situation. 
tends to support the identity of Lasos with 
our Lasea, that as here Alassa, so there 
Alos, is a various reading. The reading 
Thalassa appears to have been an error ofa 
transcriber from -aAaooa forming so con- 
siderable a part of a word of such common 
occurrence. There is a Lisia named 
in Crete in the Peutinger Table, which may 
be the same. On the very interesting 
discovery of Lasea by the Rev. ἃ. Brown 
in the beginning of the year 1856, see the 
excursus at the end of Prolegg. to Acts. 
The ruins are on the beach, about two 
hours eastward of Fair Havens. 9. 
ἱκανοῦ xp.] Not ‘since the beginning of 
our voyage, as Meyer:—the time was 
spent at the anchorage. τοῦ THods | 
Not ‘sailing, but the voyage, viz. to 
Rome,—which henceforth was given up as 
hopeless for this autumn and winter. 
That this is the meaning of 6 πλοῦς, see 
ch. xxi. 7. And by observing this, we 
avoid a difficulty which has been supposed 
to attend the words. Sailing was not 


Vou. ti 





It is singular, and - 


unsafe so early as this (see below); but to 
undertake so long a voyage, was. 

τὴν νηστείαν] The fast, κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν, is 
the solemn fast of the day of expiation, 
the 10th of Tisri, the seventh month of 
the Jewish ecclesiastical year, and the first 
of the civil year. See Levit. xvi. 29 ff. ; 
xxiii. 26 ff. This would be about the time 
of the autumnal equinox. The sailing 
season did not close so early: ‘Ex die 
igitur tertio iduum Novembris, usque in 
diem sextum iduum Martiarum, maria 
clauduntur.’ Vegetius (Smith, p. 45, note) 
de Re Milit. iv. 39. 10.| From the 
use of θεωρῶ here, and from the saying 
itself, it seems clear to me that Paul was 
not uttering at present any prophetic inti- 
mation, but simply his own sound judg- 
ment on the difficult question at issue. It 
is otherwise at vv. 22—24. As Smith re- 
marks, “The event justified St. Paul’s 
advice. At the same time it may be ob- 
served, that a bay, open to nearly one half 
the compass, could not have been a good 
winter harbour.” (p. 47.) μετὰ 
ὕβρεως is interpreted by Meyer as sub- 
jective—‘ accompanied with presumption 
on our part :’ but not to mention that this 
would be a very unusual sense, ver. 21, 
κερδῆσαι τὴν ὕβριν ταύτ. κ. τ. ζημίαν, is 
decisive (De W.) against it. ὅτι. os 
μέλλειν] A mixing of two constructions, 
see Winer, edn. 6, § 44. 8, remark 2. 
This is most flagrant in later writers, as 
Pausanias and Arrian,—see Bernhardy, 
Syntax, p. 369; but is also found earlier, 
6. g. Plato, Charm., p. 165: οὐκ ἂν αἰσχυν- 
θείην ὅτι μὴ οὐχὶ ὀρθῶς φάναι εἰρηκέναι. 
Iseeus, περὶ τοῦ φιλοκτ. κληρ. p. 57: ἐπειδὴ 
δὲ προςδιαμεμαρτύρηκεν ὡς υἱὸν εἶναι γνή- 
σιον Εὐκτήμονος τοῦτον. . , See other refer- 


ences in Winer, ]. ec. 11. τ. ναυκλήρῳ] 


290 


fal / , 
ghereonlyt. ὑπὸ [Tov] [Παύλου λεγομένοις. 
h λιμένος ὑπάρχοντος πρὸς * 


(εὔθετος, 
Luke ix. 62.) 
h here bis. ver. 
8 only. 
evi. 30. 
i ch. ii. 30 reff. 
k here only t. 
Diod. Sic. 
xix. 68 (see 
below ir), 
1 Cor. ix. 1 Γ 
: reff " m here only. Judg. xix. 30. 
.i. 10. xi. 14. Phil. iii. 11 only. 
Z = 1 Cor. xvi. 6. Tit. ill. 12 only +. (see above “k].) 
note. (ch. viii. 26, 36. Phil. iii. 14.) 


p 13. 40 vulg arm Chr-comm, Thl-fin. 
om ABN p. 


12. rec πλειους, with H™LP 13. 36 rel Chr,: txt ABN p 40. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


w. opt., here only. 


uhere only. Gen. xiii. 14 al. 


XXVIL. 


12 8 ἀνευθέτου δὲ τοῦ 
παραχειμασίαν ' οἱ πλείονες 


Ps. m ἔθεντο ™ βουλὴν ° ἀναχθῆναι ἐκεῖθεν, Ρ εἴ πως δύναιντο 
4 καταντήσαντες εἰς Φοίνικα * παραχειμάσαι ™ λιμένα τῆς 
Κρήτης " βλέποντα ‘kata "χέίβα καὶ ' κατὰ " χῶρον. 


n= ch. v. 38 reff. 
q ch. xvi. 1 reff. 
s = here only, Ezek, xi. 1 al. 
v here only t. 


o ch, xiii. 13 reff 
rch, xxviii, 
tsee 


rec ins του, with H™LP 13. 36 rel Chr, : 


rec κακειθεν, with 


HP rel syr Thi: txt ABLN b chk op 19. 36. 40 vulg Syr [copt] arm Chr. 


δυνανται A. 


the owner of the ship. Wetst. cites from 
Plutarch, ναύτας μὲν ἐκλέγεται κυβερνήτη5;, 
καὶ κυβερνήτην ναύκληρος. So Hesych.: 
ναύκληρος, ὃ δεσπότης τ. mAotov,—and 
Xen. Econ. viii. 12 : φορτίων, doa ναυκλή- 
pois κέρδους ἕνεκα ἄγεται. (Kuin.) 

12.] See above on ver. 8. ‘The anchorage 
was sheltered from the N.W., but not from 
nearly half the compass. Grotius and 
Heinsius’s rendering of πρὸς παραχειμ., 
‘ad vitandam tempestatem,’ is contrary 
to usage, besides being singularly incon- 
sistent with the fact in more ways than 
one. For this purpose the anchorage was 
εὔθετος, and in it they had (see next verse) 
actually ridden out the storm, betore they 
left it. ἐκεῖθεν] The κἀκεῖθεν of the 
rec. would be thence also, as from their 
former stopping-places. Φοίνικα] 
Ptolemy (iii. 17) calls the haven Φοινικοῦς, 
and the city (lying some way inland) 
Φοῖνιξ. Strabo (x. 4) says, τὸ δὲ ἔνθεν 
ἰσθμός ἐστιν ὡς ἑκατὸν σταδίων, ἔχων 
κατοικίαν πρὸς μὲν τῇ βορείῳ θαλάττῃ 
᾿Αμφιμάλλαν, πρὸς δὲ τῇ νοτίῳ Φοινικὴ τῶν 
Λαμπέων. ‘Lhis description, and the other 
data belonging to Pheenice, Smith (p. 48) 
has shewn to fit the modern ZLutro, which, 
though not known now as an anchorage, 
probably from the silting up of the har- 
bour, is so marked in the French admiralty 
chart of 1738, and “if then able to shelter 
the smallest craft, must have been capable 
of receiving the largest ships seventeen 
centuries before.” See an inscription 
making it highly probable that Alexan- 
drian ships did winter at Lutro, in the 
excursus at the end of Prolegg. to Acts. 
. βλέποντα κατὰ λίβα κ. κατὰ χῶ- 
ρον] looking (literally) down the 8.W. 
and N.W. winds; i, 6. in the direction 
of these winds, viz. N.E. and S.E. For 
λίψ and χῶρος are not quarters of the 
compass, but winds ; and κατά, used with 
a wind, denotes the direction of its blow- 


ing,—down the wind. This interpretation, 
which I was long ago persuaded was the 
right one, I find now confirmed by the 
opinion of Mr. Smith, who cites Herod. 
iv. 110, ἐφέροντο κατὰ κῦμα καὶ ἄνεμον, 
and Arrian, Periplus Euxini, p. 3, ἄφνω 
νεφελὴ ἐπαναστᾶσα ἐξεῤῥάγη κατ᾽ εὖρον. 
So also κατὰ ῥόον, Herod. ii. 96. And in 
Jos. Antt. xv. 9.6, the coasts near Ceesarea 
are said to be dvsopya διὰ τὰς κατὰ λίβα 
mposBoAds. See also Thucyd. vi. 104, 
In the reff., the substantive is not one of 
motion like Ah), χῶρος, or ῥόος, but of 
fixed location, as μεσημβρία, σκόπος. The 
direction then is towards the spot indi- 
cated, just as in the present case it is in 
that of the motion indicated. The harbour 
of Lutro satisfies these conditions; and is 
even more decisively pointed out as being 
the spot by a notice in the Synecdemus of 
Hierocles, Φοινίκη ἤτοι ᾿Αράδενα: νῆσος 
Κλαῦδος. Now Mr. Pashley found a vil- 
lage called Aradhena a short distance above 
Lutro, and another close by called Ano- 
polis, of which Steph. Byz. says, ᾿Αράδην 
πόλις Κρήτης" ἣ δὲ ᾿Ανωπόλις λέγεται, 
διὰ τὸ εἶναι ἄνω. From these data it is 
almost demonstrated that the port of 
Pheenice is the present port of Lutro. 
Ptolemy’s longitude for port Pheenice also 
agrees. See Sinith, pp. 51 ff. Mr. Smith 
has kindly sent me the following extract 
from a letter containing additional con- 
firmation of the view: ‘ Loutro is an ex- 
cellent harbour; you open it unexpectedly, 
the rocks stand apart and the town appears 
within. During the Greek war, when cruis- 
ing with Lord Cochrane, ...... chased a 
pirate schooner, as they thought, right 
upon the rocks; suddenly he disappeared, 
and when rounding in after him,—like a 
change of scenery, the little basin, its ship- 
ping, and the town of Loutro, revealed 
themselves.’ See Prof. Hackett’s note, 
impugning the above view and interpreta- 


ABLPR 

abcdf 
ghkl 

mopl3 


12—14. 


TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


291 


13 νυ ὑχγοπνεύσαντος δὲ " νότου δόξαντες τῆς Y προ- where onist. 


x = ch. xxviii. 


, Zz “ ayy ba c 4 13. Luke xii. 
θέσεως κεκρατήκεναι, ὅαραντες ἄσσον “ παρελέγοντο 55 (a3 Wt, 
\ 7 > > \ \ ” ᾽ iil. 29. Rev. 
τὴν Κρήτην. 14. wer οὐ πολὺ δὲ 4% ἔβαλεν κατ᾽ τιῖ 13) ony. 
Exod. x. 

13. Sir. xliii. 16 al. y = Rom. viii. 28. ix. 11. Eph, i. 11. iii. 11. 2 Tim. i. of. 2 Mace. 

iii. 8. z — here dnly. (Heb. vi. 18.) Kp. τῆς πρ.θ., Diod. Sic. xvi. 20. a=: here 

only. So Thucyd. ii. 23 al. Ὁ here only. comparat., = ch. xxv. 10 reff, c ver. 8. 


d = here only. see note. 


13. vromvevoartes(sic) δὲ. 


tion; which however does not alter my 
opinion. Dean Howson gives his solution 
thus: “The difficulty is to be explained 
simply by remembering that sailors speak 
of every thing from their own point of 
view, and that the harbour (see chart in C. 
and H. ii. 397) does look—from the water 
towards the land which encloses it—in 
the direction of S.W. and N.W.” But 
I cannot believe, till experience can be 
shewn to confirm the idea, that even sailors 
could speak of a harbour as ‘looking’ in 
the direction in which ¢hey would look 
when entering it. 13. ὑποπνεύσαντος] 
as E. V., softly blowing, compare ὑπο- 
μειδιάω. The S. wind was favourable for 
them in sailing from Fair Havens to 
Phasnice. δόξ. τ. προθ. κεκρατ.] 
imagining that they had (as good as) 
accomplished their purpose; i. e. that 
it would now be a very easy matter to 
reach Phaenice. ἄραντες “may be 
translated either ‘weighed,’ or ‘set sail ;’ 
for ancient authors supply sometimes τὰς 
ἀγκύρας, and sometimes τὰ foTtia..... 
Julius Pollux, however, like St. Luke, 
supplies neither, which is certainly the 
most nautical way of expressing it: he 
Says, αἴροντες ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς, lib. i. 103.” 
Smith, p. 55, ἄσσον παρ.] They 
crept close along the land till they passed 
Cape Matala. “A ship which could not 
lie nearer to the wind than seven points, 
would just weather that point which bears 
W. by S. from the entrance of Fair Havens. 
We see therefore the propriety of the ex- 
pression ἄσσον παρ., ‘they sailed close 
by Crete,’ which the author uses to de- 
scribe the first part of their passage.” 
Smith, p. 56. The Vulg. has: ‘quum 
sustulissent de Asson,’ connecting ἄραντες 
with “Acgoy, and understanding the latter 
asthe name ofa Cretantown. ‘There is an 
Asus mentioned by Pliny (iv. 12), but it is 
‘in Mediterraneo,’ not on the coast,—and 
the construction would be inadmissible. 
Erasmus, Luther, &c., have taken”Aocov as 
the accusative of direction, ‘ when they had 
weighed for Assus.’ But besides the /ocal 
objection, this construction also would be 
most harsh, as ἄραντες does not indicate 
the progress of their voyage, but only the 
setting out. Heinsius took ἄραντες = ava- 


φανέντες, ch. xxi. 3,—‘postquam Asos 
attollere se visa est’? (Meyer). But there 
can be little doubt that all of these are 
mistakes, and that ἄσσον is the adverb. 

14. ἔβαλεν κατ᾽ αὐτῆς) These dif- 
ficult words have been taken in three ways: 
(1) (The common interpretation) referring 
αὐτῆς to τὴν Κρήτην just mentioned, 
Thus they might mean, (a) ‘drove (us) 
against Crete, or (B) ‘struck (blew) 
against Crete, i.e. in the direction of 
Crete. Now of these, (a) is contrary to 
the expressed fact :—they were not driven 
against Crete. And (§) is as inconsistent 
with the zmplied fact. Had the wind blown 
in the direction of Crete at all, they, who 
gave themselves up to it, and were driven 
before it (ἐπιδόντες ἐφερόμεθα, ver. 15), 
must have been stranded on the Cretan 
coast, which they were not. (2) referring 
αὐτῆς to the ship, understood. This is 
adopted by Dr. Bloomfield and Mr. Smith. 
(The latter, I find by a letter received since 
this note was written, now understands it 
as I have explained it below.) But not 
to mention the harshness occasioned by 
having to supply a subject for αὐτῆς which 
has never yet been mentioned,—a decisive 
objection against this rendering is, that the 
ship throughout the narrative is τὸ πλοῖον, 
not ἡ ναῦς, in every place except ver. 41,— 
and 7d 7A. occurs in the very next clause, 
which, had this been meant of the ship, 
would certainly have been expressed συναρ- 
πασθείσης δέ, or συναρπασθείσης δὲ αὐτῆς. 
(8) referring αὐτῆς to προθέσεως. In 
that case ἔβαλεν κατ᾽ αὐτῆς must either 
(a) = κατέβαλεν ἡμᾶς am αὐτῆς, as 
Plato, Euthyph. 15 ΞΕ, ἀπ᾽ ἐλπίδος με κατα- 
βαλὼν μεγάλης ἀπέρχει, which is harsh, 
and hardly allowable; or (8) be under- 
stood, taking the neuter sense of βάλλω 
(ποταμὺς εἰς ἅλα βάλλων, 1]. A. 722), as 
meaning ‘blew against it,’ so as to thwart 
their design. And so Luther: ‘erbob fid) 
wider iby Vornehmen.’ But this mixture. 
of literal and figurative is also harsh, and) 
hardly allowable. (4) A method has oc- 
curred to me of rendering the words, which: 
seems to remove all harshness, whether of 
reference in αὐτῆς, or of construction. 
There can be no question that the obvious 
reference οἵ. αὐτῆς is to Crete. What 


U 2 


292 


> Lal 

¢ here only t. αὐυτῆὴς 
(-ὦν, Isa. 
xizi. δὶ Aq. 
[so Montf. 
from Jer. 
but ?)) 

f here only t. 

g ch. vi. 12 reff. 


h here only +. 
k = (nautical) here bis only. 


Diod. Sic. xx. 16. 


14. for κατ᾽ auTns, κατα TauvTns XN. 
P-corr). 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ AITOSFOAON. 


Wisd. xii. 14 only. 
(Lev. xxvi. 36. see ch. ii. 2.) 


XXVIT. 


v \ , 
ἄνεμος “ τυφωνικὸὲ ὁ καλούμενος | εὐρακύλων. 
12 8 θέ δὲ al x, / \ Ἀ ὃ 7 h > 

ἐ συναρπασθέντος δὲ τοῦ πλοίου καὶ μὴ δυναμένου © ἀντ- 
οφθαλμεῖν τῷ ἀνέμῳ | ἐπιδόντες * ἐφερόμεθα. 


161 pnotov 


i = here only}. (ch. xv. 30 reff.) 


] here only. 


om o καλ. evp. and ovy of συναρπ. P}(ins 


rec evpoxAvdwr, with HtL P-corr p(evpo xAvdw) rel Syr Chr, : evpu- 
κλυδων B? 40. 133: evpaxAvdwy syr-ng-gr : 


evpaxukAwy arm: aquilo maris (omg τυφ. 


o Kad.) wth: εὐτρακηλων copt{-wilk|: evpaxnAwv sah: ευρακοιδων (itacism) 13: 
txt (see note) A B1(see table) & [copt-boet], confirmed by Euroaquilo vulg Cassiod,, 
by 13 sah and in some measure (evpak.) by syr arm copt([-wilk ]. 


15. δυνομενου B}. 


then is ἔβαλεν κατ᾽ αὐτῆς Ὁ ἔβαλεν ap- 
plied to wind may be understood as above, 
neuter, or reflective, ‘blew, ‘rushed,’ 
Assuming this, and that there is no object 
to be supplied between ἔβαλεν and the pre- 
position, κατ᾽ αὐτῆς may surely be ren- 
dered, as in βῆ δὲ Kar’? Οὐλύμποιο Kaph- 
νων,---κατ᾽ ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων,--- κατὰ πέτρης, 
&c., viz. down (from) Crete, ‘down the 
high lands forming the coast’ It is a 
common expression in lake and coasting 
navigation, that ‘a gust came down the 
valleys.’ And this would be exactly the 
direction of the wind in question. When 
they had doubled, or perhaps were now 
doubling, Cape Matala, the wind suddenly 
changed, and the typhoon came down upon 
them from the high lands ;—at first, as 
long as they were sheltered, only by fits 
down the gullies, but as soon as they were 
in the open bay past the cape, with its full 
violence. This, the hurricane rushing down 
the high lands when first observed, and 
afterwards συναρπάζων τὸ πλοῖον, seems 
to me exactly to describe their changed cir- 
cumstances in passing the cape. A confirma- 
tion of this interpretation may be found by 
Luke himself using κατέβη to express the 
descending of a squall from the hills on the 
lake of Gennesareth, Luke viii. 23, where 
Matt. and Mark have only éyévero and 
γίνεται. Mr. Smith also suggests κατὰ 
τοῦ κρημνοῦ, Luke viii. 33, as confirma- 
tory. The above is also Dean Howson’s 
view. See, in the excursus appended to 
the Prolegg. to Acts, the confirmation of 
this view in what actually happened to the 
Rev. G. Brown’s party. τυφωνικός | 
“The sudden change from a south wind to 
a violent northerly wind, is a common oc- 
currence in these seas. (Captain J. Stewart, 
R.N., in his remarks on the Archipelago, 
observes, “It is always safe to anchor 
under the lee of an island with a northerly 
wind, as it dies gradually away; but it 
would be extremely dangerous with south- 
erly winds, as they almost invariably shift 


aft ἐπιδοντες ins Tw πλεοντι kK. συστειλωψτεβ τα LoTLAa C 157: 
τὴ πνεουσὴ K. συναγοντες Ta LoTLa Syr-w-ast, 


to a violent northerly wind.”). The term 
‘typhonic’ indicates that it was accom- 
panied by some of the phznomena which 
might be expected in such a case, viz. the 
agitation and whirling motion of the clouds 
caused by the meeting of the opposite cur- 
rents of air when the change took place, 
and probably also of the sea, raising it in 
columns of spray. Pliny (ii. 48), speak- 
ing of ‘repentini flatus,’ says, ‘ vorticem 
faciunt qui Typhon vocatur: Aul. Gell. 
xix. 1, ‘Turbines etiam crebriores . . . et 
figure quedam nubium tremendz quas 
τυφῶνας vocabant.’” Stith, p. 60. 
evpakvAwv | | have adopted the reading of 
ABR, according to my principle of going, 
in all cases where there is no overpower- 
ing objection, by our most ancient Mss. 
It may be that εὐρακύλων had become in 
common parlance corrupted into evpa- 
κλύδων, an anomalous word, having no 
assignable derivation, but perhaps arising 
from the Greek sailors having changed 
the Latin termination into one having sig- 
nificance for themselves. Mr. Smith, in 
his appendix, ‘On the Wind Euroclydon,’ 
has satisfactorily answered the objections 
of Bryant to the compound edpaxtAwy,— 
by shewing that εὖρος properly, was not 
the S.E., but the E. wind; and that com- 
pounds of Greek and Latin in the names of 
winds are not unknown, 6. g. Euro-Auster. 
The direction of the wind is established 
by Mr.5S., from what follows, to have been 
about halfa point N. of E.N.E.; and the 
subsequent narrative shews that the wind 
continued to blow from this point till they 
reached Malta. 15. ovvepr. | being 
hurried away, ‘borne along, by it: see 
reff. ἀντοφθαλμεῖν] It is hardly 
likely that this term, which is used so 
naturally and constantly of men facing an 
enemy (Polyb. i. 17. 3, and eight times 
more), and also metaphorically of resisting 
temptation (uh δύνασθαι τοῖς χρήμασιν 
ἀντοφθαλμεῖν, Polyb. xxviii. 17. 18), 
should have been origivally a naval term, 


C -φης 
ἣν ap- 
αντες... 
ABCLP 
Rabcd 
fghkl 
mo p 13 


293 


15—17. TIPASEIS ATIOSTOAOQN. 


/ ig / Ὰ “ ᾿ ’ 
δέ τι ™ ὑποδραμόντες καλούμενον Καὶ [λ] αῦδα, " ἰσχύσαμεν m here only +. 


, “ / a / A yy 

ὁ μόλις P περικρατεῖς γενέσθαι τῆς «σκάφης, 17 ἣν ἄραντες, τιν. 1s 
΄ > a ς / \ a 7, reff. 

‘ βοηθείαις Séeypwvto, ᾿ὑποζωννύντες τὸ πλοῖον, φοβού- » here only +- 

q νν. ὃ 

only +. Bel & Dr. 33 (32) only, but not =. (-os, 2 Mace. xii. 3, 6.) r Heb. iv. 16 only. “Pe. vil. 
10. Sir. xl. 24 al. (-θεῖν, ch. xxi. 28. -θός, Heb. xiii. 6.) s ver. 3. 1 Cor. vii. 21 al. L.P. Wisd. 
ii. 6. t here only+. 2 Macc.iii. 19 only. Polyb. xxvii. 3.3. Plato, Rep. x. 616. 3, elva yap 
τοῦτο τὸ φῶς σύνδεσμον τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, οἷον τὰ ὑποζώματα τ. τριηρῶν, οὕτω πᾶσαν ξυνέχον THY 
περιφοράν. see Thucyd, i. 29. 


16, [ὑπεκδρ. a:] ὑποδραμουντες B! 93-5. rec kAav-, with AH™LP N(but A 
erased) p rel 13. 36. 40. 137 syr syr-mg-gr [copt arm] Chr ΤῊ] Hc: καυ- Β vulg eth 
Jer,, Kyra or Keuda Syr, Gaudem Cassiod,.—rec -dnv, with H'LP rel: -dav c 25 lect- 
12, -dam fuld: -δα BX p 18. 40. 137 vulg syr syr-mg-gr copt eth [arm]. (A has only 
KAA, the remaining letters are gone at the end of a line.) rec μολις bef ἰσχυ- 
σαμεν (corrn of order 3), with HtLP rel 36 syrr copt #th-pl Chr,: txt ABN m p 13 


(40) vulg. 


17. βοηθειας Ητ c p 36. 96 lect-12: «θιαν NL 


derived from the practice of painting eyes 
on either side of the beaks of ships. More 
probably the expression was transferred to 
a ship from its usage in comion life. 
ἐπιδόντες) So Plutarch de Fortun. Rom. 
cited in note on ver. 26. Either ‘the 
ship, or ‘ourselves, may be supplied: 
or better perhaps, neither, but the word 
taken generally—giving up. ἐφερό- 
μεθα] passive: we were driven along. 
16.. ὑποδραμόντες | running under 
theleeof. “St®Luke exbibits here as on 
every other occasion, the most perfect com- 
mand of nautical terms, and gives the ut- 
most precision to his language by selecting 
the most appropriate: they ran before 
the wind to leeward of Clauda, hence it 
is ὑποδραμόντες : they sailed with a side 
wind to leeward of Cyprus and Crete: 
hence it is ὑπεπλεύσαμεν ” (Smith, p. 61, 
note). KAavSa] Here again, there 
can be little doubt that the name of the 
island was Kavéa, or Tavda, as we have 
in some MSS., or, as in Pliny and Mela, 
Gaudos: but Ptol. (iii. 7) has Κλαῦδος, 
and the corruption was very obvious. The 
island is the modern Gozzo. ἰσχύ- 
σαμ. μόλ. κ.τ.λ. | “ Upon reaching Clauda, 
they availed themselves of the smooth 
water under its lee, to prepare the ship to 
resist the fury of the storm. Their first 
care was to secure the boat by hoisting it 
on board. This had not been done at first, 
because the weather was moderate, and the 
distance they had to go, short. Under 
such circumstances, it is not usual to hoist 
boats on board, but it had now become 
necessary. In running down upon Clauda, 
it could not be done, on account of the 
ship’s way through the water. To enable 
them to do it, the ship must have been 
rounded to, with her head to the wind, and 
her sails, if she had any set at the time, 
trimmed, so that she had no head-way, or 
progressive movement. In this position 


she would drift, broadside to leeward. I 
conclude they passed round the east end of 
the island : not only because it was nearest, 
but because ‘an extensive reef with nume- 
rous rocks extends from Gozzo to the N.W., 
which renders the passage between the two 
isles very dangerous’ (Sailing Directions, 
p. 207). In this case the ship would be 
brought to on the starboard tack, i. e. with 
the right side to windward.” ... . “St. 
Luke tells us they had much difficulty in 
securing the boat. He does not say why: 
but independently of the gale which was 
raging at the time, the boat had been towed 
between twenty and thirty miles after the 
gale had sprung up, and could scarcely fail 
to be filled with water.” Smith, pp. 64, 
65. 17.] ἄραντες, having taken 
on board. βοηθείαις measures to 
strengthen the ship, strained and weak- 
ened by labouring in the gale. Pliny (ii. 
48) calls the typhoon ‘ precipua navigan- 
tium pestis, non antennas modo, verum ipsa 
navigia contorta frangens.’ Grot., Hein- 
sius, &c., are clearly wrong in interpret- 
ing βοηθεί., ‘the help of the passengers.’ 

ὑποζωννύντες τ. wA.| undergirding, 
or frapping the ship. .“ To frap a ship 
(ceintrer un vaisseau) is to pass four or 
five turns of a large cable-laid rope round 
the hull or frame of a ship, to support her 
in a great storm, or otherwise, when it is 
apprehended that she is not strong enough 
to resist the violent efforts of the sea: this 
expedient, however, is rarely put in prac- 
tice.’ Falconer’s Marine Dict. :—Smith, 
p- 60, who brings several instances of the 
practice, in our own times. See additional 
ones in C. and H. ii. 404, f. Horace 
seems to allude to it, Od. i. 14. 3, ‘ac sine 
funibus Vix durare carine Possint impe- 
riosius Aiquor.’ See reff. τὴν σύρτιν] 
The Syrtis, on the African coast ; there 
were two, the greater and the lesser (ai 
φοβεραὶ καὶ τοῖς ἀκούουσι Σύρτεις, Jos. 


294. ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XXVII. 


, Ν 2 Ἁ u / ν 5 / Ww 4 XN 
u here only x EVOL TE ΜΉ ELS TV συρτιν εαπτεσῶσιν χαλάσαντες TO 
vy = vv. 26, 2 A 
ly. Diod. X “ γ Kk ἐξέ 18 ᾿ 5 Ζ 4 
only, Diod. X σκεῦος οὕτως * ἐφέροντο. Υ σφοδρῶς δὲ * χειμαζομένων 
exnecey εἰς Ἐς“ τα λα, ΕΟ Ὁ αὶ . 3 77 19 } n © [. 
ἐκπεσεω εἰς ἡμῶν " τῇ " ἑξῆς ἡ ἐκβολὴν ἐποιοῦντο, 1" καὶ τῇ “ τρίτῃ 
8]. d Pas \ e \ a , f vre - 20 ΄ 
w ch. ix. 25 reff. AUTOVELPES ΤΡ σκευὴν TOV πλοίου ἐῤῥιψαν BITE 
x spat 7” 8 \ ys / ΄ g } ἢ ὃ φ , i2\_E * / rie OP 
Xen. Ec. ε ἡλίου μῆτε αστρῶν ἐπιφαιίνοντῶν ᾿ ἔπι ~ πΙλείονας ἢμε- 
“iii. 12. “ , > b , ᾿] / is 
ylee only. pas, ᾿ χειμῶνος τε ™ovk ™ ολίγου " ἐπικειμένου, ° λοίπον 
Gen. vii. 19 A 
compl. Sir. xiii. 13 (only ?). (-pos, Exod. x. 19.) zhere only. Prov. xxvi. 10 only. mm, ch. xxi. 
1 reff. Ὁ here only. Jonah i. 5. c alone, Luke xiii. 32 only. Exod. xxi. 29. w. Ἡμέρα, Matt. 
xvi. 21 al. fr. d here only +. e here only. Gen. xxxi. 25 Ald. (Jonahi.5?) only. σκευὴν 
ἑκατὸν τριήρεσι, Diod. Sic. xiv. 79. f ver. 29. Matt. ix. 36. xv. 30. xxvii.5. Luke iv. 35. xvil. 2 
only. Gen. xxi. 15. {-πτεῖν, ch. xxii. 23.) g ch. vii. 43 reff. h Luke i. 79. Tit, ii. 11. iii. 4 
only. Deut. xxxiii.2. (-veca, 2 Thess. ii. 8, 19s, ch. ii, 20.) ich. xiii. 31 reff. k = ch. ii. 
40 reff. 1 = Matt. xvi. 3 (xxiv. 20} Μκ. John x. 22, 2 Tim. iv. 21) only. Job xxxvii. 6. m ch. 
sii. 18 reff. n = here (Luke v. 1. xxiii. 23. John xi. 38. xxi. 9. 1 Cor. ix. 16. Heb. ix. 10) only. Job 
xix. 3. o= 2 Tim. iv, 8, 


extreTwow NR}. ins και bef yaa. P [arm]. om To ὃὲϊ, 

18. for δε, τε A 25 spec Syr exth-pl. 

19. rec ἐρριψαμεν (corrn to first person to suit avtoxeipes: so Meyer, which is much 
more probable than that,as De W., -auev should have been altered to -αν, to suit 


ἐποιουντο : see note), with HLP rel syrr copt wth-pl Chr,: txt AB?C abo p13. 36 


40 vulg spec [arm], ερειψαν B}, εριψαν δὲ. 
20. πλείους δὲ! clappy] g 101. 


B. J. ii. 16. 4), of which the former was 
the nearer to them. ἐκπέσωσιν͵ See 
reff. and add φερόμενοι τῷ πνεύματι. ... 
ἐξέπιπτον πρὸς τὰς πέτρας, Herodot. viii. 
19. χαλ. τ. σκεῦος] “It is not 
easy to imagine a more erroneous transla- 
tion than that of our authorized version : 
‘Fearing lest they should fall into the 
quicksands, they strake sail, and so were 
driven.’ It is in fact equivalent to saying 
that, fearing a certain danger, they de- 
prived themselves of the only possible 
means of avoiding it.” Smith, p. 67. He 
goes on to explain, that if they had struck 
sail, they must have been driven directly 
towards the Syrtis. They therefore set 
what sail the violence of the gale would 
permit them to carry, turning the ship’s 
head off shore, she having already been 
brought to on the starboard tack (right 
_side to the wind). The adoption of this 
course would enable them to run before 
the gale, and yet keep wide of the African 
coast, which we know they did. But what 
is χαλ. τὸ σκεῦος It is interpreted by 
Meyer, De W., and most Commentators, of 
striking sail (as E.V.): but this (see above) 
could not be: “In a storm with a contrary 
wind or on a lee-shore, a ship is obliged 
to lie-to under a very low sail: some sail 
is absolutely necessary to keep the ship 
steady, otherwise she would pitch about 
like a cork, and roll so deep as to strain 
and work herself to pieces.” Encycl. Brit. 
art, ‘Seamanship: Smith, p. 72, who 
interprets the words, lowering the gear, 
i. e. sending down upon deck the gear con- 
nected with the fair-weather sails, such as 
the suppara, or top-sails, A modern ship 


om λοιπὸν B. 


sends down top-gallant masts and yards, a 
cutter strikes her topmast, when preparing 
for a gale. In this case it was perhaps 
the heavy yard which the ancient ships 
carried, with the sail attached to it, and 
the heavy ropes, which would by their 
top-weight produce uneasiness of motion 
as well as resistance to the wind. See a 
letter addressed to Mr. Smith by Capt. 
Spratt, R.N., quoted in C. and H. ii. 
Ῥ. 405, note 5. οὕτως i.e. “not 
only with the ship undergirded, and made 
snug, but with storm-sails set, and on the 
starboard tack, which was the only course 
by which she could avoid falling into the 
Syrtis.” Smith, ib. 18. éxBoX. érrot. | 
“The technical terms for taking cargo 
out of a ship, given by Julius Pollux, are 
ἐκθέσθαι, ἀποφορτίσασθαι, κουφίσαι τὴν 
ναῦν, ἐπελάφρυναι, ἐκβολὴν ποιήσασθαι τῶν 
φορτίων. So that both here, and after- 
wards in ver. 38 (ἐκούφιζον τ. πλοῖον), St. 
Luke uses appropriate technical phrases.” 
Sinith, ib. Of what the freight con- 
sisted, we have no intimation. Perhaps 
not of wheat, on account of the separate 
statement of ver. 38. See ref, 19. τ. 
σκευὴν τ. TH. ἔῤῥ.] ἡ σκευή is the furni- 
ture of the ship—beds, moveables of all 
kinds, cooking utensils, and the spare rig- 
ging. αὐτόχειρες is used with ἔῤῥιψαν 
as shewing the urgency of the danger— 
when the seamen would with their own 
hands, cast away what otherwise was 
needful to the ship and themselves. This 
not being seen, αὐτόχ. has been supposed 
to imply the first person, and ἐῤῥίψαμεν 
has crept in: see var, readd. 20.] 
The sun and stars were the only guides of 


ABCLP 
Nabcd 
fghkl 
mopl3 


“18. 95. 


ΠΡΑΞΕῚΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


295 


Ῥ περιῃρεῖτο ἐλπὶς πᾶσα It00 σώζεσθαι ἡμᾶς. 51 πολλῆς p=2Cor. ii 


€ / , 
τε 'aowtias " ὑπαρχούσης, τότε 


tgrabeis ὁ Παῦλος ἐν 


11 (ver. 40) 
only. Zech. 


a Φ 53 / ΄ 1, 
μέσῳ αὐτῶν εἶπεν "ἔδει μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, " πειθαρχήσαντάς q consir., ch. 


\ Vv > if θ > Ν A K Ἢ, 
μοι μὴ "ἀνάγεσθαι ἀπὸ τῆς Κρήτης, 
¢ ῶ: \ \ r “ A 
x ὕβριν ταύτην καὶ τὴν * ζημίαν. 33 καὶ Υ Ta νῦν 5 παραινῶ *. 
“ an an / ” 
ὑμᾶς * εὐθυμεῖν" » ἀποβολὴ yap ° ψυχῆς οὐδεμία ἔσται ἐξ 


“ is lal 
ὑμῶν ὁ πλὴν τοῦ πλοίου. 


= 7 7 xiv. 9 reff. 
δ κερδῆσαί TE THY* here only +. 
(-Tos, ver. 
-τεῖν, 
1 Macc. iii. 17 ' 
-τί, Job 
xxiv. 6.) 
s ch. ii. 30 reff. 


΄ / / “ 
23 παρέστη Yap μοι ταύτῃ Τῇ tch. xi.13 reff. 


u ch. v. 29 reff. 


r “ -π >’ \ Φ \ ΄ 7 7 oa 
νυκτὶ τοῦ θεοῦ οὗ εἰμὶ [ἐγὼ] ᾧ καὶ “ λατρεύω ἄγγελος, " cht 


24 λέγων Μὴ φοβοῦ, Παῦλε:' Καίσαρί σε δεῖ ἴ παρα- 


reff. 
w = here only. 


(1 Cor. ix. 19 
a \ ’ \ ΄ ͵ e \ 7 ᾿ &c. reff.) 5 
στηναι Kat ἰδοὺ & κεχαρίσται σοι 0 θεὸς TAVTAS TOUS 7° μιανθή- 
ναι Tas 
\ A Ν n Y ΄΄ ες 

" πτλέοντας μετὰ σοῦ. 38 διὸ ὃ εὐθυμεῖτε, ἄνδρες" πιστεύω χεῖρας κερ- 
: alveLV, 

Jos. Antt. ii. 3. 2. x ver. 10. y ch. iv. 29 reff. z ver. 9 only (reff.). 

a here bis. James v.13 only. Ps. lxvii. 18 (17) Ald. [Trom.] only. (see ver. 36 al.) Rom. 


xi. 15 only+. (-BaAAew, Mark x. 50. Heb. x. 35.) 


viii. 10.) ch. xv. 28. xx. 23. Deut. i. 36. 
vii. 10. g 2 Cor. ii. 10 reff. 


c = ch. xv. 26 reff. ἃ (John 
ech. vii. 7 reff. f = Rom. xiv. 10. Dan. 
h ver. 2 reff. 


rec πασα bef eAms, with CHIPR rel 36 Chr,: 7. ἡ eA. L [a]: txt AB km p 13 vulg 


spec. 


21. rec δε, with Ht™LP rel syr copt Chr,: txt ABCN ον 18. 40. 187 vulg spec Syr 


zth-pl [arm] Thl-fin. om Tote A 21. 
om της Ητ [d]. 
22. amoBAn(sic) P. 


23. for ταυτη, τηδε N?}. 


ζημημιαν(δῖο) P. 

ουδεμια bef puxns RX! 80. 
rec Tn νυκτι bef ταυτη : txt ABCHTLP(R) rel 40. 137 

vulg [spec] arm Chr, Thl-sif (Thl-fin om ταυτ.). 


epucow A. for avtwy, nuwy c 137. 


rec ayyeAos bef του θεου (corrn 


of order), with H‘LP rel vulg spec; bef w x. λατρευω 13: txt ABCN m 40. 


137. 
zth[?] arm. 


the ancients when out of sight of land. 
The expression, all hope was taken away, 
seems, as Mr. Smith has noticed, to betoken 
that a greater evil than the mere force of 
the storm (which perhaps had some little 
abated :—x. οὐκ ὀλίγου seems to imply 
- that it still indeed raged, but not as before) 
was afflicting them, viz., the leaky state of 
the ship, which increased upon them, as is 
shewn by their successive lightenings of 
her. 21. aoutias | “ What caused the 
abstinence? A ship with nearly 300 people 
on board, on a voyage of some length, must 
have had more than a fortnight’s provisions 
(and see ver. 38): and it is not enough 
to say with Kuinoel, ‘Continui labores et 
metus a periculis effecerant ut de cibo ca- 
piendo non cogitarent.’ ‘ Much abstinence’ 
is one of the most frequent concomitants of 
heavy gales. The impossibility of cooking, 
or the destruction of provisions trom leak- 
age, are the principal causes which produce 
it.” Smith, p. 75: who quotes instances. 
But doubtless anxiety and mental distress 
hada considerable share init. τότε brings 
vividly before us the consequence of the 
éo17ia—when they were in that condition, 
languid and exhausted with fasting and 
fears. κερδῆσαι] ‘lucrifecisse, to 
have gained, not = to have ineurred,— 


recom eyw, with BC'H'LP p 18 rel spec Chr, : ins AC*& 40 vulg copt 


but to have turned to your own account, 
i. 6. ‘to have spared or avoided.’ So Jos. 
in ref. Aristotle, Magn. Mor. ii. 8, 6 κατὰ 
λόγον ζημίαν ἦν λαβεῖν, τὸν τοιοῦτον 
κερδάναντα εὐτυχῆ φάμεν (‘if he escape 
it’). Plin. vii. 40, ‘quam quidem injuriam 
lucrifecit ille Cicero, Verr. i. 12, ‘lu- 
cretur indicia veteris infamiz’ (‘may have 
them wiped out,’ and so make gain of 
them by getting rid of them). ὕβριν] 
See on ver. 10. “The ὕβριν was to their 
persons, the (nuiay to their property.” 
C. and H. ii. 410, note 4. 22.) The 
neglect of precision in ἀποβολὴ ψυχῆς οὐ- 
deuia ... . πλὴν τοῦ πλοίου is common 
enough. So Rev. xxi. 27, οὐ μὴ εἰξέλθῃ 
... πᾶν κοινὸν κ. ποιῶν βδέλυγμα... 
εἰ μὴ οἱ γεγραμμένοι ἐν τῷ β. τ. (ζωῆς. 
See Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 67. 1. 6. 28.] 
Paul characterizes himself as dedicated to 
and the servant of God, to give solemnity 
to and bespeak credit for his announce- 
ment. At such a time, the servants of 
God are highly esteemed. 24. κεχά- 
ptorar | “ Etiam centurio, subserviens pro- 
videntiz divinz, Paulo condonavit capti- 
vos, ver. 43. .... Non erat tam periculoso 
alioqui tempore pericuium, ne videretur 
Paulus, que necessario dicebat, gloriose 
dicere.” Bengel. μετὰ σοῦ] “ Paulus, 


996 TPAZ=EIS ATIOSTOAON. XXVII. 
ichav γὰρ τῷ θεῷ ὅτι οὕτως ἔσται ἱ καθ᾽ ‘dvi tporroy λελάληταί ABCLP 
only. see ch. 26 _ ~ δέ ὃ Trea ποι |) aes. a Q7° yRabcd 
iilrell juOl. εἰς νῆσον δέ τινα δεῖ ἡμᾶς *éxreceiv. 31 Ὥς δὲ κι ΚΙ 
ἘΞ Το ΡΥ ἢ ca Le 28 U7 m § ; e nm 5 mopl3 
l ver. 33. TETTOAPESKALOEKATN νὺξ ἐγένετο ιαφερομένων ἡμῶν ἐν 


Gen. xiv. 5. 

m ch. xiii. 49. 

n = ch. xvi. 25. 
Heb. iii. 8, 
from Ps. xciv. 
Rg 


o here only. 
see ch. xvi. 
25. Matt. 
xxv. 6. 

p ch. xiii. 25 
reff. 

xvi. 20 reff.) Josh. iii. 9. 1 Kings vii. 10 al. fr. 
xix.19. 1 Chron. xx. 2. 
ii. 7 [from Ps. viii. 5), 9. xiii. 22) only. 


26. nuas bef de B. 


Isa. lvii. 17. 


27. emeyeveto A p vulg: txt BCHTLPR rel 36 Chr,. 


q here bis. Rev. xviii. 17 only t. (-τικός, 3 Kings ix.27. Jonah i. 5.) 


u here bis only t. 


A "AS / n \ ο / “ ο μὴ p ς / e q a 
τῷ Adpia,® κατὰ ° μέσον τῆς °vuKTOSP ὑπενόουν οἱ 4 ναῦται 
΄ A \ 
τ προςάγειν τινὰ αὐτοῖς χώραν, 38 καὶ ὃ" βολίσαντες " εὗρον 
’ \ ” Vv ' \ Ww , ‘ / 
ἃ ὀργυιὰς εἴκοσι, ᾿ βραχὺ δὲ © διαστήσαντες καὶ πάλιν 
/ Φ 2 \ , ΄, 
5 βολίσαντες ' εὗρον ἃ ὀργυιὰς δεκαπέντε, 29 φοβούμενοί 


r = here only. (ch. 


s here bis only+. (-λή, Luke xxii. 41.) ὉΠ ΟΣ 


v = Luke xxii. 58. ch. ν. 34 (John vi. 1. Heb. 
w Luke xxii. 59. xxiv. 51 only. trans., Isa. lix. 2. 


for mposayew, mposavexew 


B2: mposaxew B!: mposeyyiCew ὁ 137: mposayayew 40: προαγαγειν R'. 


28. for Ist και, οιτινες XN}. 
for 2nd ευρον, ευρομεν ΟἹ. 


in conspectu Dei, princeps navis, et con- 
siliis gubernator.” Ib. 26. δεῖ] Spoken 
prophetically, as also ver. 31: not perhaps 
from actual revelation imparted in the 
vision, but by a power imparted to Paul 
himself of penetrating the future at this 
crisis, and announcing the Divine counsel. 
Mr. Humphry compares and contrasts 
the speech of Cesar to the pilot under 
similar circumstances: τόλμα kK. δέδιθι 
μηθέν, ἀλλὰ ἐπιδίδον τῇ τύχῃ τὰ ἱστία 
καὶ δέχου τὸ πνεῦμα, τῷ πνέοντι πιστεύων, 
ὅτι Καίσαρα φέρεις καὶ τὴν Καίσαρος τύχην, 
ῬΙαῦ. de Fortun. Rom. p. 518. 27. 
S.adep.| driven about, or up and down, 
as E. V., not ‘drifting through, as Dr. 
Bloomf., though this may have been the 
fact; see examples below. Plutarch 
speaking of the tumult during which 
Galba was murdered, tod φορείου καθάπερ 
ev κλύδωνι δεῦρο κἀκεῖ διαφερομένου (pro- 
bably from Tacitus, ‘Agebatur huc illuc 
Galba, vario turbe fluctuantis impulsu,’ 
Hist. i. 40); Philo, de Migr. Abr. p. 454, 
ἐπαμφοτερισταὶ πρὸς ἑκάτερον τοῖχον, ds- 
περ σκάφος ὑπ᾽ ἐναντίων πνευμάτων δια- 
φερόμενον, ἀποκλίνοντες. The reckoning 
of days counts from their leaving Fair 
Havens: see vv. 18, 19. ἐν TO 
᾿Αδρίᾳ] Adria, in the wider sense, em- 
braces not only the Venetian Gulf, but the 
sea to the south of Greece:—so Ptolemy 
(iii. 16), 7 δὲ Πελοπόννησος ὁρίζεται... 
ἀπὸ δυσμῶν καὶ μεσημβρίας τῷ ᾿Αδριατικῷ 
πελάγει. So also (iii, 4) ἡ δὲ Σικελία 
ὁρίζεται... ἀπὸ δὲ ἀνατολῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ 
᾿Αδρίον πελάγρυς. In fact, he bounds 
Italy on the S., Sicily on the E., Greece 
on the S. and W., and Crete on the W. by 
this sea, which notices sufficiently indicate 
its dimensions. So also Pausanias (v. 25), 
speaking of the straits of Messina, says that 
the sea there is θαλάσσης χειμεριωτάτη 


opyvas (twice) b! p 13, so (once) ΗΓ o. 


πάσης. of Te yap ἄνεμοι ταράσσουσιν 
αὐτὴν ἀμφοτέρωθεν τὸ κῦμα ἐπάγοντες, 
ἐκ τοῦ ᾿Αδρίου, καὶ ἐξ ἑτέρου πελάγους ὃ 
καλεῖται Τυρσηνόν. ὑπενόουν) What 
gave rise tothis suspicion? Probably the 
sound (or even the apparent sight) of 
breakers. ‘‘ If we assume that St. Paul’s 
Bay, in Malta, is the actual scene of the 
shipwreck, we can have no difficulty in ex- 
plaining what these indications must have 
been. No ship can enter it from the east 
without passing within a quarter of a mile 
of the point of Koura: but before reaching 
it, the land is too low and too far from the 
track of a ship driven from the eastward, to 
be seen in a dark night. When she does 
come within this distance, it is impossible 
to avoid observing the breakers: for with 
north-easterly gales, the sea breaks upon it 
with such violence, that Capt. Smyth, in his 
view of the headland, has made the break- 
ers its distinctive character.” Smith, p. 79. 
I recommend the reader to study the 
reasonings and calculations by which Mr. 
Smith (pp. 79—86) has established, I think 
satisfactorily, that this χώραν could be no 
other than the point of Koura, east of St. 
Paul’s Bay, in Malta. am posayety | 
was approaching them. The opposite is 
ἀναχωρεῖν, ‘recedere.’ ‘Lucas optice lo- 
quitur, nautarum more.’ Kuin. 28. 
Bodicavtes βολίζειν, ἤγουν βάθος θαλάσ- 
σης μετρεῖν μολυβδίνῃ καθέτῳ, ἢ τοιούτῳ 
τινί, Eustath. on Il. ε. p. 427 (Wetst.). 
dépyuids | ὀργυιὰ σημαίνει τὴν ἔκτα- 

σιν τῶν χειρῶν σὺν τῷ πλάτει τοῦ στήθους 
(Etymol. Magn.) = therefore very nearly 
one fathom. Every particular here cor- 
responds with the actual state of things. 
At twenty-five fathoms depth (as given in 
evidence at the court-martial on the officers 
of the Lively, wrecked on this point in 
1810), the curl of the sea was seen on the 


26—31. 


τε μή που *KaTa Y τραχεῖς τόπους * ἐκπέσωμεν, 
> 7 

> ἀγκύρας 

80 τῶν δὲ 


2 πρύμνης " ῥίψαντες 
ἃ ἡμέραν ἃ γενέσθαι. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, 


297 


ἐκ x vv. 5,7 reff. 


Ε Ε y Luke iii. 5 
> 
τέσσαρας “ εὔχοντο {ony * 
~ e ΄ z ver. 41. 
4 ναυτῶν “ ζητούντων Mark iv. 38 


only t. 


- an / = 
φυγεῖν ἐκ τοῦ πλοίου καὶ fyakacavTwy τὴν 8 σκάφην Fire, 


b here bis. ver. 


F 40. Heb. vi. 

εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν, "ἃ προφάσει ‘ws ἐκ * πρώρας  wonlyr.” 
U 4 ς a ce cn. ΧΧΥΙ. . 

> ἀγκύρας μελλόντων | ἐκτείνειν, 51] εἶπεν ὁ Ἰ]αῦλος Bom ix.3-_ 


A « / \ A , » ι 4 ᾽ν 
τω EKATOVTAPN)) Kat τοις OTPATLWTALS Kav μὴ OUTOL 


xi. 2. d ch. xii. 18 reff. 
g ver. 16. 
i = ch. xxiii. 15 reff. 


lix. 8 (10). elsw. w. χείρ, ch. xxvi. 1 aL 


29. for re, δὲ CN c p13 vulg syr copt Thl-sif. 
word), with HTLP rel 36 copt Chr: μηπω A: txt BCR ὁ p 13. 40 ΤῊ]- 51}. 


written above the line by δὲ! or corr!.) 
Chr,: txt ABCN ὁ p 13. 40 Thl-sif. 


30. exguyew A 696. 137-42. 


mpwpys Αἰ N83] d 13: πλωρης RN}. 


9. James v. 
16. 3John 
2only. Num. 


e = ch. xiii. 8 reff. f ch. ix. 25 reff. 


h Mark xii. 40 || L. John xv. 22. Phil.i.18. 1 Thess. ii.5only. Ps. cxl. 4. 
k ver. 41 only+. (-pevs, Ezek. xxvii. 29.) 


1=here only. Ps. 
- 


rec μηπως (corrn to simpler 
(που is 


rec (for κατα) εἰς, with H'LP rel 36 


rec εκπεσωσιν, with c df p sah [eth-pl arm 
Thi]: txt ABCH'LPR 18 rel 137 vulg syrr copt Chr. 


(ευχοντο, so. BICH".) 
rec μελλον- 


των bef αγκυρας (corrn of order for euphony), with H™LPX rel am [demid tol] Chr: 


txt ABC m p 18. 40. 


rocks in the night, but no land. The 
twenty fathoms would occur somewhat past 
this: the fifteen fathoms, in a direction W. 
by N. from the former, after a time suffi- 
cient to prepare for the unusual measure of 
anchoring by the stern. And just so are 
the soundings (see Capt. Smyth’s chart, 
Smith, p. 88), and the shore is here full 
of τραχεῖς τόποι, mural precipices, upon 
which the sea must have been breaking with 
great violence. 29. ἐκ πρύμνης) The 
usual way of anchoring in ancient, as well 
as in modern navigation, was by the bow: 
‘anchora de prorajacitur.’ But under cer- 
tain circumstances, they anchored dy the 
stern ; and Mr. Smith has shewn from the 
figure of a ship which he has copied from 
the “‘ Antichita de Ercolano,” that their 
ships had hawse-holes aft, to fit them for 
anchoring by the stern. ‘ That a vessel 
can anchor by the stern is sufficiently 
proved (if proof were needed) by the his- 
tory of some of our own naval engage- 
ments. So it was at the battle of the 
Nile. And when ships are about to attack 
batteries, it is customary for them to go 
into action prepared to anchor in this way. 
This was the case at Algiers. There is 
still greater interest in quoting the in- 
stance of the battle of Copenhagen, not 
only from the accounts we have of the 
precision with which each ship let go her 
anchors astern as she arrived nearly oppo- 
site her appointed station, but because it 
is said that Nelson stated after the battle 
that he had that morning been reading 
Acts xxvii.’ C. and H. ii. p. 414. The 
passage from Cesar, Bell. Civ. i. 25, ‘has 
quaternis ancoris ex quatuor angulis dis- 
tinebat, ne fluctibus moverentur,’ is not to 


the purpose, for it was in that case a plat- 
form composed of two vessels, and anchor- 
ed by the four corners. ‘‘ The anchorage 
in St. Paul’s Bay is thus described in the 
Sailing Directions: ‘The harbour of St. 
Paul is open to E. and N.E. winds. It is, 
notwithstanding, safe for small ships; the 
round, generally, being very good: and 
while the cables hold, there is no danger, 
as the anchors will never start.’”? Siith, 
Ῥ. 92. εὔχοντο] Uncertain, whether 
their ship might not go down at her an- 
chors: and, even supposing her to ride 
out the night safely, uncertain whether the 
coast to leeward might not be iron-bound, 
affording no beach where they might land 
in safety. Hence also the ungenerous but 
natural attempt of the seamen to save their 
lives by taking to the boat. See Smith, 
p97. 30.] ‘‘ We hear of anchors 
being laid out from both ends of a ship 
(ἑκατέρωθεν), Appian, Bell. Civ. p. 723.” 
ib. ἐκτείνειν] because in this case 
they would carry out the anchors to the 
extent of the cable which was loosened. 
81. ἐὰν μὴ κιτ.λ.] “ Mirum est 

quod reliquos vectores salvos posse fieri 
negat, nisi retentis nautis : quasi vero Dei 
promissionem exinanire penes ipsos fuerit. 
Respondeo, Paulum hic de potentia Dei 
precise non disputare, ut eam a voluntate 
et mediis sejungat : et certe non ideo fide- 
libus virtutem suam Deus commendat, ut 
contemptis mediis torpori et socordiz 
indulgeant, vel temere se projiciant, ubi 
certa est cavendi ratio. .... Neque tamen 
propterea sequitur, mediis vel adminiculis 
alligatam esse Dei manum, sed quum 
Deus hune vel illum agendi modum 
ordinat, hominum sensus continet, ne 


298 


TIPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


XXVIB 


7 » -“ Ἂν ς lal An » ὃ ,ὔὕ ral 32 , 
m Mark ix. 43, μείνωσιν EV τῷ πλοίῳ, ὑμεῖς TWUNVAL OV δυνασθε. TOTE 


hn 


45. Joh m2 , ς an \ n , a ΄ 
xviii. 10, 26. ἀπέκοψαν οἱ OTpATLWTAL τὰ " σχοινία τῆς ὃ σκάφης, 


Gal. v. 12 
only. Deut. 
xxi. 1. 

n John ii. 15 
only. 2Kings 
viii. 2. 


\ » > \ 02 lal 33 p ΝΜ \ se q € , r 2 
καὶ εἴασαν αὐτὴν " ἐκπεσεῖν. ἄχρι δὲ οὗ «ἡμέρα * ἤμελ- 
/ ς fal 
λεν 4 γίνεσθαι, ὃ παρεκάλει ὁ ἸΙαῦλος ἅπαντας ‘ μεταλα- 


= ch xi7 Θεῖν ἃ τροφῆς, λέγων ᾿ Τεσσαρεςκαιδεκάτην σήμερον ἡμέραν 


reff. 
p ch. vii. 18 
reff. 


q ver. 2 


A = al Ν / 
Ὗ προςδοκῶντες, * ἄσιτοι ¥ διατελεῖτε μηθὲν “προςλαβόμενοι. 


ἔ i rn a oe ny fa \ 
ἐπῶν πιο 34 διὸ ὃ παρακαλῷ ὑμᾶς ᾿ μεταλαβεῖν " τροφῆς" τοῦτο γὰρ 


5 =and constr., 4 
ch. xxiv. 4. 


πρὸς τῆς ὑμετέρας σωτηρίας ὃ" ὑπάρχει: οὐδενὸς γὰρ 


t ch. ii. 46 reff. ΗΞ Ν τὶ A a = 
uchix.loref. ὑμῶν “ἀ θρὶξ ἀπὸ τῆς κεφαλῆς “ ἀπολεῖται. 88 εἴπας δὲ 
Vv VEr. σῆς 


Gen. xiw. 5. 

w absol., Matt. 
xxiv. 50. ch. 
(iii. 5. x. 24 
reff.) xxviii. 
6. 

x here only +. 
(-τία, ver. 
21. 

y here only. 
Deut. ix. 7. Jer. xx. 18. 2 Mace. νυ. 27 only. 


σκεψόμεθα ἐάν τι ἡμῖν πρὸς λόγου ἢ, Plato, Gorg. 459. 


x. 30. 1 Kings xiv. 40. d Luke xxi. 18. 
xxiv. 51. g ch. ii. 46 reff. 
vv. 22, 25.) i gen., Rey. ii. 17. 

k so ch. xix. 7. 1 = ch. ii. 41 reff. 


z = ver. 36 only. (ch. xxviii. 2 al.) 


Winer, edn. 6, ὁ 30. 


ῦ tL λαβὼν ἃ © εὐ f ev τῷ θεῷ ' ἐνώπιον 
ταῦτα καὶ λαβὼν ἄρτον " εὐχαρίστησεν τῷ θεῷ π 
/ / i > / 
πάντων, καὶ ®Kr\aoas ἤρξατο ἐσθίειν. 
, / \ > \ Ζ / ui la 
γενόμενος. πάντες καὶ αὐτοὶ 5 προςελάβοντο “ τροφῆς. 
Ἷ - > “ a / , 
87 i ἤμεθα δὲ " αἱ " πᾶσαι ψυχαὶ ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ διακόσιαι 


36 b εὔθυμοι δὲ 


Ὁ ch. viii. 16 reff, 
e Rom. i. 21 reff. 


c Matt. 
f = Luke i. 19. Gen. 


h here only+. 2 Macc. xi. 26 only. {-μως, ch. xxiv. 10. -μεῖν, 
ie 


& \ Matt. xxiii. 30 bis. Eph. ii. 3 only. 


31. ev τω πλοιω bef μεινωσιν N! ¢ ἢ [vulg syrr ΤῊ]- 51]. 

32. rec οἱ στρατιωται bef ἀπεκοψαν (corrn of order for perspicuity), with H™LP rel 
coptt [arm Thl-fin] Chr,: txt ABCN ὁ m 13. 40. 137 vulg syrr εἰ Treg] Thl-sif. 

33. rec eweAAev bef nuepa, with H™LP rel [Syr] syr eth{ (Treg) arm} Chr Thl: txt 


ABCR® p 13 vulg. 
CH'LP rel 36 Chr: txt ABN 40. 


(ημελλεν, so BCLP ΟῚ 13. 40 Thi-sif.) 


rec undev, with 


προξλαμιβανομενοι (corrn to suit mposdoxwrTes) 


A 40 lect-12, -λαμβομ., but « marked for erasure, P. 


34. aft διο ins ca B. 


ΝῚ : τινος ὁ [137 ΤῊ]- 51]. 


παρακαίϑ:0) &. 
with HTLP rel ΤῊ]- 518: txt ΑΒΟΝ b dhk op 18. 36. 137 Chr, Thl-fin. add 
for mpos, προ B 101. 
fin: txt BCH'™N p 13 rel [vulg Syr coptt eth-pl arm] Chr Thl-sif. 


rec προςλαβειν (from mposa. above), 
τι 
ἡμεέτερας ALP ἃ ἢ syr Thl- 


ουθενος Α. 


rec (for απο) εκ (corrn from Luke xxi. 18), with H™LPN rel Thi: txt ABC p 


13. 36. 40. 137. 
2 Kings xiv. 11. 


rec πεσειται (corrn to LXX, see 3 Kings 1.52, 1 Kings xiv. 48, 
If, as Meyer supposes, awor. were a corrn from Luke xxi. 18, we 


should not have had the future, but as there, ov μη aroAnta), with H™LP rel syr sah 
Chr,: txt ΑΒΟΝ m p 18. 40 vulg Syr copt «th arm Thl-fin. 
85. rec εἰπὼν (corrn to more usual form), with H'LP p 18 rel 36 [ Bas, Chr,]: txt 


ABCR 24. 
[evxapiotnoas Te(appy) ΚΊ. 

36. ἀπαντες X}(but a erased). 
Bavov 137: weradaBar(sic) &. 


nuxap. P [1 τὰ} p 1857: evxapiotnoas N: καὶ ευχαριστησας 40 


mposeAaBov A 40: mposeAauBavoy Cc: μετελαμ- 


87. rec nuev (corrn to more usual form), with CH™LP 13. 36 rel Chr,: txt ABN p 
40. rec ev Tw πλοιω bef αἱ πασαι ψ. (corrn of order to connect ψυχαι and διακ.), 
with H™LP rel [(Syr)] syr Chr [Thl-fin]: txt (A)BCN (k τὰ p) 18. 40. 187 vulg copt 
arm (Chr-comm,) Thl-sif—om a Ak m p, πασαι bef a [13] Chr-comm, [απασαι τη]. 


for διακόσιαι εβδομηκοντα et, Cos p(so Scriv ; ['Tischdf also, ed 8.7) 


for 


διακοσιαι, ws (mistake arising from ὦ of πλοιω and C of the numeral, so Tischdf 


prescriptas sibi metas transiliant.” Calvin. 
33.] This precaution on the part 

of Paul was another means taken of 
providing for their safety. All would, 
on the approaching day, have their 
strength fully taxed: which therefore 
needed recruiting by food. ἄχρι... οὗ 
. .. Until it began to be day: i.e. in 
the interval between the last-mentioned 
occurrence and daybreak, Paul employed 
the time, &e. προςδοκῶντες | waiting 


the cessation of the storm. The following 
expressions, ἄσιτ. διατ., μηθ. mposda., are 
spoken hyperbolically, and cannot mean 


ABCLP 
R2abecd 
fghkl 
moplé 


a=here only. ἐπι-᾿ 


literally that they had abstained entirely 


from food during the whole fortnight. 

πρός with a gen. (‘e salute vestra’) is only 
found here in N. T.: compare ref., and 
ἐλπίσας πρὸς ἑωυτοῦ τὸν χρησμὸν εἶναι, 
Herodot. i. 75. 35.] “ Paul neither 
celebrates an ἀγάπη (Olsh.), nor acts as 
the father of a family (Meyer), but simply 





32—40. 
ἑβδομηκονταέξ. 


al > , “-“ \ , 
τὸ πλοῖον ° ἐκβαλλόμενοι τὸν σῖτον εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν. 
89 “ δὲ Ρ e / p Ξ' / Ἁ an ’ > / 
ὅτε δὲ Pawépa ἐγένετο, THY γῆν οὐκ 4 ἐπεγίνωσκον, 
, / fs 
: κόλπον δέ τινα ὃ“ κατενόουν ἔχοντα * αὐγιαλόν, εἰς ὃν 
> / la) a 
ἃ ἐβουλεύοντο, εἰ δύναιντο, “ ἐξῶσαι τὸ πλοῖον. 
τὰς “ ἀγκύρας * περιελόντες Y εἴων εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν, ἅμα 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


299 


38.™ κρρεσθέντες δὲ ἡ τροφῆς ™ ἐκούφιξζον m 1 Cor. ἦν. 8 


only. Deut. 
xxxi. 20 
only. 
n here only. 
Jonah 1. 5. 
1 Kings vi. & 
o — here only. 
(Matt. viii. 12 


al. 
40 καὶ Ρ wed, 33. 
= and constr,, 
Matt. xiv. 35. 
xvii. 12. see 
h. xxviii. 1. 


Zz pa A \ a / A b ὃ / \ ο. ὃ / ch. x 
QAVEVTES TAS ζευκτηρίας τῶν > πηδαλίων, καὶ “ ἐπάραντες τ = here (Luke 
vi. 


22,23. Johni. 18. xiii. 23) onlyt. (Gen. xvi. 5.) 
xxi. 5 reff. u= ch. v. 33 reff. 
29, 30 reff. x = here only. (ver. 20 reff.) 


z= ch. xvi. 26 (reff.). 


[ed 7]) B sah. 


a here only +. 


39. for emey., εγινωσκον B 25. 


for ef, mevre A: OM m. 
38. ins τὴς bef tpopns HTLP dg 1m Chr,. 


for εἰς, προς A. 


38. XV1. 
t ch. 
W VV. 
Exod. xxxii. 10. 
ἘΞΞῸΝ τ 9. 


2 Mace. ix. 25. 
Thucyd. ii. 90. 


s Matt. vii. 3 || L. 
v = here (ch. vii. 45) only. 
y = Luke xxii. 51. 
Ὁ James iii. 4 only +. 


εκβαλομενοι L a. om τὴν XX}. 
rec εβουλευσαντο, with 


H'LP rel Chr,: εβουλοντο A p eth-pl: txt BCX [k] 13(sic) 36 vulg [syrr copt arm ]. 
for δυναιντο, δυνατον CH'LP rel 36 Syr eth[(?) arm] Chr,: txt ABN [im'] p 18 


vulg [syr] Thl. 
40. mpocdortes δὲ, 


as a pious Jew, who asks a blessing before 
he eats.” De Wette. 36.] When we 
reflect who were included in these πάντες, 
—the soldiers and their centurion, the 
sailors, and passengers of various nations 
and dispositions, it shews remarkably the 
influence acquired by Paul over all who 
sailed with him. 37.] Explanatory of 
πάντες : q. d., ‘and this was no small 
number ; for we were, &c. 38. 
éxovd. τ. πλοῖον | See above on ver. 18. 
This wheat was either the remainder of the 
cargo, part of which had been disposed of 
in ver. 18—or was the store for their sus- 
tenance, the cargo having consisted of some 
other merchandise. And this latter is much 
the more likely, for two reasons : (1) that 
σῖτος is mentioned here and not in ver. 18, 
which it would have been in all probability, 
had the material cast out there been the 
same'as here ; and (2) that the fact is re- 
lated immediately after we are assured 
that they were satisfied with food: from 
whence we may infer almost with certainty 
that ὁ σῖτος is the ship’s provision, of part 
of which they had been partaking. It is 
a sufficient answer to Mr. Smith’s objec- 
tion to this (“to suppose that they had re- 
maining such a quantity as would lighten 
the ship is quite inconsistent with the pre- 
vious abstinence,” p. 99), that the ship was 
provisioned for the voyage to Italy for 276 
persons, and that for the last fourteen days 
hardly any food had been touched. This 
would leave surely enough to be of conse- 
quence ina ship ready to sink from hour to 
‘hour. 39.] It may be and has been 
suggested, that some of the Alexandrian 
seamen must have known Malta ;—but we 
may answer with Mr. Smith that “St. 
Paul’s Bay is remote from the great har- 
-bour, and possesses no marked features by 


exowoa BIC copt eth [arm]. 


which it might be recognized.” p. 100. 

κόλπον .... ἔχοντ. αἰγιαλόν) a 
creek having ἃ sandy beach. Some Com- 
mentators suppose that it should be αἰγια- 
λὸν ἔχοντα κόλπον, since every creek must 
have a beach: but what is meant is, a creek 
with a smooth, sandy beach, as distin- 
guished from a rocky inlet. ἐξῶσαι | 
Not, ‘to thrust in,’ as Ἐπ. V., but to 
strand, ‘to run a-ground: so Thucyd., 
ref., and more in Wetst. 40.| (1) 
They cut away all four anchors (the περι 
may allude to the cutting round each cable 
in order to sever it, or to the going round 
and cutting all four), and left them in the 
sea (εἰς τ. θάλ. “ in the sea, into which they 
had been cast’). This they did to save 
time, and not to encumber the water- 
logged ship with their additional weight. 
(2) They let loose the ropes which tied up 
the rudders. ‘ Ancient ships were steered 


‘by two large paddles, one on each quarter. 


When anchored by the stern in a gale, it 
would be necessary to lift them out of the 
water, and secure them ‘by lashings or rud- 
der bands, and to loose these bands when 
the ship was again got under way.” Smith, 
Ῥ. 101. (3) They raised (ἐπαίρειν, ‘to raise 
up, contrary to κατέχειν, ‘to haul down, 
a sail) their ἀρτέμων to the wind. It would 
be impossible in the limits ofa note to give 
any abstract of the long and careful reason- 
ing by which Mr. Smith has made it ap- 
pear that the ‘artemon ’ was the foresail 
of the ancient ships. I will only notice from 
him, that the rendering ‘ mainsail’ in our 
E. V. was probably a mistaken translation 
from Bayfius or De Baif, the earliest of the 
modern writers ‘ de re navali,’ and perhaps 
the only one extant when the translation 
was made: he says, “est autem artemon 
velum majus navis, ut in Actis Apost. xxvii. 


900 


d here only t. 

e constr., here 
only. 

f = here only. 
Polyb. i. 25. 

» 7. Thucyd. 
Vili. 23. 

g Luke x. 30. 
James i. 2 


MPAZEIS ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XXVII. 41—44. 


Ν d 2 / A. e ’ f a f > Ν t > iF 
τὸν ἃ ἀρτέμωνα τῇ “ πνεούσῃ ' κατεῖχον f εἰς τὸν * αὐγιαλόν. 
41 8 περιπεσόντες δὲ εἰς τόπον ὃ" διθάλασσον, | ἐπέκειλαν 

lal \ \ , ΄ 
τὴν * ναῦν καὶ ἡ μὲν | πρώρα ™ ἐρείσασα ἔμεινεν " ἀσάλευ- 
« ὃ \ oO / Ρ rv / £ \ an q a r / 
τος, ἡ δὲ ° πρύμνα Ρ ἐλύετο ὑπὸ τῆς 4 Bias [τῶν ' κυμάτων]. 


ν Ὶ lal \ nw , 
only. 2Kings 42 τῶν δὲ στρατιωτῶν " βουλὴ ἐγένετο iva τοὺς * δεσμώ- 


1. 0. 

h here only ue 
οὐκ εἰκὸς 
διθάλατ- 


τον εἶναι τὸ πέλαγος τὸ ᾿Ατλαντικόν, Strabo, i. p. 11. 


only. 3 Kings ix. 26. l ver. 80. 

n Heb. xii. 28 only. 
2. Ἐπάν. i. 55 (52). 
13 only. Ps. evi. 25. 

Ὁ here only t. Diod. Sic. xx. 88. (κολυμβ., ver. 43.) 


Exod. xiii. 16. Deut. vi. 8. xi. 18 only. 
q ch. v. 26 reff. Acts only. 


s = ch. v. 38 reff. w. tva, here only. 


Tas ἀποκτείνωσιν, μήτις " ἐκκολυμβήσας " διαφύγῃ: * ὁ 


i Πόσο only +. Hom. Od. t. 148. k here 
m here only. Prov. v. 5. Polyb. iii. 46. 1. 
o ver. 29 reff. p = Rev. v. 
τ Matt. viii. 24 1 Mk. xiv. 24. Jude 
tver.lonly. Gen. xxxix. 20. 

v here only. Josh. viii. 22. 


rec σρτεμονα, with LP 13[e sil] rel: txt AB?CH'N a b? c ἃ f g 1 m? p syr-mg-gr, apro- 


μωνα D°. 


41. rec επωκειλαν, with ΒΞΗΪ(εποκιλαν)ὴ LP rel 36: txt AB'CN p 19. 40. . 
ἐμενεν A Ht[Tischdf ; e contra, Treg] ὁ h vulg: txt BCLPR 
διελυετο L m [Ὁ 0] 187 lect-12: ελυτο δὲ. 
om των κυματων (possibly because the transcriber’s eye passed from των 


mpwpa, πρωτὴ A. 
13 rel Chry. 
Nik. 


πριμνα ΒΙ. 


for 


απο 


to των in ver 42) ABN! [syrr copt]: ins CH™'LPN? 18. 36 rel [arm(Treg); but Griesb 
cites it as omg τῆς Bias] Chr,: ὦ vt maris vulg: a fluctibus maris eth. 


42. om δε Cl. ins wa bef μητις δὲ. 


exkoAuBnoas(sic) N: εγκολυμβ. g. 


rec διαφυγοι (grammatical emendation, see note), with k m: txt ABCH™LPR p 13 rel 


36. 137 Chr;. 


. . etenim etiam nunc nomen Veneti vulgo 
retinent et artenon vocant.” These words, 
‘velum majus,’ they rendered by mainsail ; 
whereas the largest sail of the Venetian 
ships at the time was the foresail. The 
French ‘ artimon,’ even now in use, means 
the sail at the stern (mizen). But this is 
no clue to the ancient meaning, any more 
than is our word mizen to the meaning of 
the French misaine, which is the foresail. 

The usual technical name of the 
foresail was δόλων, that of the mizen, ἐπί- 
dpouos. See on the whole question, Smith’s 
Dissertation on the Ships of the Ancients, 
appended to his Voyage and Shipwreck of 
St. Paul. Mr. Pusey informs me that 
Syr. translates ἀρτέμωνα by ‘armnon par- 
ovum’ (armnon being its word for σκεῦος, 
ver. 17), and syr. in a note says that 
ἀρτέμων is “a small armnon at the ship’s 
head.” τῇ πνεούσῃ | scil. αὔρᾳ. Dat. 
commodi ;—for the wind (to fill) ;—or 
(according to Meyer and De Wette) of 
direction,—to the wind. (4) They made 
for the beach. The expression, κατέχειν 
(ναῦν or νηΐ) eis . . . for “ to steer to land,” 
is not uncommon in the classics: cf. 
examples in Wetst. It seems to get this 
meaning by a pregnant construction, “ to 
keep the ship (or, to keep one’s course in the 
ship) in hand (and direct it) towards... .” 

41. τόπον διθάλασσον | At the west 
end of St. Paul’s Bay is an island, Selmoon 
or Salmonetta, which they could not have 
known to be such from their place of an- 
chorage. This island is separated from the 
mainland by a channel of about 100 yards 


wide, communicating with the outer sea. 
Just within this island, in all probability, 
was the place where the ship struck, in a 
place where two seas met. ἐπ- 
έκειλαν] ἐπικέλλειν is used by Homer 
(ref.) in the sense of ‘ adpellere navem.’ 
Its commoner use is intransitive: see 
Hom. ib. ver. 1388, and Apollon. Rhod. ii. 
352, 382 ; 11. 576. In Οά. ε. 114, it is said 
of the ship itself, ἠπείρῳ ἐπέκελσε. The 
ἐποκέλλειν of the rec. is used several times 
by Thucydides, and has the same twofold 
usage: ef. Thucyd. iii. 12; iv. 28; viii. 102 : 
they ran the ship a-ground. “ The 
circumstance which follows, would, but for 
the peculiar nature of the bottom of St. 
Paul’s Bay, be difficult to account for. 
The rocks of Malta disintegrate into very 
minute particles of sand and clay, which 
when acted on by the currents, or by sur- 
face agitation, form a deposit of tenacious 
clay : but in still water, where these causes 
do not act, mud is found; but it is only in 
the creeks where there are no currents, and 
at such a depth as to be undisturbed by the 
waves, that mud occurs. ...A ship there- 
fore, impelled by the force of the gale into a 
creek with a bottom such as that laid down 
in the chart, would strike a bottom of mud, 
graduating into tenacious clay, into which 
the fore part would fix itself and be hekd 
fast, while the stern was exposed to the 
force of the waves.” Smith, p. 103. 

42.) ἵνα gives not only the purpose, but 
the substance of the βουλή. Their counsel 
was,—to kill, &.: this it was, and to this 
it tended. διαφύγοι has probably been 


ABCLP 
Rabcd 
fghkl 
mopl3 


MXVER I, 2. 


ΠΡΑΞΕῚΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


301 


, A : A 
δὲ ἑκατοντάρχης, βουλόμενος ~* διασῶσαι τὸν Παῦλον, κ see ch. xxiii 
req, 


*éx@Avoev αὐτοὺς τοῦ Υ βουλήματος, ἐκέλευσέν TE τοὺς 
4 ἀποῤῥίψαντας 
τὴν γῆν ὃ ἐξιέναι, 4 καὶ τοὺς λοιποὺς “οὺς μὲν ἐπὶ 
ἀσανισιν Covs δὲ ἐπί τινων τῶν 


δυναμένους ὅ κολυμβᾶν 


ἃ 4“ if 
Kat OUTWS 


XXVIII. 1 Kai 
Μελίτη ἡ νῆσος καλεῖται. 


διασωθέντες 


δον» / Ww ὃ θῇ is pee \ A 
EYEVETO TAVTAS Lac MUNVAL ETL THV YD. 


2 οἵ τε ἃ βάρβαροι ‘ παρεῖχαν 


x ch. x. 47 reff. 
constr., here 
only. Mic. 
ii. 4. Xen. 
Cyr. ii. 4. 23, 
Polyb. ii. 8, 
5. 


πρώτους ἐπὶ 


y Rom. ix. 19. 
1 Pet. iv. 3 
only +. 

2 Mace. xv, 
5 only. 
ὅπερ ἦν 
τούτοις 


» \ nw 

© amo τοῦ πλοίου. 
7 δ ’ / [74 
τότε ἐπέγνωμεν ὅτι 


1109. 15. 


3 Ἁ A A ᾿ 
οὐ τὴν * τυχοῦσαν ἰ φιλανθρωπίαν ἡμῖν" ™ ἅψαντες yap ziere oniy+. 


Symm. (-βήθρα, John v. 2.) 
τες ἐνηχόμεθα. pass., Mic. vii. 19 B ἄς, 


dhere only. 4 Kings xii. 9 Ed-vat. F(not AB) Ald. Cant. viii. 9. Ezek. xxvii. 5 only. 


(5S 455% iconstr., ch. iv. ὃ reff. 
. 62. see ch. xxvii. 39. . 
xxi. 31. 

1 Tit. iii. 4 only t+. 2 Mace. vi. 22. 
55 v.r.j only. Judith xiii. 13. 


43. exatovtapxos P[ HL Chr, Thl-sif]. 


for BovAnuatos, Bnuatos ὃξ' : βουλευματος a f. 
αἀποριψαντας CR. 


syr copt. exxoAuuBay B. 


h here bis. 
i = ch. xvi. 16 reff. xxii. 2. 
(-πως, ch. xxvii. 3.) 


Isa. xxv. 11 


a = and constr., here only. Lucian, Ver. Hist. i. 30, ἀποῤῥίψαν- 


Ὁ ch. xiii. 42 reff. ¢ 1 Cor, xi. 21 reff. 
e see ch. xii. 

g constr., Luke vii. 37. ch. xix. 34. xxii. 29. Ezek. xvi. 
Rom. i. 14. 1 Cor. xiy. 11 (bis). Col. iii. 11 only. Ezek. 
1 Tim, vi. 17. k — ch, xix. 11 reff. 


m = Luke viii. 16, xi. 33. xv. 8 [xxii. 


τον παυλον bef διασωσαι A 13. 68. 8-pe. 
for te, δε Cc p 18. 40, 137 
τῆς γης δὲ ο [157]. 


Cuap. XXVIII. 1. aft διαθωσαντες ins οἱ περι (τον) παυλον ex του πλοος (beginning of 
an ecclesiastical portion) C3-marg L Ὁ g k mo Thl-sif: τὸν is omd by C3: alii aliter: 


οἱ περι τ. 7. βαρβαροι 1-marg. 


rec ἐπεγνωσαν (corrn to suit ch xxvii. 89 ?), with 


C3-marg H'LP rel 36 Chr,: txt ΑΒΟΙΝ οἱ p 18. 187 vulg syrr copt eth [arm]. 


μελιτηνὴ B? [syr-mg-gr arm ]. 


2. rec δε (altern of characteristic re), with H™LPN rel 36 [vulg arm] copt Chr, : 


txt ABC δ» 18. 40 syrr eth Thl-sif. 


(παρειχαν, so ABN.) 


rec avapaytes 


(corrn to more precise word), with H™LP rel 36 Chr,: txt ABCN [c] p 13. 40, 


a correction to suit éyévero. But the sub- 
junctive after the past is merely a mixture 
of construction of the historic past with the 
historic present, and is used where the 
scene is intended to be vividly set before 
the reader. 43.] ἀποῤῥίψαντας is 
reflective, sc. ἑαυτούς. 44. τοὺς 
λοιπούς] scil. ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν ἐξιέναι. 

τινων τῶν ἀπὸ τ. π.} probably, as E. V., 
broken pieces of the 581} :---ϑοιηβ of the 
parts of the ship: the σανίδες being whole 
‘planks, perhaps of the decks. δια- 
σωθ. ἐπί] may be = διασ. κ. ἀφικέσθαι ἐπί, 
—a constructio preguans, but this need 
not be, as διασωθῆναι is to get safe through, 
and ἐπί is simply the direction in which the 
act is carried out. XXVIII. 1. Me- 
λίτη] The whole course of the narrative 
has gone to shew that this can be no other 
than Matta. The idea that it is not 
Matta, but Meleda, an island off ‘the 
Tilyrian coast in the Gulf of Venice, seems 
to be first found in Constantine Porphy- 
rogenitus, de Adminiculis Imperii, p. 36— 
νῆσος μεγάλη τὰ Μέλετα Fro τὸ Mado- 
(εᾶται, ἣν ἐν τοῖς πράξεσι τ. ἄποστ. ὃ 
ἅγιος Λουκᾶς μέ. νηται, Μελίτην ταύτην 
προξαγορεύων. It has been adopted by 
our own countrymen, Bryant and Dr. Fal- 
coner, and abroad by Giorgi, Rhoer, and 


more recently Paulus. It rests principally 
on three mistakes :—1. the meaning of the 
name Adria (see above on ch. xxvii. 27),— 
2. the fancy that there are no poisonous 
serpents in Malta (ver. 3),—3. the notion 
that the Maltese would not have been 
called βάρβαροι. The idea itself, when 
compared with the facts, is preposterous 
enough. Its supporters are obliged to place 
Fair Havens on the north side of Crete,— 
and to suppose the wind to have been the 
hot Sirocco (compare ver. 2). Further 
notices of this question, and of the state 
of Malta at the time, will be found in the 
notes on the following verses. Observe, 
their previous state of ignorance of the 
island is expressed by the imperf. ἐπεγί- 
νωσκον ;—the act of recognition by the 
aor. ἐπέγνωμεν [ch. xxvii. 30]. 2. 
βάρβαροι} A term implying very much 
what our word natives does, when speak- 
ing of any little-known or new place. They 
were not Greek colonists, therefore they 
were barbarians (Rom. i. 14). If it be 
necessary strictly to vindicate the term, 
the two following citations will do so: 
ἔστι δὲ ἡ νῆσος αὕτη (Malta) Φοινίκων 
ἄποικος, Diod. Sic. ν. 12.--ἐν δὲ Σικελίᾳ 
ἔθνη βάρβαρα τάδε ἐστίν. ᾿Εδυνοί, Σικανοΐ, 
Σικελοί, Φοίνικες, Τρῶες, Scylax, Periplus, 


302 TIPAZEIS AIOSTOAQN. XXVIII. 
phere bis 9 πυρὰν ° προςελάβοντο πάντας ἡμᾶς διὰ τὸν Ρ ὑετὸν 


Judith vii. 5 
al. 

o — Rom. xiv. 
1, 3. xv. 7. 


Tov 4 ἐφεστῶτα καὶ διὰ τὸ ᾿ ψῦχος. ὃ. " συστρέψαντος δὲ 


τοῦ Παύλου "φρυγάνων τι ἃ πλῆθος καὶ ἐπιθέντος ἐπὶ 


Philem. 17. 2 ; ις 
Ps.xxvi.10. τὴν π πυρὰν " ἔχιδνα “ato τῆς “ θέρμης ν᾽ διεξελθοῦσα᾽ 
h. xiv. a A \ A 
ΡΖ καθῆψεν τῆς χειρὸς αὐτοῦ. 4 ὡς δὲ εἶδον οἱ " βάρβαροι 
q = here only. A ᾿ς Ν ᾿ὲ 5 
ὁ ἐφεστὼς 8 κρεμάμενον τὸ θηρίον ἐκ τῆς χειρὸς αὐτοῦ, πρὸς ἀλλή- 
ος, Polyb. 


xviii. 8.7. see 
2 Tim. iv. 6. 
r John xviii. 18. 2 Cor. xi.27 only. Gen. viii. 22. 
xiv. 30. (συστροφή, ch. xix. 40.) 
13. John xxi. 6. 
1. Luke ix. 5 al. 
only. Job xx. 25. 
καθῆπτε. So Xen. Cyneg. vi. 9. 
ο ch. vii. 52 reff. 


λους ἔλεγον ἢ Ilavtws “ φονεύς ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος, 


5 here (Matt. xvii. 22 ν. r.) only. Judg. xi.3 B. 2 Macc. 

there only. = Job xxx.7. Isa. xl. 24. u= Luke ii. 
v Matt. iii. 7 || L. xii. 34. xxili. 33 only t. Isa. lix. 5 Aq. w = Matt. xiii. 

Sir. xxiv. 3. x here only. Job vi. 17. (-μαίνεσθαι, Mark xiv. 54.) y here 
zhere only +. trans., Polyb. viii. 8.3, τὰς πρώρας τῶν ὀργάνων εἰς ἀκίνητον 
a ch. v. 30 reff. 1 Macc. i. 61. b ch, xxi. 22 reff. 


mposaveAapBavoy XN! c [mposeAauB. 137]. 
nuas bef παντας 18 lect-12 [vulg]: om μας 40. 
δια δὲ} [vulg]. 

9. σφρυγανων (but o marked for erasure) δὲ], rec om τι (as unnecessary), with 
H'LP rel 36 syr [Syr arm Thl-sif] Chr,: ins ABCX(perhaps prima manu: in small 
letters) 13. 40 vulg(not am) Thl-fin, τε p. emiBevtes(sic) δὲ, [add του παυλου 
A.] rec (for amo) ex (see note), with rel Chr Thi-sif: txt ABCH'LPR be kop 
13. 36. 40. 137 Thl-fin, @ calore vulg. rec εξελθουσα (corrn, the compound διεξ. 
not being elsw found in N T, and its force not being seen, vide note), with [A]BCN 
p 13. 36 rel Chr-comm, Thl-fin: txt H"LPadfgk1lo Thl-sif. καθηψατο C Ὁ ἢ 
ο 36. 40. 137 Chr. 

4. «day B. rec edeyov bef προς αλληλους (corrn of order for perspicuity), with 
H'LP rel copt [eth(Treg) arm] Chr: om προς αλληλους Syr: txt ABCR cm p 18. 


om πάντας A copt zth[?] Chr-ms, : 
υηφεστωτα L 13. om 2nd 


40.137 vulg syr Thl. 


p. 4. προςελάβ.] received us, not 
to their fire (Meyer), but as in reff. 
ὑετόν ] “ Post ingentes ventos solent imbres 
sequi.’ Grot. τὸν ἐφεστ.] not, ‘ which 
came on suddenly’ (Meyer), but which was 
on us:—another instance of overlooking 
the present sense of ἕστηκα. ψῦχος] 
This is decisive against the Sirocco, which 
is a hot and sultry wind even so late as the 
month of November, and moreover (Smith, 
p- 109) seldom lasts more than three days. 
3. συστρέψαντος | “ vincti officium 
faciebat submisse, aliis quoque inserviens.” 
Bengel. φρυγάνων | From the circuin- 
stance of the concealed viper, these were 
probably heaps of neglected wood gathered 
in the forest. ἐπιθέντος x.7.A.] The 
difficulty here is, that there are now no 
venomous serpents in Malta. But as Mr. 
Smith observes, “no person who has studied 
the changes which the operations of man 
have produced on the animals of any coun- 
try, will be surprised that a particular 
species of reptiles should have disappeared 
from Malta. My friend, the Rev. Mr. 
Landsborough, in his interesting excur- 
sions in Arran, has repeatedly noticed the 
gradual disappearance of the viper from 
the island since it has become more fre- 
quented. Perhaps there is no where a 
surface of equal extent in so artificial a 
state as that of Malta is at the present 
day,—and no where has the aboriginal 


forest been more completely cleared. We 
need not therefore be surprised that, with 
the disappearance of the woods, the noxious 
reptiles which infested them should also 
have disappeared.” pp. 111, 112. ‘The 
reading ἐκ τ. θέρμ. has been an explanation 
of ἀπό, which here signifies from locally, 
not ‘on account of.’ ‘lo suppose the con- 
verse (“the ἀπό was adopted by those who 
thought the sense was ‘on account of the 
fire,’”’ Dr. Bloomf.),—is simply absurd ; 
for 1) no man ever could suppose the sense 
of ἐκ in such a connexion to be this: and 
2) even if any one did, he would not have 
substituted another ambiguons preposition, 
ἀπό. Paul had placed the faggot on the 
fire, and was settling or arranging it in its 
place, when the viper glided out of the 
heat and fixed on his hand. διεξελθ. 
gives the more precise sense, and is a less 
usual word than ἐξελθ. The serpent 
glided out through the sticks. 

καθῆψεν) attached itself: a usage un- 
exampled in earlier Greek. The narrative 
leaves no doubt that the bite did veritably 
take place. 4.1 The natives, who were 
sure to know, here positively declared it 
to have been a venomous serpent. I make 


these remarks to guard against the dis- 
ingenuous shifts of rationalists and semi- 


rationalists, who will have us believe either 


that the viper did not bite, or that if it did, 
πάντως pov. 


it was not venomous. 


ABCLP 
Nabed 
Leh & 3 
mopl3 


ο.Ονυκ 
ecacev C. 
ABLPX 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mopl3 


3—7. 


IIPAEEIS, ATIIOSTOAON. 


909 


, Lal re ~ 
ov διασωθέντα ἐκ τῆς θαλάσσης ἡ 5 δίκ ν οὐκ εἴασεν: ἀ see ch. xxiii. 
7 7) 24 reff. 


πὶ e 


\ S 
90 μὲν ουν 
3 \ (A 
οὐδὲν κακόν. 


f 


δὲ 


6 οἱ 


i , ἈΚ / 12 U 
πίμπρασθαι ἢ ὃ καταπίπτειν ' ἄφνω νεκρόν. 


> / \ / al — 
ἀποτινάξας τὸ θηρίον εἰς τὸ πῦρ ἔπαθεν © Bis. 5.9. 
8 προςεδόκων 


\ ,ὕ Jude 7) only. 
αὐτὸν © μέλλειν Demosth. 423, 
on Sp) Sin \, f Luke ix.5 

ἐπί πολὺ only. Judg. 


δὲ 5... ABE ἢ ὃ , Ν 0 θ ΄, δὲ Ρ 2 xvi. 20 A Ald. 
€ AUT@V “προς OK@VT@V Kat EMPOVVT@V [LNOEV QTOTTOV compl. 5 
hi 7 , 1 Kings x. 2. 
εἰς αὐτὸν γινόμενον, 1 μεταβαλόμενοι ἔλεγον αὐτὸν εἶναι Lm. ae 
nly. (-ay- 
͵ 7 ᾽ διὸ a r \ ἈΝ ζ 3 a s 6 A a, Tagen 
θεόν. Ev δὲ "rots " περὶ τὸν τόπον ἐκεῖνον " ὑπῆρχεν μα; Tai 
g ch. iii. 5 τε h = ch. xxi. 27 reff. ihere only +. εὐθὺς διοιδεῖ καὶ πίμπραται τὸ 
σῶμα, Diod. Sic. ii. 12. k Luke viii. 6. ch. xxvi. ldonly. Ps. cxliv. 14. 1 ch. ii. 


2. xvi. 26 only. Josh. x. 9. 
πολὺ ἀντέχει, Thue. ii. 64. 


m here only. (see ch. xx. 9, 11.) 2 Kings iii. 1, μῖσος οὐκ ἐπὶ 
n absol., ch. xxvii. 33 reff. 
p Luke xxiii. 41. ch. xxv. 5. 2 Thess. ii. 2 only. Job iv. 8. 


o w. particip., ch. xvii. 16. 
q here only. Josh. viii. 21. Jos. 


B. J. v. 9. 3, καλὸν πρὸ ἀνηκέστου συμφορᾶς μεταβαλέσθαι: and freq. act. inter., Job x. 8. 2 Macc. 


vi. 29 Ed-vat. F(not AB) Ald. 
Diod. Sic. i. 50. see ch. xiii. 13, 


om 2nd της δὲ]. 


r=here only. ἤρξατο ταπεινοῦσθαι Ta περὶ Tas Θήβας, 
s ch. iii. 6 reff. 


5. αποτιναξαμενος (corrn from ch xiii. 51, xviii. 6? so De W.) AH'L p rel 18. 36. 40. 


137 [Amm-c] Chr, Thl-fin: txt BPX afm Thl-sif. 
[μελλων A. | 


6. προξεδοκουν HTL 18. 40 Thl-sif. 


for κακον, movnpov c: om δὲ], 
πιπρασθαι Α οἱ 1. 3. 4, 


68: πεπρασθαι lect-12: εμπιμπρασθαι 27-9 : εμπιπρασθαι δὲϊ 40, 662. 98-marg 105. 


mposdoxovvtwy A: -κοντων Lf k p. 
μηθεν B. 


40. ελεγαν B. 


θεωρωντων N!: θεωρησαντων C: θεωμενων |. 
rec μεταβαλλομενοι, with ΗΤΙ δὲ 13 rel [Chr,]: txt ABP be p 
rec θεον bef avrov eva, With H™LP rel [arm] Chr: εἰναι 


αυτον θεον A: avtoy θεον εἰναι ac Καὶ m 13 [syrr]| Thi-sif: txt BX p vulg Thl-fin. 


éor. | ‘ vincula videbant,’ Beng. The 
idea of his being a murderer is not to be ac- 
counted for (as Elsner, Wolf, Kuin.) by the 
member which was bitten (for this would 
fit any crime which the hand could commit), 
—nor by supposing (Heinsius) the bite of 
a serpent to have been the Maltese punish- 
ment for murder ; it is accounted for by the 
obviousness of the crime as belonging to 
the most notorious delinquents, and the apt- 
ness of the assumed punishment,—death 
for death. 7 δίκη] Justice, or Nemesis. 
What the Phoenician islanders called her, 
does not appear ; but the zdea is common to 
all religions. 5. | “ Luke does not so 
much as hint, that any divine intervention 
took place.” De Wette. True enough: but 
why? Because Luke believed that the very 
dullest of his readers would understand 
it without any such hint. According to 
these rationalists, a fortunate concurrence 
of accidents must have happened to the 
Apostles, totally unprecedented in history 
or probability. Besides, did not the natives 
themselves in this case testify to the fact? 
None were so well qualified to judge of the 
virulence of the serpent,—none so capable 
of knowing that the hanging on Paul’s 
hand implied the communication of the 
venom :—yet they change him from a mur- 
derer into a god, on seeing what took place. 
Need we further evidence, that the divine 
power which they mistakenly attributed to 
Paul himself, was really exerted on his be- 
half, by Him who had said ὄφεις ἀροῦσιν ὃ 
See below on ver. 8. The fact that St. Luke 
understood what the natives said, is ad- 


duced by Wordsworth as another proof 
(see his and my note on ch. xiv. 11) that 
the Apostles and Evangelists commonly 
understood unknown tongues. But such 
an inference here has absolutely nothing 
to rest on. Are we to suppose that these 
βάρβαροι had no means of intercourse 
with Greek sailors ? 6.1 Both these, 
the inflammation of the body, and the fall- 
ing down dead suddenly, are recorded as 
results of the bite of the African serpents. 
Mr. Humphry quotes from Lucan, ix. 790, 
‘Nasidium Marsi cultorem torridus agri 
Percussit Prester (an African serpent 
named from this very verb πίμπρασθαι): 
illi rubor igneus ora Succendit, tenditque 
cutem, pereunte figura :’ and, of the bite of 
the asp, ix. 815: ‘At tibi, Leve miser, fixus 
precordia pressit Niliaca serpente cruor: 
nulloque dolore Testatus morsus, subita 
caligine mortem Accipis, et somno Stygias 
descendis ad umbras.’ προςδοκών- 
των] not, as Εἰ. V., ‘when they had looked,’ 
—but when they were long looking. 
peraBad.| There is no need to 
supply τ. γνώμην, though it is sometimes 
expressed :—so of πλεῖστοι τῶν ἀνθρώπων 
K. μεταβάλλονται πρὸς τὰ παρόντα, K. ταῖς 
τύχαις εἴκουσι, Lysias, pro Nicia fratre 
(Wetst.): μεταβάλλεσθαι δοκεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν 
ἔχειν πιστὸν ἢ πόλις, Demosth. pro Με- 
galop. (id.),—in neither of which places 
can τ. γνώμην well be understood. 
θεόν] “Comparabant vel Herculi qui im 
ulnis adhue jacens angues superavit: vel 
Zsculapio, qui cum serpente pingitur.” 
Wetst. and so also Grot. But so much as 


804 


tch. i. 18 reff. 

Ὦ and constr., 
ch. xiii. 50 
reff. 


2 Macc. vi. 
19, viii. 36 
only. , 
w here only +. 
2 Mace. iii. 9. 
Xen. Cyr. v. 
. 32. 
(-φρών, 
1 Pet. iii. 8 
rec. -po- 
* vet, 2 Mace. 
ii. 25. 


y constr., ch. 
iv. 5 reff. 


z Matt. viii. 15). Johniv. 52 only. Deut. xxviii. 22 only. (-έσσειν, Matt. viii. 14.) 
b =: Matt. iv. 24. Luke iv. 38. viii. 37,45 al. Job iii. 24. see 2 Cor. v. 14 reff. (-οχή, 2 Cor. ii. 4.) 
d w. πρός, ch. xi. 3 reff. 
8 — Matt. viii. 17. Luke v. 15 al. fr. 2 Macc. ix. 21, 22. 
j Sir. xxxviii. 1. 
m Luke xiv, 32. xix. 42, 


i. 30. John v. 3,6. Prov. vi. 9. 
f ch. viii. 17 reff. 
i —: Rom. xiii. 7 (see note). 
only. Xen. Cyr. viii. 2. 4. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ἈΠΌΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


ἃ δυςεντερίῳ ὃ συνεχόμενον “ κατακεῖσθαι" 
a Χ \ 
Παῦλος 4 εἰςελθών, καὶ © mposevEapevos, ἴ ἐπιθεὶς τὰς 
a A Γ “4 
χεῖρας αὐτῷ, ἰάσατο αὐτόν. 9 τούτου δὲ γενομένου καὶ 
e \ tus a ΄ ” ᾽ / / 
οἱ λοιποὶ οἱ ἐν TH νήσῳ ἔχοντες 8 ἀσθενείας προςήρχοντο 
ἈΠ ἢ 24 < 10 Δ \ AX a ij a j2 / 
καὶ © ἐθεραπεύοντο, 19 of καὶ πολλαῖς ὃ τιμαῖς 1 ἐτίμησαν 
ΠΩ ke 4 ] ἐπέθ [ἢ σὴ πὰ σοὶ No jn y 
. ἡμᾶς, καὶ * ἀναγομένοις | ἐπέθεντο ™ τὰ ™arpos τὰς "" χρείας. 


XXVIII. 


t ᾽ A u , rf ΄ > / Tl > ἃ 

χωρία τῷ "πρώτῳ τῆς νήσου, ὀνόματι Ἰ]οπλίῳ, ὃς 
΄ n a ’ 

ν ἀναδεξάμενος ἡμᾶς ἡμέρας τρεῖς “ φιλοφρόνως * ἐξένισεν. 

Sy ἐγένετο δὲ τὸν πατέρα τοῦ Ποπλίου 5 πυρετοῖς καὶ 


\ ἃ ς 
προς ὃν oO 


a here only +, 
ce = Mark 
e absol., ch. x. 9 reff. 
h ch. viii. 7 reff. 
1 = here 
n ch. xx. 34 reff. 


k ch. xiii. 13 reff. 
2 Pet. i. 3. 


7. rec tpes bef nuepas, with AH™LPN p (18) rel 36 Chr,: om,a 69: txt Be km 


40. 137. 


8. rec δυξεντερια, with p rel 36 [Synop,] Chr,: -repiots 13: -ars 25. 40: txt ABHT 


L PN m. 
for erasure. 


προςελθων P. 


aft mposevé., evgauevos is repeated by B', but marked 


9. rec for δε, ουν (seemingly more natural copula), with H™LP rel 36 ΤῊ]: txt 


ABIN c gk p18. 40. 137 syr copt Chr). 
kat B [copt]. 


10. om οἱ P 73 lect-13. 


att yevou. ins υγιους Hr. om Ist 


rec exovtes ασθενειας bef ev τη vnow, with H™LP rel 36 syr Chr, 
[Thl-sif]: txt ABIX k mp 13. 40 vulg (Syr) copt Thl-fin. 
for ta, ras A137: om N?. 


mponpxov B. 
rec τὴν χρειαν (Meyer 


thinks τας χρειας a gloss for ta προς τὴν xperav,—De W., that the plur has crept in 
from ch xx. 34. But Bornemann rightly objects (1) that the ras preceding in A 137 
shews the transcriber’s eye to have passed on to τας of tas xpetas in earlier copies, (2) 
that the use of the plur is much rarer than of the singular: see also note), with 


H'LP p rel 36 Chr,: txt ABIN 13. 40. 137 vulg syr. 


this can hardly be inferred: nor are we 
sure of the theogony of these Pheenician 
barbarians. 7.| πρῶτος Μελιταίων 
was probably an official title: the more so, 
as Publius can hardly have borne the appel- 
lation from his estates, during his father’s 
lifetime. T'wo inscriptions have been found 
in Malta, at Citta Vecchia, which seem to 
establish this view: a Greek one, contain- 
ing the words a(vAvs) κ(αστρι)κιος κυρ. 
προυδινς LMITEVS ρωμ TPWTOS μελιταιων και 
πατρων apkas και αμφιπολεὺυς a σ (Αὐγούστῳ 
σεβαστῷ) θεω. . . ., and ἃ Latin one, 
with the same title, ‘Mel. primus.’ If so 
(and his Roman name further confirms it), 
Publius was legatus of the Pretor of 
Sicily, to whose province Malta belonged ; 
see Cic. in Ver. ii. 4. 18. ἡμᾶς} 
Hardly perhaps more than Paul and 
his companions, and, it may be, Julius. 
At ver. 10, a special reason had occurred 
for his honouring Paul and his company : 
at present, his hospitality must have been 
prompted by the courtesy of Julius, who 
could hardly fail himself to be included in 
it. The three days were probably till they 
could find a suitable lodging. 8. πυ- 
petots | Hippocrates also uses the plural. 
It probably indicates the recurrence of 


fever fits.  Susevrepiw] dusevrepla, ᾿Ατ- 
τικῶς᾽ -piov, “EAAnves. Mceris ;—dysen- 
tery. Dr. Falconer makes this an argument 
against ‘Melita Africana’ being meant. 
« Such a place, dry and rocky, and remark- 
ably healthy, was not likely to produce a 
disease which is almost peculiar to moist 
situations.” But Mr. Smith answers, that 
the changed circumstances of the island 
might produce this change also: and be- 
sides, that he is informed by a physician of 
Valetta, that the disease is by no means 
uncommon in Malta. ἐπιθεὶς τ. 
χεῖρας αὐτῷ] It is remarkable, that so 
soon after the ‘taking up of serpents,’ we 
should read of Paul having ‘ laid his hands 
on the sick and they recovered.’ See the 
two in close connexion, Mark xvi. 18. 

10. τιμαῖς] The ordinary interpretation 
of this as rewards, gifts, may be right, 
but is not necessary. In all the passages 
quoted to support it, ref. Sir., Cicero, ad 
Diversos, xvi. 9 (‘Curio misi ut medico 
honos haberetur’), the expression τιμή is 
general, and the context renders an in- 
ference probable as to what sort of τιμή is 
meant. 866 especially 1 Tim. v. 3, 17 and 
notes. Here there is no such unavoidable 
indication, whereas the other meaning 


I em- 
Gets... 
ABILP 
NRabecd 
fghkl 
mopl3 





3---14. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΗ͂Σ ἈΠΌΣΤΟΛΟΝ.: 


900 


11 Μετὰ δὲ τρεῖς μῆνας * ἀνήχθημεν ἐν πλοίῳ ° παρα- 0 ch, xxvii. 12 


κεχειμακότι ἐν TH 
Διοςκούροις. 


νήσῳ, ᾿Αλεξανδρίνῳ, 

19 Ν 4 θ , 2 τ ΄ r 9 
καὶ 4 καταχθέντες εἰς Συρακούσας * ἐπ- 

εμείναμεν ἡμέρας τρεῖς: 18 ὅθεν 5 περιελθόντες * κατηντή- 


Ρ i. τε ΤΗΝ 
p here only t. 
παρασήημῳ 3 Macc. li. 29. 
see note. 
q = ch. xxvii. 
3 (xxill. 15 


reff.). 
rch. x. 48 reff. 


? ‘Pp 4 \ \ , Le a 2 ie s ch. xix. 13. 
σαμεν ELS nYytoV καὶ μετὰ [LlLaV LEP av ETTLYEVOMLEVOU “1 Tim. ν. 13. 


ἡ νότου * δευτεραῖοι ἤλθομεν εἰς Ποτιόλους, 13 οὗ εὑρόντες 
᾽ \ x Na) ’ > a r > a ς / 
ἀδελφοὺς * παρεκλήθημεν Tap αὐτοῖς * ἐπιμεῖναι ἡμέρας 


only, but not =. 
w here only. see John xi. 39. 
pass. here only. 


11. nxOnuev [for ανηχ.] Ht ἃ Ὁ] kl mo. 


b p? 40. 
12. συρακουσσας B(Tischdf). 


πνεύματος ἐπιγενομένου, Thucyd. iv. 30. 


1 Kings ix. 20. Xen. Cyr. v. 2. 2, beg. 


nuepats τρισιν B. 


Heb. xi. 37 
only. 200 1. 
7 


tch. xvi. 1 reff. 
ἃ here only t+. 
Ep. Jer. 47 

v ch. xxvii. 13 reff. 

x constr., ch. xii. 42, but 


Sioskopois P!(corrd appy eadem manu) 


13. περιελοντες BR}. 


14. rec (for map) em, with H'LP rel Chr, Thl-sif: txt ABIN ἃ τὰ} p 18. 36. 40 


Thl-fin. 
1: ] emmecva(sic) A. 


. 

is rendered probable by the form of the 
sentence, which opposes to these τιμαί, 
bestowed on them during their whole stay, 
τὰ πρὸς τ. χρείας, with which they were 
loaded at their departure. Render it there- 
fore honoured us with many honours 
(or ‘distinctions, or ‘ attentions’). THY 
χρείαν has perhaps been an alteration after 
St. Paul’s ἅπαξ κ. δὶς εἰς τὴν χρείαν μοι 
ἐπέμψατε, Phil. iv. 16. 11.1 They 
probably set sail (see on ch. xxvii. 9) ποῦ 
earlier than the sixth of the ides of March 
(i.e. Mar. 10). παρασήμῳ Διος- 
κούροις] with the sign (of) the Dioscuri, 
as ὀνόματι Ποπλίῳ, ver. 7; not, ‘with the 
Dioscuri as a sign. So in the inscription 
found by the Rev. G. Brown at Lutro 
(Phenice) in Crete, given at length in the 
excursus at the end of the prolegg. to Acts, 
we have “ gubernator navis parasemo Iso- 
pharia.” The ancient ships carried at their 
prow a painted or carved representation of 
the sign which furnished their name, and 
at the stern a similar one of their tutelar 
deity. Sometimes these were one and the 
same, as appears to have been the case 
with this ship. Cyril, in Cat., says, ἔθος 
ἀεί πως ἐν ταῖς ᾿Αλεξανδρέων μάλιστα 
ναῦσι πρός γε τῇ πρώρῃ δεξιά τε καὶ εἰς 
εὐώνυμα γραφὰς εἶναι τοιαύτας. See Virg. 
fin. x. 209; Ovid, Trist. i. 9. 1; Pers. 
Sat. vi. 30. Castor and Pollux, sons of 
Jupiter and Leda, were considered the 
tutelar deities of sailors. See Hor. Od. 
1.3.2; 12. 28. 
eighty miles, a day’s sail, from Malta. 

13.] περιελθόντες apparently denotes the 


roundabout course of a vessel tacking with ἡ 


an adverse wind. That the wind was 

not favourable, follows from ἐπιγενομένου 

below. Mr. Lewin’s account is, “as the 

wind was westerly, and they were under 

shelter of the high mountainous range of 
Vou. IL 


12.] Syracuse is about - 


επιμειναντες Ht ¢ 137 syr(adding apud eos with ast) Thl: [μείναντες 


Etna on their left, they were obliged to 
stand out to sea in order to fill their sails, 
and so came to Rhegium by a circuitous 
sweep.” And he cites a case of a passage 
from Syracuse to Rhegium, in which a 
similar circuit was taken for a similar 
reason, p. 736. The day at Rhegium, as 
perhaps the three at Syracuse before, was 
spent probably in waiting for the wind. 

ἔπιγ. vor. | the South wind having 
sprung up,—succeeded the one which blew 
before. Sevtepator | viz. afler leaving 
Rhegium : a distance of about 180 nautical 
miles. Ποτιόλους | Puteoli (anciently 
Dicearchia, δύνα. v. 4, now Puzzuoli) 
was the most sheltered part of the bay 
of Naples. It was the principal port of 
Southern Italy, and, in particular, formed 
the great emporium for the Alexandrian 
wheat ships. Strabo, xvii. 1. Seneca (Ep. 
77) gives a graphic account (cited by 
Smith, p. 117) of the arrival of the Alex- 
andrine fleet at Puteoli: ‘“Subito nobis 
hodie Alexandr'ne naves apparuerunt, qua 
preemitti solent et nuntiare secuture classis 
adventum; tabellarias vocant. Gratus 
illarum adspectus Campaniz est. Omnis 
in pilis Puteolorum turba constitit, et ex 
ipso genere velorum, Alexandrinas quamvis 
in magna turba navium intelligit, solis enim 
licet supparum (the topsail) intendere quod 
in alto omnes habent naves. Nulla enim 
res Φαὰθ adjuvat cursum, quam summa 
pars veli; illinc maxime navis urgetur. 
Itaque quoties ventus increbuit majorque 
est quam expedit, antenna submittitur, 
minus habet virium flatus ex humili: cum 
intrare capreas et promontorium ex quo 
‘ Alta procellos speculatur vertice Pallas,’ 
ceteree velo jubentur esse content, sup- 

arum Alexandrinarum insigne est.” 

14.| These Christians were perhaps Alex- — 
andrines, as the commerce was so cons 


x 


306 ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. XXVIIT. 
y= Rom.v. ἑπτά: καὶ ¥ οὕτως εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην ἤλθαμεν. = κἀκεῖθεν 
ch. ααῖν. 10. οἱ ἀδελφοὶ ἀκούσαντες “τὰ “περὶ ἡμῶν ἦλθαν εἰς 
a(inN. Τὰς ἃ ἡπάντησιν ἡμῖν ὃ ἄχρι ᾿Αππίου Φόρου καὶ Τριῶν Ta- 
these. Bepvav, ods ἰδὼν ὁ ἸΠαῦλος “ εὐχαριστήσας τῷ θεῷ ἔλαβεν 
ee | mapas 

Mattxxvit, = 16"Qre δὲ εἰςτήλθομεν εἰς “Ρώμην, *h ἐπετράπη τῷ 


b ch. xi. 5 reff. 
e Rom. i. 8 reff. 


f ch. xvi, 25, 27 reff. g here only ft. 


ἃ here only. avad. @., Job xvii. 9. (-σεῖν, ch. xxiii. 11.) 


e = ch. xxvii. 1 reff. 
h = and constr., ch. xxvi. 1 reff. 


ret ἤλθομεν, with HTIP p rel 86 : εἰφήλθομεν L: txt ABR.—nA0. bef εἰς (την) pwuny AT 
fb k o] p 18. 40 vulg [Syr copt eth(Treg) ].—om τὴν Al a Ὁ ὁ Καὶ 0 13. 40. 137 Thi-fin. 


15. om o B 96. 
(13 def.) 
[arm] Thl-sif: vuw δὲ}, 


rec axpis, with HtTILP rel 36: txt ABN p 19. 


rec εξηλθον, with HTLP rel 36 Chr, : txt BIR, -θον A p 40. 
vravtnow &! [40]: συναντησιν g. 


ἡμων ledg kop 13. 36. 40 
att 


axpt, 7 was written by ΝΕ], but marked and erased. 
16. rec ἤλθομεν (the force of the compound not being regarded), with LP rel 36 
vulg syr Chr, ΤῺ] Ge: ηλθὸν ΗΓ: txt ABIN ἃ m p 13. 40 Syr copt ath. (-θαμεν A, 


but not BN rel. [1 doubtful.) 
lect-12 3-pe. 


ins τὴν bef ρωμην LN}(N® disapproving) ὁ 137 
*rec aft ρωμὴν ins ὀἑκατόνταρχος " παρέδωκε τοὺς ἴ δεσ- 


μίους τῷ 8 στρατοπεδάρχη(-χῳ ἩΤΠΡ g!(k ?) 1 m), going on TO δὲ ΠΠαύλω 
ἐπετράπη, with ΗΤΙΠΡ rel 36 syr-w-ast Thl: om ABIX p 40 vulg (Syr) arm Chr, 


siderable between the two places. 
outws | after this stay with them: imply- 
ing that the request was complied with. 
15.] The brethren at Rome had 
heard probably by special message sent by 
some of their fellow-voyagers. See a de- 
tailed account of the stages of the journey 
not here mentioned, in C. and H. ii., pp. 
438 ff. τὰ περὶ ἡμῶν] the news con- 
cerning ws, i.e. that we were coming. 
᾿Αππίου Φόρου x. T. Ταβερνῶν] 
Luke writes as one of the travellers to 
Rome, who would come on Appii Forum 
(forty-three miles from Rome) first. It 
was on the Via Appia (“ Censura clara eo 
anno (U.c. 442) Appii Claudii, et C. Piautii 
fuit : memoriz tamen felicioris ad posteros 
nomen Appii, quod viam munivit et aquam 
in urbem duxit, eaque unus_perfecit.” 
Liv. ix. 29), which leaving Rome by the 
Porta Capena, passed through the Pontine 
marshes, as far as Capua. Being not far 
from the coast (Strabo, v. 233), it was the 
resort of sailors (‘ Forum Appt differtum 
nautis, cauponibus atque malignis.’ Hor. 
Sat.i.5.3. It has been suggested to me, 
that these may have been sailors belonging 
to the canal boats, as Appii Forum is too 
far inland to have been resorted to by 
sailors from the coast), and an unpleasant 
halting-place for travellers, having, besides, 
‘aqua deterrima’ (ib. ver. 7). The 
‘Tres Tabernze’ was a ‘ taberna deversoria,’ 
or way-side inn, ten miles nearer Rome. 
Cicero mentions both in the letters to 
Atticus, ii. 10, ‘Ab Appii Foro hora 
quarta: dederam aliam paullo ante Tribus 
Tabernis.” The brethren were in two 


parties : some had come the longer, others 
the shorter distance, to meet the Apostle. 
We have in Jos. Antt. xvii. 12. 1, an ac- 
count of the pretended Alexander, on his 
way to Rome, landing at Diczearchia (Pu- 
teoli, see above), and it is added, προΞξελ- 
θόντος εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην λόγου τοῦ περὶ 
αὐτοῦ, πᾶν τὸ τῇδε ᾿Ιουδαίων πλῆθος 
ὑπαντιάζοντες ἐξήεσαν. Suet. relates, on 
Caligula’s return from Germany, “ populi 
R. sexum, ztatem, ordinem omnem usque 
ad vicesimum lapidem effudisse se.” Cal. 
ce. 4, And Tacit. Ann. iii. 5, speaking of 
the honours paid by Augustus to the body 
of Drusus, says, “ipsum quippe asperrimo 
hiemis Ticinum usque progressum, neque 
abscedentem a corpore simul urbem intra- 
visse.” θάρσος] Both encouragement 
as to his own arrival, as a prisoner, in the 
vast metropolis,—in seeing such affection, 
to which he was of all men most sensible ; 
and encouragement as to his great work so 
long contemplated, and now about to com- 
mence in Rome,—in seeing so promising a 
beginning for him to build on. 16. } 
[ The omission of the words 6 éxar..... 
otpatoredapx(-xn) [though too strongly 
attested to allow us to retain them in the 
text | may have been originally caused by 
the transcriber’s eye passing from -apxos 
to -apxw, as in Syr. (‘permisit centurio 
Paulo’): this done, the emendation of the 
* text so as to construe by ejecting 6 ἑκατόν- 
Tapxos was obvious. 10 does not follow, 
Srom the singular being used, that there 
was but one prefectus pretorio at this 
time, and ¢hat one Burrus;—though it 
may have been so. The prefect mentioned 








15—20. IIPABREIS ATOSTOAON. 


inka 


\ / 
αὐτὸν στρατιώτῃ. 


307 


, Ξ 5 \ k ΄ : . 
Παύλῳ μένειν €AUTOVY συν φυλάσσοντι i James ii. 17 
Ἢ only. Gen. 
xliil. 32. see 
Rom, xiv. 22. 
k = ch. xii. 4 
reff. 
1 constr., ch. iv. 


τῷ 
1h; ] 3 “ δὲ \ e Ve Lal 
ἐγένετο δὲ μετὰ ἡμέρας τρεῖς 

| \ \ > na / , 

™guyKadécacbat αὐτὸν τοὺς ὄντας τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων " πρώ- 


τους" ὃ συνελθόντων δὲ αὐτῶν ἔλεγεν πρὸς αὐτοὺς ᾿Ε) γώ, 


͵ »ῸΝ / / - a 3 val 24 reff. 
ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί, οὐδὲν Ρ ἐναντίον ποιήσας τῷ λαῷ ἢ τοῖς neh. xii.50 


ᾳ Fee 4 9 ὃ / dee ΄ t i τ αν, 
eee ἔθεσιν τοῖς πατρῳοίς, εσμιος ἐξ Ἱεροσολύμων παρ- + eee 
υμων 1. A : ᾿ J ΠΩ ᾿ = ch, ‘ 
ABLPR εδόθην εἰς τὰς χεῖρας τῶν Ρωμαίων, 18 οἵτινες ἃ ἀνακρί- giv. ree 
abe ΄ nm \ \ 9 rch. xxii. 8 
ghk 1 ναντές με ἐβούλοντο YatroAdaat διὰ TO μηδεμίαν * αἰτίαν rf. 
mop! 


΄ 4 ! ΄ \ -“ 
“ θανάτου Σ ὑπάρχειν ἐν ἐμοί. 190 ἀντιλεγόντων δὲ τῶν, ἃ τεῦ. 
tch. xxi. 


Ἰουδαίων 2 ἠναγκάσθην ἃ ἐπικαλέσασθαι Καίσαρα, οὐχ a. 
" ὡς τοῦ ἔθνους μου “ἔχων τι 3 κατηγορεῖν. 


w ch. xiii. 28 reff. 
John xix. 12. Hos. iv. 4. 
11 reff. b=ch. xxiii. 15 reff. 
40. xii. 50. Winer, ἢ 44. 3. 


x ch. viii. 16 reff. 


[txt and comm]. (13 def, but has not space enough for the addition.) 
add εξω της παρεμβολης 137 demid syr-w-ast. 


αυτον B. 


5-- el, XXVIII. 


Matt. xvii. 22 
Job xvi. 
= , 12. 

90 διὰ ταύτην u ch, iv. 9 reff. 


= ch. xxv. 


32 reff. 
y Luke xx. 27. ch. xiii. 45. Rom. x. 21. L.P., exc. 
Gal. ii. 3,14. 1 Macc. ii. 25. ach. xxv. 


c constr., ch. xxi. 13. xxiii. 17, 156. Luke vii. 


d ch, xxiv. 2 reff. 


for εαυτ., 


17. ree for avtov, τον παυλον, with H®LP rel Syr eth{-pl(Tischdf) Chr,]: txt 


ABIX Καὶ p 18. 36. 40. 137 vulg syr copt [eth(Treg) arm]. 
rec avdpes adeAda bef eyw, with HtTLP rel 36 Syr Chr, 


written twice by δὲ}. 


de aft συνελθ. is 


[-Thl-sif]}: txt ABI(X) ὁ p 18. 40. 187 vulg syr copt arm Thl-fin.—for eyw, λέγων XR! 


(but corrd). 


18. ins πολλα bef avaxpivaytes ὁ 137 syr-w-ast. 


με N'(NS disapproving). 


19. aft covdaiwy ins kat επικραζοντων atpe Tov εχθρον nuwy c 137 syr-w-ast. 


μου ins ov (but marked and erased) δὲ}, 
txt ABN p 13. 40. 
syr-w-ast. 


might be one of the two who preceded 
Burrus, or one of the two who followed 
him—so that no chronological datum is 
here contained (against Wieseler, who 
builds upon it: Chren. der Apostg. p. 86). 
He attempts to meet the above argu- 
ment by accounting it improbable that 
the prisoners would be consigned to either 
of the prefects; this may have been so,— 
but they certainly would be delivered to 
one, not to both; and the fact might well 
be thus related. Luke is not so precise in 
Roman civil and military matters, as that 
he necessarily should in this case have 
written ἑνὶ τῶν στρατοπεδάρχων. The 
‘ prefectus pretorio’ was the person offi- 
cially put in charge with the prisoners sent 
from the provinces: so Plin. Epp. x. 65, 
*Vinctus mitti ad prefectos preetorii mei 
debet.” The pretorian camp was out- 
side the Porta Viminalis, where it had been 
fixed and fortified by Sejanus: see Tacit. 
Ann. iv. 2. [it was incorporated in Aure- 
lian’s walls, and now forms a square pro- 
jection from their line. }] ἐπετράπη 
τῷ Π.] This permission probably resulted 
from the letters of Festus, expressing that 


no crime was laid to the charge of Paul; | 


perhaps also partly from the favour of 


add 


avakpivovTes NX}. 


aft 
rec κατηγορῆσαι, with HTLP rel 36 Chr, : 


add αλλ wa λυτρωσωμαι THY ψυχὴν μου εκ θανατου ὁ 137 


Julius, and his report of the character and 
bearing of Paul on the journey. _ 
στρατιώτῃ ἃ Preetorian, to whom he was 
chained ; see below, ver. 20; and note on 
ch. xxiv. 23. 17.] The banishment of 
Jews from Rome (ch. xviii. 2) had either 
tacitly or openly been abrogated some 
time before this. Priscilla and Aquila had 
returned when the Epistle to the Romans 
was written, Rom. xvi. 3. Paul was 
naturally anxious to set himself right with 
the Jews at Rome—to explain the cause 
of his being sent there, in case no message 
had been received by them concerning him 
from Judeea,—and to do away if possible 
with the unfavourable prejudice which 
such letters, if received, would have created 
respecting his character. The fact of 
his sending for them, and their coming to 
him, seems to shew (as in the gloss on 
ver. 16: see digest) that he was not im- 
prisoned in the Pretorian camp, but was 
already in a private lodging. 18. 
ἐβούλ. ἀπολῦσαι] This may have been 
at ch. xxv. 8. The possibility of such a re- 
lease is asserted by Agrippa, ch. xxvi. 32, 
19.] ‘My appeal was a defensive 
and necessary step—not an offensive one, 
to complain of my nation.’ The inf. 


“X2 


908 


e — here only. 


ΠΡΑΞΕΙ͂Σ ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


- XXVIII. 


οὗν τὴν αἰτίαν “παρεκάλεσα ὑμᾶς ἴ ἰδεῖν καὶ ξπροςλαλῆσαυ" 


Xen. Cyr. 1. "-" ͵ A A : ὃ ΄ 

5.1, ὑμᾶς ἕνεκεν γὰρ τῆς " ἐλπίδος τοῦ ᾿Ισραὴλ τὴν ἱ ἅλυσιν ταύτην 
παρεκα- k 7 91 ξ δὲ \ " Ν = ‘H a vy 
(λσα. Karepixermat. 31] οἱ δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν εἶπαν Hyetis οὔτε 
= cn. XV. 5 

; viii. 20 ] , \ la 9 ΄ ᾽ Ν el ’ / ” 
Luke vii 20 1 γράμματα περὶ σοῦ ἐδεξάμεθα ἀπὸ τῆς ‘lovdaias, οὔτε 
viii. 29. , / A > a ᾽ ,ὔ > 3 
g ch. il, 48. ™ πσαραγενόμενός τις τῶν " ἀδελφῶν ἀπήγγειλεν ἢ ἐλά- 
on y. "ΧΟΩ͂, , \ a , 99 ᾽ na \ \ a 

yr. 16 AB2 ww O 

GAB? λῃσέν TL περὶ σοῦ πονηρόν. ἀξιοῦμεν δὲ παρὰ σοῦ 


xiii. 17.only. 
h constr. w. 
gen. of pers., 
2 Cor. i. 6. 
Phil. i. 20. 


Ps. lxiv. 6. i ch. xii. 6 re 


ff. 
1 = here only. (Luke xvi. 6,7. Gal. vi. 11.) 1 Macc. v. 10. 
i o = ch. xv. 38 (reff.) only. 
s ch. xvii, 30 reff. 


xxii.5. Deut. xv. 3. 


q ch. y. 17 reff. r — ch. xiii. 38 reff. 


20. παρεκαλεσαν (but ν erased) XN’. 
so δὲ, but « erased. 


al ἃ a, ee x \ r ΄ , / 
ἀκοῦσαι ἃ ? dpovets’ περὶ μὲν yap τῆς “ αἱρέσεως Tav- 
Ν lal -“ > / 
της γνωστὸν ἡμῖν ἐστιν ὅτι "πανταχοῦ ᾿Ὡἀντιλέγεται. 
k Luke xvii. 2} Mk. Heb. ν. 2. xii. lonlyt. 4 Mace. χῖϊ. 3, 


n = ch. 
2 Macc. xiv. 26. 


m absol., ch. xvii. 10 reff. 
= Rom. xii. 3 al. 
t ver. 19. 


for mposd., λαλησαι Ht. ewenrev A, 


21. The greater part of this ver is def in P, and smaller portions of vv 22 and 23. 


(ειπαν, so ABH'N p.) 


εδεξαμεθα bef περι cov A Plappy] 13 vulg eth-pl 


Thl-fin : txt BH™LN p rel 36 syrr Chr, [Euthal,] Thl-sif—for περι, κατα X&. 
22. axovoa bef rapa σου LX Ὁ do 40: om axovoa 13.—for mapa, περι ΗΓ. 
rec ἐστιν bef nu, with H™LP rel vulg spec Chr, Thl-sif: txt ABN k m p 13. 40 [Ps- 


Ath, | Thl-fin.—vpw p. 


aor. of the rec. would point to some one 
definite charge: κατηγορεῖν means ‘to 
play the accuser against my nation in any 
thing :’ indicating the habit. 20. |] 
παρεκάλεσα is here in its primary mean- 
ing, I have called you to me. 

διὰ ταύτ. τ. air., for the reason just stated: 
because I have no hostile feeling to my 
nation. Then ἕνεκεν yap... adds another 
motive; for not only so, but I may well 
wish to see and speak with you, being a 
prisoner for the hope of Israel (see ch. 
xxvi. 6, and notes). 21.) It may 
seem strange that they had received no 
tidings concerning him. But, as Meyer 
well remarks, (1) before his appeal, the 
Jews in Judza had no definite reason to 
communicate with the Jews in Rome re- 
specting him, having no expectation that 
Paul, then a prisoner in Judea, and the 
object of their conspiracies there, would 
ever go to Rome, or come into connexion 
with their brethren there. And (2) since 
his appeal, it would have been hardly pos- 
sible for them to have sent messengers who 
should have arrived before him. For his 
voyage followed soon after his appeal (ch. 
xxv. 13; xxvii. 1), and was so late in the 
year, that for the former reason it is as 
unlikely that any deputation from them 
should have left before him, as for the 
latter, after him. Had any left within a 
few days, the same storm would have in all 
probability detained them over the winter, 
and they could not certainly have made a 
much quicker voyage than Paul’s ship to 
Puteoli. Still, as casual, non-official tidings 
might have reached them, Paul shewed this 
anxiety. It appears, however, that none 


had come. Olshausen’s view, that the 
banishment of the Jews from Rome under 
Claudius had interrupted the relations 
between the Roman and Judzan Jews, is 
hardly probable: see on ver. 17. 22. | 
The δέ and μέν are inverted: “μέν si 
dicitur non sequente δέ, aut intelligi potest 
δέ, aut omittitur illa pars orationis in qua 
sequi debebat δέ, que aliquando praecedit.” 
Herm. ad Viger., p. 839. It precedes, be- 
cause it connects with the foregoing. * 
ἀξ. παρὰ σοῦ, we beg of thee: see reff. 
τῆς aip. ταύτ.} To which they perhaps 
inferred that Paul belonged, from ver. 20: 
or they might have heard thus much gene- 
rally respecting him by rumour, though 
they had received no special message. 
Their short notice of Christianity is per- 
haps the result of caution, seeing as they 
did the favour shewn by the authorities 
towards Paul (see Hackett, p. 392): or 
perhaps of dissimulation. Many Com- 
mentators have noticed the omission of all 
mention of the Christian Church at Rome, 
and of Paul’s connexion with or work 
among them. And some recently in Ger- 
many (e.g. Bauer) have called in question 
the credibility of the Acts on this account. 
But without any reason: for the work 
of the Apostle among churches already 
founded is not the subject of our history, 
and is seldom related by Luke, without a 
special reason. Of the three years at 
Ephesus (ch. xx. 31),—the year and a half 
(ch. xviii. 11), and three months (ch. xx. 3) 
at Corinth, we know from the narrative 
nothing that took place among the Chris- 
tians themselves. Besides, one great object 
of this history is to shew.forth Paul as 


ABLPN 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mop 18 


E πορ- 

εὐυθητι... 
ABELP 
Rabcd 
fghkl 
mopl3 


21—28. TIPASEIS AIOSTOAOQN 309 


B= ch: xv. 2. 
Matt. xxviii. 


23 ταξάμενοι δὲ αὐτῷ ἡμέραν ὃ ἦλθον πρὸς αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν 


/ : : , 
Y ξενέαν “ πλείονες, οἷς * ἐξετίθετο Υ διαμαρτυρόμενος τὴν Fconstt» 
Zz / a7 6 A a ‘9 > \ \ a? a Job xiv. 13. 
βασιλείαν του εου, “πεισῶν TE AUTOUS πέρυ του Ἰησοῦ τοὺς φόρους 
ΡΞ .» τ ας, Μ , ΜΕ lal: te a dos τοῖς “EAAn- 
ΑΙἿΤΟ TE TOV ~ VO{LOU @MUGEWS και τῶν προφητῶν, QaTO σι τάξας, 
de wa’ af £ , 24, \ e Mi pe fa) a Elian, Var. 
Tp@l ~ €WS εσπερᾶς. καὺ Ol μὲν 5 ETTELVOVTO τοις λε- _ Hist. xi. 9. 
v Philem. 22 


/ * ΄ 
γομένοις, οἱ δὲ ἃ ἠπίστουν. 351 ἀσύμφωνοι δὲ ὄντες πρὸς ΝΣ var. 
» , k 2 M4 Jan, ἢ aA , 1 1 1? Hist. iii. 37. 
ἀλλήλους * ἀπελύοντο εἰπόντος τοῦ ἸΙαύλου ! ῥῆμα ! ἕν, wen. ἢ. 40 τοῦ. 
- m x A X a Ng, n 5 ὃ Υ Ἡ ¥ ει ch, xi. 4 reff. 
OTL ™KaAWS TO πνεῦμα TO ἅγιον ἢ ἐλάλησεν διὰ Heaiov 
τοῦ προφήτου πρὸς τοὺς “πατέρας “ὑμῶν 26 λέγων «ἸΤορεύ- 


ch. viii. 25 
reff. constr., 
ch. xxiii. 11 
reff. 

zch. xix. 8 reff. 


‘ Ν \ A 4 a 7 ΄ 

θητι πρὸς τὸν λαὸν τοῦτον καὶ εἰπὸν ᾿Ακοῇ ἀκούσετε καὶ *~. περί, here 

\ a 4 \ > \ Sr Seo 
ov μὴ συνῆτε' καὶ βλέποντες βλέψετε καὶ ov μὴ ἴδητε. δα το 5. 
9 r2 / \ e / A a 7, \ ~ reff. : & 
7 ἐπαχύνθη γὰρ ἡ καρδία τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου, καὶ τοῖς 43 Kings xxii 
5 4 * \ » κα Mattie 
ὠσὶν " βαρέως ἤκουσαν, καὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν “ τὸ τα Gen. 
. 2-4 e ΄ ” a 5 an \ A tN Xxxii. 24. 
ἐκάμμυσαν' μήποτε ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν f Luke xxiv.29. 

͵ κ᾿ si Ps ch. iv. 3 only. 
ἀκούσωσιν καὶ TH καρδίᾳ συνῶσιν Kal" ἐπιστρέψωσιν καὶ 


Lev. xi. 24. 
g = Luke xvi. 
2.7 5 ΄ 31. ch. xvii. 
tag Oopat auTous. 


9§ Vv \ S c a yy « nA 
YV@OTOV ουν ὕμιν €OT@ OTL ποῖς 4. 
h Mark xvi. 11, 


16. Luke χχῖν. 11,41. Rom. 111, 3, 2 Τίτα. 11, 18 only+. Wisd. x. 7 ἃ]. ihere only+. Wisd. xviii. 
10 only. ao. mp. aAAnAous, Diod. Sic. iv. 1. k = ch. xiii. 3 reff. 1 Matt. xxvii. 14. see 
Matt. xxi. 24. m — Matt. xv.7al. Jer. i. 12. n ch, iii, 21 reff. o ch. iii. 


25 reff. constr., Rev. iv. 7,8 al. 
r = Matt. xiii. 15 (from 1. ec.) only. Deut. xxxii. 15. 
35. 2 Macc. xi. 1. xiv. 27 only. 
u = ch. iii. 19 reff. v ch, xiii. 38 reff. 


see ch, xxi. 23. q Isa. vi. 9, 10. 


5 Matt. xiii. 15 (from 1. c.) only. Gen. xxxi. 
t Matt. xiii. 15 only. Isa. l.c.xxix.10. Lam. ili. 44 only. 


23. *rec ἧκον, with H™LP rel Chr,: A@ov A(-Oav) BX k p 13. 36. 40. δια- 
μαρτυρουμενος p 36 Thi-fin: διαμαρτυραμενοι δὲϊ : -ραμενος δὲϑ : παρατειθεμενος A.[ —add 
αὐυτοις L. | om Ist τε δὲ! : και πειθων ἃ. rec ins ta bef περι (as rec in ch viil. 
12, and tat in ch xix. 8), with L rel Chr,: om ABH'N ac p 13. 36. 40. 1387 vulg spec 
[syrr copt zth(Treg) arm]. 

24. aft μεν ins ovy RX}. 

25. for 1st δε, τε δὲ! [36. 40 vulg Syr]. for δια, περι ΝΞ]. π. τ. πατερας 
υμων bef δια no. τ. προφ. A.—rec ἡμῶν (most prob altered to conform it to Paul’s being 
a Jew, and to the tone of his other speeches: not as Meyer and Bornemann, altered 
to vu. to distinguish him from the Jews, or because the speech was solely addressed 
to Jews. The vp. here has an important and characteristic meaning), with H™LP 
rel 36 vulg spec copt [eth-pl arm] Chr, Ambr,: om syr: txt ABN k p 13. 40 Syr 
Ath[-int,] Cyr-jer, Bas, Did, [Amm-c, ] Quest). 

26. rec Aeyov, with ΑΗΤ rel 36 [ Bas, | Chr,: txt BLPN f 13 [ Euthal, ΤῊ]. 
εἰπε (commoner form), with c [Did] Thl: txt ABEHTLPR p 19 rel [ Bas, ] Chr,. 
akovonte and βλεψητε AE [m] (p) 13 Thl-sif: -σετε and -ψητε H™N3: txt BLPN! rel 
36 [ Bas, ] Chr Thl-tin.[—om κ. Barer. βλεψ. p. | ouverte L p Thil-fin: συνίετε 18. 

27. εβαρυνθη NX}. aft 1st wow ins avtwy AX Ὁ ἃ ο 18 tol (Syr) eth-pl arm 
ΕΝ Thl-fin Jer,(om,). om kat τὴ καρδια συνωσιν N}. επιστρεψουσιν 

so LXX-N] AE p Thl[-sif]. rec ιασωμαι (so in Matt xiii. 15), with E p 18 Chr, : 
txt [so xx] ABHTLPR g!1 137 Sev Thl. 
᾿ 28. rec eotw bef uuiv, with AEHTLPRN rel: txt Β m p. 


rec 


working out the Lord’s implied command 


part, subjectively, performed that indicated 
(ch. i. 8), to preach the Gospel ‘ to the Jew 


by πείθειν ; that this did not produce its 


first, and also to the Gentile,’ and, having 
every where done this, it is but natural that 
he should open his commission in Rome by 
assembling and. speaking to the Jews. 

23. τ. ξενίαν] Probably the μίσθωμα of 
ver. 30: hardly, as Olsh., the house of 
Aquila. πείθων] persuading: not 
‘ teaching,’ as Kuin., nor ‘trying to per- 
suade.’ Meyer well remarks,—Paul, on his 


objective effect in all his hearers, does not 
alter the meaning of the word. 25. 
εἰπόντος they departed, but not before 
Paul had said one saying. It is very 
remarkable, that the same prophetic quota- 
tion with which our Lord opened his teach- 
ing by parables [Matt. xiii. 14, 15], should 
form the solemn close of the historic 
Scriptures. 26.] the πορεύθ. x. εἰπόν 


910 ΠΡΑΞΕῚΣ ATIOSTOAQN, XXVIII. -30, 31. 


w see ch. xiii. 
26. 
x = Luke ii. 30. 


/ a \ / ° a 
ἔθνεσιν ἡ ἀπεστάλη τοῦτο TO “* σωτήριον τοῦ θεοῦ" αὐτοὶ 
καὶ ¥ ἀκούσονται *. 


Hi. 6. Eph. 

yi. 17 only. ᾽ t : Ι 

δ χοῦ .. 908 ᾿νέμεινεν δὲ ὃ διετίαν ὅλην ἐν ἰδίῳ ° μισθώματι, καὶ 
Isa. Ix. 6. ΄ 

fut. mid., 


“<4 


ἃ ἀπεδέχετο πάντας τοὺς “ εἰςπορευομένους πρὸς αὐτόν, 
h 


John v.25, 28. 
otherwise, 
Acts (ch. ni. 
22, 23. xvii. 
32) only. 
Num. ix. 8. 
z.ch. xv. 7 
(reff.) only +. 
ach. xiv. 22 
reff. 
bch. xxiv. 27 
only. (-τής, 
Matt. ii. 16. 
2 Mace. x. 3.) 
see ch. xx. 31. c here only f. 
e w. πρός, here only. Esth. ii. 14. 
xxiii. 11. Sir. xix. 30. 
vii. 22.) 


31 fxnpvoowr τὴν  Bactrciav τοῦ 8 θεοῦ καὶ διδάσκων ὃ τὰ 
περὶ τοῦ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ ‘peta πάσης ἱ παῤῥησίας 


Κἀκωλύτως. 
ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. 


ἃ ch. ii. 41 reff. 
h ch. 
(-Tos, Wisd. 


(Deut. xxiii. 18.) (-οὖσθαι, Matt. xx. 1,7.) 
f ch. xx. 25 (reff.). g ch. xix. 8 reff. 
i ch. ii. 29 reff. k here only +. Job xxxiy. 31 Symm. 


rec om TovTo (as unnecessary 7), with E{-gr] Ht™LPN? tol zth! (Treg) copt(Treg) arm 
Kuthal,] Thl: ins ABN! ¢ p 18. 36. 40 vulg E-lat syrr [th-pl(Tischdf) | Chry. 

[29. *rec ins Kal ταῦτα αὐτοῦ εἰπόντος ἀπῆλθον οἱ ᾿ Ἰουδαῖοι, πολλὴν 
ἔχοντες ἐν ἑαυτοῖς * συζήτησιν, with ΗΤΠΡ rel 36 syr-w-ast «th[-rom(Treg) arm- 
usc] Chr, Thl: om ABEN c p 13. 40 am(with demid fuld &c) spec{from the space | 
Syr copt [zth-pl arm-zoh]. (In the paucity of uncial Mss, and seeing that there are 
no considerable varr in the omitted passage, I have treated it as doubtful. It is 
perhaps one of those many additions which D alone of the first class uss would have 
contained, had it been preserved to us, and was inserted on acet of the abrupt transi- 


tion from ver 28 to ver 30: but see notes.) | 
80. rec (for eveu.) εμεινεν, with AEH! LPR? rel 36 Chr,: ἐπέμεινεν € 137-56: txt B(N?) 


€ 
p 13.—eveuvar(sic) &}. rec aft de ins o παυλος, with HTLP rel 36 tol Syr syr-w-ast 
zth Chr: om ABEN ¢ p 18. 40 vulg copt arm. aft αὐτὸν ins covdaous 137 : ιου- 
daious τε Kat ελληνας 6 tol syr-w-ast. 

31. aft διδασκων, add quoniam hic est Christus filius Dei, per quem omnis mundus 
judicabitur tol: aft axwAutws, Aeywy OTL OUTOS ἐστιν χριστος iNOUS O VLOS του θεου δι᾽ 
ov κοσμος oAos μελλει κρινεσθαι syr demid. om ingov XN}, at end add αμην ἃ 
15-8. 36. 40-3. 96 am fuld harl syr Chr-ms. 


SUBSCRIPTION. mpateis των ayiwy ἀποστολων AEH'TL: om ἃ σα] τὰ [Κ 13]: ἐπληρω- 
θησαν a mp. τ. ay. απ. P: τελος των πραξιων bo: τελ. συν θεω τῶν Tp. τ. απ. 137: 


TeAos τ. πραξ. τ. αγιων amoot. f: πραξεις των ἀποστόλων p: txt BR. 


is referred to himself, in his application of 
the prophecy. ‘These words are not cited 
by our Lord (Matt. xiii. 14). 28. | 
τοῦτο was probably omitted as superfluous, 
and perhaps to suit Luke iii. 6. It adds 
greatly to the force: this, the message of 
God’s salvation, α. ἃ. ‘there is no other 
for those who reject this’ αἰτοὶ καὶ 
ἀκ. They will also (besides having it 
sent to them) hear it. “ Quod expertus 
erat Paulus in multis Asie et. Europe 
urbibus, ut apud gentes sermonis felicior 
esset seges, idem et nunc futurum pro- 
spiciebat.” Grot. [29.] This verse 
has not the usual characteristic of spurious 
passages,—the variety of readings in those 
manuscripts which contain it. It may 
perhaps, after all, have been omitted as 
appearing superfluous after ver. 25.] 

30, 31.] It is evident that Paul was not 
released from custody, but continued with 


the soldier who kept him,—(1) from the 
expressions here ; he received all who came 
in to him, but we do not hear of his preach- 
ing in the synagogue or elsewhere: he 
preached and taught with all boldness and 
unhindered, both being mentioned as re- 
markable circumstances, and implying that 
there were reasons why this could hardly 
have been expected: and (2) from his con- 
stantly speaking of himself in the Epistles 
written during this period, as a prisoner, see 
Eph. vi. 19, 20; Col. iv. 3, 4; Philem. 9; 
Philipp. passim. On the whole question 
regarding the chronology of his imprison- 
ment,—and the reason of this abrupt end- 
ing of the history, see Prolegg. to Acts, § iv. 
4—7 :—and on its probable termination 
and the close of St. Paul’s life, see the 
Trolegg- to the Pastoral Epistles, § ii. 
17 ff. 


ABELP 
Rabcd 
fghkl 
mop 13 


.««Ο͵Π0- 
στολος 
G 


ABCEK 
L[PIN a 


bedfg Tov aylov και πανευφημου αποστ. Mav. ET. προς pw. 
po. mM: Tp. pw. wav. ew. k: wav. ew. mp. pw. 17: 


hklm 
nol17 


[47] 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOYS. 


ἴ, 1 Παῦλος *d00A0s Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ, " κλητὸς ἀπό- 


a Phil. i. 1. 
James i. |. 
Pet. i. 1. 


2 
Ὁ =vv.6,7. 1Cor.i. [1] 2,24. Jude lal. 2 Kings xy.11. 


TITLE.—rec παύυλου Tov αποστολου n προς ρωμαιου5 ETLOTOAN : ET. παυ. TP. pw. Ks 


L 14. 44. 80: παυλου [am.] er. rp. 


[em. τ. παναγιου π. τ. απ. Tp. popu. P: 


ap. ρ. επ. h:] txt ΑΒΟΝ n ο [47] and Ὁ] ΕἼ at head of pages. (προς p(. .)a(.)us is legible 


in C.) 


Cuap. I. 1. χριστου bef maou B(sic : see table) am(with fuld tol &c) [arm] Orig, Aug, 


Ambr, Ambrst, [Cassiod, | Bede. 


Cuap. I. 1—7.] ADDRESS OF THE EPIS- 
TLE, WITH AN ANNOUNCEMENT OF PAUL’s 
CALLING, TO BE AN APOSTLE OF THE GOs- 
PEL OF THE SONOF GOD. “ Epistola tota 
sic methodica est, ut ipsum quoque exor- 
dium ad rationem artis compositum sit. 
Artificium quum in multis apparet, que 
suis locis observabantur, tum in eo maxime, 
quod inde argumentum principale deduci- 
tur. Nam Apostolatus sui approbationem 
exorsus, ex ea in Evangelii commendatio- 
nem incidit: que quum necessario secum 
trahat disputationem de fide, ad eam, quasi 
verborum contextu manu ducente, delabi- 
tur. Atqueita ingreditur principalem totius 
Epistole queestionem, fide nos justificari : 
in qua tractanda versatur usque ad finem 
quinti capitis.” Calvin. Paul in the 
addresses of his Epistles never uses the 
common Greek formula χαίρειν (James i. 
1), but always a prayer for blessing on 
those to whom he is writing. In:all his 
Epistles (as in both those of Peter, and in 
the Apocalypse) this prayer is for χάρις and 
εἰρήνη, except in 1 and 2 Tim., where it is 
for χάρις, ἔλεος, and εἰρήνη, as in 2 John. 
In Jude only we find ἔλεος, εἰρήνη, and 
ἀγάπη. The address here differs from 
those of most of Paul’s Epistles, in having 
dogmatic clauses parenthetically inserted: 
—such are found also in the Epistle to 
Titus, and (in much less degree) in that 
to the Galatians. These dogmatic clauses 
regard, 1. the fore-announcement of the 


. Gospel through the prophets: 2. the de- 


scription and dignity of Him who was the 
subject of that Gospel: 3. the nature and 
aim of the apostolic office to which Paul 
had been called,—including the persons 
addressed in the objects of its ministra- 
tion. 1. δοῦλος “I. x. ] so also Phil. i.1, 
and Tit. i. 1 (δοῦλος θεοῦ, ἀπόστ. δὲ x. ᾽1.), 
—but usually ἀπ. x. Ἶ. (2 Cor. Eph. Col. 
1 Tim. 2 Tim.): [κλητὸς | ἀπ. χ. Ἷ. (1 Cor.), 
—simply ἀπόστολος (Gal.),—déopmuos x. "I. 
(Philem.), but in almost all these places 
the reading varies between χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ 
and Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ. The expression an- 
swers to the Hebr. mm Ἴ2ν, the especial 
O. T. title of Israel, and of individuals, as 
Moses, Joshua, David, Daniel, Job, and 
others, who as prophets, kings, &c., were 
raised up for the express work of God. See 
Umbreit’s note, Der Brief an die Rémer 
auf dem Grunde des alten Testaments 
ausgelegt, p. 153 f. It must not be ren- 
dered slave with Schrader, nor pius cultor 
with Fritzsche: because, as Mehring re- | 
marks, the former excludes the element of 
freewill, while the latter does not express 
the entire dedication to Christ. 

κλητὸς aardot.] In naming himself a 
servant of Jesus Christ, he bespeaks their 
attention as a Christian speaking to Chris- 
tians : he now further specifies the place 
which he held by the special calling of 
God: called, and that to the very highest 
office, of an apostle; and even more— 
among the Apostles, not one by original se- 


lection, but one specially called. ““ Ceteri 


~ a 





912 


c Acts xiii. 2. 
Gal. i. 15. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


i 


στολος, “ ἀφωρισμένος εἰς ἃ εὐαγγέλιον ἃ θεοῦ, 3 ὃ © προ- 


/ \ a “ ’ cr > { al 
ev. xx. 26, g 
F od ge επηγγείλατο διὰ ὭΣ προφητῶν αὐτου ἐν γραφαῖς 
eff. © / \ fa) lal > a a , 3 ΄ 
elccrix.s ὅ ἁγίαις 3 περὶ τοῦ νἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, τοῦ ἢ γενομένου ἐκ ἷ σπέρ- C του 
only +. i \ k \k , 4 al. , vite A YEVOL.+- 
rplur, Acts ματος } Δαυεὶδ * κατὰ ὃ σάρκα, * τοῦ | ὁρισθέντος υἱοῦ θεοῦ aBcEK 
XV. «© . 
g here only. ᾿ L[P]xa 
see ch. xvi. 26. 2 Tim. iii. 16. h=Gal. iv.4, Phil. ii. 7. Acts xix. 26. i Luke i.55. John Dedfg 
vii. 42. (Acts xiii. 23.) 2 Tim. ii. 8. Jer. xxii. 30. k—ch. iv. 1. ix. 3,5. 1 Cor. x. 38) Gabiy.23, h Kim 
29 al. Paul only. see John viii. 15. 2 Cor. xi. 18. 1 Acts xvii. 26 reff. nol7 
[47] 


quidem apostoli per diutinam cum Jesu 
consuetudinem educati fuerunt, et primo 
ad sequelam et disciplinam vocati, deinde 
ad apostolatum producti. Paulus, perse- 
cutor antehac, de subito apostolus per voca- 
tionem factus est. Ita Judi erant sancti 
ex promissione: Greci, sancti ex mera 
vocatione, ver.6. Praecipuam ergo vocatus 
apostolus cum vocatis sanctis similitudi- 
nem et conjunctionem habebat.” Bengel. 
ἀπόστολος must not be taken here in the 
wider sense, of a missionary, as in ch. xvi. 
7, but in its higher and peculiar meaning, 
in which the Twelve bore the title (ods καὶ 
ἀποστόλους ὠνόμασεν, Luke vi. 13), and 
Paul (and perhaps Barnabas), and James 
the Lord’s brother. This title was not con- 
ferred on Paul by the ἀφορίσατε δή μοι of 
the Holy Spirit, Acts xiii. 2, but 2 virtue 
of his special call by the Lord in person ; 
compare σκεῦος ἐκλογῆς, Acts ix. 15, with 
ἐξελεξάμην, John vi. 70; xiii. 18; xv. 16; 
Acts i. 2. ‘ Neque eniin iis assentior, qui 
eam de qua loquitur vocationem ad eter- 
nam Dei electionem referant.” Calvin. 
ἀφωρισμένος not in Acts xiii. 2, merely, 
though that was a particular application 
of the general truth :—but (as in Gal. i. 
15, ὁ ἀφορίσας με ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός mov) 
from his birth. “Idem Pharis@i etymon 
fuerat: hoc autem loco Paulus se non 
solum ex hominibus, ex Judezis, ex disci- 
pulis, sed etiam ex doctoribus segregatum 
a Deo significat.” Bengel. eis] for 
the purpose of announcing. evay- 
γέλιον θεοῦ = τὸ εὐαγ. τοῦ θ., which (see 
reff.) is the usual form. Bp. Middleton 
(on ver. 17) remarks on the anarthrousness 
of Paul’s style, and cites from Dion. 
Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 22, as a character 
of the αὐστηρὰ ἁρμονία, that it is dAvyo- 
σύνδεσμος, GvapOpos. See the passage 
cited at length in the Prolegomena, § v. 2, 
—the good tidings sent by (not concern- 
ing) God. The genitive is not, as in 7d 
εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας, Matt. iv. 23, 
one of apposition, but of possesszon or 
origin ; God's Gosper. And so, whenever 
the expression ‘the Gospel of Christ’ oc- 
curs, it is not ‘the Gospel about Christ,’ 
but Christ's Gospel that Gospel which 
flows out of His grace, and is His gift to 
nen. Thus in the very beginning of the 
Epistle, these two short words announce 


that the Gospel is of God,—in other 


words, that salvation is of ce onl 
9.1 This good tiding inven- . 


tion, no after-thought,— but was long ago 
announced in what God’s prophets wrote 
concerning His Son :—and announced by 


way of promise, so that God stood pledged 
to its realization. ἐπειδὴ δὲ Kal KatvoTo- τ 


μίαν ἐνεκάλουν τῷ πρήγματι, δείκνυσιν 
αὐτὸ πρεσβύτερον Ἑλλήνων ὄν, καὶ ἐν 
τοῖς προφήταις προδιαγραφόμενον. Chrys. 
Hom. ii. p. 431. ypad. ἅγ.] not, ‘in 
sacred writings,—nor ‘in passages of 
Holy Writ ’—but in the Holy Serip- 
tures. ‘he expression used is defined 
enough by the adjective, to be well under- 
stood without the article;—so πνεῦμα 
ἅγιωσ. below,—my. ἅγιον passim. See 
Winer, edn. 6, § 19. 2 (and for nouns in 
government, Middleton, ch. iii. §6). But 
one set of writings being holy, it was not 
necessary to designate them more particu- 
larly. See also above on evayy. deov. This 
expression (evayy ὃ mpoetnyy.) is used 
in the strictest sense. Moses gave the 
Law: the prophets proclaimed the Gos- 
pel. See Umbreit’s note, p. 159. 

3. περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ) belongs to ὃ 
προεπ. above,—which he promised be- 
forehand, &c., concerning His Son, i. e. 
‘which (good tidings) He promised before- 
hand, &c., and indicated that it should be 
concerning His Son.’ This is more natural 
than to bind these words to evayy. θεοῦ 
which went before. Either meaning will 


-suit ver. 9 equally well. Christ, the Son of 


God, is the great subject of the good news. 
γενομένου) not ὄντος, see John i. 
1—3, and notes [nor as in E. V. ‘was 
made. There is nothing in the word 
indicating creation, however true that 
may have been: see John i. 14]. 
κατὰ σάρκα] On the side of His humanity, 
our Lord ἐγένετο; that nature of His 
begins only then, when He was γενόμενος 
ἐκ γυναικός, Gal. iv. 4. is here 
used exactly as in John i. 14, 6 Adyos 
σὰρξ ἐγένετο, to signify that whole nature. 
body and soul, of which the outward 
visible tabernacle of the FLESH is the con- 
crete representation to our senses. 
The words ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυείδ cast a 
hint. back atthe promise just spoken of. 


At the same time, in so solemn an enuncia- 


9---ῦ. 


TIPOS, POMAIOTS 


318 


méy τὸ δυνάμει ἢ κατὰ τοπνεῦμα “Ὁ ἁγιωσύνης 4 ἐξ τἀναστασεως m Mark ix.1. 


ch. xv. 13, 


: 
Τ᾿ νεκρῶν, Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν, ὃ δι’ οὗ ἐλά- 18 eer. Νὴ 
Col. i. 29 al. 
n Gal. iv. 29. ohere only. see John xiv. 17. 2 Tim.i.7. 1 John iy. 6, p 2 Cor 
vii. 1. 1 Thess. iii. 13 only. Ps, xcv. 6. xevi. 12. exliv.5. 2 Mace. iii. 12 only. q = James 
ii, 18 (bis). Rev. viii. 11 al. r 1 Cor, xv. 12 reff. L.P.H 


tion of the dignity of the Son of God, 
they serve to shew that even according to 
the human side, His descent had been 
fixed in the line of him who was Israel’s 
anointed and greatest king. 4.] The 
simple antithesis would have been, τοῦ μὲν 
yevouevov ... ὄντος δὲ υἱοῦ θεοῦ κατὰ 
πνεῦμα, see 1 ΤΊιη. 111.16,. But (1) wonder- 
ful solemnity is given by dropping the 
particles, and taking up separately the 
human and divine nature of Christ, keep- 
ing ὁ υἱὸς αὐτοῦ as the great subject of 
both clauses, and thus making them, not 
contrasts to one another, but correlative 
parts of the same great whole, And (2) 
the Apostle, dwelling here on patent 
facts, —the announcements of prophecy,— 
the history of the Lord’s Humanity,— 
does not deal with the essential subsistent 
Godhead of Christ, but with that manifes- 
tation of it which the great fact of the 
Resurrection had made to men. Also (8) 
by amplifying πνεῦμα into my. ἁγιωσύνης, 
he characterizes the Spirit of Christ as one 
of absolute holiness, i.e. as divine and 
partaking of the Godhead: see below. 

δρισθέντος | “ Multo plus dicit quam 
ἀφωρισμένος, ver. 1: nam ἀφορίζεται unus 
e pluribus, ὁρίζεται unicus quispiam.” 
Bengel. See reff. Nor does it = mpoopic- 
θέντος, as vulg. predestinatus, and as 
Irenzus (iii. 22. 1, p. 219) and Augustine 
de Predest. Sanctorum, ὁ. 15, vol. x. 
p- 982:—“ Predestinatus est ergo Jesus, 
ut qui futurus erat secundum carnem 
filius David, esset tamen in virtute Filius 
Dei secundum Spiritum Sanctificationis : 
quia natus est de Spiritu Sancto et Virgine 
Maria.” But this is one of the places 
where Augustine has been misled by the 
Latin :—the text speaks, not of the fact 
of Christ’s being the Son of God barely, 
but of the proof of that fact by His Re- 
surrection. Chrysostom has given the 
right meaning: τί οὖν ἔστιν δρισθέντος Σ 
τοῦ δειχθέντος, ἀποφανθέντος, κριθέντος, 
ὁμολογηθέντος παρὰ τῆς ἅπάντων γνώμης 
καὶ ψήφου... . Hom. ii. p. 482. That an 
example is wanting of this exact use of 
the word, is, as Olsh. has shewn, no objec- 
tion to such use; the ὁρίζειν here spoken 
of is not the objective " fixing,’ ‘ appoint- 
ing’ οἵ Christ to be the Son of God, but 
the subjective manifestation im men’s 
minds that He is so. Thus the objective 
words ποιεῖν (Acts ii. 36), γεννᾷν (Acts 
-xmi, 33) are used of the same proof or 


manifestation of Christ’s Sonship by His 
Resurrection. So again ἐδικαιώθη, 1 Tim. 
ili. 16. ἐν δυνάμει. belongs to δὁρισθέντος, 
—notto υἱοῦ devv, —nor again is it a parallel 
clause to κατ. πν. ay. and. ἐξ ἀναστ. ver. (as 
Chrys., who interprets it ἀπὸ τῶν θαυμάτων 
ἅπερ ἔπραττε, Theophyl. &c.) manifested 
with power (to be) the Son of God. 
See reff. κατὰ πνεῦμα ἁγιωσύνης] 
ἅγιωσ. is not = ἅγιον ; this epithet would 
be inapplicable here, for it would point out 
the Third Person in the Blessed Trinity, 
whereas it is the Spirit of Christ Himself, 
in distinction from His Flesh, which is 
spoken of. And this Spirit is designated 
by the ς gen. of quality, ἁγιωσύνης, to shew 
that it is not a human, but a divine Spirit 
which is attributed here to Christ,—a 
Spirit to which holiness belongs as its 
essence. The other interpretations cer- 
tainly miss the mark, by overluoking the 
κατὰ σάρκα and κατὰ πνεῦμα, the two sides 
of the Person of Christ here intended to 
be brought out. Such are that of Theo- 
doret (διὰ τῆς ὑπὸ τοῦ παναγίου πνεύματος 
ἐνεργουμένης δυνάμεω5), —Chrys. (ἀπὸ τοῦ 
πνεύματος, 50 οὗ τὸν ἁγιασμὸν ἔδωκεν), 
ἄς. Calvin and Olshausen seem to wish 
to include the notion of sanctifying 
(ἁγιασμός) in a@yiwovvyn,—which however 
true, is more than strictly belongs to the 
words. See by all means, on the whole, 
Umbreit’s important note, pp. 164—172. 

ἐξ] not ‘from and after’ (as Theo- 
doret, Luther, Grotius, al.), nor = ἀπό, 
which could not be used here, but by, as 
indicating the source, out of which the 
demonstration proceeds. “ἀναστάσεως 
νεκρῶν} not = ἄναστ. ἐκ vexpov,—which, 
besides the force done to the words, would 
be a weakening of the strong expression of 
the Apostle, who takes here summarily and 
by anticipation the Resurrection of Jesus 
as being, including, involving (ἐγώ εἶμι 7 
ἀνάστασις, John xi. 25) the (whole) Resur- 
rection of the dead. So that we must not 
render as Εἰ. V.‘ the resurrection from the 
dead,’ but the resurrection of the dead, 
regarded as accomplished in that of Christ. 
It was the full accomplishment of this, 
which more than any thing declared Him 
to be the Son of God: see John v. 25—29. 
Thus in these words lies wrapped up the 
argument of ch. vi. 4 ff. "Ino. Xp. τ. 
kup. np. | Having given this description of 
the Person and dignity of the Son of God, 
very Man and very God, he now identifies 


914 


s = ch. xii. 3. 


xy. 15. 1 Cor. 
iii. 10. Gal. 
ii. 9. Eph 
ll. 2. 
t Acts i. 25. 
1 Cor. ix. 2. > > 
Gal.ii.8 only. QUTLW EV 
Deut. xxii. 7. 
u ch. xvi. 26. 
v — vv. 16,17. 1 Pet. i. 22. w ch. v.19, 2 Cor. vii. 
ch. xvi. 26. 2Cor.x.5. 1 Pet. i. 22, 


(see note.) 
Ps, cxxvi. 2. 


z ver. l. w. gen., here only. 
x. 14, Phil. ii. 12 only. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


a Ww. gen., Matt. xii. 18. 
b = Acts ix. 13 reff. 


I. 


’ Ὁ \ , 
βομεν " χάριν καὶ * ἀποστολὴν “Y εἰς ἂν ὑπακοὴν ™ πίστεως 


ἐστε καὶ ὑμεῖς “κλητοὶ ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ, 1 πᾶσιν τοῖς 
ἿΒ / a > a“ θ lal Z - b « ΄ 
oun “ἀγαπητοῖς θεοῦ, *KANTOLS " AYLOLS. Ὁ κλη- 


15. Heb. ν.8. 1 Ῥεῖ. 1. 2 ἃ]. 2 Kings xxii. 
x objective, = Acts vi. 7. 
Acts xv. 25 (of Paul). ch. xvi. 5, 8,9. 1 Cor. 


al a » Ν -“ >] , Ε] lal 5 ? 
ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν Υ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ, ὃ ἐν οἷς Gev 


πασι..ε 


τοις... 


36 only. constr., ABCDG 
y Acts ix. 16 reff. KL[P]X 


abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


. 47 
7. om εν pwun G schol-in-47(ro ev ρωμη, ovte εν τὴ εξηγήσει, ουτε EV τω ρήτω (os 7 


μνημονευει). for αγαπητ. θεου, εν ἀγαπη θεου G am fuld! D!-lat Ambrst-ms,: om omission 
E 82 of E, see 

ᾷ prole- 
gomena.) 


this divine Person with Jesvs CaRist, the 
Lord and Master of Christians,—the his- 
torical object of their faith, and (see words 
* following) the Appointer of himself to the 
apostolic office. 5. δι᾿ od | as in Gal. 
i. 1; 1 Cor. i. 9, designating the Lord 
Himself as the Agent in conferring the 
grace and Apostleship. ἐλάβομεν] 
not ‘ all Christians, —but we, the Apostle 
himself, as he not unfrequently speaks. 
No others need be here included in the 
word. Those to whom he is writing cannot 
be thus included, for they are specially 
contrasted with the subject of ἐλάβομεν by 
the following ὑμεῖς. Nor can the aor. 
ἐλάβομεν refer to any general bestowal of 
this kind, indicating, as it must, a definite 
past event, viz. the reception of the Apos- 
tleship by himself. To maintain (as Dr. 
Peile, Annotations on the Epistles, vol. 1. 
Appendix) that the subject of ἐλάβομεν 
must be the same as the ἡμῶν which has 
preceded, is to overlook, not only the con- 
trast just noticed, and the habit of Paul to 
use indiscriminately the singular or plural, 
when speaking of himself,—but also the 
formulary character of the expression, 
« Jesus Christ our Lord,’ in which the ‘ we’ 
alluded to in ‘ our’ is too faintly indicated 
to become the subject of a following verb. 

χάριν] Hardly, as Augustine, 
“ gratiam cum omnibus fidelibus, aposto- 
latum autem non cum omnibus communem 
habet ” (Olsh.): for he is surely speaking 
of that peculiar χάρις, by which he 
wrought in his apostleship more than they 
all; see reff. ἀποστολήν) Strictly, 
apostleship, ‘the office of an Apostle,’ see 
reff. : not any mission, or power of sending 
ministers, resident in the whole church, 
which would be contrary to the usage of 
the word. The existence of such a power 
is not hereby denied, but this place refers 
solely to the office of Paul as an Apostle. 
Keep the yap. «. ἄποστ. separate, and 
strictly consecutive, avoiding all nonsensi- 
cal figures of Hendiadys, Hypallage, and 
the like. It was the general bestowal of 
grace, which conditioned and introduced 


the special bestowal (kat, as so often, 
coupling a specific portion to a whole) of 
apostleship : cf. 1 Cor. xv. 10. . εἰς] 
with a view ἴο,-- in order to bring about.’ 
ὑπακοὴν πίστεως The anarthrous 
character above remarked (on εὐαγγ. θεοῦ, 
ver. 1) must be here borne in mind, or we 
shall fall into the mistake of supposing 
é. m. to mean ‘ obedience produced by 
faith. The key to the words is found in 
ref. Acts, πολύς τε ὄχλος τῶν ἱερέων 
ὑπήκουον τῇ πίστει, compared with Paul’s 
own usage of joining an objective genitive 
with ὑπακοή, see 2 Cor. x. 5, εἰς τὴν 
ὑπακοὴν τοῦ χριστοῦ. So that πίστεως 
is the faith; not = ‘the gospel which 
is to be believed’ (as Fritzsche, citing 
ch. x. 16), but the state of salvation, in 
which men stand by faith. And so these 
words form an introduction to the great 
subject of the Epistle. ἐν πᾶσιν τ. ev. | 
in order to bring about obedience to the 
faith among all (the) nations. The Jews 
do not here come into account. There is 
no inclusion, and at the same time no ex- 
press exclusion of them : but Paul was com- 
missioned as the Apostle of the Gentiles, 
and he here magnifies the great office en- 
trusted to him. ὑπὲρ τ. dv. ait. ] on 
behalf of His name, i.e. ‘ for His glory :᾿ 
see reff. “Τὴ the name of Christ is summed 
up what He had done and was, what the 
Christian ever bore in mind, the zeal which 
marked him, the name wherewith he was 
named.” Jowett. See also Umbreit’s note. 
The words are best taken as belonging to 
the whole, from δι᾽ οὗ to ἔθνεσιν [as de- 
claring the purpose for which the grace 
and apostleship had been received }. 
6. ἐν οἷς... .7 The whole to χριστοῦ 
should be taken together: among whom 
ye also are called of Jesus Christ; other- 
wise, with a comma at ὑμεῖς, the assertion, 
‘among whom are ye,’ is flat and un- 
meaning. De Wette and Calvin would 
take Ἰησοῦ xp. as a gen. of possession, 
because the call of believers is generally 
referred to the FaTHER: but sometimes the 
Son is said to call likewise, see John v. 25; 


6—8. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


91 


"χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ " εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ « see introduc- 


κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ. 


lal ἊΣ d > las a e Lal 

8 ἸἹΙρῶτον μὲν I εὐχαριστῶ τῷ ° θεῷ 

~ if e an vo ΄ ΄ n 
χριστοῦ περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν, OTL ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν 


viif. 25. (Wisd. vill. 2.) 2 Macc. i. 11 only. 
ἘΣ (Ὁ 26." 1 Cor. 2 Cor. xii. 21. 
only. ‘Psalms and Prophets passim. 


8. om δια ino. xp. N}(ins corr?) ὁ. 


tory note. 
d w. dat., Luke 
XViil. 1]. 


6 ὃ Ν Ἶ a John xi. 41. 
μου ta OOVU Acts xxvii. 
f 35. xxviii. 
- Lo, worst, 
KaTay 4al. Judith 
e Matt. xxvii. 46 bis || Mk. (from Ps. xxi. 1.) John 
phi. i. 3. iv. 19. Philem. 4. Rev. ii. 7. wii, 12 (four times) 


f Acts xiii. 5 reff. 


rec : (for περι) ὑπερ (see note), with D3GL[P] 


rel Chr Thdrt: [pro latt syr arm Orig-int, :] txt ABCD! KN ὁ 17 [Syr] Damase. 


1 Tim. i. 12:—and with ἀγαπητοὶ θεοῦ 
following so close upon it, the expression 
can I think har dly be taken otherwise than 
as called by Jesus Christ. ἐκλεκτοὶ av- 
τοῦ, Matt. xxiv. 31, cited by De W. 
hardly parallel. 7. 1 This verse follows, 
‘in the sense, close on ver. 1. ay. 6., 
κλητ. Gy. | Both these clauses refer to all 
the Christians addressed: not (as Bengel) 
the first to Jewish, the second to Gentile 
believers. No such distinction would be 
in place in an exordium which anticipates 
the result of the Epistle—that Jew and 
Gentile are one in guilt, and one in Christ. 
ἀπ. 0. war. Hp. κ΄ κυρ. Ἶ. x.} Not, 
as Erasiaus, ‘from God, the Father of us 
and of our Lord Jesus Christ, —but from 
God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus 
Christ. God is the Giver of Grace ana 
Peace,—Christ the Iimparter. 
΄σ 8—1%7.] OPENING OF THE EPISTLE. 
| His thankfulness for the faith of the 
Romans: remembrance of them in his 
prayers: wish to visit them: hindrances 
hitherto, but still earnest intention of 
doing so, that he may further ground them 
in that Gospel, of which he is not ashamed, 
inasmuch as it is THE POWER OF GOD 
TO ALL WHO BELIEVE. This leads to the 
announcement (in a citation from the 
Scripture) of one great subject of the 
Epistle,—viz.: JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH. 
8.1 This placing himself in intimate 
connexion with his readers by mention of 
and thankfulness for their faith or Chris- 
tian graces, is the constant habit of Paul. 
The three Epistles, Gal., 1 Tim., and Titus, 
are the only exceptions : Olsh. adds 2 Cor., 
but in ch. i. 3—22 we have an equivalent : 
see especially vv. 6, 7, 11, 14. μέν] 
The corresponding δέ follows, ver. 13. ‘Ye 
indeed are prospering in the faith: but I 
‘still am anxious further to advance that 
-fruitfulness.’ There is no ἔπειτα to follow 
to πρῶτον. τῷ θεῷ μου] ὅρα μεθ᾽ 
ὅσης διαθέσεως εὐχαριστεῖ. οὐ γὰρ εἶπε, 
τῷ θεῷ, ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ μου’ ὃ καὶ οἱ προ- 
φῆται ποιοῦσι, ᾿τὸ κοινὸν ἰδιοποιούμενοι. 
καὶ τί θαυμαστὸν εἰ οἱ προφῆται; αὐτὸς 
γὰρ αὐτὸ συνεχῶς 6 θεὸς φαίνεται ποιῶν 
ἐπὶ τῶν δούλων, θεὸν ᾿Αβραὰμ καὶ Ἰσαὰκ 


καὶ Ἰακὼβ ἰδιαζόντως λέγων ἑαυτόν. Chrys. 
Hom. iii. p. 436. διὰ I. x. ] “ Velut 
per Pontificem magnum: oportet enim 
scire eum qui vult offerre sacrificium Deo, 
quod per manus Pontificis debet offerre.” 
Origen. So also Calvin, “Hic habemus 
exemplum, quomodo per Christum agende 
sunt gratia, secundum Apostoli przcep- 
tum ad Heb. xiii. 15.” Olshausen says, 
‘This is no mere phrase, but a true ex- 
pression of the deepest conviction. For 
only. by the Spirit of Christ dwelling in 
men’s hearts are thanksgivings and prayer 
acceptable to God.” But perhaps here it 
is better to take the words as expressing 
an acknowledgment that the faith of the 
Romans, for which thanks were given, 
was due to, and rested on the Lord Jesus 
Christ: see ch. vii. 25, and rendering 
there. περί] This prep. and “ἘΝ 
both occur in this connexion, see 1 Cor. 
4; Col. i. 3; 1 Thess. 1.2; 2 Thess. i. 3; 
Eph. i. 16; Phil. i. 4:—and it is impos- 
sible to say, in cases of their confusion 
by the mss., which may have been sub- 
stituted for the other. The internal cri- 
ticism which would adopt ὑπέρ as being 
the less usual, may be answered by the pro- 
bability that ὑπέρ, being known to be some- 
times used by Paul, may have been substi- 
tuted as more in his manner for the more 
usual περί. So that manuscript authority 
in such cases: must be our guide; and 
this authority is here decisive. The differ- 
ence in meaning would be, that ὑπέρ would 
give more the idea that thanks were given 
by Paul on their behalf, as if he were aid- 
ing them in giving thanks, for such great 
mercies: whereas περί would imply only 
that they were the subject of his thanks, — 
that. he gave thanks concerning them. 
ἡ πίστις ὑμ. “In ejusmodi gra- 
tulationibus Paulus vel totum Christianis~ 
mum describit, Col. i. 3, sqq.,—vel partem 
aliquam, 1 Cor. i. 5. Itaque hoe loco fidem 
commemorat, suo convenienter instituto, 
vv. 12,17.” Bengel. καταγγέλλεται De 
Wette notices the other side of the report, 
as given by the Jews at Rome, Acts xxviii, 
22, to Paul himself. This praise was in 
the Christian churches, and brought by 


316 


g 2 Cor. i. 23. 
Phil. i. 8. 
1 Thess. ii. 5, 
10. Gen. 
xxxi. 50 
constr., Acts 


v. 32. 
bh Acts vii. 7 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


I. 


, δ A r / ΄ ΕῚ \ e 
γέλλεται ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ. 5 ὃ μάρτυς yap μου ἐστὶν ὁ 
΄ ἴω ῷ , : = ͵ 

θεός, ᾧ " λατρεύω ἐν τῷ ‘ πνεύματί μου ͵ ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ 
rn tpn >’ a k e ] LO » / mn f c ry m A 
τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, * ὡς ' ἀδιαλείπτως ™ μνείαν ὑμῶν ™ ποιοῦ- 

, ~ lal , , 

μαι πάντοτε “ ἐπὶ τῶν °mposevy@v pov 10 δεόμενος, Pet 


jActs xvii ως Ἵ ἤδη " ποτὲ " εὐοδωθήσομαι ‘ev τῷ " θελήματι τοῦ 
ΤΟΙ. 


ἀντ γι k -- Acts χ.ἕ 28. Phil. i. 8. 
ch. ix. 2. 2 Tim. i. 3.) m Eph. i. 16. 
i.3. 1 Thess. iii. 6. 2 Tim. i. 3 only. δ 
Diod. Sic. iv. 3. pceh. xi. 14. Phil. iii. 11. 
iv. 10 only. Thuc. viii. 69. s 1 Cor. xvi. 2. 
Num. xiv. 41. τ-δως, Prov. xxx. [see xxiv.] 29.) 


9. μαρτυρ Di. 
quomodo G | Orig-int, }. 


1 Thess. i. 2. 

o Eph. i. 16. 
Acts xxvii. 12 (w. opt.) only. 
3 John 2 bis, only. Gen. xxxix. 3,23. 2 Chron. xiii. 12. (-δος, 


for Ist μου, μοι D'G Ὁ] ο vulg syrr arm lat-ff. 


11 Thess. i. 2. ii. 13. v. 17 only+. 2 Macc. xv. 7 al. (-τος, 
Philem. 4. Ps. ex. 4. nas above (m). Phil. 

1 Thess. i.2. Philem.4 only. ἐπὶ τῶν δείπνων, 
q ch. xiii. 11. r Phil. 


t Heb. x. 10. (Col. iv. 12.) 


for ws, πως 


10. for εἰ πως, orws Lo 5. 71-7. 93 lect-12. 


Christian brethren. ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ] 
A popular hyperbole, common every where, 
and especially when speaking of general 
diffusion through the Roman empire, the 
‘orbis terrarum.’? The praise would be 
heard in every city where there was a 
Christian church,—intercourse with the 
metropolis of the world being common to 
all. 9.| “ Asseveratio pia, de re ne- 
cessaria, et hominibus, remotis presertim 
et ignotis, occulta.” Bengel. There could 
be no other witness to his practice in his 
secret prayers, but God: and as the as- 
sertion of a habit of incessantly praying 
for the Roman Christians, whom he had 
never seen, might seem to savour of an 
exaggerated expression of affection, he so- 
lemnly appeals to this only possible testi- 
mony. To the Eph., Phil. (see however 
Phil. i. 8), Col., Thess., he gives the same 
assurance, but without the asseveration. 
The thus calling God to witness is no un- 
common practice with Paul: see reff. in 
E. V. ᾧ Aatp.| The serving God in 
his spirit was a guarantee that his profes- 
sion was sincere, and that the oath just 
taken was no mere form, but a solemn and 
earnest appeal of his spirit. See also Phil. 
iii. 3 (present text), and John iv. 24, “The 
LXX use λατρεύω generally (not so, but 
only in a few places, 6. g. Num. xvi. 9, 
Ezek. xx. 32; it is mostly rendered by 
λειτουργεῖν ; λατρεύειν for the most part 
rendering 73y) for the Heb. ny, which 
mostly implies the service of the priests in 
the temple: 6. 5. Num. iii. 31; iv. 12; 
xviii. 2, &. The Apostle means then, 
that he is an intelligent, true priest of 
his God, not in the temple, but in his 
spirit,—not at the altar, but at the gos- 
pel of His Son.” Umbreit. ἐν τῴ 
evay.] ἡ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου προςθήκη τὸ εἶδος 
δηλοῖ τῆς διακονίας, Chrys. Hom. iii. p. 
438. His peculiar method of λατρεία was 
concerned with the gospel of the Son of 
God. “Quidam accipiunt hance particu-_ 


lam, quasi volucrit Paulus cultum illum, 
quo se prosequi Deum dixerat, ex eo com- 
mendare, quod Evangelii prescripto re- 
spondeat: certum est autem, spiritualem 
Dei cultum in Evangelio nobis precipi. 
Sed prior interpretatio longe melius quad- 
rat, nempe quod suum Deo obsequium 
addicat in Evangelii preedicatione.” Cal- 
vin. See evayyeAiov, Phil. iv. 15. [ὡς 
ἀδιαλείπτως | how unceasingly: the words 
may also mean ‘that without ceasing,’ but 
the former rendering seems the better of 
the two.] πάντοτε belongs to the 
following, not to the preceding words. 
This latter construction would not be 
without example,—ev παντὶ καιρῷ ἀδιαλεί- 
πτως-, 1 Mace. xii. 11, but this very exam- 
ple shews that if so, its natural place would 
be close to ἀδιαλείπτως. The whole phrase 
is a favourite one with Paul, see reff. 
““mayTote Vice nominis accipio, ac si dic- 
tum foret, ‘In omnibus meis orationibus, 
seu quoties precibus Deum appello, adjungo 
vestri mentionem.’” Calvin. ai προς- 
evxai pov must be understood of his ordi- 
nary stated prayers, just in our sense of 
my prayers: “quoties ex professo et 
quasi meditatus Deum orabat, illorum quo- 
que habebat rationem inter alios.” Calv. 

10. εἴ πως] if by any means. 
No subject of δεόμενος is expressed, but it 
is left to be gathered from this clause, as 
in Simon’s entreaty, Acts viii. 24, δεήθητε 
ὑμεῖς ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ... . ὅπως μηδὲν ἐπέλθῃ 
ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ ὧν εἰρήκατε, where ὅπως κιτ.λ. is 
not the contents of the prayer, but the end 
aimed at by it. ἤδη ποτέ] before 
long :—lit., ‘at last, some day or other. 

εὐοδωθήσομαι}) I shall be al- 
lowed, prospered: see reff., and Deut. 
xxvii. 29: and cf. Umbreit’s note. The 
rendering, ‘I might have a prosperous 
journey’ (Vulg.and E.V.), isetymologically 
incorrect ; the passive of SBbu, ‘to shew 
the way, ‘to bring into the way,’ must be 


_‘ to be shewn the way,’ or ‘ brought into the 


ABCDG 
KL[P]x 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


9—15. 


τ ἐλθεῖν προς ὑμᾶς" 


" μεταδῶ δ χάρισμα ὑμῖν " πνευματικὸν Υ εἰς τὸ 
oan ὑμᾶς, 13 τοῦτο δέ ἐστιν 
ς “ \ lal Ὁ ᾽ / / ¢ la \ ΕῚ nw 
ὑμῖν διὰ τῆς ἐν ἀλλήλοις πίστεως ὑμῶν τε καὶ ἐμοῦ. 
» lal > / 
ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, 


13 οὐ θέλω δὲ ὑμᾶς ὃς 


“ προεθέμην ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, καὶ 


ΠΡΌΣ POMAIOTS. 


11° ἐπυποθῶ γὰρ ἰδεῖν ὑ ee ἵνα αν. int.,2 Cor 


317 


hess, 


ii. oy as Ti 
2 OTN- i ann 

᾽ exvill. 20.) 
ἃ συνπαρακληθῆναι ἐν see 2 Cor. ἴα. 
v ch. xii. 8 reff. 


constr., 
1 Tess. ii. 8. 


ο΄ rs 
© OTL TOAAGKLS 2 Mace. viii. 
12. Xen. 
Fig iv. ὅ. 


© éxwdrvOnv ἴ ἄχρι τοῦ 


ats “ Lh \ A ΦΥΝἜ eon fap. , ee w= ch. v5 15, 
€upo, wa TLVa καρπον σχω και ἐν υμιν KAUWS Kal EV 5. vi. 23. 
xii. δ. 1 Cor 
i.7 al. Paul only, exc. 1 Pet. iv. 10+. x =Eph.i.3. Col. iii. 16. y Acts iii. 19. vii. 
19. ver. 20 al. z= Luke xxii. 32. ch. xvi. 25 al. Ps. 1. 12 (14). a here only +. 
Diche πὶ δ 1 Cor, xl. xu. 2 Cor: 18. 1 Thess; tv. 29. c ch. ii. 4. vi. 3. Wisd. xii. 10. 


d = Eph. i. 9 (ch. iii. 25) only ¢. Exod. xl. 4. 
xx. 6 reff. 5 
22. Phil. i. 22. iv. 17. 


= and w. art., here only. 
James ili. 18. Jer. xvii. 10. 


e Acts xvi. 6 reff. see Acts xxviii. 31. f Acts 
(Acts vii. 3 reff.) h = John iy. 36. ch. vi. 21, 


12. rout εστιν, omg δε, A latt(but G-lat has id est aut hoc enim est) [Orig-int, : 


om Syr]. 
om 2nd ev G [arm]. 


Κι, rec καρπὸν bef τινα: 


om 2nd και G [1] ο 48. 109-78 [fuld] eth. 


way.” 
εὐωδώθη τὸ ἐς τὸν Δημάρητον πρῆγμα. 

ἐν τῷ θελ. τοῦ θεοῦ} In the course of,— 
by, the will of God. ἐλθεῖν belongs to 
εὐοδωθήσομαι, not to δεόμενος. 11. 
ἐπιποθῶ] not ‘I vehemently desire: ἐπί 
does ποῦ intensify, but merely expresses 
the direction of the πόθος, see Herod. v. 93, 
and compare such expressions ἃ8 μὴ m™pos- 
εῶντος ἡμᾶς Tov ἀνέμου, Acts xxvii. 7. 

ἵνα τὶ μεταδῶ χάρισμα mv.| That the 
χάρισμα here spoken of was no mere super- 
natural power of working in the Spirit, 
the whole context shews, as well as the 
meaning of the word itself in reff. And 
even if χάρισμα, barely taken, could ever 
(1 Cor. xii. 4, 9 are no examples, see 
there) mean technically a supernatural 
endowment of the Spirit, yet the epithet 
πνευματικόν, and the object of imparting 
this χάρισμα, confirmation in the faith, 
would here preclude that meaning. Be- 
sides, Paul did not value the mere bestowal 
of these ‘ gifts * so highly, as to make it the 
subject of his earnest prayers incessantly. 
The gift alluded to was παράκλησις, as De 
Wette observes. πνευμ.., Spiritual :— 
springing from the Spirit of God, and im- 
parted to the spirit of man. tis τὸ 
στηρ. ὑμ. Knowing the trials to which 
they were exposed, and being conscious of 
the fulness of spiritual power for edifica- 
tion (2 Cor. xiii. 10) given to him, he 
longed to impart some of it to them, that 
they might be confirmed. ‘The Apostle 
does not say eis τὸ στηρίζειν ὑμ., for this 
belongs to God; see ch. xvi. 25. He i is 
only the instrument : hence the passive.” 
Philippi. 12.] εἶτα ἐπειδὴ καὶ τοῦτο 


rec συμπαρακληθηναι, with B2(sie : 
ins της [bef] πιστεως ἃ. 
13. for ov θελω, ove οιομαι D![and lat] G Ambrst,. 

om τινα L 42. 115 Syr copt [zth(appy) |: 
ABC(D)GK[P 8 rel vulg gr-ff lat-ff—for τινα, τι ἢ). 


So Herod. vi. 73, ὡς τῷ Κλεομενεῖ 


see table) L[KP]: txt AB'CDGR. 


for δε, yap C 73 fuld: om 
txt 
for σχω, exw ἃ 77. 


σφόδρα φορτικὸν ἦν, ὅρα πῶς αὐτὸ παρα- 
μυθεῖται διὰ τῆς ἐπαγωγῆς. ἵνα γὰρ μὴ 
λέγωσι, τί γάρ; σαλευόμεθα καὶ περι- 
φερόμεθα, καὶ τῆς παρὰ σοῦ δεόμεθα γλώτ- 
Tns εἰς τὸ στῆναι βεβαίως, προλαβὼν 
ἀναιρεῖ τὴν τοιαύτην ἀντίῤῥησιν οὕτω λέγων 
(ver. 12). ὡς ἂν εἰ ἔλεγε, μὴ ὑποπτεύσητε 
ὅτι κατηγορῶν ὑμῶν εἶπον, οὐ ταύτῃ τῇ 
γνώμῃ ἐφθεγξάμην τὸ ῥῆμα: ἀλλὰ τί ποτέ 
ἐστιν, ὅπερ ἠβουλήθην εἰπεῖν ; Πολλὰς 
ὑπομένετε θλίψεις ὑπὸ τῶν διωκά ῥῶ περι- 
αντλούμενοι' ἐπεθύμησα τοίνυν ὑμᾶς ἰδεῖν, 
ἵνα παρακαλέσω, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐχ ἵνα παρα- 
καλέσω μόνον, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα καὶ αὐτὸς παρά- 
κλησιν δέξωμαι. Chrys. Hom. ii. p. 440. 
The inf. συμπαρακληθῆναι is parallel with 
στηριχθῆναι, ἐμέ being understood: that 
is, that I with you may be comforted 
among you, each by the faith which is in 
the other. That the gift he wished to - 
impart to them was παράκλησις“, is implied 
in the συνπαρακλ. See the same wish 
expressed in different words ch. xv. 32, and 
the partial realization of it, Acts xxviii. 15. 

ἐν ἀλλήλοις, which might otherwise 
be ambiguous, is explained by ὑμῶν τε καὶ 
ἐμοῦ to mean which we recognize in one 
another: or as above and in A. V. ἢ. 
The expression “mutual faith,” of the 
E. V. should properly mean, faith which 
each has in the other. πίστις is used in 
the most general sense—faith as the neces- 
sary condition and working instrument of 
all Christian exhortation, comfort, and con- 
firmation ; producing: these, and evidenced 
by them. 13. οὐ θέλω δὲ ip. ay. | A 
Pauline formula: see reff. καὶ ἐκωλ. 
ἄχρι τ. δεῦρο is best as a parenthesis, as 
it is impossible that ἵνα can depend on 


918 TIPO POMAIOTS Τ᾽ 
a -“ 4 Δ, @¢ 
j Acts xxviii, Τοῖς λοιποῖς ἔθνεσιν. 1: “Βλλησίν te καὶ |‘ PapPaposs, 
2, 4 reff. om \ > ΄ > ΄, ow - oA 
k Luk + k 1 = © 1 5rm n 
Luke xxiv. σοφοῖς τε καὶ * ἀνοήτοις * οφειλετης εἰμί οὕτως "TO 
» τ \ / \ ς la a b) c / by / 
135 nin. "KAT ἐμὲ 5. πρόθυμον καὶ ὑμῖν τοῖς ἐν Ρώμῃ Pevayyert- 
3 only, L.P. \ ΄ \ > , Ε i 
Prov. xvi. σασθαι. 16 οὐ yap 4 ἐπαισχύνομαι TO εὐαγγέλιον" * δύναμις 
Ich. viii. 12. 
Fs Matt. vi. 12. xviii. 24. Luke xiii. 4. Gal. v.3 only +. Soph. Aj. 590. = Rev. iii. 16. 
nch.ix.5. Eph. vi. 21. aN, x. 44. 1. see ch. xii. 18. o Matt. xxvi. 41} Mk. only. a Ὑ. τον xxix, 
31. (- τμως,1 Pet. v. -μία, Acts xvii. 11.) p constr., Gal. iv. 13. pass., 1 Pet. iv. 6. q Luke 


ix. 26 (bis) || Mk. ch. τῇ 21. 
r =— Acts viii, 10 reff. 


15. for to κατ ewe, o ew eve G-gr: 
Pel: 
D}(and lat!) Ὁ] 0 am fuld! G-lat: ew G-gr. 

16. for το, em: super G: de Aug, Vig. 


D3KL[P] rel ΤῊ] Gc: om ABCDIGR Ἵ7 vulg syrr copt arm Orig,[-int,] Eus, 


2 Tim. i. 8 Heb. ii. 11 al. 


Job xxxiv. 19 BX. Isa. i. 29 ΑΝ 1930 Ald. compl. only. 


quod in me promptum est vulg G-lat Sedul, 
quod in me est promtus sum D-lat Ambr Ambrst Sedul,. 


ins ev bef υμιν 
oth Trois εν pwun G. 

rec aft evayyeAcov ins του χριστου, with 

Bas, 


Cyr[-p] Chr Thdrt Procop Damase Phot Tert, Arnob Hil. 


ἐκωλύθην. So Demosth. p. 488. 7, ἐμοὶ δ᾽, 
ὦ ἄνδρες ᾽Αθ., δοκεῖ Λεπτίνης (καί μοι πρὸς 
Διὸς μηδὲν ὀργισθῇ" οὐδὲν γὰρ φλαῦρον 
ἐρῶ σε) ἢ οὐκ ἀνεγνωκέναι τοὺς Σόλωνος 
νόμους ἢ οὐ συνιέναι. The reason of the 
hindrance is given in ch. xv. 20—22: it 
was, his φιλοτιμία to preach the gospel 
where it had not been preached before, 
rather than on the foundation of others. 
καρπόν) Not, ‘ wages,’ or ‘result of 

my apostolic labour,’ for such is not the 
ordinary meaning of the word in the N. T., 
but fruit borne by you who have been 
planted to bring forth fruit to God. This 
fruit 1 should then gather and present to 
God; cf. the figure in ch. xv. 16: see also 
Phil. i. 22 and note. 14.) The con- 
nexion seems to be this: He wishes to have 
some fruit, some produce of expended la- 
bour, among the Romans as among other 
Gentiles. ΤῊ] this was the case, he himself 
was a debtor to every such people: which 
situation of debtor he wished to change, by 
paying the debt and conferring a benefit, 
into that of one having money out at in- 
terest there, and yielding a καρπός. The 
debt which he owed to all nations was (ver. 
15) the obligation laid on him to preach 
the gospel to them; see 1 Cor. ix. 16. 
“EAA. — BapB. — aod. — ἀνοήτ.] 

These words must not be pressed as apply- 
ing to any particular churches, or as if any 
one of them designated the Romans them- 
selves,—or even as if σοφοῖς belonged to 
“Ἕλλησιν, and ἀνοήτοις to βαρβάροις. They 
are used, apparently, merely as compre- 
hending all Gentiles, whether considered 
in regard of race or of intellect ; and are 
placed here certainly not without a pro- 
spective reference to the universality of 
guilt, and need of the gospel, which he is 
presently about to prove existed in the 


Gentile world. 7 does not 
eall_himself.a_debtor to the Jews—tor they 
ean hardly be included ti BapBdpois (see 


Col. iii. 11). Though he had earnest de- 
sires for them (ch. ix. 1—8; x. 1), and 
every where preached to them first, this 
was not his peculiar ὀφείλημα, see Gal. ii. 7, 
where he describes himself as πεπιστευμέ- 
vos TO εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας, καθὼς 
Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς. 15. οὕτως] 
“ς Est quasi .... illatio a toto ad partem 
insignem.” Bengel. ‘As to all Gentiles, 
so to you, who hold no mean place among 
them.’ 16.] The ov γὰρ ἐπαισχύ- 
vopat seems to be suggested by the posi- 
tion of the Romans in the world. ‘Yea, 
to you at Rome also: for, though your 
city is mistress of the world, though your 
emperors are worshipped as present deities, 
though you are elated by your pomps and 
luxuries and victories, yet I am not 
ashamed of the apparently mean origin of 
the gospel which 1 am to preach; for 
(and here is the transition to his great 
theme) it is,’ ἄς. So for the most part, 
Chr ysostom, Hom. iii. p. 444 

δύναμις γὰρ 0. ἐστίν] The gospel, which 
is the greatest example of the Power of 
God, he strikingly calls that Power itself. 
(Not, as Jowett, ‘a divine power, nor is 
δικαιοσ. θεοῦ below to be thus explained, 
as he alleges.) So in 1 Cor. i. 24 he calls 
Christ, the Power of God. But not only 
is the ‘gospel the great example of divine 
Power ; it is the “field of agency of the 
power of God, working in it, and inter- 
penetrating it throughout. The bare 
substantive δύναμις here (and 1 Cor. i. 24) 
carries a superlative sense: the highest 
and holiest vehicle of the divine Power, 
the δύναμις κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν. “It is weighty 
for the difference between the Gospel and 
the Law, that the Law is never called 
God’s power, 15, but light, or teaching, 
in which a man must walk, Ps. xxxvi. 10; 


ABCDG 


, KL[P]x 


abecdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


exix. 105; Prov. vi. 23; Isa. ii. 5.” Umbreit. | 


And the direction in which this power acts 
in the gospel is εἰς owtypiav—it is a 


14—17. 


a 9 5 \ A 
yap θεοῦ ἐστιν Sets σωτηρίαν παντὶ TO πιστεύοντι, 


δαίῳ τε πρῶτον καὶ “EAN MU. 


om εἰς cwrnpiay α. 
BG Tert, : 
Chr, Thdrt Damasc ΓΗ] Ge Bede. 


healing, saving power: for as Chrysostom 
reminds us, there is a power of God εἰς 
κόλασιν, and eis ἀπώλειαν, see Matt. x. 28. 

But to whom is this gospel the power 
of God to save? παντὶ τῷ πιστεύοντι. The 
universality implied in the παντί, the con- 
dition necessitated in the πιστεύοντι, and 
the δύναμις θεοῦ acting εἰς σωτηρίαν, are 
the great subjects treated of in the former 
part of this epistle. A// are proved to be 
under sin, and so needing God’s righteous- 
ness (ch. i. 18—iii. 20), and the entrance 
into this righteousness is shewn to be by 
faith (ch. iii. 21—v. 11). Then the δύ- 
ναμις θεοῦ in freeing from the dominion of 
sin and death, and as issuing in salvation, 
is set forth (ch. v. 1l—viii. 39). So that if 
the subject of the Epistle is to be stated 
in few words, these should be chosen: to 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


17 ὃ δικαιοσύνη yap ' θεοῦ ἐν 


for ιουδαιω τε, tovde(sic) N1(txt N-corr?). 
ins ACDKL[ PN 17 rel [vulg syrr copt eth arm] Orig[and -int, Eus, Did, | 


919 


? 
lov- s = ver. 5 reff. 
t ch. iii. 5, 21, 
22. X. ὃ. 
2 Cor. v. 21. 
James i. 


20. 2Pet.i.1. (Micah vi. 5.) 


om TpwToV 


join De Wette’s note on δικ. θεοῦ. +“ The 
Greek dix. and the Heb. ΠῚ are taken 
sometimes for ‘virtue’ and ‘piety’ which 
men possess or strive after,—sometimes 
imputatively, for ‘freedom from blame’ or 
‘justification.’ The latter meaning is most 
usual with Paul: δικ. is that which is so in 
the sight of God (ch. 11. 13), the result of 
His justifying forensic Judgment, or of 
‘ Imputation’ (ch. iv. 5). It may certainly 
be imagined, that a man might obtain jus- 
tification by fulfilling the law : in that case 
his righteousness is an ἰδία (δικαιοσύνη) 
(ch. x. 3), a dik. ἐκ Tov νόμου (Phil. iii. 9). 
But it is impossible for him to obtain a 
‘righteousness of his own,’ which at the 
same time shall *vail before God (ch. iii. 
20; Gal. ii. 16). The Jews not only have 
not fulfilled the law (ch. iii. 9—19), but 


> D ΄ a > , . ee Ἂ . 

εὐαγγέλιον, δύναμις θεοῦ εἰς σωτηρίαν could not fulfil it (vii. 7 ff.) : the Gentiles 
Ν . . 

παντὶ τῳ WLOTEVOVTL. 1s expresses ᾿ὖῦ likewise have rendered themselves ob- 


better than merely “Justification by faith,’ 


which is in fact only a subordinate part of 
the great theme,—-only the condition neces- 
sitated by man’s sinfulness for his enter- 
ing the state of salvation: whereas the ar- 
gument extends beyond this, to the death 
unto sin and life unto God and carrying 
forward of the sanctifying work of the 
Spirit, from its first fruits even to its com- 
pletion. *lovd. πρῶτον Kx.” EAN. ] This 
is the Jewish expression for all mankind, as 
“EAA. k. βαρβ. ver. 14 is the Greek one. 
“EAA. here includes all Gentiles. πρῶτον 
is not first in order of time, but princi- 
pally (compare ch. ii. 9), spoken of na- 
tional precedence, in the sense in which the 
Jews were to our Lord of ἴδιοι, John i. 11. 
Salvation was ἐκ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων, John iv. 
22. See ch. ix. 5; xi. 24. Not that the 
Jew has any preference under the gospel ; 
only he inherits, and has a precedence. 
οὐδὲ yap ἐπεὶ δὴ πρῶτός ἐστι, καὶ ἀλέο» 
λαμβάνει τῆς χάριτος᾽ ἣ γὰρ αὐτὴ δωρεὰ 
καὶ τούτῳ κἀκείνῳ δίδοται: ἀλλὰ τάξεώς 
ἐστι τιμὴ μόνον τὸ πρῶτος. Chrys. Hom. 
11, p, 448. 17.) An explanation, how 
the gospel is the power of God to salva- 
tion, and how it is so to the believer :— 
because in it God’s righteousness (not His 
attribute of righteousness,—‘ the righteous- 
ness of God,’ but righteousness flowing 
trom, and acceptable to Him) is unfolded, 


noxious to the divine wrath (i. 24—3z). 
God has ordained that the whole race 
should be included in disobedience. Now 
if man is to become righteous from being 
unrighteous,—this can only happen by 
God’s grace,—because God declares him 
righteous, assumes him to be righteous, 
δικαιοῖ (111. 24; Gal. 111. 8) :---δικαιοῦν is not 
only negative, ‘to acquit, as pasa Exod. 
xxiii. 7; Isa. v. 23; ch. ii. 13 (where how- 
ever see my note), but also’ positive, ‘ to 
declare righteous: but never ‘to make 
righteous’ by transformation, or imparting 
of moral strength by which moral perfec- 
tion may be attained. Justificatio must 
be taken as the old protestant dogmatists 
rightly took it, sensu forensi, i.e. impu- 
tatively. God justifies for Christ’s sake 
(ch. iii. 22 ff.) on condition of faith in Him 
as Mediator: the result of His justifica- 
tion is δικαιοσύνη ἐκ πίστεως, and as He 
imparts it freely, it is δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ (gen. 
subj.) or é« θεοῦ, Phil. 111. 9: so Chrys. 
&e. (dik. θεοῦ is ordinarily taken for dix. 
mapa θεῷ, as Luth.: ‘die Geredtigkeit 
die vor Gott gilt :’ compare ch. ii. 13; iii. 
20; Gal. iii. 11; but that this is at least 
not necessary, see 2 Cor. v. 21). This 
justification is certainly an objective act 
of God: but it must also be subjectively 
apprehended, as its condition is subjective, 
It is the acquittal from guilt, and cheer- 


and the more, the more we believe. Isub- fulness of conscience, attained through 


990 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 


ι δὶ 


’ Fu 2 ΄ > f 8 > f θὰ , 
u—Matt.xi, @UT@ “ ATOKANUTTTETAL EK πίστεως ὃ ELS πίστιν, KAU WS γε- 


25. xvi. 17 

al. Isa. lvi. 
i 

v Hap. ii. 4. 

w - Luke xvii. 
30. 1Cor. iii. 
13. 2 Thess. ii. 3. 


17. for yap, δε A Clem. 


2.) Eph.v.6. Rev. xix. 15. 


γραπται ἡ Ὁ δε δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται. 
’ / \ rn r 
18 ἡ ᾿Αποκαλύπτεται yap * ὀργὴ " θεοῦ ἀπ᾽ οὐρανοῦ ¥ ἐπὶ 


x John iii. 36. (ch. iii, 5. ix, 2 


y = Acts xiii, 11 reff 


aft δικαιος ins μου (as LXx-A) C!; aft εκ πιστεως (as 


LXX-Bk) syr Eus [Orig-int, ] Jer, : txt ABDGKL[P]X rel Clem, [ Did, ] Chr Thdrt Iren- 


int, Ambr. 


faith in God’s grace in Christ,—the very 
frame of mind which would be proper to 
a perfectly righteous man,—if such there 
were,—the harmony of the spirit with 
God, — peace with God. All interpretations 
which overlook the fact of imputation (the 
R.-Cath., that of Grotius, Baumgarten- 
Crusius, ὅθ.) are erroneous.” To say, 
with Jowett, that all attempts to define 
δικαιοσ. θεοῦ are “the after-thoughts of 
theology, which have no real place in the 
interpretation of Scripture,” is in fact to 
shut our eyes to the great doctrinal facts 
of Christianity, and float off at once into 
uncertainty about the very foundations of 
the Apostle’s argument and our own faith : 
of which uncertamty his note here is an 
eminent example. ἐν αὐτῷ] in it, 
‘the gospel: not, in τῷ πιστεύοντι. 

ἀποκαλύπτεται | generally used of making 
known a thing hitherto concealed: but here 
of that gradually more complete realization 
of the state of justitication before God by 
faith in Christ, which is the continuing 
and increasing gift of God to the believer 
in the Gospel. ἐκ πίστεως) “ἐκ 
points to the condition, or the subjective 
ground. πίστις is faith in the sense of 
trust, and that (a) a@ trustful assumption 
of a truth in reference to knowledge = 
conviction: (b) a trustful surrender of 
the soul, as regards the feeling. Here it 
is especially the latter of these: that trust 
reposed in God’s grace in Christ, which 
tranquillizes the soul and frees it from all 
guilt,—and especially trust in the atoning 
death of Jesus. Bound up with this (not 
by the meaning of the words, but by the 
idea of unconditional trust, which excludes 
all reserve) is humility, consisting in the 
abandonment of all merits of a man’s own, 
and recognition of his own unworthiness 
and need of redemption.” De Wette. 

εἰς πίστιν] ἀπὸ πίστεως ἄρχεται κ. εἰς 
πιστεύοντα λήγει (Ecum.) seems the most 
probable interpretation, making πίστιν 
almost = τοὺς πιστεύοντας, see ch. iii. 22: 
but not entirely,—it is still the aspect, 
the phase, of the man, which is receptive 
of the δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ, and to this it is re- 
vealed. The other interpretations,—‘for 
the increase of faith’ (Meyer),—‘ that faith 
may be given to it’ (Fritzsche, Tholuck, 


Krebs),—‘ proceeding from faith, and 
leading to a higher degree of faith’ 
(Baumg.-Crus.),—do not seem so suitable 
or forcible. It will be observed that é« 
π. εἰς π. is taken with ἀποκαλύπτεται, not 
with δικαιοσύνη. The latter connexion 
would do for ἐκ π., but not for εἰς 7. 
καθὼς γέγρ. He shews that righteous- 
ness by fuith is no new idea, but found in 
the prophets. The words (ref.) are cited 
again in Gal. iii. 11; Heb. x. 38, in the 
former place with the same purpose as here. 
They are used in Habakkuk with reference 
to credence given to the prophetic word: 
but properly speaking, all faith is one, in 
whatever word or act of God reposed: so 
that the Apostle is free from any charge of 
forcing the words to the present purpose. 
The two ways of arranging them, 6 δίκαιος 
—éx πίστεως ζήσεται, and ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ 
πίστεω----(ήσεται, in fact amount to the 
same: if the former, which is more agree- 
able to the Heb., be taken, ζήσεται must 
mean, ‘shall live on,’ endure in his δι- 
καιοσύνη, by means of faith, which would 
assert that it was a δικαιοσύνη of faith, 
as strongly as does the latter. See by 
all means, on the quotation, Umbreit’s 
note: and Delitzsch, der Proph. Habakuk, 
p- 51 ff. This latter remarks (I quote 
from Philippi), “The Apostle rests no 
more on our text than it will bear. He 
only places its assertion, that the life of 
the just springs from his faith, in the 
light of the N. T.” 

Cuap. I. 18—XI. 36.] Taz DocrrinaL 
EXPOSITION OF THE ABOVE TRUTH: THAT 
THE GOSPEL IS THE POWER OF GOD UNTO 
SALVATION TO EVERY ONE THAT BELIEV- 
ETH. And herein, ch.i. 18—iii, 20,—inas- 
much as this power of God consists in the 
revelation of God’s righteousness in man 
by faith, and in order to faith the first re- 
quisite is the recognition of man’s unwor- 
thiness, and incapability to work a righte- 
ousness for himself,—the Apostle begins 
by proving that all, Gentiles and Jews, are 
GUILTY before God, as holding back the 
truth in unrighteousness. And FIRST, ch. i. 
18—32, oF THE GENTILES. 18.' He 
first states the general fact, of all mankind ; 
but immediately passes off to the considera- 
tion of the majority of mankind, the Gen 


ABCDG 
KL[P]x 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[17] 


16; iv: 


al z) / \ 10 ΄ » θ , lal \ > 60 
πᾶσαν 5 ἀσέβειαν καὶ ἀδικίαν av ρώπων τῶν τὴν ἀληθειαν « 
> LO / a , 19 b oF ἣν c \ “ θ lal 
εν a tKLa KATEVOVTWV, OLOTL TO YV@OTOV TOU €0U 


15,18 only. Jer. ν. 6. (-Bys, ch. iv.5. -Becv, 2 Pet. ii. 6.) 
c = Actsi. 19 reff. (see note.) constr., see Winer, ᾧ 34. 2. 


b = Acts xviil. 10, or 1 Cor. xv. 9. 
18. ins των bef ανθρωπων D'G. 


tiles ; reserving the Jews for exceptional 
consideration afterwards. ἀποκ. yap | 
The statement of ver. 17 was, that the 
RIGHTEOUSNESS of God is revealed. The 
necessary condition of this revelation is, 
the DESTRUCTION of the righteousness of 
MAN by the revelation of God’s anger 
against sin. ἀποκαλύπτεται, not in 
the Gospel (as Grot.): not ¢ men’s con- 
sciences (as Tholuck, ed. 1, Reiche): not 
in the miserable state of the then world 
(us K6llner): but (as implied indeed by 
the adjunct am odpavov,—that it is a 
providential, universally-to-be-seen reve- 
la ion) in the PUNISHMENTS which, ver. 24, 
God has made to follow upon sin, see also 
ch. ii, 2 (so De W., Meyer, Tholuck, 
ed. 5, &.). So that ἀποκ. is of an ob- 
jective reality here, not of an evangelic 
internal and subjective unfolding. 

ὀργὴ θεοῦ is anthropopathically, but with 
the deepest truth, put for the righteous- 
ness of God in punishment (see ch. ii. 8 ; 
v.9; Eph. ii. 3; Matt. iii.7; John iii. 36). 
It is the opposite, in the divine attributes, 
to Love (De W.). ἀπ᾽ ovp. (see above) 
belongs to ἀποκαλύπτεται, not to θεοῦ, nor 
to ὀργὴ θεοῦ (7 ἀπ᾽ οὐρ.). ἀσέβειαν, 
godiessness; ἀδικίαν, iniquity: but 
neither term is exclusive of the other, nor 
to be formally pressed to its limits. They 
overlap and include each other by a large 
margin: the specific ditference being, that 
noeB. i ὃ in (but at the 
sale time partially the result) οἵ ἀδικίᾳ, 
—which adic. is more the cesult.<but at 
the same time partially the fountain) of 
ἀσέβεια. adic. is the state of the thoughts 
and feelings and habits, induced originally 
by forgettulness of God, and in its turn 
inducing impieties of all kinds. We may 
notice by the way, that the word ἀσέβεια 
forms an interesting link to the Pastoral 
Epistles [where it, and its opposite εὐσέβεια 
are the ordinary terms for an unholy and 
a holy life]. ἄνθρ. τῶν τὴν aX. ἐν 
ἀδικίᾳ κατεχόντων | of men who hold back 
the truth in iniquity: who, possessing 
enough of the germs of religious and moral 
verity to preserve them from abandon- 
ment, have checked the development of 
this truth in their lives, in the love and 
practice of sin. That this is the meaning 
of κατεχόντων here is plain from this 
circumstance: that wherever κατέχω in 
the N.'T. signifies ‘to hold,’ it is emphatie, 


Vou. I. 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 


821 


h. xi. 26 
(from Isa, lix. 
20). 2 Tim. 
ii. 16. Tit. 
ii.12. Jude 
a == 2 Thess. ii. 6 (see note). 


‘to hold fast,’ or ‘ to keep to,’ or ‘to take 
or have complete possession of ? see for 
the first, Luke viii. 15 ; 1 Cor. xi.2; xv.2; 
1 Thess. v. 21 ; Heb. iii. 6, 14; x. 23: for 
the second, Luke xiv. 9 (every other place 
except the lowest being excluded) : for the 
third, Matt. xxi. 38; 1 Cor. vii. 30. Now 
no such emphatic sense will apply here. 
If the word is to mean ‘ holding,’ it must 
be only in the loosest and least emphatic 
sense: ‘ having a half and indistinct con- 
sciousness of,’ which does not at all corre- 
spond to the xara, indicating vehemence 
of purpose, as in καταφιλέω, ἃς. But the 
meaning ‘ keeping back,’ ‘hindering the 
development of, —while it has a direct 
example in Paul’s own usage in reff., and 
in Luke iv. 42, and indirect ones in (the 
spurious John v. 4) Acts xxvii. 40; ch. vii. 
6 ; Philem. 13,—admirably suits the sense, 
that men had (see vv. 19 ff.) knowledge of 
God sufficient, if its legitimate work had 
been allowed, to have kept them from 
such excesses of enormity as they have 
committed, but that this ἀλήθεια they 
κατεῖχον ἐν ἀδικίᾳ, i.e. crushed, quenched, 
in (as the element, conditional medium in 
which) their state and practice of un- 
righteousness. It is plain that to take ev 
ἀδικίᾳ for ἀδίκως (as Theophyl. and Reiche) 
is to miss the force of the expression 
altogether—the pregnant ἐν, ‘in and by,’ 
implying that it is their ἀδικία, --- 8 
very absence of δικαιοσύνη for which the 
argument contends,—which is the status 
wherein, and the instrument whereby, they 
hold back the truth lit up in their con- 
sciences. 19.] διότι, because, may 
either give the reason why the anger of 
God is revealed, aud thus apply to all that 
follows as far as ver. 32, beiug taken up 
again at vv. 21, 24, 26, 28 (so Meyer) : or 
may explain τῶν... - κατεχ. (so Thol.): 
which latter seems most probable: the 
subauditum being, ‘(this charge I bring 
against them), because.’ For he proves, 
first (ver. 20) that they had the ἀλήθεια; 
then (vv. 21 ff.) that they held it back. 

τὸ γνωστόν, that which is known, 
the objective knowledge patent and recog- 
nized in Creation :—so Chrys., Theodoret, 
Luther, Reiche, Mever, De Wette, al. :— 
not ‘ that which may be known’ (as Orig., 
Theophyl., Gic., Erasm., Beza, Grot., al. 
{and E. V.]), which would assert what, as 
simple matter of fact, was not the cause, 


Y 


899 


, ᾽ 4 
a—ch.iils. φανερὸν ἐστιν 
ech. = 5: nn 90 τ ᾿ς f 

xvi.26. John « 

i. 31 al. fr. Ta γαρ 
Jer. xl. 
(xxxiii.) 6 
only. 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 


Ι. 


2 ᾽ ἮΝ e θ \ \ ’ a e 3 , 

ἐν αὑτοῖς" ὁ θεος yap αὐτοῖς “ ἐφανέρωσεν. 
lal ‘ / a 

ἀόρατα αὐτοῦ 8 ἀπὸ " κτίσεως κόσμου τοῖς 

- ΄ 5 - 4 >. > a 

ἱ ποιήμασιν Ἐνοούμενα ἰκαθορᾶται, ἥ τε ™ ἀϊδιος αὐτοῦ 


J J 7, \ n / ο » ‘ ? ᾽ ‘ Ρ ΕῚ ͵7 
fCol.i. 15,16. δύναμις καὶ ™ θειότης, 5 εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτοὺς avaTroXoyn- 


1 Tim. i. 17. 
Heb. xi. 27 
only. Gen. 
ies plea 
xlv. 3. 2 Macc. ix. 5 only. 
i Eph. ii. 10 only. Isa. xxix. 16, 
only. Num. xxiv.2. Job x. 4 only. 
BF [not AN].) 
reff. = 2 Cor. viii. 6. 


p ch. it. 1 only τ. 
8 = 1 Cor. vi. 29. Mal. i. 11. 


Dan. v. 23. xi. 38 Theod. 


19. for διότι, ort D'G Chr,. 


nhere only. Wisd. xvili. 9only. (τος, Acts xvii. 29.) 


, ’ \ e x , 
τους, “1 4 διότι " γνόντες τὸν * θεὸν οὐχ ὡς θεὸν " ἐδόξασαν 


g = Matt. xxv. 34. 
k = Matt. xxiv. 15. 


ἢ τὸ Mark x. 6. xiii. 19: P Pet. iii. 4. 
2 Tim. ii. 7. Heb. xi. 3. Prov. i 2,6. here 
m Jude 6 only+. Wisd. vii. 26 only. (-679S, Wisd. ii. 23 
och. iv. 11 


q = 1 Cor. xv. 9. ¥ 1 Cor. i. 21 reif, 


rec yap hef θεος, with D'KL{P rel] Ath, ΤῺ] 


(Ec: txt ABCD!GRN m 17 Orig, Eus, Ath, Chr ‘Thdrt. 


20. for aop., ορατα G-gr 115. 


that all which could be known of God 


was φανερὸν ἐν αὐτοῖς. He speaks now 


not of what they might have known οἵ 


God, but of what they did know Thus 
τὸ γνωστ. τ. θεοῦ will mean, that universal 
objective knowledge of God as the Creator 
which we find more or less in every nation 
under heaven, and which, as matter of his- 
torical fact, was proved to be in possession 
of the great Gentile nations of antiquity. 

dav. ἐστ. ἐν αὐτοῖς} is evident in 
them, i.e. in their hearts: not, to them 
(as Luth.),—nor, among them (as Erasm., 
Grot., &c.): for if it had been a thing 
acknowledged among them, it would not 
have been κατεχόμενον. Every man has 
in him this knowledge; his senses convey 
it to him (see next verse) with the phaeno- 
mena of nature. ὁ 0. y. ἐφ.] gives 
the reason why that which is known of 
God is manifest in them, viz. because God 
Himself so created the world as to leave 
impressed on it this testimony to Him- 
self. Notice, and keep to, the historic 
aorist, ἐφανέρωσεν, not ‘hath manifested 
it’ (perf.), but manifested it, viz. at the 
Creation. This is important for the right 
understanding of ἀπὸ κτ. κόσμ. ver. 20. 

20.| For (justifying the clause 
preceding) His invisible attributes (hence 
the plur. applying to δύναμις. and θειότης 
which follow), ἀπὸ κτίσεως kéop., from 
the time of the creation, when the mani- 
festation was made by God: not = ἐκ 
κτίσεως κ. ‘by the creation of the world ;’ 
which would be tautological, τοῖς ποι- 
ἤμασι νοούμενα following, besides that 
κτίσις κόσμου cannot = ἡ κτίσις, in the 
sense of ‘ the creation,’ i.e. ‘the creatures.’ 
Umbreit has here a long and important 
note on O. T. prophecy in general, which 
will be found well worth study. τοῖς 
ποιήμ. voovp. | being understood (appre- 
hended by the mind, see reff.) by means of 
His works (of creation and sustenance, 
—nhot here of moral government), καθ- 


om αἰδιὺυς L. 


[ϑεοτης P Did, (txtyexm)-] 


ορᾶται, are perceived; not, ‘are plainly 
seen, —this is not the sense of κατά in 
καθοράω, but rather that of looking down 
on, taking a survey of, and so apprehending 
or perceiving. ἥ τε atd. adr. Suv. | 
His eternal Power. To this the evi- 
dence of Creation is plainest of all: Eter- 
nal, and Almighty, have always been re- 
cognized epithets of the Creator. 

x. θειότης] and Divinity (not Godhead, 
which would be θεότης). The fact that the 
Creator is divine ;—is ofa different nature 
from ourselves, and accompanied by dis- 
tinct attributes, and those of the highest 
order,—which we call divine. eis TO 
εἶναι αὖτ. ἀναπολ.} εἰς τό with an inf. 
never properly indicates only the result, 
‘so that ;? but is often used where the re- 
sult, aud the intention, are bound together 
in the process of thought. This is done hy 
a very natural habit in speaking and writ- 
ing, of transferring one’s self to the posi- 
tion of the argument, and regarding that 
which contributed to a result, as worked 
purposely for that result. And however 
true it is, that in the doings of the Allwise, 
all results are purposed,—to give the sense 
‘in order that they might be inexcusable,’ 
would be manifestly contrary to the whole 
spirit of the argument, which is bringing 
out, not at present God’s sovereignty in 
dealing with man, but man’s inexcusable- 
ness in holding back the truth by unright- 
eousness. εἰς τό, then, in this case, is 
most nearly expressed by wherefore, or so 
that. See Winer, edn. 6, § 44.6. οὐ διὰ 
τοῦτο ταῦτα πεποίηκεν ὃ θεός, εἰ καὶ τοῦτο 
ἐξέβη. οὐ γὰρ ἵνα αὐτοὺς ἀπολογίας ἀπυ- 
στερήσῃ, διδασκαλίαν τοσαύτην εἰς μέσον 
προύθηκεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα αὐτὸν ἐπιγνῶσιν" ἀγνω- 
μονήσαντες δὲ πάσης ἑαυτοὺς ἀπεστέρησαν 
ἀπολογίας. Chrys. Hom. iv. p. 450. 

21. διότι) expands avamoAoyhrous— with- 
out excuse, because...’ γνόντες] 
‘with the knowledge above stated.’ This 
participle testifies plainly that matter οὗ 


ABCDG 
KL[P]x 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 323 


x 4 Ἑ ’ ’ 4 A Ξ 
ἢ ᾿ηὐχαρίστησαν, ἀλλ᾽ ἃ ἐματαιώθησαν ἐν τοῖς " διαλο- Εἴ Cor. αἱ. 24 


lal > A \ Ww ’ ’ ς Χ 
γισμοῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ * ἐσκοτίσθη ἡ 
53 ΄ € 
22 Ὑ φάσκοντες εἶναι σοφοὶ 5 ἐμωράνθησαν 38 καὶ ὃ ἤλλαξαν 


ΓΟΙ͂, 

ΠΤ) ΤΣ ΓΛ where only. 
ἀσύνετος αὐτῶν καρδία. * Me ony. 
13. Jer. ii. 5. 
(-ότης, ch. 
viii. 20.) 


\ a > / n e » 
τὴν δόξαν τοῦ " ἀφθάρτου θεοῦ © ἐν ἃ ὁμοιώματι © εἰκόνος ¥ = 1Cor. iii. 


»“ / \ lal , 
Γφθαρτοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ 8 πετεινῶν καὶ " τετραπόδων Kal 


1 ἑρπετῶν. 


19 (from Deut. xxxii. 31) only. 
only. 
a Psa. cv. 20. 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52 reff. 


only +. Wisd. xii.1. xviii. 4 only. (-σία, ch. ii. 7). 


12) vid; vili. 3.) Phil) 1: 7. 
f 1 Cor. ix. 25. xv. 53, 54. 

12 reff. Deut. xiv. 19, 20. 

(h). James iii. 7 only. Gen. i. 24. 

42. constr., vv. 26, 28. ch. vi. 17. Eph. iv. 19. 


Rev. ix. 7 only. 
1 Pet. i. 18, 23 only +. 


21. om7 A. 


Thdrt Thl.) αλλα B. 


\ \ / \ 6 Ν 
24k διὸ [ξ καὶ] ἱπαρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς ἐν 
(Matt. xxiv. 391} Mk. Luke xxiii. 46. Rev. viii. 12) only. 


y Acts xxiv. 9. xxv. 19 only. Gen. xxvi. 20. 2 Macc. xiv. 27, 32 
z = 1 Cor. i. 20 (Matt. v.15. Luke xiv. 34) only. Jer. x. 13. 2 Kings xxiv. 10. 


Isa, xxxiii. 23. 


20 (from Ps. 
xcill. 11). 
James ii. 4. 

w = ch. xi. 10, 
from Ps. 
lxviii. 23 

x Matt. xv. 16\| Mk. ver. 31. ch. x. 


b 1 Cor. ix. 25. xv. 52. 1 Tim.i.17. 1 Pet. i. 4, 23. iii. 4 


c constr., Ps. l. c. d ch. v. 

Deut. iv. 17, 18. e ch, viii. 29 reff. 

Wisd. ix. 15 412. 2 Mace. vii. 16 only. g Acts x. 

h Acts x. 12. xi. 6 only. Gen. xxxiv. 23. i Acts as above 
k = (ch. iv. 22.) Phil. ii. 9. 1 = Acts vii. 


Sir. iv. 19. 


(ηυχαριστησαν, so ACDN cd Καὶ mn 17 Clem, Orig, Eus, [ Meth, ] 
καρδια bef avtwy D'G vulg [Orig-int, Aug]. 


23. ἡλλαξαντο K ὁ gh k Orig,[and mss, | Eus,. 
24. om και ABCR 17 vulg [spec Syr copt arm] Orig,[and int,] Did, Damase Ang 


Ambrst Pelag: ins DGKL[P] rel syr Ath, Chr Thdrt. 


fact, and not of possibility, has been the 
subject of the foregoing verses. From 
this point, we take up what they MIGHT 
HAVE DONE, but DID NOT. οὐχ ὡς 
θεὸν ἐδόξ. They did not give Him glory 
(δοξάζω here principally of recognition by 
worship) aS GoD, i.e. as the great Crea- 
tor of all, distinct from and infinitely 
superior to all His works. Bengel well 
divides ἐδόξασαν and ηὐχαρίστησαν -- 
“ Gratias agere debemus οὐ beneficia: 
glorificare ob ipsas virtutes divinas.” They 
did neither: in their religion, they deposed 
God from His place as Creator,—in their 
lives, they were ungrateful by the abuse of 
His gifts. ἐματαιώθησαν | 527, vanus 
Suit, is used of worshipping idols, 2 Kings 
xvii. 15; Jer. ii. 5, and 525, vanitas, of an 
idol, Deut. xxxii. 21; 1 Kings xvi. 26 al.: 
and hence probably the word ματαιόω was 
here chosen. ᾿ διαλογισμοῖς) their 
thoughts: but generally in N.T. in a dad 
sense: they became vain (idle, foolish) 
in their speculations. ἐσκοτίσθη ἢ 
ἀσύν. ait. kapd.] ἀσύνετος is not the re- 
sult of écxot.,—‘ became darkened so as to 
lose its understanding, —but the converse, 
—their heart (καρδία of the whole inner 
man,—the seat of knowledge and feeling) 
being foolish (unintelligent, not retaining 
God in its knowledge) became dark (lost 
the little light it had, and wandered blindly 
in the mazes of folly). 22. φάσκοντες 
εἶν. σοφ.] Not, ‘because they professed 
themselves wise,’ but while they professed 
themselves wise—professing themselves 
to be wise. The words relate perhaps not 
so much to the schools of philosophy, 
as to the assumption of wisdom by the 
Greeks in general, see 1 Cor. i. 22, of 


om ὁ Geos C!(appy) Did, 


which assumption their philosophers were 
indeed eminent, but not the only examples. 
23. ἤλλαξαν «.7.A.] quoted from 
ref. Ps., only τὴν δόξαν αὐτῶν, ‘their 
glory,’ of the Psalm, is changed to ‘ God’s 
glory,’—viz. His Power and Majesty visi- 
ble in the Creation. év represents the 
conditional element in which the change 
subsisted. ἀφθάρτου and φθαρτοῦ 
shew by contrast the folly of such a sub- 
stitution: He who made and upholds ail 
things must be zncorruptible, and no cor- 
ruptible thing can express His likeness. 
ὁμοιώματι εἰκόνος) the simili- 
tude of the form—eixévos generalizes it 
to mean the human form, it not being 
any one particular man, but the form of 
man (examples being abundant) to which 
they degraded God,—and so of the other 
creatures. Deities of the hwman form pre- 
vailed in Greece—those of the Jestial in 
Egypt. Both methods of worship were 
practised in Rome. 24. 32.] Immo- 
rality, and indeed bestiality, were the 
sequel of idolatry. 24.) The καί after 
διό may import, As they advanced in de- 
parture from God, so God also on His 
part gave them up, &c.;—His dealings 
with ¢hem had a progression likewise. 
παρέδωκεν] not merely permissive, but 
judicial: God delivered them over. As 
sin begets sin, and darkness of mind deeper 
darkness, grace gives place to judgment, 
and the divine wrath hardens men, and 
hurries them on to more fearful degrees of 
depravity. ἐν ταῖς ἐπιθ.} in the 
lusts—not by nor through the lusts (as 
Erasmus and Εἰ. V.);—the lusts of the 
heart were the field of action, the depart- 
ment of their being, in which this dis- 


Y2 


994, ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 1 
m =1 Thess, ταῖς ™ ἐπιθυμίαις τῶν " καρδιῶν αὐτῶν eis ° ἀκαθαρσίαν 

wis, Xx. P τοῦ ἃ ἀτιμάζεσθαι τὰ σώματα αὐτῶν ἐν αὐτοῖς, 58 " οἵτινες 
msi 2B S μετήλλαξαν τὴν ᾿ ἀλήθειαν τοῦ θεοῦ " ἐν τῷ " ψεύδει καὶ 
: Paul (ch ἘΥ v ἐσεβάσθησαν καὶ x ἐλάτρευσαν τῇ Σ κτίσει 3: παρὰ τὸν 

mi 21. Eph. ἃ κτίσαντα, ὃς ἐστιν Ὁ εὐλογητὸς “ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν. 

φησεὰς. 90 διὰ τοῦτο ἃ παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς εἰς ° πάθη 1 ἀτιμίας" 
εἷς Eo ai te yap 8 θήλειαι αὐτῶν * μετήλλαξαν τὴν ἢ φυσικὴν 
ott χρῆσιν * εἰς τὴν ‘rapa ™ φύσιν, 51 κα ὁμοίως " τε " καὶ οἱ 
ra σις τι ὃ ἄρσενες Ῥ ἀφέντες τὴν ἃ φυσικὴν ' χρῆσιν τῆς ὃ θηλείας 


s here bis only. 
Esth. ii. 20 BN &c.(not A}. 
14 al. fr. v= 2 Thess. 1. 11. 
y = ch. viii. 39 reff. z = ch. xiv. 5 reff. 
al. Deut. iv. 32. b ch. ix. 5 reff. 
e Col. iii. 5. 
43. %Cor. vi. 8. xi. 21. 2 Tim. ii. 20 only. P. 
Gal. iii. 28 only. 
Wisd. xv. 7, 15. 


Esdr. i. 31 (29) al. 


Matt. xix. 4 | Mk. 
i here bis only. 1 Kings 1. 28. 


i John ii. 22. 


1 Thess. iv. 5only+. Job xvi. 4 Symm. = Xen. Mem. iii. 10. 8. 
Jer. xx. ll. 
Gen. i. 27. vii. 2. 

Sir. xviii. 8 only. Thuc. vii. 5. 


t = here only. see 1 Thess. i. 9. u = Eph. iv. 
Isa. xliv. 20. w here only t. x ver. 9. 
a Mark xiii. 19. Eph. iii. 9. Col. iii. 10. 1 Tim, iv. 3 
ech. xi. 36. Heb. xiii. 8. d ver. 24. 


f ch. ix. 21. }1 Cor. xi. 14. xv. 

g fem., here bis only. Lev. xxvii. 4. neut., 
h here bis. 2 Pet. ii. 12 only +. '-K@s, Jude 10.) 
ὃ k = James iv.9. Rev. xi. 6. 


1 = Acts xviii. 13. ch. iv. 18. xi. 24. Gal. i. 8, 9 al. m ch. ii. 14, 27. xi. 21, 24 (3ce). 1 Cor. xi.14. Gal. ii. 
15. iv. 8. Eph. ii.3. Jamesiii.7 bis. 2 Pet.i.4 only +. Wisd. vii. 20 only. n here only. see 1 Cor. 
vii. 3, 4. o here 3ce. Matt. xix.41i Mk. Luke ii. 23. Gal. iii. 28. Rev. xii.5,13 only. Jer. xx. 15. 


p = Matt. xxiii. 23. Rev. ii. 4. 


Judg. ix. 9, &c. A Ald. compl. 


[om εἰς ακαθαρσιαν A}(insd eadem mann, appy). | 


propr., Matt. iv. 11, 22. 


rec eavtoas, with 


D*EGKL{P] 17 rel [Orig,}] Chr, Thdrt Damase ΤῺ] Ee: txt ABCD!®. 


(25. ἐσεβαστησαν P. 


arm [ Ambrst | Jer. 


τὴν κτισιν P. | 
26. for χρησιν, κτισιν D!: sensum D-lat. 


aft παρα φυσιν, add xpnow D'G vulg 


27. for τε, δε AD!G!P] 41 17 [47] vulg syr Clem, [ Eus,] Ath, Chr, Thdrt Damase 
ΤῊ] [Orig-int,] Aug Ambrst: om C a! bh ο copt Orig,[and int,] Jer,: txt BD?KLN 
Syr eth [Ephr, ] Ce. om οἱ Lk [ Euthal-ms]. i Steph ] (1st) appeves, 
with ACD3/K, e sil] L[P]X rel Ath, Chr Thdrt | Ephr, Damase] Thi: txt BD!G (¢?) 


honour took place. ἀκαθαρσίαν] 
more than mere profligacy in the satis- 
faction of natural lust (as Olsh.); for the 
Apostle uses cognate words ἀτιμάζεσθαι 
and ἀτιμία here and in ver. 26 :—bestial- 
ity ; impurity in the physical, not only in 
the social and religious sense. TOU 
ἀτιμάζεσθαι the genitive may imply 
either (1) the purpose of God’s delivering 
them over to impurity, ‘ that their bodies 
should be dishonoured, or (2) the result 
of that delivering over, ‘so that their 
bodies were dishonoured, or (3) the 
nature of the ἀκαθαρσία, as πάθη ἀτιμίας 
below,—‘ impurity, which consisted in 
their bodies being dishonoured. ‘The se- 
cond of these seems most accordant with 
the usage of the Apostle and with the argu- 
ment. ἀτιμάζεσθαι is most likely pas- 
sive (Beza, al. De Wette), as the middle 
of ἀτιμάζω is not found in use. And this 
is confirmed by the old and _ probably 
genuine reading αὐτοῖς, which has been 
altered to ἑαυτοῖς from imagining that 
‘they’ was the subject to ἀτιμάζεσθαι. 
So that their bodies were dishonoured 
among them. 25.| This verse casts 
light on the τὴν ἀλήθ. ἐν ἀδικίᾳ κατεχόν- 
των of ver. 18. The truth of God (the 
true notion of Him as the Creator) which 
they professed, they changed into (see on 


ἐν, ver. 23) a lie (ψεῦδος = wd, used of 
idols, Jer. xvi. 19), thus counteracting its 
legitimate agency and depriving it of all 
power for good. σεβάζομαι, of the 
honour of respect and observance and 
reverence,—hatpevw, of formal worship 
with sacrifice and offering. Both verbs 
belong to τῇ κτίσει ; though σεβάζομαι 
would require an accusative, λατρεύω, the 
nearest, takes the government. τῇ 
κτ.] the thing made, the creature—a 
general term for all objects of idolatrous 
worship. παρά, beyond—which would 
amount to the exclusion of the Creator. 

The doxology expresses the horror 
of the Apostle at this dishonour, and puts 
their sin in a more striking light. But 
we need not supply εἰ καὶ οὗτοι ὕβρισαν, as 
Chrys. εὐλογητός is Blessed, κατ᾽ 
ἐξοχήν : the LXX put for it the perf. part., 
Ps. exvii. 24. The adjective is usually of 
God : the participle, of man. 26.) πάθη 
atip —see above, ver. 24,—stronger than 
ἄτιμα πάθη, as setting forth the status, 
ἀτιμία, to which the πάθη belonged. Con- 
trast 1 Thess. iv. 4, τὸ ἑαυτοῦ σκεῦος κτᾶ- 
σθαι ἐν τιμῇ. χρῆσιν) usum vene- 
reum; see examples in Wetstein. This 
abuse is spoken of first, as being the most 
revolting to nature. “In peccatis argu- 
endis seepe scapha debet seapha dici. Pu- 


ABCDG 
KL[PJx 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


25—29. ΠΡΌΣ PUM AIOE. 


" ΄ 3 A , / , lal ᾽ » , 
“ ἐξεκαύθησαν ἐν τῇ " ὀρέξει αὐτῶν εἰς ἀλλήλους, 5 ἄρσενες q here only. 


s2.. 0 » \ ti ΄ u ͵ ᾿ Η Deut. xxix. 
ἐν “ῶᾶρσεσιν τὴν * ἀσχημοσυνὴν κατεργαζόμενοι καὶ τὴν 30. Τὴιοὰ. | 


> / A BA na ΄, lal ΄ “ ) i 
‘ ἀντιμισθίαν ἣν ἔδει τῆς © πλάνης αὐτῶν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς * ἀπο- Rely = 10, 


Ζ r here only +. 
λαμβάνοντες. Sir. xxiil. 6 al. 


\ \ \ ‘ 
58 καὶ καθὼς οὐκ Y ἐδοκίμασαν τὸν θεὸν 


s -= 1 Tim. 1. 16: 
z Ὑ Se aie ZL b le > \ aN > t = here (Rev 
ἔχειν ἐν “ ἐπιγνώσει, παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς ὃ εἰς τ 15) ante, 
c 100 a a \ NS κε θ ΄ 99 e (Exod. xx. 
AOOKLLOV νοῦν, TOLELY TA μὴ “ KAUNKOVTA, ““ © TETANPW= 2.) Jos. 


/ " ΄ / 41» 
μένους ‘racy ὃ ἀδικίᾳ, Τὶ 


xii. 23, -μονεῖν, 1 Cor. vii. 36.) 


/ Η / " 
πονηρίᾳ, ἣ πτλεονεξίᾳ, Ἐπ᾿ κακίᾳ, 1.5. | 
ri 2} 4) (-μων,1 Cor 
u = ch. ii. 9 reff. ν 2 Cor. vi. 13 only Ἔ, 


w = James v. 20. 2 Pet. ti. 186. 2.461]. Ezek. xxxiii. 10. x Luke vi. 34. xxiii. 41 al. Num 
xxxiv. 14. 2 Macc iv. 46. vi. 21. viii. 6 only. y = here only}. Jos. Antt. ii. 7. 4, see ch. xiv 
22 reff. 1 Cor. iii. 13 reff. z= 1Tim. iii. 4. so ἐχειν ἐν αἰτίαις or δι᾿ αἰτίας, Thuc. ii. 18. sec 


Viger, p. 249. a ch. iii. 20 reff. Hos. iv. 1. Ὁ ver. 24. e I'Cor. ix::27; 2 Gor. 


xiii.5,6,7. 2 Tim. iii.8. Tit.i. 16. Heb. vi. 8 only. P.H. Prov. xxv.4. Isa. i. 22 only. d Acts 
xxii. 22 only. Deut. xxi.17. 2 Macc. vi. 4. e constr., Luke ii. 40. 2 Cor. vii. 4only. 2 Mace. 
vii. 21. f = Acts xx. 19 reff. g Luke xiii. 21. Actsi.18. Ps. xxvii. 3. 
h Acts iii. 26 reff. i Mark vii. 22. k 1 Cor. v. 8. L Eph. iv. 19. 2 Pet. ii. 


3al. Ezek. xxii. 27. m = 1 Cor. xiv. 20 reff. 


Athen, Orig, Eus, (ic. appeves (2nd) ACN! b! 17 Clem Orig, Ath, [Ephr] Chr 
Thdrt: txt BDGL[ KP] &-corr! [ Eus, Damase} Th] Ce. ev appeot AN! 5. 17 
Clem Orig Ath, Thdrt: txt BCDGL[ KP] &-corr! [Eus, Ephr, Damase] Ath, Chr 
Thi Ge. for eavt., αὐτοῖς BK 35. 

28. om o θεος A N*(ins corr!) 2 Nyss Damasc Hil-ms, Vict-tun: Chr, has it bef 
auTous. 

29. rec aft αδικια ins πορνεια, with L rel syrr farm Bas, Nyss, (Ephr,) Euthal-ms] 
Thdrt ΤῊ] Ge Ennod, and D!EG vulg Lucif Ruf Ambrst aft κακία, omg movnpia: [P 
ins καὶ πορν. (omg πονηρ.), and m ακαθαρσια πορν. :] on ABCKN 17 copt eth Ephr, 
Bas,{and mss,] Chr, Isid Max Gennad Damasce [Orig-int,] Aug. κακια bef 
πλεονεξ. AN [Syr] Ephr, [Orig-int,] Aug: kak. πον. tA. C 17 copt eth Damase: kak. 
mopveia πλεον. D1 (aft πορν. ins πονηρ. D3 [d!) ἃ [(d)] 2. 46. 71. 92: txt B(K[P] omg 
movnp.) L rel syr Bas, [ Nyss,] Chr Thdrt ΤῊ] Cc. 


dorem preeposterum ii fere postulant qui 
pudicitia carent ... Gravitas et ardor stili 
judicialis, proprietate verborum non violat 
verecundiam.” Bengel. 27.) τὴν 
ἀσχημ. perhaps, as De W., ‘the (well- 
known, too frequent) indecency, —‘cui 
ipsa corporis . . . conformatio reclamat,’ 
Bengel: but more probably the article is 
only generic, as in 2 Pet. i. 5-8 re- 
peatedly. τὴν ἀντιμισθίαν] The 
Apostle treats this ἀτιμία into which they 
fell, as a consequence of, a retribution for, 
their departure from God into idolatry,— 
with which 2” fact it was closely connected. 
This shame, and not its consequences, 
which are not here treated of, is the ἂντι- 
μισθία of their πλάνη, their aberration 
from the knowledge of God, which they 
received. This is further shewn by ἣν 
ἔδει in the past tense. εἰ yap καὶ μὴ γέ- 
evva ἦν, μηδὲ κόλασις ἤπείλητο, τοῦτο 
πάσης κολάσεως χεῖρον ἦν. εἰ δὲ ἥδονται, 
τὴν mposOyKny μοι λέγεις τῆς τιμωρίας. 
Chrys. Hom. v. p. 457. ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, 
in their own persons, viz. by their de- 
gradation even below the beasts. 

28.] The play on δοκιμάζω and ἀδόκιμος 
can hardly be expressed in any other lan- 
guage. ‘Non probaverunt’ and ‘repro- 
bum’ of the Vulgate does not give it. 
Because they reprobated the knowledge 
of God, God gave them over to a repro- 
bate mind, is indeed a very inadequate, 


but as far as the form of the two words is 
concerned, an accurate representation of 
it. (Mr. Conybeare gives it,—‘“ As they 
thought fit to cast out the acknowledg- 
ment of God, God gave them over to an 
outcast mind.”) For ἀδόκιμος is not 
‘judicii expers” (as Beza, Tholuck, &c.), 
but reprobate, rejected by God. God 
withdrew from them His preventing grace 
and left them to the evil which they had 
chosen. The active sense of ἀδόκιμος, 
besides being altogether unexampled, 
would, in the depth of its meaning, be 
inconsistent with the assertion of the 
passage. God did not give them up to 
a mind which had Jost the faculty of 
discerning, but to a mind judicially aban- 
doned to that depravity which, being well 
able to exercise the δοκιμασία required, 
not only does not do so, but in the head- 
long current of its abandonment to evil, 
sympathizes with and encourages (ver. 32) 
its practice in others. It is the ‘video 
meliora proboque,’ which makes the ‘ dete- 
riora sequor’ so peculiarly criminal. 

οὐκ ἐδοκίμασαν ἔχειν is not = ἐδοκίμ. οὐκ 
ἔχειν (as Dr. Burton): the latter would 
express more a deliberate act of the judg- 
ment ending in rejection of God, whereas 
the text charges them with not having 
exercised that judgment which would, if 
exercised, have led to the retention of God 
in their knowledge. ἔχειν ἐν ἐπιγν.} 


326 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. I. 30—82. 
‘ , , "» ᾽ , 
n-Matt. ἢ μεστοὺς P φθόνου, ° φόνου, °?" ἔριδος, δόλου, * κακοηθείας, 
xxiii. 28. ch. 7 Ὁ / ΄- ΄ ͵ὕ 
t 30 u v w 
14. James eX «αταλᾶάλο σ 
iii. 8, 17 al. ψιθυριστάς, a A ye Geo Sea baie ὑβριστάς, 
Ἐν 7 ὑπερηφάνους, ** ἀλαζόνας, * ἐφευρετὰς κακῶν, * γονεῦσιν 
1 
ο ‘Gal. v. 20, 21.) p Phil. i. 15. 1 Tim. vi. 4. q as above (op). Matt. xxvii. 18||Mk. Tit. 
~ 411,38. Jamesiv. 5. 1 Pet. ii. 1 only. Wisd. vi. 23 (25). 1 Macc. vili. 16 only. r 1 Cor. i. 11 reff. 
s here only+. 3 Mace. iii. 22. vii. 3. κακοήθεια, TO ἐπὶ τὸ χεῖρον ὑπολαμβάνειν ἅπαντα, Aristot. Rhet. ii. 13. 


there only +. (-Geuv, Ps. xl. 7. -topos, 2 Cor. xii. 20.) 
iv. 11.) v here only +. 
Prov. xx. 1.) x 2 Tim. iii. 2. 
only. Ps. cxviii. 21,51. (-véa, Mark vii. 22.) 
ii. 2 only. a here only t. 


φονων G D!-lat [tol] Lucif,: [φον. bef φθ. 17:] epidos bef φονου A. 
(vv. 27—30 are in a difft hand from the rest of D.) 


30. κακολαλους D. 


So Job xxi. 14,—“ they say to God, Depart 
from us: for we desire not the knowledge 
of thy ways,” and xxii. 15—17. 
29—31.] πεπληρωμένους belongs to the 
subject of ποιεῖν, understood. The 
reading πορνείᾳ appears to have arisen out 
of πονηρίᾳ, and is placed by some Mss. 
after that word, by some after κακίᾳ, omit- 
ting πον. The Apostle can bardly have 
written it here, treating as he does all 
these immoralities of the heart and con- 
science as results of, and flowing from, 
the licentious practices of idolatry above 
specitied. Accurate distinctions of 
ethical meaning can hardly be found for 
all these words. Without requiring such, 
or insisting on each excluding the rest, I 
have collected the most interesting notices 
respecting them. Umbreit has illustrated 
their LXX usage and Hebrew equivalents. 
ἀδικίᾳ) Perhaps a general term, 
comprehending all that follow: such would 
be according to the usage of the Epistle : 
but perhaps to be confined to the stricter 
import of injustice; of which on the part 
of the Romans, Wetst. gives abundant 
testimonies. πονηρίᾳ | Ammonius in- 
terprets τὸ πονηρόν, Td δραστικὸν Kakov,— 
used therefore more of the tempter and 
seducer to evil. πλεονεξίᾳ] covet- 
ousness (not as 1 Thess. iv. 6, see there), 
of which the whole provincial government 
and civil life of the Romans at the time 
was full. ‘Quando | major avaritie patuit 
sinus 2?’ exclaims Juvenal, soon after this. 
Sat. i. 87. κακίᾳ) more the passive 
side of evil—the capability of and pro- 
clivity to evil,—the opposite to ἀρετῆ :— 
so Arist. Eth. Nic. ii. 3.6, ὑπόκειται ἄρα 
ἢ ἀρετὴ εἶναι... . τῶν βελτίστων πρακτική" 
ἡ δὲ κακία, τοὐναντίον. φθόνου «πὰ 
φόνου are probably put together from 
similarity of sound. So Eurip. Troad. 
770 ff., ὦ Τυνδάρειον ἔρνος, οὔποτ᾽ εἶ Διὸς 
πολλῶν δὲ πατερων φημί σ᾽ ἐκπεφυκέναι, 
᾿Αλάστορος μὲν πρῶτον, εἶτα δὲ φθόνου, 
φόνου τε, θανάτου θ᾽, ὅσα τε γῆ τρέφει 
κακά. κακοηθείας see reff. 
Ψιθυρ. secret maligners,—xatadX. open 
Slanderers. The distinction attempted 


w 1 Tim. i. 13 only. 


u here only τ. (-Aca, 2 Cor. xii. 20. -λεῖν, James 
Prov. vi. 17 al. (-τρια, Jer. xxvii. [1.13]. -τικός, 
y as above (x). Lukei.dl. Jamesiv.6. 1 Pet.v.5 
zas above (x) only, Job xxviii.8. Prov. xxi. 24. Hab. 


om δολου A. 


to be set up by Suidas and others, 
between θεομισῆς, ὑπὸ θεοῦ μισούμενος, 
and θεομίσης, ὁ μισῶν τὸν θεόν, has been 
applied to θεοστυγεῖς also, which has 
therefore been written θεοστύγεις. But 
the distinction is untenable; all com- 
pound adjectives in ys being oxyton. 

θεοστυγής is never found in an active 
sense, ‘hater of God, but always in a 
passive, hated by God (cf. Eur. Troad. 
1205, 7 θεοστυγὴς “EAévn: Cycl. 395, τῷ 
θεοστυγεῖ ἅδου μαγείρῳ : ib. 598: so θεο- 
φιλής, Demosth. 1486 ult.: εὐτυχεστάτην 
πασῶν πόλεων τὴν ὑμετέραν νομίζω καὶ 
θεοφιλεστότην : and Asch. Eum. 831); 
and such is apparently the sense here. 
The order of crimes enumerated would be 
broken, and one of a totally different kind 
inserted between καταλάλους and ὕβρισ- 
τάς, it θεοστ. is to signify ‘ haters of God, 
But on the other supposition,—if any 
crime was known more than another as 
‘hated by the gods,’ it was that of ‘dela- 
tores, abandoned persons who circum- 
vented and ruined others by a system 
of malignant espionage and false informa- 
tion. And the crime was one which the 
readers of this part of Roman history know 
to have been the pest of the state; see 
Tacitus, Ann. vi. 7, where he calls the dela- 
tores ‘Principi quidem grati, et Deo exosi.’ 
So also Philo, ap. Damascen. (quoted by 
Wetst.) διάβολοι καὶ θείας ἀποπέμπτοι 
χάριτος, of τὴν αὐτὴν ἐκείνῳ διαβυλικὴν 
νοσοῦντες κακοτεχνίαν, θεοστυγεῖς τε καὶ 
θεομισεῖς πάντη. It does not follow that 
the delatores only are intended, but the 
expression may be used to include all those 
abandoned persons who were known as 
Diis exosi, who were employed in pursuits 
hateful and injurious to their kind. So 
Wetst., Meyer, Rickert, Fritzsche, De 
Wette:—the majority of Commentators 
incline to the active sense,—so Theodoret, 
(Ec., Erasm., Luther, Calv., Beza, Estius, 
Grot., Tholuck, Reiche, &c. ὕβριστάς] 
opposed by Xenoph. Mem. i. and Apol. 
Socr. to σώφρων, ‘a discreet aud modest 
man: but here perhaps, as said by Paul of 
himself, ref. 1 Tim., ‘qui contumelia afficit,’ 


ABCDG 
KL[P 

abcdf 
ghkl 
τ πο" 


[1] 


=. ah 


ΤΠ. 


xb 


,’ a“ ν , ς 
ἀπειθεῖς, 5ὲ © ἀσυνέτους, 


’ , 9 (/ Ν ΐ , κ la > 
Γἀνελεήμονας, 53 ὃ οἵτινες TO” δικαίωμα τοῦ θεοῦ ™* ἐπι- 
, 7 e \ -“ , 
γνόντες, OTL οἱ TA τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες ™ ἄξιοι " θανάτου 
’ , > / > lal lal 
εἰσίν, οὐ μόνον αὐτὰ ποιοῦσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ° συνευδοκοῦσιν 


τοῖς πράσσουσιν. 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 


i 
4 ἀσυνθέτους. 


BOL 


’ , 

© ADTOPYOUS, b Luke i. 17. 
Acts xxvi. 19, 
2 Tim. iii. 2. 
Tit. i. 6. iii. 3 
only. L.P. 
Deut. xxi. 18. 
(-θεῖν, -θεια, 
ch. xi. 30. 

c ver. 21 reff, 

d here only. 
Jer. iii. 8, 10, 

/ 11 only. 


» ’ 3 “ ral ΄ 
II. 1 Διὸ Ρ ἀναπολόγητος εἶ, ὦ ἄνθρωπε πᾶς ὁ 4 κρί- Demorth. p. 
383. 6 


e 2 Tim. iii. 3only +. schin. p. 47,29. 

h Job xxxiv. 27. i= 
xiii. 12 reff. 
xxiii. 29 reff. 


f here only. 

Luke i. 6. ch. ii. 26. viii. 4. 
ΤᾺ -- of persons, ch. xiii. 46, 
ΟἹ Cor. vii. 12, 13 reff. 


Prov.v. 9. xi. 17. 

Heb. ix. 1,10. Exod. xv. 25. 
Matt. x. 10 4]. Deut. xxv. 2. 
p ch. i. 20 only +. 


g = Acts x. 41 reff. 
= 1'Cor. 

n Acts 

= ch. xiv. 3,4 reff. 


31. ree aft αστοργους ins ασπονδους (gloss in marg to explain ἀασυνθετους), with 
CDK L[P]&3 rel vulg syr [arm Nyss, |] Chr,(omg acuverous) Thdrt ; pref, 17. 76 Thl; 
bet ασυνθετους D3: om ABD'GN! fuld! [Syr] copt Ephr, Damase [Orig-int,] Lucif,. 

32. επιγνωντες L 17 [Ephr,(txt,)]: επιγινωσκοντες B80: yrovtes Thi: εἰδοτες 116 
Chr : add οὐκ evonoay D Bas: οὐκ εγνωσαν G 8-pe: ov συνηκαν 15: non intellexerunt, 


or the like, latt [Orig-int, Cypr, Lucif; Ambrst]. 
ov μ. δε 46 Bas [ EKuthal-ms]: και δέ] ov μ. vulg[-clem] Ambrst. 


ov μονον yap (see above) D!: 
ποιουντες and 


συνευδοκουντες B: ov μον. ot ποιουντες auTa ad. Kat οἱ συνευδοκουντες soIne mentd by 


Isid vulg(not am!) D?-lat G-lat [(syrr) } 
Lucif, |. 


‘an insulting person.’ ὑπερηφάνους] 
ἐστὶ δὲ ὑπερηφανία καταφρόνησίς τις πλὴν 
αὑτοῦ τῶν ἄλλων, Theophr. Char. 354. It 
may be observed that Aristotle, Rhet. ii. 
16, mentions ὕβρισταί and ὑπερήφανοι as 
examples of τῷ πλούτῳ ἃ ἕπεται ἤθη. 

ἀλαζόνας] see reff. δυκεῖ δὲ καὶ ἀλαζὼν 
εἶναι ὁ θρασὺς καὶ προςποιητικὸς ἀνδρείας, 
Aristot. Eth. Nic. iii. 10. δοκεῖ δὴ 6 μὲν 
ἀλαζὼν mpostointixods τῶν ἐνδόξων εἶναι, 
καὶ μὴ ὑπαρχόντων, καὶ μειζόνων ἢ ὑπάρχει 
«νον (ἕνεκα δόξης καὶ τιμῆ5) . . - . καὶ γὰρ 
ἢ ὑπερβολὴ καὶ ἣ λίαν ἔλλειψις ἀλαζονικόν, 
Ibid. iv. 13. ἐφευρ. kak. |] “ Sejaius 
omnium facinorum repertor habebatur,’ 
Tacit. Ann. iv. 11:—‘scelerumque inventor 
Ulixes,’ Virg. Mn. ii. 161: στασιάρχαι, 
φιλοπράγμονες, κακῶν ebperal, ταραξιπόλι- 
des, Philo in Flace. ὃ 4, vol. ii. p 520:— 
πάσης“ κακίας εὑρετής (of Antiochus Epiph.), 
2 Mace. vii. 31. ἀσυνέτους, destitute 
of (moral) understanding, see Col. 1.9, and 
reff. Here perhaps suggested by the simi- 
larity of sound to ἀσυνθέτους, without 
good faith, οὐκ ἐμμένοντας ταῖς συνθή- 
καις, Suid. and Hesych. In the same 
sense, εὐσυνθετεῖν and ἀσυνθετεῖν are op- 
posed by Chrysippus and Plutarch (see 
Wetst.). ἀστόργους) μὴ ἀγαπῶν- 
τάς τινα, Hesych. And Athenzus, speak- 
ing of of καλούμενοι ὄρνιθες μελεαγρίδες, 
-- ἐστὶ δὲ ἄστοργον πρὸς τὰ ἔκγονα Td 
ὕρνεον, καὶ ὀλιγωρεῖ τῶν νεωτέρων, XiVv. 
p- 655 σ. ‘In hac urbe nemo liberos tol- 
lit, quia, quisquis suos heredes habet, nec 
ad coenas nec ad spectacula admittitur.” 
Petronius, 116. (Wetst.) 32.] The 
Apostle advances to the highest grade of 
moral abandonment,—the knowledge of 
God’s sentence against such crimes, united 
with tle contented practice of them, and 


arm (Clem-rom,) Ephr, [Orig-int, Cypr, 


encouragement of them in others. τὸ 
δικαίωμα τ. θ.] the sentence of God, un- 
mistakeably pronounced in the conscience. 

ὅτι x.7.A.] viz. that they who do 
such things are worthy of death; this zs 
the sentence, and must not be enclosed in 
a parenthesis, as in Wetstein, Griesbach, 
aud Scholz. θανάτου, what sort of 


death? Probably a general term for the 


ae ee courses 
lead to ruin. The word can hardly be 
pressed to its exact meaning: for many of 
the crimes mentioned could never be visited 
with judicial capital punishment in this 
world (as Grot.): nor conld the heathen 
have any definite idea of eternal, spiritual 
death, as the penalty attached to sin 
(Calov.),—nor again, any idea of the con- 
nexion between sin and natural death. 
« Life and Death,” remarks Umbreit, “ are 
ever set over against one another in the 
O. T. as well as in the N.T., the one as 
including all good that.can befall us, the 
other, all evil.” p. 246. The descrip- 
tion here given by the Apostle of the moral 
state of the heathen world should by all 
means be compared with that in Thucyd. 
iii. 82—84, of the moral state of Greece in 
the Peloponnesian war: and ἃ passage 
in Wisd. xiv. 22—31, the opening of 
which is remarkably similar to our text: 
εἶτ᾽ οὐκ ἤρκεσε τὸ πλανᾶσθαι περὶ τὴν τοῦ 
θεοῦ γνῶσιν, ἀλλὰ .. . .«. Ver. 22, and 
again ver. 27, ἣ γὰρ τῶν ἀνωνύμων εἰδώ- 
λων θρησκεία παντὸς ἀρχὴ κακοῦ καὶ αἰτία 
καὶ πέρας ἐστίν. 

II. 1—29.] Secondly, THE SAME, that 
all are guilty before God, Is PROVED OF 
THE JEWS AaLso. And first, vv. 1—11, πὸ 
man (the practice of the Jews being hinted 
at) must condemn another, for all alike are 


328 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. Tf. 
" iA εὖ - 
reh.xiv.2. νων Tey ᾧ γὰρ κρίνεις τὸν "ἕτερον, σεαυτὸν ἧ κατα- ΠΝ 
1 Pet. ii. 12. ¢ Ξ A x oe Ἶ 
sch. xii. ὃ, κρίνεις" τὰ γὰρ αὐτὰ πράσσεις ὁ «κρίνων. 3 οἴδαμεν δὲ a bedt 
or. iy. 6. ch 
gC 2 © \ a a a Ν ’ 7 a an \ 5 
a ἔχ, OTL τὸ ἃ κρῖμα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστὶν " κατὰ " ἀλήθειαν “ ἐπὶ τοὺς mn 017 
xvi. 15 \ A ͵΄ 3x , \ A ea 6 [47] 
ἘΞ ἴοι. Ta TOLAVTA πρασσοντας. λογίζη δὲ τοῦτο, ὦ ἂν ρωπε 
xxvii. 
, \ \ ‘al / \ “ > , 
Jonni. ὁ IKplvwY τοὺς τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντας Kal ποιῶν αὑτά, 
23. Esth. ii. A a nr x a Ἕ 
ἔα, ἢ ὅτι σὺ Y ἐκφεύξῃ τὸ " κρῖμα τοῦ θεοῦ ; 4 ἢ τοῦ % πλούτου 
Ὡ τ Mark ΧΙ. 
40. Luk A ab Γ 4 lal \ aA οὐ » fol XN fol 
ei εἴν ch. τῆς χρηστότητος αὑτοῦ καὶ τῆς ἀνοχῆς καὶ τῆς 
iii. 8. iii. / -“ 3 r .“ Ἂ Ν 
al. Jer, . ade μακροθυμίας ' καταφρονεῖς, © ἀγνοῶν © ὅτι τὸ ἢ χρηστὸν 
xxviii. (li. - 2 Bose - ΑΙ ᾿ 
10. a a i 5 k = ies 
srs ΚΕΝ τ θεοῦ εἰς μετάνοιαν σε ᾿' ἄγει, ° κατὰ δὲ τὴν “ σκλη sa 
w = Acts xiii. : ε ' Πα, ᾧ 
tr., (ch. σῖν. 14) 2 σου. σ. 7, 11. Heb. xi. 19. 1 Macc. vi. 9. y = Luke xxi. 
ee Cor. xi. 33. itpess 3.3 (Acts oY 2: eet aie 6) Mane L.P.HL. 2 Macc. vil. 35, z=ch.ix. ABDG 
23. xi.33, Eph.i.7,18. ii. 7al.(Paul.) τρυφᾷς ὑπὸ πλούτου τῆς σοφίας, Plato, Euthyphr.p.124. (= πλῆθος, KL[ PIR 
LXxX. Ps. Ixviii. 16 al.) a2 Cor. vi. 6. Gal. v. 22. Ὁ as above (a). ch. iii, 12. xi. 22 (8.6). Eph. abcaf 
ii. 7 al2. P. Ps. xxiv.7. {(-τεύεσθαι, 1 Cor. xiii. 4.) ce (=) ch. iii. 25 only +. (1 Mace. xii.25 only. Jos. ghk 1 
Antt. vi. 5. 1.) ἃ see Eph. iv. 2. ch. ix. 22. 1 Tim.i. 16 al. Prov. xxv. 15. (-wecv,1Cor. mn ol? 
xiii. 4. -μως, Acts xxvi. 3.) f Matt. xviii. 10. 1 Cor. xi. 22 al. Prov. xiii. 13. g ch. i. 13 [47] 


reff. h 1 Cor. xv. 33 reff. Ps. xxxiii. 8. constr., ch. i. 19, 20. i= ch. viii, 14. Gal. 


2 18. 2 Tim. iii. 6. Polyb. i, 15. 13. k here only. = Deut, ix. 27. see Matt. xix. 8. 
Cuap. II. 1. ins κρίματι bef xpivers ΟἹ m 73. 80. 93. 179 syr-w-ast copt. 
2. for δε, yap CR m 17. 80. 122-79 vulg D-lat copt arm Chr, Pelag: txt AB D-gr 


GKL[P] rel Thdrt Damase Th] (ἂς (Orig-int, Ambrst] Tert,: om 23 eth. 


3. [for Aoy. to πρασσυντας, vouCers ovy 0 Tavta πρασσων P. | 


guilty. 1.1 The address passes gra- 
dually to the Jews. They were the people 
who judged—who pronounced all Gentiles 
to be born in sin and under condemnation: 
—doubtless there were also proud and cen- 
sorious men among the Gentiles, to whom 
the rebuke might apply, but these are 
hardly in the Apostle’s mind. This is evi- 
dent by comparing τὰ γὰρ αὐτὰ πράσσεις 
ὁ κρίνων with vv. 21—23, where the same 
charge is implied in a direct address to 
the Jew. διό, on account of this 
δικαίωμα θεοῦ decreeing death against the 
doers of these things—FOR thou doest them 
thyself. ‘Yherefore thy setting thyself up 
as a judge, is unjustifiable. πᾶς 6 
κρίνων] The Jew is not yet named, but 
hinted at (see above): not in order to con- 
ciliate the Jews (Riickert), but on account 
of the as yet purposely general form of 
the argument. This verse is in fact the 
major of a syllogism, the minor of which 
follows, vv. 17—20, where the position 
here declared to be unjustifiable, is as- 
serted to be assumed by the Jew. 
év@ ... | For wherein (not ‘in that’), 
as ΕἸ. V.—i.e. ‘in the matter in which, 
2.] οἴδ. δέ, ‘atqui scimus’—now 
we know. κατὰ ἀλ.] according to 
truth, as E. V., De Wette :—not, ‘truly,’ 
‘revera’ (as Raphel, &c.)—for οἴδαμεν, 
on which the emphasis is, implies certain 
knowledge. Nor does kara aa. belong to 
κρῖμα, ‘judgment according to truth’ (as 
Olsh.),—but to ἐστίν, is, (proceeds) ac- 
cording to justice (John viii. 16). 
8.1 Here he approximates nearer to the 


τουτω A. 


Jews. They considered that because they 
were the children of Abraham they should 
be saved, see Matt. iii. 7, 9. TOUTO, 
viz. ὅτι σὺ éxo., following. ov has the 
emphasis on it, thou thyself,—‘thou above 
all others.’ 4.] 4, or (introducing 
a new error or objection, see ch. iii. 29; 
vi. 3; xi. 2), ‘tnasmuch as God spares 
thee day by day (see Eccles. viii. 11), dost 
thou set light by His long-suffering, ig- 
norant that His intent in it is to lead thee 
to repentance ?” πλούτου, -- a favourite 
word with the Apostle (see reff.),—the ful- 
ness, ‘ abundance.’ xpnor., as shewn 
by His ἀνοχή and pakpod. (reff.) 

ἀγνοῶν, not knowing,—being blind to the 
truth, that... Grot., Thol., al. would ren- 
der it ‘not considering :? but as De Wette 
remarks, it isa wilful and guilty ignorance, 
not merely an inconsiderateness, which is 
blamed in the question. ἄγει, is lead- 
ing thee: this is its intent and legitimate 
course, which thy blindness will frustrate. 
‘Malo deducit quam invitat; quia illud 
plus quiddam significat. Neque tamen pro 
adigere accipio, sed pro manu ducere.’ 
Calvin. 5.] I am inclined with Lach- 
mann to regard the question as continued. 
If not, the responsive contrast to the ques- 
tion in ver. 4 would begin more emphati- 
cally than with κατὰ δὲ. . .; it would be 
σὺ δὲ κατὰ, . - - or θησαυρίζεις δὲ σεαυτῷ 
kara... . Βαῦ the enquiry loses itself 
in the digressive clauses following, and no 
where comes pointedly to an end. I have 
therefore not placed a mark of interroga- 
tion at ἄγει or at θεοῦ, as Lachm. does,— 


9--ἰ͵ 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΤΌΩΣ. 


τῷ 
ζῷ 


δύ σου καὶ ' ἀμετανόητον καρδίαν ™ θησαυρίζεις σεαυτῷ 1 here only. 


== Prov. i. 18. 


" ὀργὴν ἐν ἡμέρᾳ "ο ὀργῆς καὶ "ἀποκαλύψεως δικαιοκρισίας "Gilat. xii 


τοῦ θεοῦ, ® ὃς 

[σὰ a \ > 

‘trois μὲν καθ 
p=) Cori. 14. 2 Loess. In. ale 


Hexapl. (-κρίτης, 2 Mace. xii. 41.) 
s = Luke xxi. 19. ch. τι 3,4. Heb. xii. 1 al. 
36 reff. sing., ch. xiil. 3. 


5. for αποκαλυψεως, avtatodocews A (xth!- rom |) Cees-arel,. 
κρισιας )3 ΚΤ ΓΡΊΝ 3 17 rel syr (zth[-rom }) Orig, 


᾿ ἀποδώσει ' ἑκάστῳ "KATA τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν, 
€ \ ͵ 
ὁ ὑπομονὴν * ἔργου 


Ezra x. 
u = ch. v. 2. viii. 18. ix. 23 al. 


n abs., Luke 
XE, 93. ch. 
Like δ. ὃν 
15 al. 

o Rey. vi. 17. 
Zeph. ii. 3. 


᾿ ἀγαθοῦ ὃ δόξαν καὶ 


q here only+. Hos. vi. 5 (for EW) Incert. (Quinta?] in 


Prov. xxiv. 12, 
t Acts ix. 


r= Matte ΧΤΕ 27: Hey xxii. 12. 
2. see James i. 4. constr., 1 Thess. i. 3. 


ins kat bef δικαιο- 
tus, Ephr, Bas ι Chr, [Cyr,-p Euthal- 


ms | Thdrtsepe: της ὃ. 33-5. 108-21: om ABD!GN! vulg Syr copt g ΤΕ [ar in | Orig,[ and 
Intsepe Eus, | Damase (Kc Iren-int, Cypr Lucif. 


but have left the construction to expiain 
itself. κατά] not, ‘in proportion to’ 
(Meyer), but as E. V. after, ‘in conso- 
nance with, ‘secundum, —describing the 
state out of which the action springs: see 
ver. 7, καθ᾽ ὑπομονήν. ἄμεταν.}ὕ not 
admitting that μετάνοια to which God is 
leading thee. ἐν ἡμέρᾳ, not for, nor 
= eis ἡμέραν, nor should it be rendered 
‘against the day, as E.V. I need hardly 
remind any accurate scholar, that such an 
interpretation as ‘ ἐν for eis’ is no where 
to be tolerated. It belongs to ὀργήν, - 
wrath in the day of wrath, ‘wrath which 
shall come upon thee in that day,’—not 
to θησαυρίζεις, imagining which has led to 
the mistake. The ἡμέρα ὀργῆς is the day 
of judgment, viewed in its relation to sin- 
ners : see reff. ἀποκαλ. δικαιοκρ.] 
the manifestation (public enforcement, it 
having been before latent though deter- 
mined) of God’s righteous judgment. 
The reading amor. καὶ δικαιοκρ. would 
mean, ‘the appearance (reff.) of God, 
and his righteous judgment, —not refer- 
ring merely to the detection of men’s 
hearts, as Origen, Theophyl., Riickert. 
But the reading is not strongly upheld, 
nor is it according to the mode of speak- 
ing in the argument—see ch. i. 17, 18. 

, 1.) This retribution must be 
carefully kept in its place in the argu- 
ment. The Apostle is here speaking ge- 
nerally, of the general system of God in 
governing the world,—the judging accord- 
ing to each man’s works—punishing the 
evil, and rewarding the righteous. No 
question at present arises, how this righte- 
ousness in God’s sight is to be obtained— 
but the truth is only stated broadly at 
present, to be further specified by and by, 
when it is clearly shewn that by ἔργα νόμου 
no flesh can be justified before God. The 
neglect to observe this has occasioned two 
mistakes: (1) an idea that by this passage 
it is proved that not faith only, but works 
also in some measure, justify before God 
(so Toletus in Pool’s Syn.), and (2) an idea 


(Tholuck Ist edn. and K6llner) that by 
ἔργου ἀγαθοῦ here is meant faith in Christ. 
However true it be, so much is certainly 
not meant here, but merely the fact, that 
every where, and in all, God punishes evil, 
and rewards good. 7, 8. τοῖς μὲν καθ᾽ 
ὀργὴ K. θυμός) To those who 
by endurance in good works seek for 
glory and honour and immortality (will 
He render) eternal life: but to those who 
are (men) of self-seeking, aud disobey 
the truth, but obey iniquity (shall accrue) 
anger and wrath, &c. ‘he verb ἀπο- 
δώσει, ver. 6, should have two accusatives, 
representing the two sides of the final retri- 
bution,—(whv αἰών. and ὀργήν, ἄς. But 
the second of these is changed to a no- 
minative and connected with ἔσται under- 
stood, and made the first member of the 
following sentence, δόξα δὲ «.7.A. being op- 
posed to it. Thus also two datives belong 
to ἀπυδώσει, Viz. τοῖς . . - . Cnrovou',— 
and τοῖς . .. ἀδικίᾳς Τὸ ζητοῦσιν belong 
δόξ. κι΄ τιμ. K. ἀφθ. as its accusatives, and 
καθ᾽ ὕπομ. ἔργ. ay. as its adverb. This, as 
De Wette remarks, is the only admissible 
construction: in opposition to (a) (cum. 
and Beza, who divide ἔργ. ay. from καθ᾽ 
ὕπομ. (iis quidem qui secundum patientem 
expectationem querunt boni operis glo- 
riam),—(B) Bengel,- Knapp, Fritzsche, 
Olsh., and Krehl, who take trots .... 
ἀγαθοῦ as meaning ‘those who endure in 
good works’ (as Ce. does τοῖς καθ᾽ brow. 
those who endure, absol.), and δόξαν .. .- 
ζητοῦσιν, as in apposition with it,—(y) 
Photius (in Gcum.), Luther, and Estius, 
who take it, rots ..... (nrovow ζωὴν 
αἰών.,---δόξαν .7.A.,—(5) Reiche, who 
takes τοῖς uév,—‘ to the one,’—alone, and 
makes καθ᾽ vou. parallel to κατὰ τὰ ἔργα, 
representing the rule of judgment, taking 
the rest as (γ). ἔργου, sing. of moral 
habitude in the whole, the general course 
of life and action (see reff.). δόξαν, 
absolute imparted glory like His own, see 
Matt. xiii. 43; John xvii. 22:—tipyy, re- 
cognition, relative precedence, see Matt. 





\ \ 
νυ :=1Cor. xv. τιμὴν Kat 
42, ἄς. 
2 Tim. i. 10 
nen vi. 24) 
only 
(Ww Ted. ii. 23. 
vi. 18, 19 
only. j 
w — Matt. vi. 
33. Coll. iii. 
Ralv Pas 


Se 
νοχωρία, 


, 
ζομένου 
xxxiii. 14. 


z = John xviii. 37. ch. 11}. 26. iv. 12,14. Gal. iii. 7 al. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


n \ ΠῚ / νυ ὃ 7 lal ‘ 
τὸ "xakxov, Ἰουδαίου τε πρῶτον καὶ 


ΤΊ, 


ἡ ἀφθαρσίαν * ζητοῦσιν ζωὴν αἰώνιον; 8 τοῖς δὲ 
* ἐξ ἐριθείας καὶ ὁ ἀπειθοῦσι μὲν τῇ * ἀληθείᾳ, 


> πειθομένοις 


A ᾿ ἐν τραβᾷ ἂν 
δὲ τῇ ° ἀδικίᾳ, 45ἴ ὀργὴ καὶ “8 θυμός, 9 ™ θλῦψις καὶ ᾿' στε- 
: Ate Ν \ ; , 

ἐπὶ πᾶσαν ᾿ψυχὴν ἀνθρώπου τοῦ ™ κατεργα- 


“Ἑλληνος" 


y 2 Cor. xii. 206. Gal. v. 20. Phil. i. 17. ii. 8. James 


iil. 14, 16 only t+. z=ch.x.21. Deut. xxi. 20. a = 1 Johni. 6 al. b = Acts 
νυν. 36 reff. c ch. i. 18 he d ver. 6. e Eph. iv, 21. f Ps. lxxvii. 49. g — Rev. 
χν. 1. Ezek. vy. 15. = 2 Thess. i. 6. ich. viii. 35. 2 Cor. vi. 4. Isa. viii. 22. xxx. 6. jas 
above (i). 2 Cor. xii. 10 a (-ρεῖσθαι, 2 Cor. iv. 8.) k —. Acts xiii. 11 reff. 1 Acts 
ii. 43 reff. Luke ix. 56 ν. τ. Num. xix. iyi 13. m = ch. i. 27. vii. 18, 15,17, 15. 1Cor.v.3. 1 Pet. 


iv. 3. Ps. Ixvii. 31 (28) 854 Ald. compl. 
19. 1 Cor. xiii.5. 3John1llonly. Deut. xxx. 15, 


8. ερηθειας A f: ΠΡ ΝΣ BD'G: 


εριθιας D?. 


n John xviii. 23. ch. vii. 21. xii, 21 (bis). xiii. 4 (bis). xvi. 


om μεν BDIGN! Th[ph-ant,) : 


ins ΑΘ ΚΙ ΓΡΊΝϑ 27 rel svr Orig,[and int, ] Ephr Chr Thdrt Damase Thl (ec. 
rec @vuos και opyn, with 231 ΠΓΡῚ 17 rel syr {Eus, Kuthal-ms]Thdr Ge: txt ov 
m vulg Syr [copt] arm Orig,[and int, ] Ephr, Damase ΤῊ. 


9. tovdaiw and ελληνι G m 1. 109 D!-lat. 


x. 32; xxv. 81:- ἀφθαρσίαν, incorrupti- 
bility: so the aim of the Christian athlete 
is deseribed, 1 Cor. ix. 25, as being to obtain 
στέφανον ἄφθαρτον. 8. τοῖς δὲ ἐξ 
ἐριθείας] as in reff., to be supplied by 
οὖσιν, those who live in, act from, are 
situated in and do theirdeeds from—é€pifeta 
as a status, as of ἐξ spoken of place. 

ἐριθεία,- --ποῦ from ἔρις, from which it is 
distinguished 2 Cor. xii. 20; Gal. v. 20, 
but from &pi6os, a hired workman, whence 
ἐριθεύω or -ouat, properly ‘to work for 
lure,’ but met. and generally, ‘ ambitum 
exercere, used principally of official per- 
sons, who seek their own purposes in the 
exercise of their office, and (according to 
the analogy of παιδεία from παιδεύω, 
δουλεία from δουλεύω, ἀλαζονεία from 
ἀλαζονεύομαι) ἐριθεία, ‘ambitus, “ self- 
seeking, ‘greed. It stands opposed to 
ὑπομονὴ ἔργου ἀγαθοῦ, which requires self- 
denial and forbearance. There seems to 
he no reason why this, the proper mean- 
ing, should not here apply, without seek- 
ing for a more far-fetched one, as ‘ the 
party spirit of the Jews, Rickert. The 
mistake of rendering it ‘ contentiousness, 
and imagining a derivation from ἔρις pre- 
vailed universally (Orig., Chrys., Theodo- 
ret, Theophyl., cum., Hesych. (ἠριθεύετο, 
ἐφιλονείκει), Vulg., Erasm., Grot., &c., and 
even the wore recent English Commen- 
tators, Bloomf., Slade, and Peile, τοῖς ἐὲ 
ἐριθείας, i.e. τοῖς ἐμίζουσι) according to De 
Wette, down to Rickert, who first sug- 
gested the true derivation. It appears to 
have arisen from ἐρεθίζω being somewhat 
similar in sound. Aristotle nses it in the 
sense of ‘ ambitus,’ canvassing for office, in 
Polit. v. 3 »- μεταβάλλουσι δὲ αἱ πολιτεῖαι 
καὶ ἄνευ στάσεως διά τε τὰς ἐριθείας, ὥςπερ 
ἐν Ἡραίᾳ ἐξ αἱρετῶν γὰρ διὰ τοῦτο ἐποίη- 
σαν κληρωτάς, ὅτι ἡροῦντο τοὺς ἐριθευομέ- 
vous. Fritzsche, who has an excursus on 
the word, renders οἱ ἐξ ép.0.,—‘ malitiosi 


FSraudum machinatores” Ignatius, ad 
Philad. ὃ 8, p. 704, opposes ἐριθ. to 
χριστομαθία. On the whole, self-seeking 
seems best to lay hold of the idea of the 
word: see note on Phil. i. 16, 17. 
ἀπειθ. μ. τῇ ad. ] Hindering (see ch. i. 18) 
the truth which they possess from working, 
by self-abandonment to iniquity. 
ὀργὴ κ. θυμός According to this arrange- 
ment (see var. readd.) the former word 
denotes the abiding, settled mind of God 
towards them (n ὀργὴ τ. θεοῦ μένει ἐπ᾽ 
αὐτόν, John iii. 36),—and the latter, the 
outbreak of that anger at the great day of 
retribution. So the grammarians: θυμὸς 
μέν ἐστι πρόξκαιρος (excandescentia, as 
Cicero)’ ὀργὴ δὲ πολυχρόνιος μνησικακία, 
Ammon. See the same further brought out 
by Tittmann, Syn. i. p. 131. 9. θλῖψ. 
k. otev.| An expression from the LXX 
(see reff.): the former signifying more 
the outward weight of objective infliction, 
—the latter the subjective feeling of the 
pressure. It is possible, in the case of 
the suffering Christian, for the former to 
exist without the latter: so 2 Cor. iv. 8, 
ev παντὶ θλιβόμενοι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ στενοχω- 
ρούμενοι. But here the objective weight 
of infliction and the subjective weight 
of anguish, are co-existent. ἐπὶ 
πᾶσαν Ψ. ἀνθ. probably ἃ periphrasis 
for the sake of emphasis and solemnity. 
Had it been (as Fritzsche and Meyer) 
to indicate that the soul is the suffering 
part of the man (nearly so Olsh.), it 
should have been as De W. observes, 
ἐπὶ ψυχὴν παντὸς ἄνθρ., or ἐπὶ πᾶσαν 
ψυχὴν a θρώπων (see reff.). KaTepy. | 
κατεργάζομαι and ἐρὴ ἄζομαι seem to have 
but this slight difference,—that κατεργάζο- 
μαι, answering rather to our ‘commit,’ is 
more naturally used of evil, as manifested 
and judged of by separate acts among 
men, whereas ἐργάζομαι, answering to our 
‘work,’ is used indifferently of both good 


ARDG 
KLEPJX 
abecdt 


gh 
mn 


ΚΙ 


o17 


§—15. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


991 


10 oO , \ \ \ \ 9 ’ ΟΥ̓ “ 4 ’ uv , rene “ 
δόξα δὲ καὶ τιμὴ Kal Ρ ειρηνὴ παντί Tw “ εργαζφομένῳ οὐδ᾿ εἴτ 


\ Ud > ω ie 
tro‘ ἀγαθόν, ᾿Ιουδαίῳ te πρῶτον καὶ “λληνι. 
ἐστιν ὃ προςωπολ ; a τῷ θεῶ: 15 ὅ ὰρ * ἀνό- 
RTOS ημψία παρὰ τῷ θεῷ σου yap ἡ avo 
δ ΄ CV r ‘\ c/ 3 
ws ἥμαρτον, tavouws καὶ ἃ ἀπολοῦνται, καὶ ὅσοι " ἐν 
/ ’ , 
νόμῳ ἥμαρτον, διὰ νόμου ~ κριθησονται" 


- John xiv. 

27. ch. v. 1. 

vili. 6 (x. 

15 (from Isa. 


1 ov yap 


lii. 7)) al. 

q = Matt. vii. 
23. xxvi. 10. 
Gal. vi. 10 al. 

13 > \ €) ΠΕ πεν 2; 

OU yap Οἱ τ Matt. xix. 17. 

Luke vi. 


45. ch. vii. 13 bis. xii. 21. xiii. 3,4. Philem. 14 al. 2 Kings xiv. 17. see John v. 29. 1 Pet. iii. 11. 
s Eph. vi. 9. Col. iii. 25. Jamesii. 1 only +. (-77y5, Acts x. 34, -m7Teuv, James li. 9.) t here bis 
only+. 2 Mace. viii. 17 only ; but not =. (-mos, 1 Cor. ix. 21.) u = Matt. xviii. 14. 1 Cor. 1. 
18. 2 Cor. ii. 15. iv.3. 2 Thess. ii. 10. Lev. xxiii. 30. v — here only. (Gal. iii. 11. v. 4.) 
τ = Acts xvii. 31. ver. 16. ch. iii. 6 al. Ps. xcv. 13. 
10. τω εργαζ. το ayaboy bef παντι G, 11. om τω D!. 


and evil. That this is not always kept to, 
see reff., especially ch. vii. 18, and Plato 
Legg. iii. p. 686, end, in both which places, 
however, definite acts are spoken of. The 
pres. part. denotes the status or habit of 
the man. *Iovd. τε πρῶτον] Because 
the Jew has so much greater advantages, 
and better opportunities of knowing the 
divine will: and, therefore, pre-eminent 
responsibility. 10. εἰρήνη) Here in 
its highest and most glorious sense, see 
reff. 11.] This remark serves as the 
transition to what follows, not merely as 
the confirmation of what went before. As 
to what preceded, it asserts that though 
the Jew has had great advantages, he shall 
be justly judged for his use of them, not 
treated as a favourite of Heaven: as to 
what follows, it introduces a comparison 
between him and the Gentile to shew 
how fairly he will be, for those greater 
advantages, regarded as πρῶτος in re- 
sponsibility. And thus we gradually (see 
note on ver. 1) pass to the direct com- 
parison between him and the Gentile, 
and consideration of his state. 

12—16.] The justice of a GENERAL judg- 
ment of ALL, but according to the advan- 
tages of each. 12. ὅσοι y. ἀνό- 
pos ....] For as many as have sinned 
without (the) law (of Moses): shall also 
perish without (the) law (of Moses) : i.e. 
it shall not appear against them in judg- 
ment. Whether that will ameliorate 
their case, is not even hinted,—but only 
the fact, as consonant with God’s justice, 
stated. That this is the meaning of ἀνό- 
pws is clear from 1 Cor.ix.21. That even 
these have sinned against ὦ νόμος, is pre- 
sently (ver. 14)shewn. Chrys. says (Hom. 
vi. p. 466), . . . . ὁ μὲν γὰρ Ἕλλην ἀνό- 
pws κρίνεται" τὸ δὲ ἀνόμως ἐνταῦθα οὐ τὸ 
χαλεπώτερον, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἡμερώτερον λέγει" 
(this is perhaps saying too much, see above) 
τουτέστιν, οὐκ ἔχει κατηγοροῦντα τὸν νό- 
μον. τὸ γὰρ ἀνόμως τοῦτ᾽ ἐστι, χωρὶς τῆς 
ἐξ ἐκείνου κατακρίσεως, φησίν, ἀπὸ τῶν τῆς 
φύσεως λογισμῶν καταδικάζεται μόνων. 6 
δὲ ᾿Ιουδαῖος, ἐννόμως, τουτέστι, μετὰ τῆς 
φύσεως καὶ τοῦ νόμου κατηγοροῦντος ὅσῳ 


γὰρ πλείονος ἀπήλαυσεν ἐπιμελείας, τοσού-. 


τῳ μείζονα δώσει δίκην. καί (De W.) 
serves to range dmod., as well as ἥμαρτ. 
under the common condition ἀνόμως : As 
miny as without the law have sinned, 
without the law shall also perish. 

ἀπολοῦνται, the result of the judgment 
on them, rather than κριθήσονται, its pro- 
cess, because the absence of the law would 
thus seem as if it were the rule by which 
they are to be judged,—whereas it is only 
an accident of that judgment, which de- 
pends on other considerations. ἐν 
γόμῳ, under (77, as a status) the (Mosaic) 
law; not “ὦ law,’ which would make the 
sentence a truism: it is on that very 
undeniable assumption, ‘ that all who have 
had a law given shall be judged by that 
law,’ that the Apostle constructs his ar- 
gument, asserting it with regard to the 
Mosaic law in the case of the Jews, and 
proving that the Gentiles have had a law 
given to them in the testimony of their 
consciences. As to the omission of the 
article, no inference can be drawn, as the 
word follows a preposition: see ver. 23, 
where ἐν νόμῳ unquestionably means ‘zn 
the law of Moses.’ Besides, these verses 
are no general assertions concerning men 
who have, and men who have not, a 


‘law revealed (for all have one), but a 


statement of the case as concerning Jews 
and Gentiles. vopos, throughout, 
signifies the law of ‘Moses, even though 
anarthrous, in every place, except where 
the absence of the article corresponds to 
a logical indefiniteness, as e.g. ἑαυτοῖς 
εἰσιν νόμος, ver. 14: and even there 
not ‘a law:’ see note. And I hope to 
shew that it is never thus anarthrously 
used as = 6 νόμος, except where usage 
will account for such omission of the 
article. διὰ νόμ. κριθ.] Now, shall be 
judged by the law: for that will furnish 
the measure and rule by which judgment 
will proceed. 13. | ‘This is to explain to ἡ 
the Jew the fact, that not his mere hearing 
of the law read in the synagogue (= bis 
being by birth and privilege a Jew) will 
justify him before God, but (still keeping 
to general principles and not touching 
as yet on the impossibility of being thus 


999 


x James i. 22, 
23, 25 only 
Isa. ili. 3 
only. 

y 1 Cor. iii. 19. 
Gal. ii. 11 al. 
= James, as 
above (x), 
and iv. ll 
(Acts xvii. 
28) only +. 

1 Mace. ii. 67 h 
only. 

a == Paul (Acts : 
xili. 39. ch. iii. 20 al23.) only, exc. Luke xviii. 14. 

8. Eph. ii. 3 only. (ch. i. 26 reff.) 

d= Acts x. 41 reff. 
iv. 14 [see note there] 412. Heb. vi. 10,11) only. P.H. 
only. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 22. Esdr. 11. 2. 
i. 10 reff. (Eccles. x. 20.) Wisd. xvii. 11 only. 


13. [om ver P.] 


Thdrt Phot: om ABDGN [47? Orig(Tischdf) Euthal-ms} Damase. 
[Orig,]: ins AD3GKLN rel Mcion-e, (Orig, | Chr Thdrt. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


νόμου ὃ δικαιωθήσονται. 


James ii. 21, 24, 25, 
e = ch. ix. 17 (from Exod. ix. 16), 22. 


2 Macc, xi. 15 only. 


ΤΙΣ 


, , a a Ε ’ ¢ \ 
* ἀκροαταὶ νόμου δίκαιοι ¥ παρὰ τῷ θεῷ, ἀλλ᾽ οἱ * ποιηταὶ 


Ἰφ ὅταν γὰρ ἔθνη τὰ μὴ νόμον 


ἔχοντα ὃ φύσει “ τὰ τοῦ νόμου ποιῶσιν, οὗτοι νόμον μὴ 
ἔχοντες ἑαυτοῖς εἰσιν νόμος, 15 ἃ οἵτινες " ἐνδείκνυνται τὸ 
Γἔργον τοῦ νόμου δ γραπτὸν ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις αὐτῶν, 
συμμαρτυρούσης αὐτῶν τῆς ἱσυνειδήσεως καὶ * μεταξὺ 


Ps. exlii. 2. Ὁ Gal. it. 15. iv 


c constr., ch. viii. 5. Matt. xvi. 23. Luke ii. 49. Thuc. viii. 31. 
2 Cor. viii. 24, Eph. 1i. 7. 1 Tim. i. 16 (2 Tim. 

(Gen. 1. 15, 17.) f see ver. 7 reff. gz here 

h ch. viii. 16. ix. 1 only +. i2 Cor. 


k Acts xv. 9 reff. 


rec ins tov bef Ist vouov, with KI. 17 rel [arm] Mcion-e Chr 


om tw BD! Κὶ 
for αλλ᾽ οι, αλλα (ἃ. 


rec ins tov bef 2nd vouov, with D°KL 17 rel Mcion-e, Chr Thdrt Phot : om 


ABD'GR [ Orig, Euthal-ms] Damase. 


14, for yap, δε G eth arm Orig,[(txt, and int,): om a]. 
rec mom (grammatical corrn), with D rel [ Kus, | Chr Thdrt: woree KLE P 1] 


k. 


aft δικαιωθησονται ins rapa θεω G | spec}. 
ins ta bef εθνη (ὦ 


17: mowovow DIG [Cyr,-p Euthal-ms]: txt ABN [47-marg] Clem, Orig, Damase. 
for ουτοι, οἱ τοιουτοι G vulg D-lat Orig,{and int, | (Hil). 


15. ενδίγνυνται A: evdinv. GR. 


Tns συνειδησεως bef αὐτων DG [arm]: αὐτοῖς 


τ. συν. tol' [Orig-int,] Chr Jer: avtois τ. σ. avtwy vulg Pelag Ambrst: txt ABKL[P)X& 


17 rel [ Orig,-int, Chr, ]. 


justified) the doing of the law. τοῦ 
has been apparently inserted in both cases 
in the later Mss. from seeing that νόμος 
was indisputably the law of Moses, and 
stumbling at the unusual expression of 
ἀκροαταὶ vduov. But the of in both cases 
Is generic, and ἀκροατὴς-νόμου, ποιητὴ5- 
νόμου (almost as one word in each case), 
‘a hearer-of-the-law,’ a ‘ doer-of-the-law.’ 
So that the correct English for of ἀκροαταὶ 
νόμου is hearers of the law, and for of 
ποιηταὶ νόμου, doers of the law. It is 
obvious, that with the omission of the 
τοῦ in both places, the whole elaborate and 
ingenious criticism built by Bp. Middleton 
on its use, falls to the ground. (See 
Middleton, Gr. Art. in loc.) His dictum, 
that such an expression as of ἀκροαταὶ νό- 
μου is inadmissible, will hardly in our day 
be considered as deciding the matter. 
14.] ἔθνη. the Gentiles [in general] ; see 
ch. iii. 29; xi. 138; xv. 10, 12. In this 
place, ἔθνη τὰ μὴ vdu. ἔχοντα is the 
only way in which the sense required 
could be expressed, for τὰ ἔθνη τὰ μὴ v. 
ἔχ.. would mean ‘ those Gentiles who have 
not the law,’ as also would ἔθνη μὴ νόμον 
éx., whereas the meaning clearly is, the 
Gentiles not having the law. 
νόμον] Again, ‘the law,’ viz. of Moses. 
A law, they have; see below. 
φύσει, by nature, τοῖς φυσικοῖς ἑπόμενα 
λογισμοῖς, Schol. in Matthai. τὰ 
τοῦ νόμου m.| do things pertaining 
to the law [i.e. the things about which 
the law is concerned], e.g. abstain from 
᾿ stealing, or killing, or adultery. But it 
by no means follows that the Apostle 


means that the Gentiles could fulfil the 
law, do the things, i.e. all the things en- 
joined by the law (as De Wette): he ar- 
gues that a conscientious Gentile, who 
knows not the law, does, when he acts in 
accordance with requirements of the law, 
so far set up the (see below on the art.) 
law to himself. τὰ τοῦ νόμου is in- 
terpreted by Beza, Wetst., and Elsner, 
‘ that which the law does,’ i.e. make sane- 
tions and prohibitions: but this can hardly 
be. The Apostle does not deny cer- 
tain virtues to the Gentiles, but maintains 
the inefficiency of those, and all other vir- 
tues, towards man’s salvation. ἑαυτοῖς 
εἶσιν νόμος} are to themselves (so far) 
the law, not ‘a@ law,’ for a law may be 
just or unjust, God’s law or man’s law: 
there is but one law of God, partly written 
in men’s consciences, more plainly mani- 
fested in the law of Moses, and fully re- 
vealed in Jesus Christ. The art. could not 
have been here used without stultifying 
the sentence by distributing the predicate, 
making the conscientious heathen to be 
to himself the whole of the law, instead of 
‘the law, so far as he did the works of the 
law. Cf. Aristot. Eth. iv. 14,6 δὲ χαρίεις 
kK. ἐλευθέριος οὕτως ἕξει οἷον νόμος ὧν 
ἑαυτῷ. 16. ἐνδείκν., by their con- 
duct shew forth,—give an example of. 

TO ἔργ. TOU νόμον = τὰ τοῦ νόμου 
above : but sing. as applying to each of the 
particular cases supposed in the 6rav.... 
ποιῶσιν. If it had here been τὰ ἔργα τοῦ 
νόμου, it might have been understood to 
mean the whole works of the law, which 


* the indefinite ὅταν prevents above. 


ABDG 
ΚιΙΓΡΊΝ 


abe 
ghk 
mn 


[47 | 


f 
1 
17 


2s OTOAQ- 


you τ΄. 
-..0 θεὸς 
G 


a. 
ABDK 
ταῦ 
dfghk 
Inno 


17 [47] 


‘speak, with himself. 


what has this verse reference? 


14—17. 


ἀλλήλων τῶν 'ἱ λογισμῶν 
16 ἐν ἡμέρᾳ 


e 


λογουμένων. ο 7 


τῶν ἀνθρώπων, κατὰ τὸ 
χριστοῦ. 


n abs., Luke xxi. 14. 

xxiv. 50. p ver. 12 reff. 
2Cor.iv.2. Isa. xxii. 9. 
2 Thess. ii. 14. 


20. 


i. 5. s here only. 


διαλογισμων G. 


TIPOS POMAIOTS. 


™ κατηγορούντων 
A € \ 
Ρ κρινεῖ ὁ θεὸς 
Γεύα aN / r ὃ Ν Al nm 
γγέλιον μου ola Inoov al. 
17 > δὲ \ Ἴ ὃ lal Ss ᾽ / \ t 3 / 
εἰ δὲ σὺ ᾿Ιουδαῖος "ἐπονομάζῃ καὶ ' ἐπαναπαυῃ 
Acts xxvi. 1 (xix. 33 reff.). L.P. 


rch: xvi. 25. 
Gen. iv. 17, 20. 
xi. 25.) Micah iii. 11. w. dat., 1 Macc. vii. 12. 


οος 
Ore 


᾽ 

ῃ ATrO=- 12Cor. x.5 
only. Prov. 

1. 18... Jer. 


x \ 
η Kab 
\ q \ 
Ta KpUuTTa 
m = John v. 45 
Paul, 
Acts xxiv. 13 
al3. Epp., 
here only τ. 
1 Mace. vii. 6. 
ὁ constr., 2 Cor. i.4. Matt. 
q Matt. vi.4 al. Deut. xxix. 29. constr., 1 Cor. iv. 5. xiv. 
2 Tim. ii. 8 only. see 2 Cor. iv. 3. 1 Thess. 
t -= here (Luke x. 6) only. (Num. 


Jen? Zi. Ue 


16. rec (for 4) ore, with DGKLN 17 rel vulg syr [arm spec Ps-]Ath, Chr Thdrt 
(Ee [Orig-int,|: [ewm aeth:] txt A B(m mu.) tol Syr copt Cyr|-p,] Damasce(ev ἢ) 


fOrig-int, ] Ambr Aug Ambrst. 


του κυριου nuwy D G-lat Ambr, {Ambrst }. 


xp. bef ino. BUN! ?): ev χριστω ino. Orig, : 
om ino. [Mcion-in-]Tert : δια w xv is written by R-corr! over an erasure. 


add 


17. rec tor εἰ δε, we (see note), with D°L rei svr Chr Thdrt Ge: txt ABD'K® d? 
[472] vulg G-lat Syr [copt eth arm] Clem, Damase ΤῊ] [Euthal-ms Orig-int, Ambrst ]. 


eravaravet Καὶ 17(sic) [ Kuthal-ms ]. 


γραπτὸν ἐν τ. x. αὐτ.7 Alluding to the 
tables of stone on which the law was 
written: see a similar figure 2 Cor. 11. 3. 
συμμαρτ. avr. τ. συνειδ.) This is 

anew argument, not a mere continuation 
of the ἔνδειξις above. Besides their giving 
this example by actions consonant with the 
law, their own conscience, reflecting on 
the thing done, bears witness to it as good. 
oupp., not merely = wapt., as Grot., 
Thol., nor = una testatur, viz. as well as 
their practice,—but confirming by its 
testimony, the σὺν signifying the agree- 
ment of the witness with the deed, as con 
in contestari, confirmare :—perhaps also 
the σὺν may be partly induced by the σὺν 
in cuvedhoews,—referring to the reflective 
process, in which a man confers, so to 
καὶ pet. ἀλλ. 
κιτ.λ.] and their thoughts (judgments or 
reflections, the self-judging voices of the 
conscience, which being corrupted by sin- 
ful desires are often divided) among one 
another (i.e. thought against thought in 
inner strife) accusing, or perhaps excusing 
(these two participles are absolute, de- 
scribing the office of these judgments,— 
and nothing need be supplied, as ‘ them,’ or 
‘ their deeds’). Notice the similarity of 
this strife of conscience, and its testimony, 
as here described, to the higher and more 
detailed form of the same conflict in the 
Christian man, ch. vii. 16. 16.| Zo 
Hardly to 
that just preceding, which surely speaks of 
a process going on iz this life (so however 
Chrys. takes it. See also a fine passage in 
Bourdaloue’s Sermons, Vol. i. Serm. ii. p. 
27, ed. Paris, 1854): nor, as commonly as- 
sumed, to κριθήσονται (ver. 12), which only 
terminates one in a series of clauses con- 
nected by γάρ :—but to the great affirma- 
tion of the passage, concluding with ver. 
10. To this it is bound, it appears to me, 


by the τὰ κρυπτὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, answering 
to πᾶσαν ψυχὴν ἀνθρώπου, ver. 9. This 
affirmation is the las¢ sentence which has 
been in the dogmatic form :—after it we 
have a series of quasi-parenthetic clauses 
ov γάρ- ὅσοι γάρ-- οὐ γάρ--ὅταν γάρ; 
1. 6... the reasons, necessitated by the start- 
ling assertion, are one after another given, 
and, that having been done, the time is 
specified when the great retribution shall 
tuke place. κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγ. μου] See 
retf. according to (not belonging to 
κρινεῖ as the rule of judgment, but to the 
whole declaration, ‘as taught in,’ ‘as form- 
ing part of’) the Gospel entrusted to me 
to teach. διὰ “Ino. xp.| by Jesus 
Christ, viz. as the Judge—see John v. 22: 
—belongs to κρινεῖ. See also Acts xvii. 
91. 17—24.| The pride of the Jews 
in their law and their God contrasted 
with their disobedience to God and the 
law. 17. εἰ δέ] This has been in the 
later Mss. changed into ἰδέ, apparently to 
avoid the anacoluthon, or perhaps merely 
by mistake originally. The anacoluthon, 
however, is more apparent than real. It is 
only produced by the resumption of the 
thread of the sentence with οὖν, ver. 21. 
Omit (in the sense) only that word, and all 
proceeds regularly—‘ But if thou art de- 
nominated a Jew, and &c. .. ., thou that 
teachest thy neighbour, dost thou not teach 
thyself?’ ἄς. The εἰ δὲ ov carries on the 
apostrophe from ver. 5, since when it has 
been broken off by reference to the great 
day of retribution and its rule of judg- 
ment; the ov identifies the person ad- 
dressed here as the same indicated by the 
cov and σεαυτῷ there, and by ὦ ἄνθρωπε 
in ver. 1. Thus the Apostle by degrees sets 
in his place as a Jew the somewhat inde- 
finite object of his remonstrances hitherto, 
—and reasons with him as such. étroy. | 
No stress on é7-,—art named, ‘denomi- 


334 


u Paul (ver. 17. 
ch. v. 3, 11. 
2 Cor. x. 15 
al.) only, exc, 
James i. 9. 
iv. 16. Jer. 
ix. 23, 24. 

v Acts xxii. 14 
reff. 

w ellips., here 
only. see ch, 
xii. 2. 

x Phil. i. 10. 

y — Luke xii. 
56. Ps. xvi. 
3 


/ / 
νόμου, 19 » πέποιθάς 
al “- “ 
φῶς τῶν 4 ἐν ἅ σκότει, 
\ 
ἐνηπίων, ἔχοντα τὴν 


= 1 Cor. xv. 
41. Dan. vii. 
3 


c Aots i. 16 reff. d Lukei.79. 1 Thess. ν. 4. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


ἊΨ 5» rn f é [4] 
ἀληθείας ἐν τῷ νόμῳ" “ 
, id , - Ν U ΄ r, ΄ 
οὐ διδάσκεις; ὁ κηρύσσων * μὴ κλέπτειν κλέπτεις ; 3: ὁ 
- ΄ ε . 
λέγων "μὴ μοιχεύειν μοιχεύεις ; ὁ | βδελυσσόμενος τὰ 


a Luke i. 4. Acts xviii. 25. xxi. 21,24. 1 Cor. xiv. 19. Gal vi. 6 only Ὑ. 
1 John i. 6. 
f Luke xi. 40. xii. 20. 


If. 


νόμῳ καὶ "καυχᾶσαι "ἐν θεῷ 18 καὶ " γινώσκεις ** τὸ θέλημα 
καὶ ᾿ὐδοκιμάξεις τὰ ** διαφέρον τα, " κατηχούμενος ἐκ τοῦ 
τε σεαυτὸν “ ὁδηγὸν εἶναι τυφλῶν, 
30 ὁ παιδευτὴν ἴ ἀφρόνων, διδάσκαλον 
h μόρφωσιν τῆς ᾿ἱ γνώσεως καὶ τῆς 


l e = ὃ ὃ 7 Ca \ 
O OVY OLOADKWYV ETEPOV σεαῦυτον 


Ὁ constr. w. inf., 2 Cor. x. 7. 
see Matt. iv. 16. Isa. ix. 2. e Hebd. xii. 9 


1 Cor. xv. 36. 2 Cor. xi. 16 bis, 19. xii. 


only. Hos.v.2. Sir. xxxvii. 19 only. 
6,11. Eph. v.17. 1 Pet. ii. 15 only. Job v. 3. g = 1 Cor. iii. 1 reff. h 2 Tim. iii. 5 
only +. (-οὔσθαι, Gal. iv. 19.) i= Lukei, 77. xi. 52 al. Mal. ii. 7. k constr., Acts xxi. 4, 21. 


1 = here (Rey. xxi. 8) only. Exod. v. 21. 


rec ins tw bef vouw, with Π ΚΙ, 17 rel [arm Euthal-ms] Thdrt ΤῊ] @e: om ABD! 


Clem, Did, Chr-comm,(and mss) Damasc. 
20. om διδασκ. νηπιων A. 


nated,’—* hast the name put on thee ;’ see 
reff. ἐπαναπ.} Used of false trust, 
see reff. The 7@ of the rec. has been in- 
serted in the later Mss. before νόμῳ, be- 
cause it here clearly applied to the ‘law of 
Moses,’ and the absence of the article gave 
offence. It is omitted, because ‘the law’ 
is not here distributed—it is not the law 
itself in its entirety, which is meant, but 
the fact of having or of knowing the law :— 
the strict way of expressing it would per- 
haps be, ‘in the fact of possessing a law,’ 
which condensed into our less accurate 
English, would be in one word, in the 
law: viz. ‘ which thou possessest.’ 
καυχ. ἐν θ.7 viz. ‘as thy Covenant God ? 
‘as being peculiarly thine.’ 18. yu. 
τὸ θέλ. θεός having been just mentioned, 
it is left to be inferred that θέλημα refers 
to Him. Soxip. τ΄ Sad | provest 
(in the sense of sifting and coming to a 
conclusion on) things which differ,— 
ἐναντία ἀλλήλοις, δικαιοσύνην κ. ἀδικίαν, 
k.7.A. Theod. κρίνεις τί δεῖ πρᾶξαι κ. τί 
μὴ δεῖ πρᾶξαι, Theophylact. The Vulg. 
‘ probas utiliora,’ and E. V. ‘ approvest the 
things that are more excellent,’ is some- 
what flat in meaning, and not so applicable. 
κατηχ. ἐκ Tov νόμ.} being (lhia- 
bitually, not in youth only,—force of pres.) 
instructed (not merely catechetically but 
didactically, in the synagogues, &c.) out of 
the law (τοῦ νόμου, though after a prepo- 
sition—because the law is distributed—it 
is the book of the law, the law itself, out 
of which the κατήχησις takes place). 
19.] πέποιθας, sometimes with ἑαυτῷ or 
ep’ ἑαυτῷ (see Luke xviii. 9), and some- 
times with ὅτι (Luke, ib.; Gal. v. 10; Phil. 
ii. 24; Heb. xiii. 18),—regardest thyself 
as,—art confident in thyself as being. 
ὁδηγὸν tupA | We can hardly say 
with Olsh., that the Apostle undoubtedly 
refers to the saying of our Lord, Matt. xv. 


21. ins τὸν bef erepov L n 1. 30-8. 93. 


14,—but rather that both that saying and 
this were allusive to a title ‘ leaders of the 
blind’ given to themselves by the Pha- 
risees, with which Paul asa Pharisee would 
be familiar. Similarly, the following titles 
may have been we!l-known and formal ex- 
pressions of Jewish pride with reference to 
those who were without the covenant. 
20.] μόρφωσιν, not the mere apparent 
likeness (Theophylact, &c.), but the real 
representation. 'The law, as far as itwent, 
was a reflexion of the holiness and cha- 
racter of God. Hardly so much is here 
meant (Olsh.), as that the law contained a 
foreshadowing of Christ,—for the Apostle 
is speaking now more of moral truth and 
knowledge, by which a rule of judgment is 
set up, sufficient to condemn the Jew as 
well as the Gentile. But after all, this 
clause (ἔχοντα ... νόμῳ) is not to be 
pressed as declaring a fact, but taken sub- 
jectively with regard to the Jew, after πέ- 
ποιθας, and understood of his estimate 
of the law. ἐν τῷ νόμῳ, because the 
book of the law, the whole law, is denoted. 
[21.] “And now the righteous re- 
buke may no longer be restrained. Such 
advantages and such pretensions ought 
undoubtedly to be followed and justified 
by a corresponding course of holy con- 
duct.” Ewbank.] 22. ὁ βδελ. τὰ 
εἴδ. ἱεροσυλεῖς The contrast here must 
be maintained ; which it will not be if 
we understand ἱεροσυλεῖς of robbing the 
temple of God of offerings destined for 
him (Jos. Antt. xviii. 3, 4). And τὰ 
εἴδωλα leads into the kind of robbery 
which is meant. Thou who abhorrect 
idols, dost thou rob their temples? 
That it was necessary to vindicate Jews 
from such a charge, appears from Acts 
xix. 37: and Jos. Antt. iv. 8. 10 gives as 
alaw, uh συλᾷν ἱερὰ ξενικά, und ἂν ἐπωνο- 
μασμένον ἢ τινι θεῷ κειμήλιον λαμβάνειν. 


ABDK 
LN abe 
dfghk 
Ilmno 
17 [47] 


18—27. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOYE. 335 


τὸ εἴδωλα " ἱεροσυλεῖς ; ; 35 ὃς 5 ἐν νόμῳ “ καυχᾶσαι, διὰ τῆς mw. art., Acts 


" παραβάσεως τοῦ νόμου τὸν θεὸν 4 ἀτιμάξεις ; 2. τὸ γὰρ 
ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ δι’ ὑμᾶς " βλασφημεῖται ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, 
πὸ περιτομὴ μὲν yap " ὠφελεῖ, 
υ παραβάτης νόμου ἧς, ἡ 
W γέγονεν. 
βυστία τὰ " δικαιώματα τοῦ νόμου Y φυλάσσῃ, οὐχὶ ἡ 
ἀκροβυστία 5 αὐτοῦ * εἰς περιτομὴν ὃ λογισθήσεται ; 27 καὶ 
" ἀκροβυστία τὸν νόμον “ 


καθὼς γέγραπται. 
, 7 
ἵνομον ' πράσσῃς" 
Θηπερι- στεριτομή σου ἣ ἀκροβυστία 
TOILN «+ p M1) P 
ABDG 
KLNab 
edfghV 


kimn 
917 [47] 


ἐὰν δὲ 


ὑ κρινεῖ ἡ ex “ἃ φύσεως 


i Cie zit. 2. 


1 Thess. i. 9. 
1 John y. 21. 
. berry 


3. 

n Het only +. 
ἐὰν (-λος, Acts 
xix. 37. -Aca, 
2 Macc. xiii. 


6. 
26 ἐὰν οὖν ἡ " ἀκρο- δ Υ ΟΣ 
p w. gen., here 
Coosa 2'Macc. 
xv. 10. abs., 
ch..iv. 15 reff. 


(-Barys, ver. 
25: 
τελοῦσα 4 Acts v. 41 


rIsa. lii.5. Tit. ii. 5. s absol., = John vi. 63 only. Hab. ii. 18. Xen. Anab. v. 1. 12. 

t here only. see John vii. 19. u here bis. Gal. ii. 18. James ii. 9, 11 only +. Symm., Ps. xvi. 
4; Ezek. xviii. 10 [Montf., gn Field}. v ch. iv. 9—12 al. Paul only, exc. Acts xi. 3. Gen. xvii. 11. 

w= Matt. iv. 8.11. John ii. x. 16 x ch. i, 32 reff. y ‘act., = Acts xvi. 4 reff. Exod. 
xv. 26 z indef. on Luke xxiii. 51. John viii. 44. Eph. v.12. 1 Pet. iii. is Jude 24 al. Winer, 
edn. 6, $ 22. 3. 2). a = ch. ix. 8 reff. b see oh xiv. 22. James iy. 11, 12. c here 
only. d = Gal. ii. 15. (ch. i. 26 reff.) e = James ii. 8. Gal. v. 16. 


25. om yap ἃ τὰ vulg D-lat th arm [Orig-int,] lat-ff. 


for mpacons, φυλασσης 


D!-gr [arm]; observes vulg D-lat [Ambrst] ; custodias [Orig-int] Aug,. akpo- 
βιστια( but corrd) XN}. 

26. for τα δικαιωματα, δικαιωμα G-gr G?-lat harl! [Orig-int,(txt,)]. φυλασσει 
L. for ovxt, ovx BR 44 Damasec: txt DGKL 17 rel Chr [Cyr,- -p] Thdrt ΤῺ] Gc. 


(A uncert.) 
27. om ἡ ek φυσ. axpoB. G. 


23.] ἐν νόμῳ, see above (ver. 17) 
for the omission of the art.—but it is not 
διὰ παραβάσεως νόμου, because a παράβασις 
is τοῦ νόμου, the law being broken as a 
whole (see James ii. 10: and on παρα- 
Barns νόμου below, ver. 25). And τῆς 
παρ. τ. vou., is thy breaking of the law. 

This question comprehends the pre- 
vious ones. 24.| ‘ For what is written 
in the prophet Isaiah [also in Ezekiel, 
xxxvi. 20, 23], is no less true now of you?’ 
‘the fact is so, as it is written.’ 25— 
29.| Inasmuch as CIRCUMCISION was the 
especial sign of the covenant, and as such, 
a distinction on which the Jewish mind 
dwelt with peculiar satisfaction: the Apos- 
tle sets forth, that circumcision without 
the keeping of the law is of no avail, and 
that true circumcision and true Judasm 
are matters of the heart, not of the flesh 
only. ἀλλ᾽ ἣ “περιτομὴ μέγα, φησίν. ὁμο- 
λογῶ κἀγώ, ἀλλὰ πότε; ὅταν ἔχῃ τὴν 
ἔνδον περιτομήν. καὶ σκόπει σύνεσιν, πῶς 
εὐκαίρως τὸν περὶ αὐτῆς εἰςξήγαγε λόγον. 
οὐ γὰρ εὐθέως ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς ἤρξατο, ἐπειδὴ 
πολλὴ ἣν αὐτῆς ἡ ὑπόληψις' ἀλλ᾽ ἡνίκα 
ἔνδειξεν αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ μείζονος mposke- 
κρουκότας καὶ τῆς εἰς θεὸν βλασφημίας 
αἰτίους, τότε λοιπὸν λαβὼν τὸν ἀκροατὴν 
κατεγνωκότα αὐτῶν, καὶ γυμνώσας τῆς 
προεδρίας, eisaryer τὸν περὶ περιτομῆς λόγον, 
θαῤῥῶν ὅτι οὐδεὶς αὐτῇ ψηφιεῖται λοιπόν. 
Chrys. Hom. vii. 474. 25.) περι- 
τομή, chosen as an example in point, and 
as the most comprehensive and decisive 
example; and μὲν γάρ binds it on to the 
foregoing reasoning: q. (1. ‘/n the same 
way circumeision, ke. νόμον, not τὸν 


νόμον. tpacons,—because the latter would 
import the perfect Sulfilment of the whole 
law: whereas the supposition is of acting 
according to the law, doing the law. 
παραβάτης νόμου here, not τοῦ νόμου, the 
παμαβάτης νόμου, like ἀκροατὴς-νόμου and 
ποιητὴ "»-νόμου, ver. 13, being a designation 
generally of a law-breaker, as those of a 
law-hearer and law-fulfiller. ἀκροβ. 
γέγ.] counts for nothing: the Jewish 
transgressor is no better off than the Gen- 
tile transgressor. 26. ἢ ἀκροβ. 1.8 
οἱ ἐν τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ. τὰ δικαίωμ..] 
plainly, the moral requirements, not the 
ceremonial: for one of the very first of 
the latter was, to be circumcised. The 
case is an impossible one: nor does the 
Apostle put it as possible, only as shewing 
manifestly, that circumcision, the sign of 
the covenant of the Law, was subordinate 
to the keeping of the Law itself. The 
articles shew how completely hypothetical 
the case is—no less than entire fulfilment 
of all the moral precepts of the law being 
contemplated. οὐχὶ 7...) ‘In such 
a case would not he be counted as a cir- 
cumcised person ?? 27.) I prefer with 
De Wette (and Erasm.), Luth., Bengel, 
Wetst., Knapp, and Meyer, to regard this 
verse not as a continuation of the ques- 
tion, but as a separate emphatic assertion, 
aud as leading the way to the next verse. 
κρινεῖ, ‘shall rise up in judgment 
against,’ judge indirectly by his example. 
See Matt. xii. 41, 42, where κατακρίνω is- 
used in a sense precisely similar. ἡ 
ἐκ φύσεως ἀκροβ.) ‘he, who remains in 
his natural state of uncircumcision. ἐκ 


336 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. II. 28, 29. 
4 \ A o ’ ἈΝ »" , , 
τον σὲ τὸν ' διὰ δ γράμματος καὶ περιτομῆς " παραβάτην νόμου. 
ἘΗ 98 eee. ΟὟ ae “ἢ a 7 ὃ ar ; Ae ἧς ἘΠ 
20οτ.".4 “Ὁ οὐ γὰρ O “ἐν τῷ φανερῷ Ιουδαῖος ἐστιν, οὐδὲ ἡ " ἐν 
τυ - A δι᾿" : \ / , » ΄ t's A 
δ μετ άπ, σῷ "Ὁ φανερῷ ἱέν ἱσαρκὶ περιτομή, “9 ἀλλ᾿ ὁ ev τῷ 
g see note & hk na? a \ Ay / ἌΡ ΩΝ ΄ 
"ver 2aret. MK κρυπτῷ Ιουδαῖος, καὶ περιτομὴ | καρδίας ἐν ™ πνεύματι 
1 here | Matt. 
χ" - ΄ φΦ ε , ’ > ’ , ᾽ » 
δἰ ἀν δ το... οὐ πὶ γράμματι" οὗ ὁ " ἔπαινος οὐκ ο ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλ 
ich. viii. 8, 9. a κα 
᾿ΞΌον, 8. ὁ ἐκ TOD θεοῦ. 
Sal. ii. 20. 
a ἴω. Eph. ii. 11 (bis). Phil. i. 22. iii. 3, 4 (bis), (ΟἹ. ii. 1. 1 Tim. iii. 16. Philem. 16. 1 Ῥεῖ. iv. 1,2. 1Jotn 
iv. 2. 2 John 7. k Matt. as above (ἢ). John vii. 4, 10. xviii. 20, 1 -—1Cor. ἵν" 6. Ezek. xliv. 7,9. 


m ch. vii. 6. 2 Cor. iii. 6. 
o = Matt. i. 20. Acts v. 39. ch. v. 16. 


29. adda (1st) D'G. 
του (bef θε.) D?G a. 


ovo. is contrasted with διὰ γράμ. κ. περιτ. 
below. The position of ἐκ φύσεως decides 
for this rendering and against joining it 
with τελοῦσα, which would require ἢ axpo- 
βυστία, ἐκ φύσεως τὸν νόμον τελοῦσα. 
τὸν νόμ. τελ.} such is the supposition— 
that an uncircumcised man could fully act 
up to the (moral) requirements of the law. 
It is not ἣ τὸν νόμ. TeEA.; because ἀκροβ. 
is used in the widest abstract sense: no 
distinction is made between one and an- 
other uncircumcised person, but some one 
man is taken as an example of ἀκροβυστία. 
So that the omission of the art. does not 
give a new hypothetic sense, ‘if a fulfil 
the law,’ but merely restates the hypo- 
thesis: fulfilling (as it does, as we have 
supposed) the law. σὲ τὸν 
παραβάτην νόμου] Here again the posi- 
tion of διὰ γράμματος κ. περιτομῆς, between 
τὸν and παραβάτην, sufficiently shews that, 
as ἐκ φύσεως above, it is a qualification of 
σὲ τὸν παραβάτην νόμου. Bp. Middleton 
(it appears, Gr. Art. in loc. and compare 
his ref.) would take σὲ τὸν διὰ γράμματος 
kK. περιτομῆς (ὄντα), ‘thee who art a pro- 
Sessor of the law and a circumcised per- 
son, and understand εἶναι after tapaBarny, 
—shall adjudge thee to be a transgressor 
of the law. But this appears exceedingly 
forced, and inconsistent with the position 
of παραβ. νόμου, which if it had been thus 
emphatic, would certainly have been placed 
either before, or immediately after κρινεῖ, 
We may well imagine that such an inter- 
pretation would not have been thought of, 
except to serve the supposed canon, that, 
‘if τόν were immediately the article of 
παραβάτην, νόμου depending on it could 
not be anarthrous.’ See above on παραβ. 
you. ver. 25, and on ver. 13. διὰ yp. 
k. περ.] διά (see reff.) is here used of the 
state in which the man is when he does 
the act, regarded as the medium through 
which the act is done. It is rightly ren- 
dered by in E V. [though this gives too 
much the idea of the state being the in- 
strument by means of which] (not, ‘in 


n Paul (1 Cor. iv. 5, 


for 2nd ev, os G D-lat. 
aft θεου ins eorw D! vulg lat-ff. 


Eph. i. 6 al6.) only, exc. 1 Pet. i. 7. ii, 14. 


αλλα (2nd) B. om 


spite of, as Kéllner and al.). γράμ- 
ματος | ‘litera scripta,’ the written word : 
here in a more general sense than in ver. 
29, where it is pressed to a contrast with 
πνεῦμα: thee, who in a state of external 
conformity with the written lav and of 
circumcision, art yet a transgressor of 
the law. In vv. 28, 29, supply the 
ellipses thus: in ver. 28, fill up the sub- 
jects from the predicates,—ov yap 6 ἐν τῷ 
φανερῷ (Ἰουδαῖος) ᾿Ιυυδαῖός ἐστιν, οὐδὲ 7 
ἐν τῷ φανερῷ ἐν σαρκὶ (περιτομὴ) περιτομή 
(€or); in ver. 29, fill up the predicates 
from the subjects,—aAa’ 6 ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ 
Ιουδαῖος (Ἰουδαῖός ἐστιν)ὴ, καὶ περιτομὴ 
καρδίας ἐν πνεύματι οὐ γράμματι (περιτομή 
ἐστιΐ). Thus the real Jew only, and the 
real circumcision only, are expressed in 
both verses. This is the arrangement of 
Beza, Estius, Riickert, De Wette: Erasm., 
Luther, Meyer, Fritzsche, take ᾿Ιουδαῖος, 
and ἐν mv. ov ypdu., as the predicates in 
ver. 29; but the latter gives a very vapid 
sense, besides that the opposition of 6 év 
τῷ φανερῷ, and 6 ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ is, as Ve 
W. observes, also vapid. 29. ἐν τῷ 
kp. as belonging to Ἰουδ. is parallel with 
καρδίας as belonging to περιτομή, both de- 
signating the inner and spiritual reality, 
of which the name of Jew and the carnal 
circumcision are only the signs. περ. 
καρδ. is no new expression :—we have it 
virtually in Deut. x. 16; Jer. iv. 4: see 
also Acts vii. 51. ἐν mv. ov yp.| in 
[the] spir.t, not in [the] letter. Not 
merely ‘spiritually, not externally :’ nor 
does av. allude to the necessitating cause 
of circumcision (the uncleanness of the 
inner man) ((c., Grot., Estius, Fritzsche) : 
—nor signify the material (‘que spiritw 
constat,’ Erasm.): nor the rule (Meyer), 
—but as De Wette rightly, the living 
power or element, wherewith that inner 
sphere of being is filled—év being [used ] 
as in Acts xvii. 28, of that in which apy 
thing lives and moves,—compare χαρὰ ἐν 
mv. ἁγίῳ, ch. xiv. 17,—ayarn ἐν πν., Col. i. 
8,—dovAcvew ἐν kau. Tv., Ch. vii. 6,—elvae 


ABDG 
KLN ab 
cdfgu 
kima 
0 17[47] 


111, 1—3. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 


991 


Ill. 1 Τί οὖν τὸ Ρ περισσὸν τοῦ ᾿Ιουδαίου, ἢ τίς ἡ p = Matt. v.31 
4 


1 ὠφέλεια THs περιτομῆς ; 2 πολὺ " κατὰ τ πάντα * τρόπον. 
8 πρῶ ὃ μὲν [" γὰρ] ore " ἐ 10 1 "No ῦ 
πρῶτον ὃμ γὰρ] ὅτι ' ἐπιστεύθησαν τὰ ἃ λόγια τοῦ 


. Eccles. 
vii. 1 BX ἄς, 
Dan. v. 12, 
14 Theod 
(-σσεια, 


ra} A Wes BO ΣΑΣ οὖ A - ‘ ' 2 / Eccles. i. 3.) 
εου. τι yap > €b HNTLOTNHCAV TLVES μῇ ἢ ΟΑἼΤισ TLE gq Jude 16 only. 
Job xxii. 
So Bs. xxix79. r = Num. xviii. 7. see Acts xv. 11. s 1 Cor. xi. 18. t = 1 Cor. 
ix. 17. constr., Acts xxi. 3. Gal. ii.7. 1 Thess. ii.4. πιστευθέντος τὴν ἐν Περγάμῳ βιβλιοθήκην, 
Diog. Laert. vii. 1.29. Winer, edn. 6, $ 39. 1. a. u Acts vii. 38. Heb. v.12. 1 Pet. iv. 11 
only. Num. xxiv. 4, 16 al. _ ¥ Phil. 1. 18. w=2Tim. ii. 13. (Acts xxviii. 24 reff. «Τος, 
Luke xii. 46.) x = ch. xi. 20. Heb.iii. 19. see note. 


Cuap. III. 1. om ἡ GN! [ὁ 47(Tischdf) ]. 
2. rec ins yap, with AD3K LN 17 rel syr [ Chr, Euthal-ms] Thdrt Phot ΤῊ] ec: om 


BD'G [copt eth arm] vulg Syr Chr, Orig[-int. Damasc Ambrst ]. 


σαν ins avtos G2. 
3. ηπειθησαν A, deliquerunt Pacian,. 


ev πν., ch. vill. 9. So that πνεῦμα here is 
not man’s spirit, nor properly the Holy 
Spirit, but the spirit, as opposed to the 
letter, of the Jewish law and of all God’s 
revelation of himself. οὗ | viz. Ἰουδαίου, 
—of the true Jew. περιτομὴ caps. as be- 
longing to him, is subordinate. The 
ἔπαινος of such a character, (for ἔπαινος it 
must be,) can only come from him who sees 
ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ (Matt. vi. 4, 6), and can dis- 
cern the heart. Ill. 1—20.] Taxine 
INTO ALL FAIR ACCOUNT THE REAL AD- 
VANTAGES OF THE JEWS, THESE CANNOT, 
BY THE TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE ITSELF 
CONCERNING THEM, EXEMPT THEM FROM 
THIS SENTENCE OF GUILTINESS BEFORE 
GoD, IN WHICH ALL FLESH ARE IN- 
VOLVED. 1—4. | The circumcised 
Jew did unquestionably possess great ad- 
vantages, which were not annulled by the 
rebellion of some. 1.] οὖν, ‘ quee cum 
ita sint.’ If true Judaism and true circum- 
cision be merely spiritual, what is the profit 
of external Judaism and ceremonial cir- 
cumcision ? περισσόν) advantage, 
profit, pre-eminence,—see reff. It is best 
to take the question, not as coming from 
- an objector, which supposition has obscured 
several parts of this Epistle, but ‘as asked 
by the Apostle himself, anticipating the 
thoughts of his reader. πολύ 
answers the first question of ver. 1, but 
takes no account of the second, as it is 
virtually included in the first. Nor can 
it be properly regarded as answered in ch. 
iv. 1 ff. (see there). κατὰ πάντα 
tp.| not merely omnino, but as Εἰ. V. (in) 
every way, i.e. in all departments of the 
spiritual life. πρῶτον] The Apostle 
begins as if intending to instance several 
of these advantages, but having mentioned 
the greatest, leaves it to his reader to fill 
in the rest, and turns to establish what he 
has just asserted. For πρῶτον can only be 
first, —‘ secondly,’ &c., being to follow: 
—not, ‘ primarium illud’ (as Beza),—nor 
‘ precipue’ (as Calv.),—nor ‘7d quod pre- 
cipuum est’ (as Caloy.), all of which are 
Vou. II. 


aft emorevdn- 


attempts to avoid the anacoluthon: com- 
pare a similar one at ch. i. 8. ἐπιστ.] 
see reff.—they were entrusted with. 

τὰ λόγια τ. θεοῦ) These words look very 
like a reminiscence of Stephen’s apology, 
see Acts vii. 38. These oracles are not only 
the law of Moses, but all the revelations of 
God hitherto made of Himself directly, all 
of which had been entrusted to Jews only. 
By these they were received into a special 
covenant, which advantage is therefore in- 
cluded in their being entrusted with the 
divine oracles. 8.1 And this advan- 
tage is not cancelled, nor the covenant 
annulled, by their disobedience. τί 
γάρ;] For what? (‘quid enim?’ Hor. 
Sat.i.1. 7.) The γάρ confirms the pre- 
ceding—the τί indicates some difficulty, or 
anticipated objection to it. εἰ ἠπίστ. 
τινες] If we place an interrogation at γάρ, 
we must render this, suppose some were 
unfaithful ; if only a comma, as in Εἰ. V., 
‘ For whatif... The former seems pre- 
ferable, as more according to usage. See 
Phil is) 18. ἠπίστησαν, did not. 
believe. If this seem out of place here, 
where he is not speaking of faith or want 
of faith as yet, but of ἀδικία (ver. 5) and 
moral guilt, we may meet the objection by 
remembering that unbelief is here taken 
more on its practical side, as involving 
disobedience, than on the other. They 
were ἄπιστοι, unfaithful to the covenant, 
the very condition of which was to walk 
in the ways of the Lord and observe his 
statutes. The word may have been chosen 
on account of ἐπιστεύθησαν above and rT. 
πίστιν τ. θεοῦ below. μὴ ἡ ἀπ. 
x.7.A.| Shall their unfaithfulness (to the 
covenant : see above, and Wisdom xiv. 25: 
in the root of the matter, their unbelief, 
as in reff.: and the substantive ἀπιστία is 
bound to the verb ἠπίστησαν, but its ren- 
dering must be ruled by the contrast to 
ἡ πίστις τοῦ θεοῦ, which must be “the 
faithfulness of God’) cancel (nullify) the 
faithfulness of God? ‘ Because they have 
broken faith on their part, shall God break 

Z 


398 ΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. ΠῚ, 


9. AR ‘ / la “ ,ὔ 
γ- Matt. xxii, αὐτῶν τὴν Y πίστιν τοῦ θεοῦ * καταργήσει; 4 * μὴ γένοιτο" 
23. Tit. i. 


al, Frov. Ὁ γινέσθω δὲ ὁ θεὸς “ ἀληθής, πᾶς δὲ ἄνθρωπος “ ψεύστης, 
καθὼς γέγραπται “Ὅπως ° ἂν ἴ δικαιωθῇς ἐν τοῖς λόγοις 


"- 


Paul (ver. 31. 
1 Cor. xiii. 8 


al. fr.) only, \ , a s 
exe. luke © σοὺ καὶ νικήσῃς ἐν τῷ ὅ κρίνεσθαί σε. ὅ εἰ δὲ ἡ " ἀδικία 
ΧΙ, /. . 
se e a a . , = ,ὔ fa} \ 
lt Era ἡ μῶν θεοῦ ἱ δικαιοσύνην Ἰ συνίστησιν, * τί * ἐροῦμεν ; μὴ (P quuv 
δ. vi.Sonly. » ε θ \ IER f \ πὶ 7, n At oe eee 

a Paul (ver. ὃ ἄδικος ὁ θεὸς ὁ 'érrihépwv τὴν ™ opynv; “Kata ἄνθρωπον ‘ABDG 
Ξ ? πο, / \ , A ’ \ a “-“ 6 \ ‘ ΚΙΓΡΊΝ 
exe-Luke λέγω. 6 μὴ γένοιτο ἐπεὶ Pras 3 κρινεῖ ὁ θεὸς Tovavcdt 
xxii, 29. , aa heey \ oS) We) a 6 ay? At shi ee eb ee 
Gen. xliv.17. Κόσμον ; Ἷ εἰ yap ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ θεοῦ ᾿ ἐν τῷ ἐμῷ " ψεύ- τὰ πο 17 
= ch. xi. fi 
6. Νὴ Cor. xiii. 1 al. c subj., Matt. xxii. 16. John iii. 33. vii. 18. viii. 26. 2 Cor. vi. 8 ζ. d John [17] 

viii. 44,55. 1 Tim.i.10. “ΤΊ. Σ. 12. 1Johni.10al4. Psa. cxv. 11 (2;. e Acts iii. 19 reff. Psa. 1. 4 (6). 


f = Luke vii. 29, 35. 1 Tim.iii.16. Ps.l.c. 
ich. i. 17 reff. ἢ πὲ ν- 8: 
5). Wisd. vii. 14. Diod. Sic. xiv. 45. 


n Gal. iii. 15. 1 Cor. ix. 8. 
p = Luke xi. 18. ch. vi. 2 al. 


; Bee 
2 Cor. vi. 4. vii, 11. 
ole k ch. iv. I. vi. 1. vii. 7. viii. 31. 1x. 14, 30 only. P. 
1 = Jude 9 (only). Gen. xxxvii. 22. ἐπιφ. τινὶ πόλεμον, Polyb. xv. 18. 4. 
(see ch. vi. 19. 2 Cor. ili. 3. xv. 32. 
q = ch. ii. 12 reff. 
s here onlyt+. Job xxxiv. 6 Aq. Theod. (Symm.(Field, Auct. ad Hex.)]). 


== Acts xxv. 9, 10 al. h = ch.i, 18 al. 


Gal. ii. 18. Puul only (exc. Luke ix. 32. 2 Pet. iii. 
Josh. vii. 8. 
™ = Chi lie, 6. 

o ver. 4 rel. 
Luke xxi. 34. 


Gal.i.11. 1 Pet. iv. 6.) 


r=ch.v.9. Matt. xvii. 21. 


καταργηση L Ὁ! o Chr-2-mss: καταργει 47. κατεργασει 5: κατηργησε 28. 76 syrr Cypr 


Pelag Vig. 


4. for γινεσθω, eotw G-gr; est vulg D-lat Syr Cypr,, est and esto G-lat, s7é Ambr, : 


γενεσθω Le Chry. 


ing) [Syr copt Philastr, ]. 
7. [for e:, 7 P.] 


faith also on His ?’ 4. μὴ yev., let it 
not be: see reff. The Apostle uses this ex- 
pression of pious horror, when he has sup- 
posed or mentioned any thing by which the 
honour, truth, or justice of God would be 
compromised, as hereby His covenant-word 
being broken. It is often found in Poly- 
bius, Arrian, and the later Greek writers. 

γινέσθω κ.τ.λ.} ‘rather let us be- 
lieve all men on earth to have broken their 
word and truth, than God His. Whatever 
becomes of men and their truth, His truth 
must stand fast.’ The citation which 
follows goes to the depth of the matter. It 
is the penitent confession of a sinner, that 
he is sensible how entirely against God lis 
sin has been, and how clearly his own un- 
worthiness sets God’s judgment against 
sin vindicated before him. And to this 
meaning the objection in the next verses 
js addressed,—see below. That thou 
mightest be justified (shewn to be just) 
in thy sayings (sentences, words of jndg- 
ment), and mightest conquer when Thou 
art judged,—yonwa ‘in thy judging,’ 
which cannot well be our rendering of ἐν 
τῷ κρίνεσθαί oc,—i.e. ‘when thy dealings 
are called in question by men.’ 5.] In 
the citation, the penitent regarded his sin 
as having been the instrument of bringing 
out God’s justice into clearer light. On 
the abuse which might be made of such a 
view, the Apostle founds another ques- 
tion:—It would almost seem as if God 
would be unjast in inflicting His wrath (the 
consequences of His wrath) on men whose 
very impiety has been the means whereby 


for δε, yap G D-lat Syr Cypr Ambrst Sedul : οὖν arm. 
for καθως, καθαπερ BN Thdrt: ws 73: καθο 76. 
5. δικαιοσυνὴην Ὀρέθεου G vulg [Orig-int, ]. 


νικησεις ADN ἢ : νικησις 17. 
aft opyny ins αὐτου δ (δ 8 disapprov- 


for yap, δε A[N] d 5. 23.57. 74. 124 harl copt Damase. 


His own righteousness has been shewn 
forth, and established.’ ἡμῶν] “ of the 
Jews’ (Grot., De Wette, &e.), not ‘ of all 
men ’ (Fritzsche), for only to the Jews can 
ver. 7 apply. δικαιοσύνην viz. that 
established by the διικαιοῦσθαι of ver. 4; 
not His goodness (as Chrys., Theodoret, 
Grot., al.),—nor His truth (Beza, al.). 
κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγω | said, as elsewhere by 
Paul, to excuse a supposition bearing with 
it an aspect of inconsistency or impiety :— 
not implying that he speaks in the person 
of another, but that he puts himself into 
the place of the generality of men, and uses 
arguments such as they would use. 
6.1] He does not enter into the objection 
and answer it in detail, but rejects at once 
the idea of God being unjust, alluding pro- 
bably to Gen. xviii. 25, by recalling to 
mind, that the Judge of all the earth must 
do right. ἐπεί, for (i.e. ‘if it were 
so,’ £ alioquin’). τὸν κόσμον is not the 
Gentiles (Bengel, Reiche, Olsh., al.), nor is 
the respondent in ver. 7 a Gentile (Olsh., 
al., not Bengel), but one of the ἡμῶν in ver. 
5, only individualized to bring out one such 
case of pretended injustice more strikingly. 
7.7 This follows (connected by γάρ) 
upon ver. 6, and shews that the supposition 
if carried out, would overthrow all God’s 
judgment, and (ver. 8) the whole moral 
life of man. How shall God judge the 
world? For, if the truth (faithfulness) 
of God abounded (was manifested, more 
clearly established) by means of my false- 
hood (unfaithfulness), to His glory (so 
that the result has been the setting forth 





4---9. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


999 


t2 , u ~? \ ay a ny a SEIN ἔῃ 
σματι “εἐπερῤβισσεξεύυσεν “εἰς Τὴν ὀξαν αὐυτοῦυ, ᾿ TL ETL KAY® t Phil. i. 26. 


ra 


ὡς “ ἁμαρτωλὸς * κρίνομαι; ὃ καὶ μὴ καθὼς " βλασφη- 


1 Thess. iv. 1. 
Tobit iv. 16 
ΓΝ def.]. 

== COLI. 1. 


΄, Ν / a “ ΄ δ , 
μούμεθα Kai καθώς φασίν τινες ἡμᾶς λέγειν OTL ποιήσωμεν Mek ον τα 


“ Ys \ ie A 5) , 
τὰ κακὰ ἵνα “ἔλθῃ τὰ ἀγαθά; ὧν τὸ " κρῖμα ὃ ἔνδικόν ¥ chix. 1. 
te Ye } i al. v. 
9¢'Ts οὖν ; ἃ προεχόμεθα ; “ ov “ πάντως. 


Σ 
εστίιν. 
xlix. 16. x = John viii. 15. 
2. James ii. 7. 
c ch. vi. 15. xi. 7. 
v. 10. xvi. 12. 


d here only. 


8. om 2nd ka BK a 39. 74 [eth(appy, Treg) ]. 


[ Orig-int] Aug Pelag Ambrst. 


1 Cor. v. 12 (bis). 
z= Matt. xviii. 7. 

Eccl. x. 10 Symm. 
(Acts xxi. 22 reff.) Winer, edn. 6, $ 61. 4 (5).f. 


i. 6 al. 
11. 
for 
po- 
8, 19. 
y= ch. xiv. 16. 1. ὉοΥ. x. 30." 
a — ch. il. 2 reff. Ὁ Heb. ii. 2 only t. 


e = here only. 8661 Cor. 
here only +. 


om ot: G 76. 120 vulg Epiph, 


om Ta (bef κακαὶ) Ὁ}. 


9. προεχωμεθα AL (k!): epoumer eth: προκατεχομεν περισσον D1(and lat) G 31 Syr 
Chr-2-mss,: karexouev π. Thdrt Sev: tenemus D-lat G-lat [Orig-int,] Ambrst-mss. 
[om ov παντως D!GP syrr(ins syr-mg) eth Chr-2-mss, Thdrt Severn-c Orig-int. | 


of His glory), why any longer (ἔτι, this 
being so,—assuming the premises) am I 
also (i.e. as well as others,—am I to be 
involved in a judgment from which I ought 
to be exempt) judged (to be judged,—the 
pres. expressing the rule or habit of God’s 
proceeding) asa sinner? And (why should 
we) not (in this case rather say) as we (1 
Paul, or we Christians) are slanderously 
reported, and as some give out that we 
(do) say (é7: recitantis), “Let us do 
evil that good may come ?’’ whose con- 
agemnation (not that of our slanderers 
(Grot., Tholuck), but that of those who so 
say and act) is according to justice (not 
only by the preceding argument, but by 
the common detestation of all men, for such 
ἣν maxim as doing evil that good may come). 
The way adopted generally (Calv., 

Beza, Grot., Bengel, Wolf, Riickert, K6ll- 
ner, Tholuck) is to connect ver. 7 by yap 
with ver. 5, and to regard κατὰ ἄνθρ. .. .. 
κόσμον as a series of parentheses; but I 
very much prefer that given above, which, 
in the main, is De Wette’s. Fritzsche and 
Schrader strangely enough regard κἀγώ as 
bona fide the individual Paul, and κρίνομαι 
as the judgment passed by his adversaries 
“nam si Dei veracitas meo peccatoris 
mendacio abunde in Dei laudem cessit, 
cur adhuec ego quoque, Paulus, tanquam 
facinorosus ab hominibus reus agor,” &c.) : 
Reiche, Olsh., &c. put ver. 7 into the 
mouth of a Gentile: Bengel, into that of a 
Jew. Doubtless the main reference of this 
part of the argument is to Jews: but the 
reasoning from the introduction of the 
words τὸν κόσμον (see above) is general, 
applying both to Jew and Gentile, and 
shewing the untenableness of any such view 
as that of the Jewish objection of ver. 5. 
9—20.] The Jew has no preference, 

but is guilty as well as the Gentile, as shewn 
by Scripture ; so that no man can by the 
law be righteous before God. 9.) τί 
οὖν cannot be joined with προεχόμεθα (CKe., 
&e.), because οὐδέν would then have been 


the answer. There is considerable diffi- 
culty in mpoexope8a. The meaning of 
mpoexoua every where else is passive, ‘ to 
be surpassed,’ and προέχω, act., is to sur- 
pass, or have the pre-eminence. So Plut. 
p- 1038 Ὁ (Wetst.), κατ᾽ οὐδὲν προεχομένοις 
tro τοῦ Διός, ‘cum Jove minores non sint:” 
and Herod. i. 32, 6 μὲν δὴ μέγα πλούσιος 
ἀνόλβιος δέ, δυοῖσι προέχει τοῦ εὐτυχοῦς 
μόνον, &e. (see Wetst.) Those therefore 
who have wished to preserve the usage of 
the word, have variously interpreted it in 
that attempt: (a) Wetst. would render it 
passively, and understand it (as spoken by 
a Jew) ‘Are we surpassed by the Gen- 
tiles?’ But (1) for this inference there 
is no ground in what went before, but the 
coutrary (vv. 1 ff.),—and (2) the ques- 
tion if it mean this, is not dealt with 
in what follows. (8) Cicum. (2nd altern.) 
regards it as said by a Gentile, ‘Are we 
surpassed by the Jews?’ but for this 
question there is no ground in the pre- 
ceding, for ali has tended to lower the 
Jews in comparison and reduce all to 
one level. (vy) Reiche and Olsh. take it 
passively, and render, ‘ Are we preferred 
(dy God) ?’ but no example of this mean- 
ing occurs, the above use in Plutarch not 
justifying it. (δ) Koppe and Wahl render, 
taking it as the middle voice, ‘ What can 
we then allege (as an excuse)?’ but this 
will not suit ob πάντως. (ε) Meyer, 
‘ What then, have we an excuse?’ but 
mpoexdu. has not this meaning. (9 
Fritzsche, ‘ What then? do we excuse our- 
selves (i.e. shall we make any excuse) ?’ 
But (1) προεχ. is put absolutely ; and (2) 
the answer would rather be μηδαμῶς than 
ov πάντως, which replies to a question on 
matter of fact. Besides (3) the argument 
would then go to shew, not that all are sin- 
ners, as it does, vv. 10—20, but that all are 
liable to God’s wrath, without excuse. (n) 
The only way left seems (with Theophyl., 
(Ec. (1st altern.), Schol. in Matthai, Pelag., 
Vulg., Erasm., Luther, Calv., Beza, Gret., 


940 ΠΡΟΣ ῬΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. III. 


ε- μαι vii, ἡτιασάμεθα yap lovdaious τε καὶ “EXAnvas πάντας ὃ ὑφ᾽ 


Σ ΣῊΝ l4, ς / Bie 10 θ \ ΄ hv - ” 
; . lil ° 
τς Rak ee aLapT lav é€lval, KaAUWS yeypa 77 TAL OTL OU εστιν 


Deut. xxxiii.3, 
h Psa. xiii. 1 ff, 
BN! (AN? 
&c. om our 
vv. 13—18) 
freely at beg. 

i Acts iv, 32 reff. 


/ i De e i Ὁ» » ξ' εἰς , > ” ε 
δίκαιος OVOE εἰς" OUK ἐστιν O συνιὼν, OUK ἐστιν O 


al Ἀ ’ / , “ > , 
Ἰἐκζητῶν tov θεόν' 13 πάντες ™ ἐξέκλιναν, ἅμα ™ ἡχρειώ- 


A , ” 7 
σαν" οὐκ ἔστιν ποιων ° στοτΤῆτα οὐκ εστιν EWS 
ῆ ’ 


= ν « / “ ΄ > a“ lal 

wer ἑνός. 13 P tahos ἀνεῳγμένος ὁ “λάρυγξ αὐτῶν, ταῖς 

] Acts xv. 17 , 3... ἣν r2 a s > ἢ. ΄ δίς 44 Ν 

at a, λώσσαις αὐτῶν ἐδολιοῦσαν. 5 ἰὸς. ἀσπίδων ὑπὸ τὰ 

5 aig ey ΡΞ ᾿ Ν , a \ / 
ag = inn ἢ χείλη αὐτῶν. 14% ὧν τὸ στόμα Κ᾽ ἀρᾶς καὶ * πικρίας ¥ γέμει. 
ZXXIVv. 27. - a , a 3 / / \ 
Malis, 15 2 ὀξεῖς οἱ πόδες αὐτῶν ὃ ἐκχέαι ὃ αἷμα. 16» σύντριμμα καὶ 
ΒΑ. Lil. 


.“ € an a A 
BNF &.(4 ὁ ταλαιπωρία ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν, 17 καὶ ἃ ὁδὸν “ εἰρήνης 


Ὦ here only. » ” 
dings i, Οὐκ ἔγνωσαν. 
19. Jer. xi. 
16. Polyb. i. 14. 6 al. 
al4. only. Psa. v. 9. q here only. 
ll. cc. (v. xili.) civ. 25 only. 
13. Ep. Jer. 12, 24 only. t here only. 


xi. 12. xiii. 15. 


o = here only. (ch. ii. 4 reff.) Ps. xxxvi. 3. 
Ps. clix. 6. 
s James iii. 8. v. 3 only. 
Job xx, 14. 

1 Pet. iii. 10 (from Ps. xxxiii. 13) only. 


18 © οὐκ ἔστιν ' φόβος ἴ θεοῦ 8 ἀπέναντι TOV 


p Matt. xxiii. 27, 29 
rhere only. Num. xxv. 28. Ps. 
Psa. (1..c. BN1} exxxix. 3. Ezek. xxiv. 6, 11, 12, 

Ὁ Matt. xv. 8 || Mk. 1 Cor. xiv. 21. Heb. 


v Psa. ix. 7 (27) (singular). - w here 


only. Hos. iv. 2. x = Acts viii. 23 reff. y Matt. xxiii. 6,7. Luke xi. 39. Rev. iv. 6,8 
415. only. z -- here (Rev. i. 16. ii. 12. xiv. 14, &c. xix. 15) only. Amos ii. 15, a (-χύν., Acts 
xxii. 20.) Rev.xvi.6 only. Gen. ix.6. Isa. lix. 7,8. Prov. i. 16 ANS &c. (not BCN)). b here 
cnly. Prov. xx. 30 al. c James y. 1 only. Isa. xlvii. 1]. (-pos, ch. vii. 24.) d Luke i. 79 
only. 1. c. (Ps.) Isa. only. e Psa. xxxv. 1. £2 Cor, vii. 1 only. (φ. τ. Kuptov, Acts ix. 


$1. 2Cor. v.11. φ. χριστοῦ, Eph. v. 21.) — Neh. ν. 9. Isa. xi. 3. 
6 


jii. 16. xvii. 7 only. Josh. xxiv. 26. 


g Matt. xxi. 2. xxvil. 24,61. Acts 


for mpont., ntiacaueba DIG 31. 89! [syr-txt(mpo w-ast, appy)] Chr-2-mss, 


(Ec-comm, causati suwmus latt. 
τε ins mpwrov A. anavTas 


10. ovd D! 1. 


om yap D! [Syr eth(appy, Treg) |. 


: TavTa τι. 


aft .ovd. 


υπο 


11. om Ist o ABG [(vulg Orig-int Ambrst)]: ins ὈΚΤΙΓΡῚΝ syrr arm Euthal-ms] 


Chr, Thdrt Damase ΤῊ] (Ec. 
12. ηχρεωθησαν AB!D'GR. 

Ambrst |. 
13. λαρυξ ΑΓΡ 4] dk: -υνξ G. 


om 2nd o BG [latt, as before |. 
ins o bef ποιων (so Ps xiii. 3 N') DX [Orig-int, 
om 2nd οὐκ eotiv B 67? Syr. 


for ex, ζγτων B. 


14. aft στομα ins avtwy B(not Tischdf [N. T. Vat.]) 17. 


Bengel, Tholuck, Kéllner, Schrader, De 
Wette, al.) to take προεχόμεθα as middle, 
and understand it as tpoéyouev—Have we 
(Jews) the (any) preference? We have 
an use of παρέχομαι as active, Acts xix. 24, 
Tit. ii. 7. See also Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 38, 
5. οὐ πάντως) No, by no means. 
This would more naturally be πάντως ov, see 
reff. But we have οὐδὲν πάντως for “ not 
at all,’ Herod. v. 34. The meaning ‘not 
in every way,’ ‘not altogether,’—as 1 Cor. 
v. 10 and Theophr. de Caus. Plant. vi. 
24 (Wetst.), ποιεῖ yap οὐ πάντως, ἀλλ᾽ 
ἐὰν οὐλή τις ἢ ὑπόκαυστος.---}}} not 
apply, for it does not agree with what fol- 
-lows, where the Apostle proves absolute 
equality in respect of his argument. 
mpoyt..... εἶναι) we have before proved 
(chs. i. ii.) both Jews and Gentiles all to 
be under sin; the construction is not acc. 
and inf.,—that Jews and Gentiles ave under 
sin,—but "Iovd. . . . πάντας is ace. after 
the verb, and ὑφ᾽ au. εἶναι the matter of the 
charge,—q. ἃ. ‘ we have before brought in 
guilty Jews and Gentiles all as sinners.’ 
10—18.] Proof of this universal sinfulness 
from the Scripture, said directiy (ver. 19) 


of the Jews, but a portion including, and 
taken for granted of, the Gentiles. Com- 
pare throughout the LXX (reff.). 
11.] In the Psalm,— Jehovah looked down 
from heaven on the children of men, to see 
εἰ ἔστι συνιὼν ἢ ἐκζητῶν τ. @. He found 
none. ‘This result is put barely by the 
Apostle as the testimony of Scripture, 
giving the sense, but departing from the 
letter. 198. ἐδολιοῦσαν, an Alexandrine 
form for ἐδολίουν ; see Lobeck, Phrynichus, 
p- 349. The open sepulchre is an emblem 
of perdition, to which their throat, as the 
instrument of their speech, is compared. 
15.| The LXX (Isa. 1. 6.) have of 
δὲ πόδες αὐτῶν ἐπὶ πονηρίαν τρέχουσι, 
ταχινοὶ ἐκχέαι αἷμα" καὶ οἱ διαλογισμοὶ 
αὐτῶν διαλογισμοὶ ἀπὸ φόνων (διαλ. appd- 
νων AN) σύντριμμα καὶ ταλαιπωρία ἐν ταῖς 
ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁδὸν εἰρήνης οὐκ οἴδασιν 
(ἔγνωσαν, A). 19.1 He proves the 
applicability of these texts to the Jews by 
their being found in the Jewish Scriptures: 
not in any Gentile representation, which 
might exclude Jews, but spoken univer- 
sally, in those very books which were the 
cherished possession of the Jews them- 


ABDG 
KL[P]x 
abcdf 

ghkl 
mnol7 


[1] 


abcdf 


10—21. 


ἣν a b] aA ” δ δι ΄ 
ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν. 19 οἴδαμεν δὲ ὅτι ὅσα ὁ νόμος λέγει, κ = Lake vii 
43. ch. i 
“ h 2 a ΄ a a Ul ; a \ 
τοῖς " ἐν τῷ νόμῳ λαλεῖ, We πᾶν oTOMA' φραγῇ Kat 
͵ a € ’ A a 
δικος γένηται πᾶς ὁ κόσμος τῷ θεῷ. 
, > 4 la) 
™ νόμου " οὐ "ὁ δικαιωθήσεται "Ρ πᾶσα Ρ σὰρξ | ἐνώπιον av- 
Ξ hk] ας ὃ \ \ , yo ς ’ 9] \ 
mnol7 τοῦ διὰ γὰρ νόμου " ἐπίγνωσις ἁμαρτίας. 7! Nuvi δὲ 
[47] τούτων τι παραβαίνῃ ὑπόδικος ἔστω τῷ παθόντι, Demosth. 518, 3. 


1. Gal. ii. 16 (3ce). iii. 8, 24. James ii. 24 (bis), 25. 
n Matt. xxiv. 22. 


10 only. 


o = ch. ii. 13 reff. p Acts ii. 17 reff. 


q 
28. x.2. Eph. iv.13 alll. elsw., Heb. x. 26. 2 Pet. i. 2, 3,8. ii. 20 only. Prov. ii. 5. 


19. for λεγει, λαλει N! vulg D-lat Orig,[int, Ambrst]. 


Syr]. 
επιγνωσεως F. 


selves. | 6 νόμος] Here, the whole O. T., 
the law, prophets, and Psalms : see John x. 
34, where our Lord cites a Psalm as in 
‘the law, τοῖς ἐν τῷ v. λαλεῖ] it 
speaks (not says,—AaAéw is not ‘to say,’ 
see John viii. 25, note) to (or for, dat. 
commodi: i.e. its language belongs to, is 
true of, when not otherwise specified) those 
who are in (under) the law. So that the 
Jews cannot plead exemption from this 
description or its consequences. ἵνα] 
in order that—not ‘so that : the bring- 
ing in all the world guilty before God is an 
especial and direct aim of the revelation of 
God’s justice in the law,—that His grace 
by faith in Christ may come on all who 
abandon self-righteousness and believe the 
gospel. πᾶν στόμα φραγῇ] If the 
Jew’s mouth is shut, and his vaunting in 
the law taken away, then much more the 
Gentile’s, and the whole world (see above 
ver. 6) becomes (subjective, as γίνεσθω 
ver. 4) guilty before God. 20.] The 
solemn and important conclusion of all the 
foregoing argument. But not only the 
conclusion from it: it is also the great 
truth, which when arrived at, is seen to 
have necessitated the subordinate conclu- 
sion of ver. 19, the stopping of every mouth, 
ἄς. And therefore it is introduced, not 
with an illative conjunction, ‘ wherefore’ 
(which διότι will not bear), but with ‘ be- 
cause. Because by the works of the law 
(Gop’s LAW: whether in the partial reve- 
lation of it written in the consciences of the 
Gentiles, or in the more complete one given 
by Moses to the Jews,—not, by works of 
law: no such general idea of Jaw seems to 
have ever been before the mind of the 
Apostle, but always the law, emanating 
from God) shall no flesh be justified before 
Him (the future as implying possibility,— 
perhaps also as referring to the great day 
when πᾶσα σάρξ shall stand before God,— 
perhaps also as a citation from ref. Ps. 
LXX, οὐ δικαιωθήσεται ἐνώπιόν σου mas 
ζῶν. ov.... πᾶσα, which we render by 
nulla, must be kept in the mind to its lo- 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


94] 


iv. 10. 
Philem. 20 al. 
12 Cor;,xi. 10. 
Heb. xi. 33 
only. 2 Macc. 
xiv. 36 Ald. 
see Dan. vi. 
22 Theod. 
\ k here only τ. 
ἐάν τις 
1 ver. 30. ch. iv. 2. v. 
m = ver. 28. Gal. ii. 16 (3ce). iil. 2,5, 
Acts x. 14. Gal. ii. 16. Exod. xv. 26. Psa. cxlii. 2. 
= luke xvi. lo. “Ps: 1) c: 


΄ ’ 
Κὑπο- 


20 διότι 1 ἐξ ™ ἔργων 


r Paul, ch. i. 


for λαλει, λεγει DIF[K 


] 
20. ov δικ. bef εξ epy. vou. D F(and lat) fuld [Orig-int,(txt,) ] Ambrst. 


gical precision: All flesh—subject—shall 
be—copula—not justified—predicate). 
The Apostle does not here say either (1) 
that justification by legal works would be 
impossible if the law could be wholly kept, 
or (2) that those were not justitied who ob- 
served the prescribed sacrifices and offer- 
ings of the ceremonial law (of which he 
has never once spoken, but wholly of the 
moral): but he infers from his argument 
on matters of fact, a result in matter of 
fact: ‘Mankind, Jew and Gentile, have all 
broken God’s law, and are guilty before 
Him: Man keeps not God’s law. By that 
law then he cannot arrive at God’s righte- 
ousness.” διὰ γὰρ. . . .] For by 
[means of] the law (as before, whether 
partially known to the Gentile or more 
fully to the Jew) is the knowledge of 
sin (whatever knowledge each has,— 
whether the accusing and excusing of the 
Gentile’s conscience, or the clearer view 
of offence against Jehovah granted to the 
Jew). The reasoning is:—the law 
has no such office, in the present state 
of human nature manifested both in his- 
tory and Scripture, as to render righteous : 
its office is altogether different, viz. to de- 
tect and bring to light the sinfulness of 
man. Compare Gal. ii. 16. 

21—V. 11.] THE ENTRANCE INTO GOD’S 
RIGHTEOUSNESS (ch. i. 17) 15 SHEWN TO 
BE BY FAITH. 21—26.] The Apostle 
resumes the declaration of ch. i. 17 (having 
proved that man has no righteousness of 
his own resulting from the observance of 
God’s law) : viz. that God’s righteousness 
is revealed by Christ, whose atoning Deati, 
is, consistently with God's justice, suffi- 
cient for the pardon of sin to those who 
believe in Him. 21. νυνί] Is this of 
time, ‘now,’ in contradistinetion to ages 
past, = ἐν τῷ νῦν καιρῷ, ver. 26,—or is it 
merely = ‘as things are,’ ‘now we find ?? 
The former is held by Grot., Bengel, Tho- 
luck, Reiche, Olsh., Rickert, al.,—the 
latter by Fritzsche, Meyer, and De Wette. 
The former is true in sense, and applicable 


ch. iv. 6. Vii. ’ 
8,9. 1 Cor. 
iv. Sal. 
t ch. i. 17 reff. 
u ch. i. 19 reff. 
τ = John xviii. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


II. 


Sywpis νόμου ' δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ " πεφανέρωται, τ᾽ μαρτυ- 
\ aA / 5 “ A os 

ρουμένη ἡ ὑπὸ τοῦ "νόμου καὶ τῶν * προφητῶν, 5" 'δικαιοσύνη 

\ la ὃ Ν Ζ / T lol “-“ b > ᾽ὔ \ 

Υ δὲ θεοῦ διὰ * πίστεως ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ, ὃ εἰς πάντας [Kat 


Ἀν / A / 5 ‘ 3 , 
ὅτ 3John 3. © ἐπὶ πάντας] τοὺς πιστεύοντας. ov yap ἐστιν ἃ διαστολή" 
Heb. vil. &. 

; ν 22 Ὡς , \ [4 Χ e e -“ fal f ’ f an 
— 3 πάντες yap ἥμαρτον καὶ " ὑστεροῦνται τῆς ἶ δόξης ' τοῦ 
Acts xiii. 15 a ῶΔ4, o , Ν - ’ aA: ' \ a 
‘<a βεοῦ, 5} § δικαιούμενοι ἢ δωρεὰν TH αὐτοῦ ἱ χάριτι διὰ τῆς 

= Phil. ii. 8. 
a i iy Mark xi. 22. Actsiii. 16. Gal. ii. 16,20. James ii. 1 al. b = Gal. iii. 14. ο Acts iv. 33 
reff. d ch. x, 12 reff. e — (but act.) Luke xxii. 35 αἱ. Ps. xxii. 1. w. ἐν, 1 Cor. i. 7. constr., 
2 Cor. xi. 5. f constr., John xii. 43. g w. dat., ver. 28. Tit. iii.7 only. (ch. ii. 13 reff.) 
h Matt. χ. 8. 2Cor.xi.7. Exod. xxi.2. (John xv. 25, from Ps. xxxiv. 19.) i= ch. νυ. ld al. 


21. [ins του bef θεον F.] 


μαρτυρομενὴ ὮὨ)}. 


22. for ino. xp., εν χριστω ino. A: om Chr, : om ιἥσου B (Tert,): txt CDFKL[P]& 
17 rel vss Clem, Orig,{(int,) Damasc] Thdrt ΤῺ] (ec Pelag Ambrst Chrom Bede. 
om καὶ emi παντας (possibly from homeotel: on the other hand, the longer text 

may be the junction of two readings) ABCR}|P 471] copt (2th) arm Clem, (Orig,[int, }) 


Cyr[-p,] Aug;: 


ins DFKLN? 17 [rel} syrr vulg(but am demid [harl} al Damase om 


εἰς παντ. kar) Chr, [Euthal-ims] Thdrt ΤῺ] (ὃς Ambrst Chrom). 


to the circumstances of the gospel: but 
the meaning is too strong, where no con- 
trast of time is expressly in view. I 
therefore prefer the latter, especially as 
Paul’s usage elsewhere justifies it ; see ch. 
vii. 17 ; 1 Cor. xv. 20. χωρὶς νόμου] 
without the (help of the) law, ‘inde- 
pendently of the law:’ not ‘without the 
works of the law;’ for here it is not the 
way to the δικ. θεοῦ which is spoken of 
(which is faith), but that dix. ztself. 
δικαιοσ. θεοῦ) God’s righteousness: in 
what sense, see ch. i. 17, and note. 
mehavepwrat | viz.in the facts of the gos- 
pel. The perfect sets forth the manifesta- 
tion of this righteousness in history as an 
accomplished and still enduring fact—the 
ἀποκαλύπτεται of ch. i. 17 denotes the con- 
tinual unfolding of this righteousness in 
the hearts and lives of faithful believers. 
μαρτυρουμένη «.7.A. | being borne 
witness to (pres. because the law and pro- 
phets remain on record as a revelation of 
God’s will) by the law and the prophets 
(not merely the types and prophecies, but 
the whole body of the O. T., see Matt. 
xxii. 40). 22. δικαιοσ. δὲ θ.} but 
that (so δέ in Herod. vii. 8, ᾿Αρισταγόρῃ 
τῷ Μιλησίῳ, δούλῳ δὲ juctéep~,—and i. 
114, ὑπὸ τοῦ σοῦ δούλου, βουκόλου δὲ 
παιδός : the contrast being between tlie 
general mention which has preceded, and 
the specific distinction now brought in. 
See Hartung, Partikellehre i. 168 ff.) the 
righteousness of God (i.e. ‘I mean, the 
righteousness of God διὰ πίστεως Ἰ. xp.’) 
which is (7 is not necessary, the art. being 
often omitted in cases where the ear is re- 
minded of a usage of the cognate verb 
with a preposition, such as δικαιοῦσθαι διὰ 
πίστεως. Compare Col. i. 4, ἀκούσαντες 
τὴν πίστιν du. ἐν χριστῷ Ἴησ., and Eph. 
iii. 4, δύνασθε νοῆσαι τὴν σύνεσίν μου ἐν 
τῷ μυστηρίῳ (συνιέντες ἐν πάσῃ σοφίᾳ 


occurs Dan. i. 4 Theod.). See Winer, 
edn. 6, § 20. 2. b) by the faith in Jesus 
Christ (gen. : see reff.). εἰς πάντ. [K. 
ἐπὶ πάντ. depends on πεφανέρωται, —(is 
revealed) unto (‘ towards,’ ‘so as to pene- 
trate to’) 811}, and upon (‘ over,’ ‘so as to 
be shed down on,’ but in the theological 
meaning, no real difference of sense from 
eis ; this repetition of prepositions to give 
force is peculiar to Paul, see ver. 30, and 
Gal. i.1) all] who believe. Probably the 
repetition of πάντας was suggested by the 
two kinds of believers, Jew and Gentile, 
so as to prepare the way for ov yap ἐστι 
διαστολή (but still no essential difference 
in the interpretations of εἰς and ἐπί must 
be sought). 23. [ὑστεροῦνται should 
be rendered fall short, not, as E. V., 
“come short,” since this latter may be 
taken for the past tense, after the auxi- 
liary ‘‘ have.” | τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ] 
Of the praise which comes from God, 
see reff. (so Grot., Thol., Reiche, Fritz., 
Meyer, Riickert, De Wette) : not, ‘of praise 
in God’s sight’ (Luther, Calv., Estius, 
K6llner): nor, ‘of glory with God,’ as 
ch. v. 2 (Cée., Beza, al.),—for the Apostle 
is not speaking here of future reward, 
but of present worthiness: nor, of the 
glorious image of God which we have 
lost through sin (Calov., al., Riickert, 
Olsh.), which is against both the usage of 
the word, and the context of the passage. 

24. δικαιούμενοι agrees with πάν- 
τες, without any ellipsis; nor need it be 
resolved into καὶ δικαιοῦνται : the partici- 
pial sentence is subordinated to the great 
general statement of the insufficiency of 
all to attain to the glory of God. It is 
not necessary, in the interpretation, that 
the subjects of πάντες and δικαιούμενοι 
should be in matter of fact strictly com- 
mensurate:—‘all have sinned—all are 
(must be, if justified) justified freely, &e. 


C και 

των προ- 
φητων..- 
ABCDF 
KL[P]x 
abcdf 

ghkl 

mnol7 


[47] 


92-95 


os , a 12 A 
ἀπολυτρώσεως TIS "EV χριστῷ 


Ὁ 8. \ n φ΄ , ὃ 4 / 02 a > ~ “, 

ὃ θεὸς " ἱλαστήριον διὰ πίστεως “ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἵμωτι, 
> 5 A , >? a \ \ r , 

Peis «ἔνδειξιν τῆς δικαιοσύνης αὐτοῦ, διὰ τὴν " πάρεσιν τ 


only. L.P.H. Dan. iv. 32 LXX only. (-οῦν, Exod. χχὶ. 8. Zeph. iii. 1.) 
m = here (ch. i. 13. Eph.i.9) only. Polyb. i. 33. 9, προθέμενοι τοὺς γροσφομάχους, 


see note. 
Phil. i. 28 only +. 


(Heb. 1x. δ) only. 
q here bis. 2 Cor. vill. 24. 


: ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


343 


, ral Com. ἃ , 
Inaod, 2 ὃν προέθετο & Luke xxi. 28. 


ch. viii. 23. 


1 = ch. vi. 11. viii. 2 al, 
7 n = here 
0 -- Matt. xii. 27, 28 al. p ch. i. 5 refi, 


there only+. (-vévat, Sir. xxiii. 2.) 


25. ἱλαστηρειον F: om arm: propitiatorem D-lat vulg-sixt harl? Ambrst Oros, Jer 
Ambr: propitiationem vulg[-clem(with am ὅσο) F]-lat syr: placationem ΗΠ 
rec ins τῆς bef πιστεως, with BC3D3KL{ PJ 17 rel Chr-txt, [Bas, Euthal-ms] Thdrt Ec: 
om C!D'FX Orig, Eus, Bas, Cyr|[-p,] Damase Thl.—om δία πίστεως A Chr-comm(and 


2-mss). for lst αὐτου, eavtov B 47. 


for παρεσιν, πωρωσιν 46: παραινεσιν 69. 


116: [wapeoveow k:] propositum D'-lat Aug, Ambrst Pelag-comm, 


Swpedv] see reff.: here ‘without 
merit or desert as arising from earnings of 
our own;’ ‘gratis.’ τῇ αὐτοῦ χάριτι] 
by His grace, i. 6. ‘His tree undeserved 
Love,’ as the working cause (De W.). 
διὰ τῆς God. κιτ.λ.} By means of the 
propitiatory redemption which is in (has 
been brought about by, and is now in the 
Person of) Christ Jesus. ἀπολύτρω- 
σις, redemption by ἃ λύτρον, propitiation, 
—and, as expressed by the preposition ἄπο, 
redemption from some state of danger or 
misery: here,—redemption from the guilt 
of sin by the propitiatory sacrifice of 
Christ's death, see reff. and Matt. xx. 28. 
In Eph, i. 7 this ἀπολύτρωσις is defined 
to = ἡ ἄφεσις τῶν παραπτωμάτων. 

25.] προέθετο, not here ‘ decreed,’ as in 
ref, N..T.,—but put forth, set forth, 
manifested historically in His incarnation, 
sufferings, and exaltation. Wetst. quotes 
Thucyd. ii. 34, τὰ ὀστᾶ προτίθενται τῶν 
ἀπογενομένων, ‘they expose the bones of 
the deceased to public view.’ 

ἱλαστήριον] as a propitiatory offering. 
So we have σωτήρια, Exod. xx. 24,— χαρι- 
στήριον (εὐχαριστήριον A), 2 Mace. xii. 45, 
—and καθάρσιον, Herod. i. 35, in the sense 
of thank-offerings and offerings of purifi- 
cation (no subst., as θῦμα, need be sup- 
plied,—the words being themselves sub- 
stantives): and we have this very word 
in Dio Chrysos. Orat. ii. p. 184 (cited by 
Stuart), where he says that the Greeks 
offered an ἱλαστήριον τῇ ᾿Αθήνᾳ, a propiti- 
atory sacrifice. The ordinary interpreta- 
tion (Theodoret, Theophyl., Luth., Calv., 
Grot., Calov., Wolf, Olsh.) is founded on 
the sense in which the LXX use the word, 
as signifying the golden cover of the ark 
of the covenant, between the Cherubim, 
where Jehovah appeared and whence He 
gave His oracles. τὸ ἱλαστήριον πέταλον 
ἣν χρυσοῦν, ἐπέκειτο δὲ TH κιβωτῷ. ἑκατέ- 
ρωθεν δὲ εἶχε τὰ τῶν χερουβὶμ ἐκτυπώματα. 
ἐκεῖθεν τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ λειτουργοῦντι ἐγίνετο 
δήλη τοῦ θεοῦ 7H εὐμένεια . . - - τὸ ἀληθινὸν 
ἱλαστήριον 6 δεσπότης ἐστὶ χριστόΞ' ἐκεῖνο 
δὲ τὸ παλαιὸν τούτου τὸν TUTOY ἐπλήρου. 


ἁρμόττει δὲ αὐτῷ ὡς ἀνθρώπῳ τὸ ὄνομα, 
οὐχ ws θεῷ ὡς γὰρ θεός, αὐτὸς διὰ τοῦ 
ἱλαστηρίου χρηματίζει. ἸΠπροάοτοῦ : on 
which Theophylact further,—éd7Aouv δὲ 
πάντως τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην φύσιν, ἥτις πῶμα 
ἦν τῆς θεότητος, ἐπικαλύπτουσα ταύτην. 
The expression occurs in full, ἱλαστήριον 
ἐπίθεμα, Exod. xxv. 17: elsewhere ἱλα- 
στήριον only, as ref. Heb. See also Philo, 
Vita Mos. iii. 8, vol. ii. p. 150. But. De 
Wette well shews the inapplicability of 
this interpretation, as not agreeing with 
εἰς ἔνδειξιν x.7.A. (which requires a victim, 
see below), and as confusing the unity of 
the idea here, Christ being (according to 
it) one while a victim (ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἵματι), 
and another, something else. The other 
interpretation (Vulg. propitiationem : so 
KE. V.: Beza, Rickert, al.: adj.—Rosen- 
miller, Wahl), which makes ἱλαστήριον 
an adj. agreeing with ὅν, ‘a propitiator,’ 
hardly agrees with προέθετο, implying an 
external demonstration of Christ as the 
ἱλαστήριον, not merely an appointment in 
the divine ceconomy. διὰ πίστεως] 
by faith, as the subjective means of ap- 
propriation of this propitiation:—not to 
be joined with ἐν αὐτοῦ αἵματι (but the 
omission of τῆς is no objection to this, see 
above on ver. 22), as Luth., Calv. al, 
Olsh., Riickert,—for such an expression as 
πίστις OY πιστεύω ἐν τῷ αἵμ. I. xp. would 
be unexampled,—and (which is decisive) 
the clause ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἵματι requires a 
primary, not a subordinate place in the 
sentence, because the next clause, eis ἔνδ. 
τ. dix. αὖτ., directly refers to it. As διὰ 
miot,is the subjective means of appropria- 
tion, so ev τῷ αἵμ. αὐτοῦ is the objective 
means of manifestation, of Christ as a pros 
pitiatory sacritice. αἷμα does not = dava- 
τος, but refers to propitiation by blood,— 
the well-known typical use of it in sacrifice. 

εἰς ἔνδειξιν x.7.A.] in order to 
the manifestation of His righteousness: 
this is the aim of the putting forth of 
Christ as an expiatory victim. δικαιο- 
σύνη, not truth (Ambrst., al.),—not good- 


' ness (Theodoret, Grot., Hammond, Koppe, 


344 ΠΡῸΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. Il. 
A 8 , t e 4 > A u b] a a 
shereonlyt. ΤΩΡ Ti POYEyovoT@vV ALAPTHMAT@Y EV TH ΨΟΧΉ του 
2 Macc. Xiv. Ὁ ἐς < 5 + Ἢ ete? : , Ths 
exon 9, θεοῦ, 28% πρὸς τὴν «ἔνδειξιν τῆς δικαιοσύνης αὐτοῦ ἐν 
29. 1 Cor. vi. w A a ow Ay x 128 \ (ὦ oe δὲ \ y 
- βεῖχ j Τῷ νυν KalpW, εἰς TO εἰναὺ AVUTOV OLKALOV Kat δικαι- 
sa. lvili. 1. = Ν , > a oe , 
uch ἢ ἀτοῆ. Obyra 2 τὸν ἐκ ὃ πίστεως ἃ Ἰησοῦ. “70 Tlod οὖν ἡ ° καύ- 
1 Cor. vi. 5 al. 
w ch. viii. 18. xi. 5. 2 Cor. viii. 14 only. Gen. xxx. 20. x Acts iii. 19. vii. 19. ch. i. 11, 20 Me y ch. 
ii. 13 reff. z constr., ch. ii. 8 reff. a constr., ver. 22. = 1 Cor. 1. 20. 


c Paul (ch. xv. 17. 


26. recom την, with D3KL Chr Thdrt [Euthal-ms] ΤῊ] Ge: 
Clem, Cyr,. (F 17 omit from du. αὐτου ver 25 to dik. αὐτου ver 26.) 
for δικαιουντα, δικαιουν D!. 


fuld Avibret. 


1 Cor. xv. 31 17.) only, exc. James iv. 16. Jer. xii. 13. 


ins ABCD!X[P 47] 
om και F 
om inoov F 52 E-lat: for τησ., 


ino. xp. vulg[ with demid harl tol] copt Thdrt [Orig-int,] Ambrst Pelag{[-comm]: 


xp. ino. D'-lat: 


του Kup. nM. ing. xp. Syr: 


inoowy D-gr Lb dfgmol7 Clem,: txt 


ABCKN([P 47] am fuld D?-lat syr eth [arm Euthal-ms] Chr, ΤῊ] (ἔς Aug, Oros,. 


Rosenm., Reiche),—not both these com- 
bined with justice (Beza),—not justifying 
or sin-forgiving righteousness (Chrys., 
Aug., Estius, Krehl, B.-Crus.),—not the 
righteousness which He gives (Luther, 
Elsner, Wolf, al.), which last would repeat 
the idea already contained in ver. 21 and 
rob eis τὸ εἶναι αὐτ. δίκαιον of all meaning, 
—not holiness, which does not correspond 
to δίκαιος and δικαιοῦν, ---- but judicial 
righteousness, JUSTICE (as Orig., Calov., 
Tholuck, Meyer, Schrader, Riickert ed. 2, 
al.). his interpretation alone suits the 
requirements of the sense, and corresponds 
to the idea of δικαιοῦν, which is itself judi- 
cial. <A sin-offering betokens on the one 
side the expiation of guilt, and on the 
other ensures pardon and reconciliation : 
and thus the Death of Christ is not only 
a proof of God’s grace and love, but: also 
of His judicial righteousness which re- 
quires punishment and expiation. (Mainly 
from De Wette.) διὰ τ. πάρεσιν 
κιτιλ.} = = διὰ τὸ παριέναι τὸν θεὸν τὰ 
προγΎ. ἁμαρτήματα ἐν τῇ ἀνοχῇ αὐτοῦ, and 
contains the reason why God would mani- 
fest His judicial righteousness ; on account 
of the overlooking of the sins which “aig 
passed, in the forbearance of God: 

to vindicate that character for Ἔτι 
which might seem, owing to the sus- 
pension of God’s righteous sentence on 
sin in former ages in His forbearance, te 
be placed in question:—to shew, that 
though He did not then fully punish for 


sin, and though He did then set forth 


inadequate means of (subjective) justifica- 
tion,—yet He did both, not because His 
justice was slumbering, nor because the 
nature of His righteousness was altered, 
—but because He had provided a way 
whereby sin might be forgiven, and He 
might be just. Observe, mdpeots is not 
forgiveness [nor “remission,” as E. V. 
erroneously renders it ], but [passing over, 
or] overlooking, which is the work of 
Sorbearance (see Acts xvii. 30), whereas 
Sorgiveness is ) work of grace,—see 


ch. ii. 4:—nor is τῶν mpoyey. au., * the 
sins of each man which precede his con- 
version ’ (Calov.), but those of the whole 
world before the death of Christ. See the 
very similar words Heb. ix. 15. The 
rendering διά, ‘by means of’ (Origen, 
Luth., Calv., Calov., Le Clere, Elsn., 
Koppe, Reiche, Schrader), is both un- 
grammatical and unmeaning. 26. 
πρὸς τὴν ἔνδ. «.7.A. | The art. distinguishes 
this ἔνδειξις from the former, as the fuller 
and ultimate object, of which that ἔνδειξις 
was a subordinate part :—with a view to 
the (or His) manifestation of his righte- 
ousness in this present time. The shew- 
ing forth that He was righteous through- 
out His dealings with the whole world, by 
means of setting forth an adequate and 
complete propitiation in the death of 
Christ, was towards, formed a subsidiary 
manifestation to, His great manifestation 
of His righteousness (same sense as before, 
judicial righteousness, justice) under the 
Gospel. The joining πρὸς τὴν beck. 
K.T.A. With ἐν τῇ ἀνοχῇ T. θεοῦ (Beza, 
Riickert ed. 2, Thol., al.) would draw 
off the attention from the leading thought 
of the sentence to a digression respecting 
the avoxy τ. θ., which is not -probable. 
εἰς TO εἶναι «.7.A.] in order that 

He may be (shewn to be :—the whole pre- 
sent concern is with ἔνδειξις, the exhibition 
to men of the righteousness of God) just 
and (yet, on the other side) justifying 
him who is of (the) faith in Jesus (rdv 
ἐκ πίστ. Ino., him who belongs to, stands 
in, works from as his standing-point, faith 
in Jesus: see ch. ii. 8, note, and reff.). 
27—IV. 25.] JEWISH BOASTING 


ALTOGETHER REMOVED by this truth, NOT. 


however BY MAKING VOID THE LAW, nor 
BY DEGRADING ABRAHAM FROM HIS PRE- 
EMINENCE, but BY ESTABLISHING THE 


ABCDF 
ΚΙΓΡΊΝ 
abcaf 
ghk1l 
mnol7 


[1] 


LAW, and shewing that Abraham was really 


JUSTIFIED BY FAITH, and is the FATHER 
OF THE FAITHFUL. 27.) ἣ καύχησις, 
the boasting, viz. of the Jews, of which 
he had spoken before, ch. ii., not ‘ boasting * 


ο[Ξ-51, ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 845 


χήσις ; “ ἐξεκλείσθη. διὰ © ποίου νόμου ; τῶν ἴ ἔργων ; 4Gal.iv.17 

᾽ ΄ > \ \ ΄ Ι 

οὐχί, ἀλλὰ διὰ νόμου πίστεως. ee, 
re 


; 5 only. Exod. 
98 g λογιζόμεθα % yap xxili. 2 B. 
h§ a 6 7 " θ i \ jz re fk 21 (only ?). 
ικαιοῦσθαι πίστει ἄνθρωπον ἱ χωρὶς Jépywv J νόμου. e= Actsiv.7 
5) / e \ , A op 
29 ἢ Ἰουδαίων ὁ θεὸς μόνον, οὐχὶ καὶ ἐθνῶν ; vat καὶ f= ch iv.2,6 


A e ς \ . ᾿ - i. 14— 
ἐθνῶν, 39 * εἴπερ εἷς ὁ θεὸς ὃς 1 δικαιώσει περιτομὴν "ἐκ 2" ™ 
t \ 12 / Ν A 7 21] 7 ἘΞ and constr., 
πίστεως καὶ ἱ ἀκροβυστίαν διὰ τῆς πίστεως. νόμον εἰ. xiv. 14. 
11, . 


13. Wisd. xv. 12. 
k ch. viii. 9 reff. 
xvii. 1}. 


h w. dat., ver. 24 reff. 
1 Paul (ch. ii. 25. iv. 9, ἄς. 


i ver. 21. j ver. 20 (reff.). 
1 Cor. vii. 18, 19 al.) only, exc. Acts xi. 3. Gen. 


27. aft καυχησις ins σου F latt [Orig-int,] Augg. for ουχι, ουκ D!: ov F, 


om 2nd δια D!. 

28. λογιζωμεθαι ὉΞΚ[ΡΊ. * rec οὖν (prob corrn from misunderstandg of 
λογιζομαι to convey a conclusion : see note), with BCD3KL[P] 17 rel syrr Chr, Thdrt 
[Euthal-ms} ΤῊ] Gic: yap ADIFR [47] latt copt [(ath arm)] Cyr[-p,] Damase [Orig- 
int,] Ambrst Aug, Ambr. rec moret bef δικαιουσθαι (to throw emphasis on 
moter, supposing the ver to convey a solemn conclusion), with KL[P]€? 17 rel syrr 
[arm] Chr Thdrt [Euthal-ms ΤῊ] ec]: for more: ἀνθρωπον, avOp. δια πιστεως F vulg 


zth [ Orig-int, Ambrst] Aug: txt ABCD! [47] (copt). 


αρθρωπον Β. 


29. om 7 n 391] Thdrt: un Al(appy) 392 [Julian(in Cyr)]: εἰ 77: an latt [Origs 


int |. 


μονων Bab [o] 23. 39. 47-8. 76 Clem, Ath, Chr,(mss vary) Cyr ΤῊ] (but 


aft sovd. Clem, Ath,): wovos D: txt ACFKL[P]® 17 rel Ath, [Eus, Chr, Cyr-p(with 


some variation of mss) Damasc ] Thdrt Cc, tantum latt. 


rec aft ovx: ins δε, with 


L[P] 17 rel syr Chr Cyr,[-p] Thdrt ΤῊ] @c: om ABCDFK® k [47] latt Syr copt 
[eth arm] Clem, Ath, Chr-ms, Cyr[{-p,] Damase [Orig-int, Hil, Ambrst]. 

30. rec ἐπείπερ (corrn), with D'3FKL[P]€% 17 [47-marg] rel Eus, Ath, Chr 
Thdrt Th! Ge: quoniam quidem l\att Ambr[{st Orig-int,]: txt ABCD?N! [47-txt 


Clem, Orig, Cyr;[mss vary] Did, Damasc: siquidem Jer, Pacian,. 


in general, which will not suit ver. 29. (So 
Theodoret, τὸ ὑψηλὸν τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων φρό- 
ynua,—Chrys., Theopbyl., Gc. :—Vulg. : 
gloriatio tua: Bengel, Riickert, Meyer, 
De Wette, al.) ἐξεκλ. οὐκ ἔτι χώραν 
ἔχει, Theodoret. διὰ π. ν. κιτ.λ.} By 
what law (is it excluded) ? (is it by that) 
of works? No, but by the law (norma, 
the rule) of faith. The contrast is not 
here between the law and the Gospel as 
two dispensations, but between the law of 
works and the law of faith, whether found 
under the law, or the Gospel, or (if the 
case admitted) any where else. This is 
evident by the Apostle proving below that 
Abraham was justified, not by works, so 
as to have whereof to boast, but by faith. 

28.] λογιζόμεθα, not ‘we con- 
clude,’ but we hold, we reckon, see reff. : 
the former is against Ν. T. usage; and 
has probably caused the change of γάρ 
into οὖν, by some who imagined that this 
verse was a conclusion from the preceding 
argument. For we hold (as explanatory 
of the verse preceding,—on the other 
supposition the two verses are disjointed, 
and the conclusion comes in most strange- 
ly), that a man is justified by faith 
[apart. from] (without [but more than 
without—so distinctly without as to be 
utterly and entirely separate from and 
independent of |) the works of the law (not 
works of law); and therefore boasting is 


om o D! Orig,, 


excluded. 29.] In shewing how 
completely Jewish boasting is excluded, 
Paul purposes to take the ground of their 
own law, and demonstrate it from that. 
He will shew that God is not (the God) 
of Jews alone, but of Gentiles, and that 
this very point was involved in the pro- 
mise made to Abraham, by believing which 
he was justified (ch. iv.), and therefore 
that it lies in the very root and kernel 
of the law itself. But, as often elsewhere, 
he passes off from this idea again and again, 
recurring to it however continually,—and 
eventually when he brings forward his 
proof-text (πατέρα πολλῶν ἐθνῶν τέθεικά 
σε, iv. 17), Abraham’s faith, and not this 
fact, has become the leading subject. 

30. εἴπερ] if at least (if we are to hold 
to what is manifest as a result of our 
former argument) God is One, who shall 
justify the circumcision (= the Jews, 
after the analogy of ch. ii. 26) by (ἐκ, as 
the preliminary condition,—the state out 
of which the justification arises) faith, and 
the uncircumcision (the Gentiles) through 
(by means of) their faith. Too much 
stress must not be laid on the difference 
of the two prepositions (see ver. 22 and 
note). The omission of the art. in ἐκ πίστ. 
and its expression in διὰ τῆς πίστ. are 
natural enough: the former expresses the 
ground of justification, generally taken, 
ἐκ πίστεως, by faith: the latter the means 


940 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


IV. 


¢ τῇ a Sua a [ ae , ’ νι 
mver.3ref. οὗ» “ καταργοῦμεν Ola τῆς πίστεως ; " μὴ γένοιτο, ἀλλα 


n ver. + reff. 


o — Heb. x. 9. νόμον ο ἱστάνομεν. 


see ch. vi. 
13. 1 Cor. iii. 1 reff. 
8. xxvi. 12. 


p ch. iii. 5 reff. 


IV.1 PT οὖν ἐροῦμεν [4 εὑρηκέναι] ᾿Αβραὰμ τὸν 


q = Luke ἰχ. 12. Acts νἱῖ. 11. 2 Τίπι. i. 18. Gen. vi. 


81. ree tor@uev, with DSK LN3[P 47-marg] rel Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms] ΤᾺ] Ge: 
Γισταμεν 47-txt:] συνιστωμεν 17. 65. 93 lect-6: περιστανομεν D!: txt ABCD?FR! Orig, 


Cyr[-p,] Damase. 


Cuap. IV. 1. ree aBpaau τὸν matepa nuwy bef ευρηκεναι, with KL[P] 17 rel syrr 
Chr{-txt Euthal-ms] Thdrt Th] (ic Gennad Phot: om ευρηκεναι B 47! [Chr-comm, 1: 
ins bef αβρααμ ACDFN latt [copt eth arm] Cyr[-p, | Damase [ Orig-int, | Ambrst [aft 


whereby the man lays hold on justification, 
διὰ τῆς πίστεως, by his faith : the former 
is the objective ground, the latter the 
subjective medium. Jowett’s rendering 
οἱ περιτομὴν ἐκ πίστεως, ‘the circumcision 
that is of faith, though ingenious, is 
hardly philologically allowable, nor would 
it correspond to the other member of the 
sentence, which he rightly renders ‘ and 
the uncircumcision through their faith? 
"ΠῸ understand τῆς πίστεως (as Mr. Green, 
Gr. p. 300) as referring to πίστεως just 
mentioned ‘ by the instrumentality of the 
identical faith which operates in the case 
of the circumcised,’ is to contradict the 
fact: the faith was not, strictly speaking, 
identical in this sense, or the two cases 
never need have been distinguished. See 
BV. 1; 2. 31.] But again the Jew 
may object, if this is the case, if Faith be 
the ground, and Faith the medium, of 
justification for all, circumcised or un- 
circumcised, surely the law is set aside 
and made void. That this is not so, the 
Apostle both here asserts, and is prepared 
to shew by working out the proposition of 
ver. 29, that the law itselt belonged to a 
covenant whose original recipient was jus- 
tified by faith, and whose main promise 
was, the reception and blessing of the 
Gentiles. vopov, not ‘ daw,’ but the 
law, as every where in the Epistle. We 
may safely say that the Apostle never 
argues of law, abstract, in the sense of 
a system of precepts,—its attributes or 
its effects,—but always of THE LAW, con- 
crete,—the law of God given by Moses, 
when speaking of the Jews, as here: the 
law of God, in as far as written in their 
consciences, when speaking of the Gen- 
tiles: and when including both, the law 
of God generally, His written as well as 
His unwritten will. Many Com- 
mentators have taken this verse (being 
misled in some cases by its place at the 
end of the chapter) as standing by itself, 
and have gone into the abstract grounds 
why faith does not make void the law (or 
moral obedience); which, however true, 
hace no place here; the design being to 


shew that the law itself contained this 
very doctrine, and was tounded in the pro- 
mise to Abraham on a covenant embracing 
Jews and Gentiles,—and therefore was not 
degraded from its dignity by the doctrine, 
but rather established as a part of God’s 
dealings,—consistent with, explaining, and 
explained by, the Gospel. 

IV. 1—5.] Abraham himself was justified 
by faith. The reading and punctuation of 
this verse present some difficulties. As to 
the first (see var. read.), the variation in 
the order of the words, and the reading 
προπάτορα seemed to me formerly, how- 
ever strongly supported, to have sprung 
out of an idea that κατὰ σάρκα belonged 
to πατέρα. ‘This being supposed, εὑρη- 
κέναι appeared to have been transposed 
to throw πατέρα ju. κατὰ σάρκα together, 
—and then, because Abraham is distinctly 
proved (ver. 11) to have been in another 
sense the father of the faithful, πατέρα to 
have been altered to the less ambiguous 
προπάτορα, ancestor, a word not found in 
the N. T., but frequent in the Fathers. 
I therefore in the 3rd edition of this vol., 
with De Wette, Tholuck, and Tischendorf 
(in his last [7th, not 8th] edn.), retained 
the rec. text. Being now however con- 
vineed that we are bound to follow the 
testimony of our best Mss., and to distrust 
such subjective considerations as unsafe, 
and generally able to be turned both ways, 
I have adopted the reading of A(B)CDFRX 
&e., bracketing εὑρηκέναι as of doubtful 
authority, omitted as it is by B. 

Grot., Le Clerc, and Wetst. punctuate, τί 
οὖν ἐροῦμεν ; ebdpnk. . . σάρκα :—and 
Matthai, τί οὖν; ἐροῦμ. . . .- σάρκα; 
supplying δικαιοσύνην (or more rightly an 
indefinite tz) after εὑρηκέναι. But as 
Thol. well remarks, both these methods of 
punctuating would presuppose that Paul 
had given some reason in the preceding 
verses for imagining that Abraham had 
gained some advantage according to the 
flesh: which is not the case. 1. 
οὖν] The Apostle is here contending with 
those under the law from their own stand- 
ing-point: and he follows up his νόμον 





ABCDF 
KL[P]s 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


1--5. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 


547 


᾿προπάτορα ἡμῶν " κατὰ " σάρκα ; 3 εἰ γὰρ ᾿Αβραὰμ, " ἐξ rhere onlyt. 


ἔργων “ἐδικαιώθη, Y ἔχει καύχημα. 
θεόν" 3 τί γὰρ ἡ Y γραφὴ λέγει; *’Emiotevoev δὲ ᾿Αβραὰμ 


τ Gal. vi. 4. 
12, or John i. 1, 2. y ch 


σαρκα 47-marg |. 


w Paul (1 Cor. v. 6 al8.) only, exc. Heb. iii. 6. 
. ix. 17 reff. 


Ps. xxix. 8 
Symm. 
s ch. i. 3 reff. 
t ch. iii. 20 reff. 
τύ =‘ch. xv. 11: 
1 Cor. xv. 31. 
Deut. x. 21 al. x = Mark xii. 
zw. dat., GEN. xv.6. Acts xvi. 34 reff. 


"AAW οὐ X πρὸς 


rec (for προπατ.) marepa, with C23DFKL[P] &-corr! 17 rel latt 


syr Chr[txt and comm KEuthal-ms] Thdrt Gennad Phot ΤῊ] ec: patriarcham Syr: 
txt ABC!8! 3 copt 2th arm Eus Cyr{-p,] Damasce. 


2. adda F. 
Damasc]: om ABCDIFR. 


3. in δὲ yap has been written twice, but the first erased. 


rec ins Tov bef θεον, with D3KL[P] 17 rel Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms 


om de (as unneces- 


sary) D'F Ὁ o latt [Syr eth arm] Chr, [Euthal-ms Orig-int,] Cypr,. 


iotavouev, by what therefore (‘hoc con- 
cesso,’ ‘seeing that you and I are both 
upholders of the law’) shall we say, Xc. 
This verse, and the argument following, 
are not a proof, but a consequence, of 
νόμον ἷστ., and are therefore introduced, 
not with yap, but with οὖν. evpn- 
κέναι [if read ]] viz. towards his justifica- 
tion, or more strictly, earned as his own, 
to boast of. κατὰ σάρκα belongs to 
evp., not (as Chrys., Theophyl., Erasm.) 
to προπάτορα jp. For the course and 
spirit of the argument is not to limit the 
paternity of Abraham to a mere fleshly 
one, but to shew that he was the spiritual 
father of all believers. And the question 
is not one which requires any such distinc- 
tion between his fleshly and _ spiritual 
paternity (as in ch. ix. 3,5). This being 
so, what does κατὰ σάρκα mean? It 
cannot allude to circumcision; for that 
is rendered improbable, not only by the 
parallel expression ἐξ ἔργων in the plural, 
but also by the consideration, that circum- 
cision was no ἔργον at all, but a seal of 
the righteousness which he had by faith 
being yet uncircumcised (ver. 11),—and 
by the whole course of the argument in 
the present place, which is not to disprove 
the exclusive privilege of the Jew (that 
having been already done, chs. ii. iii.), 
but to shew that the father and head of 
the race himself was justified not by 
works, but by faith. Doubtless, in so far 
as circumcision was a mere work of obedi- 
ence, it might be in a louse way considered 
as falling under that category : but it came 
after justification, and so is chronologically 
here excluded. κατὰ σάρκα then is in 
contrast to κατὰ mvedua,—and refers to 
that department of our being from which 
spring works, in contrast with that in 
which is the exercise of faith : see ch. viii. 
4, 5. 2.| For if Abraham was [not 
‘were’ as Εἰ. V.] justified (assuming, as a 
fact known to all, that he was justified 
by some means) by works, he hath matter 
of boasting (not expressed here whether 
in the sight of men, or of God, but taken 


generally : the proposition being assumed, | 


‘He that has earned justification by 
works, has whereof to boast’). Then, in 
disproof of this,—that Abraham has matter 
of boasting,—whatever men might think 
of him, or attribute to him (6. g. the per- 
fect keeping of the law, as the Jews did), 
one thing at least is clear, that he has 
none before God. (πρός, probably as in 
the second ref., with, in the sense of chez : 
apud Deum.) This we can prove, (ver. 3) 
for what saith the Scripture ? Abraham 
believed God (God’s promise) and it (τὸ 
πιστεῦσαι) was reckoned (so LXX. Heb., 
‘He reckoned it’) to him as (ch. ii. 26) 
righteousness. The whole question 
so much mooted between Protestants on 
the one hand, and Romanists, Arminians, 
and Socinians on the other, as to whether 
this righteousness was reckoned (1) ‘ per 
fidem, being God’s righteousness imputed 
to the sinner; or (2) ‘propter fidem,’ so 
that God made Abraham righteous on 
account of the merit of his faith, lies in 
fact in a small compass, if what has gone 
before be properly taken into account. 
The Apostle has proved Jews and Gentiles 
to be all under sin: utterly unable by 
works of their own to attain to righteous- 
ness. Now faith, in the second sense 
mentioned above, is strictly and entirely ὦ 
work, and as such would be the efficient 
cause of man’s justification,—which, by 
what has preceded, ἐέ cannot be. It will 
therefore follow, that it was not the act 
of believing which was reckoned to him as 
a righteous act, or on account of which 
perfect righteousness was laid to his 
charge, but that the fact of his trusting 
God to perform His promise introduced 
him into the blessing promised. God de- 
clared his purpose (Gen. xii. 3) of blessing 
all the families of the earth in Abraham, 
and again (Gen. xv. 5) that his seed should 
be as the stars of heaven, when as yet 
he had no son. Abraham believed this 
promise, and became partaker of this 
blessing. But this blessing was, justifica- 
tion by faith in Christ. Now Abraham 
could not, in the strict sense of the words, 
be justitied by faith ἐν Christ,—nor is it 


‘ κῷ 
348 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS IV. 
~ ~ \ - > A , , A 
a=chixs TO θεῷ, καὶ ὃ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ 5 εἰς δικαιοσύνην. 4 τῷ δὲ 
siz” > ῥργαζομένῳ 6° μισθὸς οὐ λογίζεται ἃ κατὰ ἃ χάριν, ἀλλὰ 
τιον 1:22. εργα ee Οο΄μισῦος OV AOYLCETAL “ κατα χάριν, AANA 
8. ev. 31. \ > 5 a \ \ ? , ΄ 

binol, Acts Κατὰ © ὀφείλημα" ὃ τῷ δὲ μὴ ἢ ἐργαζομένῳ, ' πιστεύοντι δὲ 
mare hone: Oe \ g BS A 4 h 2 ἥν τς Xx / ς / 

c ay: ee A bb of ome TOV ἀσεβῆ, ᾿ογίξεται ' ω) ἜΤΙ 
τὰ Gta αὐτοῦ ὃ εἰς δικαιοσύνην. 8‘ καθάπερ καὶ Δαυεὶδ 1 λέγει τὸν 
xxxi. 7. 

ἃ ver. 16. e = here (Matt. vi. 12) only. Deut. xxiv.10. Thue. ii. 40, (-λή, ye ae: 7.) f ver. 

24. Acts ix. 42. xi. 17. see Matt. xxvii. 42 νυ. r. g ch. ii. 13 reff. .6. 1Tim.i. 9. 1 Pet. 
iv. 18. 2 Pet. ii. 5. iii. 7. Jude 4, 15 (bis) only. Prov. xxi. 30. (Beas, ch. i. 18.) "7 Paul (ch. xii. 4. 1 Cor. 


xii. 12 418.) only, exc. Heb. iv. 2. Lev. xxvii. 8 only (?). see Heb. v. 


j = John viii. 27, Phil. iii. 18. 


4. rec ins To bef οφειλημα (appy as agreeing better with the idea of a definite obliga- 


tion incurred: ἃ. 6. = τὸ ὀφειλόμενον, “ 


what is due from the employer,’ as indeed 
Bloomf. explains it): om ABCDFKL{[P JX rel [arm]. 


B! repeats from ὁ pic8o* 


to epyaCouerw, ver 5, but the passage is marked for erasure, except the first o. 


δ. ασεβην DIFR. 
6. for καθαπερ, καθως DF. 


necessary to suppose that he directed his 
faith forward to the promised Redeemer 
in Person; but in so far as God’s gracious 
purpose was revealed to him, he grasped 
it by faith, and that righteousness which 
was implied, so far, in it, was imputed to 
nim. Some have said (Tholuck, e. g.) 
that the parallel is incomplete —Abraham’s 
faith having been reckoned to him for 
righteousness, whereas, in our case, the 
righteousness of Christ is reckoned to us 
as our righteousness, by faith. But the 
incompleteness lies in the nature of the 
respective cases. In his case, the righteous- 
ness itself was not yet manifested. He 
believed implicitly, taking the promise, 
with all it involved and implied, as true. 
This then was his way of entering into 
the promise, and by means of his faith 
was bestowed upon him that full justifica- 
tion which that faith never apprehended. 
Thus his faith itself, the mere fact of 
implicit trust in God, was counted to him 
for righteousness. But though the same 
righteousness is imputed to us who believe, 
and by means of faith also, it is no longer 
the mere fact of believing implicitly in 
God’s truth, but the reception of Christ 
Jesus the Lord by faith, which justifies us 
(see vv. 23—25 and note). As it was 
then the realization of God’s words by 
faith, so now: but we have the Person of 
the Lord Jesus for the object of faith, 
explicitly revealed: he had not. In both 

cases Justification is gratuitous, and is by 
faith: and so far, which is as far as the 
argument here requires, the parallel is 
strict and complete. 4. τῷ epyalon. | 
(q. ἃ. τῷ ἐργάτῃ, but the part. is used 
because of the negative τῷ μὴ épyat. fol- 
lowing)—to the workman (him that works 
for hire, that earns wages, compare mpos- 
npydoaro, Luke xix. 16) his wages are 
not reckoned according to (as a matter 
of) grace (favour), but according to (as 
a matter of) debt. The stress is on xara 


ins o bef δανειδ DF [g]. 


χάριν, not on λογίζεται, which in this first 
member of the sentence, is used hardly 
in the strict sense, of imputing or reckon- 
ing, but of allotting or apportioning :— 
its use being occasioned by the stricter 
λογίζεται below. And the sentence is a 
general one, not with any peculiar refer- 
ence to Abraham,—except | that after κατὰ 
χάριν we may supply ὡς τῷ ᾿Αβραάμ, if we 
will ; for this is evidently assumed. 
ὅ.} But to him who works not (for hire, 
—is not an ἐργάτης looking for his μισθός) 
but believes on (casts himself in simple 
trust and humility on) Him who justifies 
(accounts just, as in ver. 3) the ungodly 
(‘¢mpious : stronger than ‘ unrighteous :’ 
—no allusion to Abraham’s having for- 
merly been in idolatry,—for the sentence 
following on ver. 4, which is general and 
of universal application, must also be 
general,—including of course Abraham : 
ἀσέβεια is the state of all men by nature), 
—his faith is reckoned as righteousness. 
κατὰ χάριν is of course implied. 
6—8.| The same is confirmed by a passage 
JSrom David. This is not a fresh example, 
but a confirmation of the assertion involved 
in ver. 5, that a man may believe on Him 
who justifies the ungodly, and have his 
faith reckoned for righteousness. The 
applicability of the text depends on the 
persons alluded to being sinners, and 
having sin not reckoned to them. 
ἀσεβεῖς und λογίζομαι are the two words 
to be illustrated. The Psalm, strictly 
speaking, says nothing of the imputation 
of righteousness,—but it is implied by 
Paul, that the remission of sin is equiva- 
lent to the imputation of righteousness— 
that there is no negative state of innocence 
—none intermediate between acceptance 
for righteousness, and rejection for sin. 
6. λέγ. Tov pax. | pronounces the 
blessedness, ‘the congratulation:’ in 
allusion perhaps to the Heb. form, "γῶν 
‘(O) the blessings of, .... It is 


ABCDF 
K: [PIN 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnolj 


[47] 


4---1}. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ, 


949 


k \ ree | 0 /, 5 \ l / , δ 
μακαρισμὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ᾧ ὁ θεὸς ' λογίζεται δικαιοσύ- k here bis. 


νὴν ™ χωρὶς ἔργων, 7 Μακάριοι ὧν " ἀφέθησαν αἱ ° ἀνομίαι 
Ni aes ΄, θ ες , 

Kat ὧν Ῥ ἐπεκαλύφθησαν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι. 

οὐ μὴ ' λογίσηται κύριος ἁμαρτίαν. 

Ὁ q 5 \ \ , r x \ q 3 \ \ 5 > 

οὗτος ἐπὶ τὴν περιτομήν, "ἢ καὶ “ ἐπὶ τὴν ὃ ἀκροβυ- 
/ / \ σ ] ᾽ i θ A "A \ ΄ 7 

στίαν ; λέγομεν γὰρ ὅτι | ἐλογίσθη τῷ ᾿Αβραὰμ ἡ πίστις 

lets δικαιοσύνην" 10 πῶς οὖν | ἐλογίσθη; " ἐν περιτομῇ 


Gal. iv. 15 


only t. 
1 ver. 3. 
8 ΠῚ tos ἃ Η ΜΞ iii. 21 
or ur ρ ae “ n = Matt, vi 
" 12. xii. 31: 
O “μακαρισμος οὖν ΚΝ 39. 


Isa. xxii. 14. 
Psa. xxxi. 1. 
o = Matt. vii. 
23. xiii. 41. 
ch. vi. 19 al. 
Exod, xxxiv. 


Ρ here only, 


/ A“ ’ 
ὄντι, ἢ *év SaxpoBvotia; οὐκ ‘ev περιτομῇ, ἀλλ᾽ * ἐν 1c. Gen. 


8 > / 1l \ u a + ν r Ww 
ἀκροβυστίᾳ. 11 καὶ ἃ σημεῖον ἔλαβεν " περιτομῆς, ἡ σφρα- 
n a ’ A / a > A > / 

yida τῆς δικαιοσύνης τῆς " πίστεως τῆς ἡ ἐν TH " ἀκροβυστίᾳ, 


reff. Mark ix. 12, 13. 
t = ch. iii. 19 reff. 


neb. vii, 13, 
ii. 19. Rev. v. 1 all2.) only. 


(Hagg. ii. 24.) 


7. for emex., εκαλυφθησαν B?. 


u = Matt, xxvi. 48. 1 Cor. xiv. 22. 


apposit., Acts iv. 22. 2Cor. v.5. Col. iii. 24. Winer, edn. 6, ᾧ 59. 8, a, 


vii. 19 A &c., 
20 A Ed-vat. 
compl. (B 
def.) (-vuma, 
1 Pet, ii. 16.) 
q = Acts iv. 33 
8 ch. iii. 30 reff. 
Vv constr., gen. of 
w = 1 Cor. ix. 2 (2 Tim, 


r 1 Cor. ix, 8 reff. 
GEN. &vii, 11. 


8. for @, οὗ (so LxyxX-ABN!) BD!GRNI: txt (so rxx-edd &32) ΑΟΌΞΕ ΚΙ ΡΊΝ 8. rel 


{Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc}. 

9. [autos F*(not G: -τους F!).] 
(not am demid fuld) Ambrst. 
om ott BD! [47]. 


λογισεται K[ P] n 17 [ Euthal-ms]. 

aft περιτομὴν ins μονον D [vulg-clem ] harl! 
for 2nd em, εἰς C: om 29. 33: om em τὴν a, 
om ἡ πιστις Καὶ : ims aft δικαιοσ. 17. 62. 


10. om οντι F vulg(not fuld!) D%-lat [Syr] Cyr,. 
11. περιτομὴν AC! [m-marg-corr(sic Treg) 47 arm] syrr Orig-schol[and int, ] Chr, 
Procop, Damase : txt BC?-DFKL[PjX 17 rel latt copt Orig-c Chr, Cyr,[-p] Thdrt ΤῊ] 


(Ec [Euthal-ms Ambrst ]. 
Ts (bef dix.) A. 


very clear that this righteousness must 
be χωρὶς ἔργων, because its imputation con- 
“sists in the remission and hiding of offences, 
whereas none can be legally righteous in 
whom there is any, even the smallest 
offence. 8.] ov μὴ λογίσηται, as the 
same construction usually in the N. T., is 
Suture (Winer, edn. 6, § 56. 3), and must 
be referred to the great final judgment. 
Or we may say with Olsh. that the ex- 
pression is an O. T. one, regarding sin as 
lying covered by the divine long-suffering 
till the completion of the work of Christ, 
at which time first real forgiveness of sins 
was imparted to the ancient believers; 
compare Matt. xxvii. 53; 1 Pet. iii. 18. 
In this last view the future will only refer 
to all such eases as should arise. 
9—12.| This declaration of blessedness 
applies to circumcised and uncircumcised 
alike. For Abraham himself was thus 
justified when in UNCIRCUMCISION, and 
was then pronounced the father of the 
Faithful, uncireumeised as well as circum- 
cised, μακαρισμός of course includes 
the fact, on account of which the con- 
gratulation is pronounced,—the justifica- 
tion itself. 9. ἐπί sc. λέγεται, see 
reff. The form of the question, with ἢ 
kal, presupposes an affirmative answer to 
the latter clause ; which affirmative answer 
is then madethe ground of the argumenta- 
tion in vy. 10, 11, 12:—On the uncir- 


aft σψραγιδα ins δια Εἰ: 
om τη DF Ὁ co Procop Damase, 


Tns περιτομή L. om 


cumcision (-cised) also. For we say, 
ἄς. The stress is on τῷ ᾿Αβραάμ, not on 
ἢ πίστις : for we say that 10 ABRAHAM 
faith was reckoned for righteousness. 

10.1 πῶς, under what circum- 
stances? ‘The interval between the re- 
cognition of his faith (Gen. xv. 6) and his 
circumcision, was perhaps as much as | 
twenty-five, certainly not less (Gen. xvii. 
25) than fourteen years. 11.] And he 
received (from God) the sign (token, or 
symbol) of circumcision (gen. of apposition, 
see reff. The reading rep:touhy appears 
to have been an alteration on account of 
σφραγῖδα following), a seal (the Targum 
on Cant. iii. 8, cited by 'Tholuck, has the 
expression, ‘ the seal of circumcision,’ and 
in Sohar, Levit. vi. 21, it is called ‘a holy 
sign.’ So also Baptisin is called in the 
Acta Thome, ὃ 26, ἡ σφραγὶς τοῦ λουτροῦ, 
and elsewhere in the Fathers simply 7 
σφραγίς. Grabe, Spicil. Patr. i. 333) of 
the righteousness (to stamp, and certify 
the righteousness) of the faith (gen. of 
apposition (but not zz appos. with dik. 
by construction),—‘ of the righteousness 
which consisted in his faith,’—not, ‘ of 
his justification by faith: the present 
argument treats of faith accounted as 
righteousness) which was (or, ‘which he 
had : τῆς may refer either to dix. or to 
ricr.,—but better to the former, because 
the object is to shew that the righteous. 


350 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS TM. 
xActsiii,19. Σ εἰς TO εἶναι αὐτὸν πατέρα πάντων τῶν πιστευόντων ὃ δι᾿ ABCDP 
vii. 19. ver. ] ΚΙΓΡῚΝ 
8. chil, 5 ἀκροβυστίας, " εἰς τὸ ᾿ λογισθῆναι [καὶ] αὐτοῖς τὴν δι- avcat 
τ τας , - : : ghkl | 
oe  καιοσύνην, 13 καὶ πατέρα περιτομῆς τοῖς οὐκ ὃ ἐκ © περι- τὰ πο 11 
b = ch. ii. 8 A , ᾽ \ \ nw ad a n e ΡΥ [47] 
ff. 
Jr ς Τομῆς μονον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς “ στοιχοῦσιν τοῖς “ἴχνεσιν 
reff. a t.2 ee 8 / / af \ Ξε a f’°AB , a 
a hets xxi, Τῆς “ἐν ἢ ἀκροβυστίᾳ πίστεως τοῦ ἡ πατρὸς ἡμῶν ραὰμ 
Gal. v. 25. 13 5) \ \ , es / a? Ν BY a t 
vi. 16. Phil. 18 οὐ γὰρ διὰ νόμου ἡ ἐπαγγελία τῷ “ABpaap ἢ TO ὃ σπέρ- 
ili. 16 only. e 


Eccles. xi. 5 only, but not =. 


42. 7. (dat., ch. xiii. 13.) f Acts vii. 2 reff. 


e 2 Cor. xii. 18. 1 Pet. ii. 21. Sir. xxi. 6. 


ἴχνη τῆς ἀληθείας, Polyb. iv. 
g ch. i. 3 reff. 


for δι, δια AD'F L[e sil]: txt BCD?:3 [Ke sil) ῬῚΝ rel [Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc ]. 
om καὶ ABN?! [47] a demid tol [copt] Orig-schol Cyr[-p,] Damase: ins CDF K 


L[ P83 17 rel latt syrr eth [arm Orig-int, | Thdrt ΤῊ] Gc. 
Damasc]: for τὴν, εἰς A ἃ 32 [47] 114-24 Syr, ad justitiam vulg D*-lat ἃ 


Orig-int, ] Ambrst Pelag Aug. 


12. om τοις ovr ex mepitouns (homeot) N1(ins X-corr!). 
rec ins τῇ bef ακροβυστια, with D3KL{ P] rel 


tantur F : τυχουσι 1 m(m!, Treg). | 


om τὴν C?D! ἐξ (crm 
x-lat{ (tn 7.) 


[στοιλουσειν qui sec- 


Chr, { Euthal-ms] Thdrt ΤῊ] : om ABCD'FRalcfhlmn [47 Cyr-p] Procop, Damase.— 
τὴς mort. THs εν (τη) akpoB. DKL [ P(t. π. τοι5}} abe f(g) hk1ln ο 17 vulg(not am 
fuld harl') [Euthal-ms] Thdrt lat-ff: om πιστεως N1(ins X-corr!). 


13. om ἡ N}(ins X-corr!). 


ness was imputed in uncircumcision) during 
his uncircumcision. In literal historical 
matter of fact, Abraham received circum- 
cision as a seal of the covenant between 
God and him (Gen. xvii. 1—14). But this 
covenant was only a renewal of that very 
one, on the promise of which Abraham's 
faith was exercised, Gen. xv. 5, 6,—and 
each successive renewal of which was a fresh 
approval of that faith. The Apostle’s point 
is,—that the righteousness was reckoned, 
and the promise made, to Abraham, not 
in circumcision, but in uncircumeision. 

εἰς τὸ εἶναι... .7 In order that 
he might be (not ‘so that he is;’ see 
Gal. iii. 7) the father of all in uncircum- 
cision (διά, see reff.,—‘ conditionis’) that 
believe. Abraham is the Sather of the 
faithful. But the triumph and recoguition 
of that faith whereby he was constituted 
so, was not during his circumcision, but 
during his uncircumcision :—therefore the 
faithful, his descendants, must not be 
confined to the circumeised, but must take 
in the uncircumcised also. On πατέρα 
in this sense, Tholuck compares the ex- 
pression Gen. iv. 20; 1 Mace. ii. 54 (Φινεὲς 
ὁ πατὴρ ἡμῶν ἐν τῷ ζηλῶσαι (ζῆλον), and 
Maimonides, ‘ Moses is the father of all 
the prophets who succeeded him.’ See 
also our Lord’s saying, John viii. 37, 39. 
The Rabbinical book Michlal Jophi on 
Mal. ii, (Thol.) has a sentiment remarkably 
coincident with that in our text: “ Abraham 
is the father of all those who follow his 
faith.” εἰς TO Aoy. «.7.A.] (is in fact 
parenthetical, whether brackets are used 
or not; for otherwise the construction 
from the former to the Jatter πατέρα 
would not proceed) in erder that the 
righteousness (which Abraham’s faith was 
reckoned as being,—the righteousness of 


God, then hidden though imputed, but 
now revealed in Jesus Christ) might be 
imputed to them also. 12. καὶ (εἰς 
τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν) πατέρα περιτομῆς ... .] 
And (that he might be) father of the 
circumcision (the circumcised) to those 
(dat. commodi ‘ for those,’ ‘in the case of 
those’) who are not only (physically) of 
the circumcision, but also who walk (the 
inversion of the article appears to be in 
order to bring out more markedly τοῖς ἐκ 
περιτ. and τοῖς στοιχ. »— who are not only 
vi ἐκ mepit., but also of στοιχοῦντες ... .) 
in the footsteps (reff.) of the faith of our 
father (speaking here as a Jew) Abraham 
(which he had) while he was in uncircum- 
cision. (The art. would make it ‘ during 
his uncircumcision,—but the sense is 
better without it, the word being general- 
ized.) 13—17.] Not through the 
LAW, but through THE RIGHTEOUSNESS 
OF FAITH, was THE INHERITANCE OF THE 
WORLD promised to Abraham: so that 
not only they who are of the law, but they 
who follow Abraham's faith aie HEIRS OF 
THIS PROMISE. 13.] γάρ, strictly for. 
The argumentation is an expansion of 
πατέρα πάντ. τῶν πιστευόντων above. If 
these believers are Abraham’s seed, then 
his promised inheritance is ἐλθὲ). 

διὰ νόμου | not, ‘under the law,’—uor, ‘ by 
works of the law * —nor, ‘by the righteous- 
ness of the law: but, through the law, 
so that the law should be the ground, or 
efficient cause, or medium, of the promise. 
None of these it was, as matter of histori- 
cal fact. For not through the law was 
the promise (made) to Abraham, or (# in 
negative sentences answers to καί in affirm., 
see Matt. v. 17) to his seed, viz. that he 
should be heir of the world, but by the 
righteousness of faith. ‘This specifica- 


12—16. 


>) 
ματι αὐτοῦ, ὃ 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


τὸ ἱκληρονόμον αὐτὸν εἷναι κόσμου 
ΡῚ 


351 


2 A ᾿ 
ἀλλὰ ἢ ΤΟ w. inf., 
1 Thess. iii. 


ES \ BS , , 14: 2 x © b? t i / 3 
la OLKALOTUVNS πίστεως, ** εἰ γὰρ OL > EK νόμου * KANPOVO= ; > nie 5.7, 


Γ ΄ / 
μοι, Ἰ κεκένωται ἡ πίστις Kal * κατήργηται ἡ ἐπαγγελία. 


15 «ς \ , ] 
ὁ γὰρ νόμος 
“ IO \ n / 
νόμος, οὐδὲ " παράβασις. 
k ch, iii. 3 reff. 


James i. 3 al. 
Wisd. xiv. 31 only. 


xiv. 2. xv. 9 only.) 
8,13. 2 Cor. iv. 17. 
15 only. Ps. c.3. 
20, 30 al. 


[εἰναι bef αὑτὸν Καὶ n 17. | 


16 διὰ τοῦτο 5 ἐκ πίστεως, ἵνα 


n absol., ch. v. 14. 
w. gen.,ch. ti. 28. 2 Macc. xv. 10 only. 


Heb. i. 2. 
Viv 17. ΕΠ 20 
James ii. 5. 


>] A / ’ a = 
ὀργὴν ™ κατεργάζεται. οὗ δὲ οὐκ ἔστιν. Micah i. 15. 


= τ Οὐ iyi. 
ix. 15. 2Cor. 
ix. 3 (Phi 11. 
7) only. (Jer. 
m — ch. v. 3. Vii. 

1 Tim. ii. 14, Heb. ii. 2. ix. 
o = ch. iii. 


1 = ch. ii. 5, 8 reff. 
Gal. iii. 19. 


] rec ins tov bef κοσμου, with KL[P] 17 rel [ Euthal-ms ] 
Thdrt Thl @e: om ABCDFR ἃ [47 arm] Damase. 


for δια δικαιοσυνη, δικαιο- 


συνην F[-gr: om δια a2 6]. (διακαιοσυνης G!.) 


15. for ov, που [F |G! [arm]. 


rec (for δε) yap (see note), with DF KL[P ]&3 rel 


latt syrr Chr(ot: o vou. for o yap ν. above) (Ec [ Kuthal-ms Orig-int,] Ambrst Aug,: 
txt ABCN! syr-mg copt [arm Cyr-p,] Thdrt ΤῊ] [Damasce Orig-int,] Julian Ambr,. 


παραβασεις (ttacism) A ΕἾ -gr]}. 
16. aft morews ins τηἡσου D}(and 1401). 


tion of the promise has perplexed most of 
the Commentators. The actual promise, 
Gen. (xii. 2, 3) xiii. 14—17; xv.18; xvii. 
8, was the possession of the land of Ca- 
naan. But the Rabbis already had seen, 
and Paul, who had been brought up in their 
learning, held fast the truth,—that much 
more was intended in the words which 
accompany this promise, ‘In thee (or in thy 
seed) shall all families of the earth be 
blessed,’ than the mere possession of Ca- 
naan. They distinctly trace the gift of the 
world to Abraham to this promise, not to 
the foregoing. So Bemidbar Rabb. xiv. 
202. 3 (Wetst.),—‘ Hortus est mundus, 
quem Deus tradidit Abrahamo, cui dictum 
est, “et eris benedictio”’ (see other citations 
in Wetst.). The inheritance of the world 
then is not the possession of Canaan merely 
(so that κόσμου should = ys) either 
literally, or as a type of a better posses- 
sion,—but that ultimate lordship over the 
whole world which Abraham, as the father 
of the faithful in all peoples, and Christ, 
as the Seed of Promise, shall possess: the 
former figuratively indeed and only impli- 
citly,—the latter personally and actually. 
See ch. viii 17; Matt. v. 5; 2 Tim. ii. 
12; 1 Cor. xv. 24, Another difficulty, 
that this promise was made chronologically 
before the reckoning of his faith for right- 
eousness, is easily removed by remembering 
that the (indetinite) making of the promise 
is here treated of as the whole process of its 
assertion, during which Abraham’s faith 
was shewn, and the promise continually 
confirmed. αὐτόν includes his seed. 

14 | The supposition is now made which 
ver. 13 denied,—and its consequences 
shewn. For if they who are of the law 
(who belong to the law, see reff.: not, 
‘who keep the law,’ nor is δίκαιοι to be 
supplied) are inheritors (i. 6. inherit 
‘ejyus rei causa,’ by virtue of the law: 
they may be inheritors by the righteous- 


aft wa ins ἡ A 45. 80 arm. 


ness of faith, but not quoad their legal 
standing), faith is (thereby) made empty 
(robbed of its virtue and rendered use- 
less), and the promise is annulled (has 
no longer place). Howandwhyso? ‘The 
Apostle himself immediately gives the rea- 
son. 15.] For the law works (brings 
about, gives occasion to) wrath (which 
from its very nature, excludes promise, 
which is an act of grace,—and faith, which 
is an attribute of confidence) ;—but where 
(or, for where ; but I should regard yap 
as introduced to suit the idea of the second 
clause rendering a reason for the first) 
there is no law (lit. ‘where the law is 
not’), neither (is there) transgression. 
‘We should rather expect (says De W.) 
the affirmative clause, “ And where the law 


- is, there is transgression :”’ but the negative 


refers to the time before the Mosaic law, 
when there was no transgression and there- 
ferealsonowrath. Yes; but not because 
there was no transgression then; the pur- 
pose of the Apostle here is not to deny the 
existence of the law of God written in the 
heart (which itself brings in the knowledge 
of sin) before Moses, but to shew that no 
promise of inheritance can be by the law, 
because the property of the law is, the more 
it is promulgated, to reveal transgression 
more,—znot to unfold grace. So that com- 
paratively (see notes on ch. vii.) there was 
no transgression before the law of Moses ; 
and if we conceive a state in which the law 


‘whether written or unwritten should be 


altogether absent (as in the brute creation), 
there would be zo transgression whatever. 

But observe (see ch. v. 12—14) that this 
reasoning does not touch the doctrine of the 
original taint of our nature in Adam,—only 
referring to the discrimination of acts, 
words, and thoughts by the conscience iz 
the light of the law: for παράβασις 
is not xatural corruption, but an act of 
transgression ; nor does the Apostle here 


B52 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


IV. 


/ > Ν 3 
pver.d.ellirs, Ρ κατὰ χάριν, eis τὸ εἶναι ᾿ βεβαίαν τὴν " ἐπαγγελίαν 


Gal. ii. 9. ν. 
13. 


\ a , > a wn , , % 
παντὶ τῷ ' σπέρματι, OV τῳ " ἐκ τοῦ νόμου μόνον, ἀλλὰ 


ver. 11 reff. 

22 Cor. iT. \ Au2 , f? ΄ e 3 f \ ΄ 
Heb. ii. 2. Kal TW EK WLOTEWS Αβραάμ, OS ἐστιν “ TATHP παντων 
ri (ὀΥ τὰς ἢ δν 17 θὰ , τος ͵ aioe Tes 
7. 2 Pet. NUWV (κα ως YEeypaTrTal ᾿οτι πάαάτερα “πὸ ων εὔνων 
10, 19 only +. , , ͵ ensue x a 
10, Woonlyt; τ τέθεικά σε) * κατέναντι " οὗ ἐπίστευσεν θεοῦ, τοῦ * Cwo- 
only. a \ \ \ κα \ 

cActsitref. ποιοῦντος τοὺς νεκροὺς Καὶ * καλοῦντος τὰ μὴ ὄντα ὡς 

u ch. ii. 8 reff. 

γ GEN. xvii. 5. w=1Tim.ii.7. 2 Tim.i.11. Heb.i.2. 2 Pet.ii.6. Jer. i. 5. x = 2 Cor. 
ii. 17. xii. 19 (Mark xi. 2} L.{Mt. and Matt. xxvii. 24, v. 1.) xii. 41. xiii. 3) only. Exod. xxxii.11 A Ald. (Num. 
xxv. 4.) y attr., Luke i. 4. Winer, edn. 6, ¢ 24. 2. Ὁ. z John v. 21. ch. viii. 11. 1 Cor. 
xv.22al. 4 Kings v. 7. a see note, and Isa. xli. 4. xviii. 13, 4 Kings viii. 1 .2). τὰ μὴ ὄντα ἐκάλεσεν 


εἰς τὸ εἶναι, Philo de Creat. Princ. ᾧ 7, vol. ii. p. 367. 


aft vowov ins eorw D4. 


om povoy and και F(and lat) 91 D-lat : om καὶ fuld harl?. 


17. emorevoas F, credidisti vulg-mss(demid flor fuld tol, besides F-lat) D-lat Syr 


Ambrst Vig Pelag ; eredent eth: emorevoay D)-gr. 


deny the former, even in the imaginable 
total absence of the law of God. 16. | 
For this (viz. the following) reason it (the 
inheritance,—not the promise; the pro- 
mise was not strictly speaking ἐκ πίστεως : 
——-nor must we supply ¢hey, meaning the 
heirs, who although they might fairly be 
said to be ἐκ πίστεως (compare οἱ ἐκ νόμου 
above, and reff.) could hardly be without 
harshness described as being κατὰ χάριν) 
was by faith that it might be (strictly 
the purpose ;—not, ‘so that it was’) 
according to grace (free unmerited favour. 
As the law bringing the knowledge of 
guilt, works wrath,—so the promise, 
awakening faith, manifests God’s free 
grace,—the end for which it was given) ; 
in order that the promise might be sure 
(not, ‘so that the promise was sure :’ this 


was the result, but the Apostle states this: 


as the aim and end of the inheritance being 
by faith, —quoad the seed of Abraham,— 
that they all might be inheritors,—as the 
manifestation of God’s grace was the higher 
aim and end) to all the seed, not only to 
that (part of it) which is of the law (see 
ver. 14), but to that which is of the faith 
(walks in the steps of the faith, ver. 12) of 
Abraham (it is altogether wrong to make 
*ABpadu depend on σπέρματι expressed 
or understood, as (cum., Koppe, and 
Fritzsche). The part of the seed which 
is of the law here is of course confined to 
believing Jews; the seed being believers 
only. This has been sometimes lost sight 
of, and the whole argument of vv. 13—16 
treated as if it applied to the doctrine of 
justification by faith without the works of 
the law, a point already proved, and now 
presupposed,—the present argument being 
an historical and metaphysical one, pro- 
ceeding on the facts of Abraham’s history, 
and the natures respectively of the law and 
grace, to prove him to be the father of all 
believers, uncircumcised as well as cireum- 
cised, ὅς ἐστὶν πατὴρ πάντων ἡμῶν 


[θεω ΚΕ] 


By the last declaration, the paternity of 
Abraham, which is co-extensive with the 
inheritance, has been extended to all whe 
are of his faith ; here therefore it is reas- 
serted: ἡμῶν meaning τῶν πιστευόντων. 
17. καθὼς yéyp. | The words (ref.) are 
spoken of the numerous progeny of Abra- 
ham according to the flesh: but not with- 
out a reference to that covenant, according 
to the terms of which all nations were to 
be blessed in him. The Apostle may here 
cite it as comparing his natural paternity of 
many nations with his spiritual one of all 
believers: but it seems more probable that 
he regards the prophecy as directly an- 
nouncing a paternity far more extensive 
than mere physical fact substantiated. 
These words are parenthetical, being 
merely a confirmation by Scripture tes- 
timony of ὅς ἐστιν mar. πάντ. ἧμ.. with 
which (see below) the following words are 
immediately connected. κατέναντι 
οὗ ἐπίστευσεν θεοῦ | The meaning appears 
to be, ‘ Abraham was the father of us all, 
—though not physically, nor in actuality, 
seeing that we were not as yet,—yet in 
the sight and estimation of God,—in 
his relation with God, with whom no 
obstacles of nature or time have force.’ 
The resolution of the attraction 
must be κατέναντι θεοῦ, κατέναντι οὗ 
ἐπίστευσεν, as in ref. Luke, before 
God, in whose sight he believed. (Chry- 
sostom’s interpretation (and similarly 
Theodoret, al.),—domep 6 θεὸς οὐκ ἔστι 
μερικὸς θεός, ἀλλὰ πάντων πατήρ, οὕτω 
καὶ αὐτὸς. . . . τὸ γὰρ “κατέναντι᾽ ὁμοίως 
ἐστί,- ἀοοβ not fall in with the context, 
and is certainly a mistake.) 
τοῦ ζωοπ. τ. vexp.| Who quickens the 
dead,—a general description of God’s 
almighty creative power (see 1 Tim. vi. 
13), applied particularly to the matter 
in hand—the deadness of generative phy- 
sical power in Abraham himself, which was 
quickened by God (but νεκρούς is a wider 


ABCDF 
KL[P]X 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


17---19. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΊΟΥΣ. 


909 


, 
ὄντα" 18 ὃς "παρ᾽ ἐλπίδα " ἐπ᾽ © ἐλπίδι ἃ ἐπίστευσεν, © εἰς TO d= Acts xviii 


13. ch. i. 26. 


Acts ii. 26 


, SS , a a ars 
γενέσθαι αὐτὸν πατέρα πολλῶν ἐθνῶν κατὰ TO ‘ εἰρημένον Ἀπ 


σ Οὗ ” St , 19 \ ΩΣ / i a 

8 Οὕτως ἔσται τὸ ᾿ σπέρμα σου, 13 καὶ μὴ ™ ἀσθενήσας ‘TH 
/ > / fal “ 

πίστει, [οὐ] * κατενόησεν τὸ ἑαυτοῦ σῶμα [ἤδη] | veve- 


thing, Luke xxiv. 26 only. 
24. Isa. lvii. 1. 


18. ed. ελπιδὶ CIDIF. 


1 Col. iii. 5. 


e ver, 11 reff. 
h = 2 Cor. xi. 21. xiii. 9. ch. xiv. 2,21. 1 Macc. xi. 49. 
i Heb. xi. 12 onlyt. 
γενασθαι F(but not G). 
have been written twice, and the first erased.) 


(from Ps. xv. 
9). ch. viii. 
i or. 
ix. 10 al. L.P. 
Hos. ii. 18. 
d w. dat. of 
g Gen. xv. 5, 


f Acts xiii. 40 reff. 
i k = Heb. x. 


ich, xiy. 1 only. 


(in δὲ κατα seems to 
(for εἰρημ., Ὑεγραμμενον K Syr. |} 


at end add ws a aorepes Tov ovpavou και To αμμον της θαλασσης F vulg-sixt(with 

flor F-lat al) some lat-ff, simly 106-8 marg ΤῊ] [demid]; sicut stelle ceili har]! G-lat; 
sicut arena maris fuld mar, sicut arena que est in litore maris tol. 

19. ins ev bef ty more: D'F vulg-sixt(with [fuld!] F-lat) D'-lat G-lat [Orig-int 


(om,)] Julian. 


om ov (see notes) ABCR am fuld-corr Syr copt Chr,{and ms, | 


Damase Julian: ins DFKL[P] rel latt syr Chr,{-montf Chron,] ΤῊ] Gc Ambrst. 
om 737 BF [47] am(and demid harl) old-lat Syr eth Chr, Epiph, [Orig-int,]: 
ins ACDKL[P|® rel syr-w-ast [copt arm] Thdrt [Euthal-ms Chron, Damase ΤῊ] 


term than vevexpwuévov, the genus, of 
which that is a species). The peculiar ex- 
cellence of Abraham’s faith, that it over- 
leaped the obstacles of physical incapa- 
city, and nonentity, and believed implicitly 
God’s promise. Compare 2 Cor. i. 9. 

kal καλ. τὰ μὴ ὄντα ὡς ὄντα] Much diffi- 
culty has been found here: and principally 
owing to an idea that this clause must 
minutely correspond with the former, and 
furnish another instance of God’s creative 
Almightiness. Hence Commentators have 
given to καλεῖν the sense which it has in 
reff., ‘to summon into being, and have un- 
derstood ὡς ὄντα as if it were eis τὸ εἶναι. 
Thus, more or less, and with various 
attempts to escape from the violence done 
to the construction, Chrys., Grot., Elsn., 
Wolf, Fritzsche, Tholuck, Stuart, De 
Wette, al. I see however in this latter 
clause not a repetition or expansion of 
the former, but a new attribute of God’s 
omnipotence and eternity, on which Abra- 
ham’s faith was fixed, Who calleth 
(nameth, speaketh of) the things that are 
not, as being (as if they were). This He 
did in the present case with regard to the 
seedof Abraham, which did not as yet exist: 
—the two key-texts to this word and clause 
being, ἐν Ἰσαὰκ κληθήσεταί σοι σπέρμα 
ch. ix. 7 (see note there),—and Acts vii. 5, 
ἐπηγγείλατο δοῦναι αὐτῷ εἰς κατάσχεσιν 
αὐτὴν καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦ μετ᾽ αὐτόν, 
οὐκ ὄντος αὐτῷ τέκνου. These τέκνα, 
which were at present in the category of τὰ 
μὴ ὄντα, and the nations which should 
spring, physically or spiritually, from him, 
God ἐκάλει ὡς ὄντα, spoke of as having an 
existence, which word Abraham believed. 
And here, as in the other clause, the καλεῖν 
τὰ μὴ ὄντα ws ὄντα is not confined to the 
case in point, but is a general attribute of 
al] God’s words concerning things of time, 
past, present, and future, being to His Om- 

ie iF: 11 


nipotence and Omniscience, all one. His 
purposes, when formed, are accomplished, 
save in so far as that evolution of secondary 
causes and effects intervenes, which is also 
His purpose. This also Abraham appre- 
hended by his faith, which rested on God’s 
absolute power to do what He had promised 
(see below). 18—22.] .4 more detailed 
description of this (Abraham’s) faith, as 
reposed on God’s Omnipotence. 18.] 
Who against hope (where there was no- 
thing to hope) believed in (ἐπί, with dat. 
in its literal import signifying close ade 
herence, is accordingly used to connect an 
act with that to which it is immediately 
attached as its ground or accompaniment, 
Thus here, the hope existed as the neces- 
sary concomitant and in some sense the 
condition of the faith) hope, in order to 
his becoming the father of many nations 
(i. e. as a step in the process of his becom- 
ing, and one necessary to that process going 
forward. He would never have become, ἄς.» 
had he not believed. To render εἰς τὸ γεν. 
‘that he should become,’ and connect it 
with ἐπίστευσεν (Theophyl., Beza, all., De 
Wette) is against Paul’s usage, who never 
connects πιστεύω with a neut. mf.,—and 
not justified by Phil. i.23; 1 Thess. iii. 10. 
The mere consecutive sense, ‘so that he 
became,’ here, as every where, is a weaken- 
ing of the sense (see however note on 
ch. i. 20),—and besides, would introduce 
an objective clause in a passage which all 
refers subjectively to Abraham). 
οὕτως viz. as the stars of heaven: see l.c., 
—and compare Ps. exlvii. 4. 19.] The 
reading (with or without od?) must first be 
considered. Reading οὐ, the sense will be, 
And not being weak in faith, he paid 
no attention to, &c. Omitting ov, ‘And 
not being weak in (his) faith, he was well 
aware of, &c.—but did not,’ &e. Of these, 
the second agrees the better with εἰς de ὁ 


Aa 


904. 


m here only. 
Gen. xvil. 17 
only. 

n of time, here 
(Heb. ii. 6. 
iv. 4) only. 

o Acts viii. 16 


Ε m 
κρωμένον, 


reff. 

p 2 Cor. iv. 10 
only +. 

q Luke ii. 23 
(from Exod. 
xili. 2) only. 
Gen. xx. 18. , ἥ 
constr. {Acts 7} a 

αν, QUTOV μόνον OTL 

Soph. Ant. 
12. s Acts i. 4 reff. 


onl w Luke xvii. 18. John ix. 24. 


a ver. 


Cc}. (vulg (with fuld) join it with exarovr.) 


20. om de F eth. αλλα B 


ΠΡΟΣ PQMAIOTS 


72 = Acts x. 20 reff. 
of Paul, = τες Paul (Zph. vi. 10 814.) aie exc. Heb. xi. 34. Ps. li. 7 (9). 

γ. Acts xil. a Josh, vii. 19. 
j= a act., Heb. xii. 26 ΘΗ. pass., Gal. iii. 19. 2 Mace. iv, 


IV. 20—25. 


« / n Ὁ e s Ἁ \ p / 
EXATOVTAETNS "Tov “ὑπάρχων, καὶ τὴν P νέ- 
a. 4 7 τ “95- 90 ta? \ A s2 / 
Kpwow τῆς Iuntpas Lappas, 29 ‘eis δὲ τὴν " ἐπαγγελίαν 
τοῦ θεοῦ ov * διεκρίθη τῇ " ἀπιστίᾳ, ἀλλ᾽ 


V ἐνεδυναμώθη τῇ 


πίστει, ἡ δοὺς * δόξαν τῷ θεῷ, 2! καὶ * πληροφορηθεὶς ὅτι ὃ 

Y ἐπήγγελται δυνατός ἐστιν καὶ ποιῆσαι. 

8 > / > “ ἃ > ὃ ΄ 
ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ ὃ εἰς δικαιοσύνην. 


222810 [7 καὶ] 


23 οὐκ ἐγράφη δὲ δι 


ὃ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ, 3: ἀλλὰ καὶ δι’ ἡμᾶς, 


u ch. iii. 3 reff. v Acts ix. 22 
Judg. vi. 4 AB(not Ed-vat. F.) ἄς. 
x = ch. xiv. 5 reff. only. 


1 aor., James i. 12 al. z = (ch. i. 24) Phil. 


umapxet D}{-gr]. 


for eved., εδυναμωθη F [ evduy. τη]. 


21. om Ist καὶ (as unnecessary : but the repetitions of ka are characteristic) D4F 


latt [Ambrst ]}. 
22. om xa: BD'F Syr copt [arm] : 


ins ACD*°KL[P]X rel vulg syr Thdrt ΤῊΙ Ec 


{ Euthal-ms Chron, Damasc, Orig-int,] Ambrst Julian Sedul. 


23. μονον bef δι avrov DF latt. 


at end ins εἰς δικαιοσυνην D4 vulg(not am 


[{fuld]) Syr Chr Cyr[-p,] Thdrt(prefixing ἡ πιστις) ΤῊ] [Orig-int, ] Ambrst Sedul. 


τὴν ἐπ. ver. 20,—but the first very much 
better suits the context; the object being, 
to extol Abraham’s faith, not to intro- 
duce the new and somewhat vapid notice 
of his being well aware of those facts of 
which it may be assumed as a matter of 
course that he could not be ignorant. 
The Apostle does not want to prove that 
Abraham was in his sound senses when he 
believed the promise, but that he was so 
strong in faith as to be able to overleap all 
difficulties in its way. The erasure of ov 
seems to have been occasioned by the use 
of καί instead of οὐδέ before τὴν νέκρωσιν. 
And the following δέ, without being 
strongly adversative, falls well into its 
place—He took no account of, &c. but.... 

The rendering, ‘And he did not, 
being weak in faith, take account of, &c.’ 
(omitting οὐ, and making μή the ruling neg. 
particle of the clause), is ungrammatical : 
ov would be required. Abraham did 
indeed feel and express the difficulty (Gen. 
xvii. 17), but his faith overcame it, and he 
ceased to regard it. But most probably 
Paul here refers only to Gen. xv. 5, 6, 
where his belief was implicit and unques- 
tioning. éxatovt. | Abraham’s own 
expression in 1. ¢., where he also describes 
Sarah as being 90. His exact age was 99. 
Gen. xvii. 1, 24. 20.1 On δέ, see 
above. But with regard to (ref.) the 
promise of God he doubted not through 
unbelief—(De Wette thinks from the 
analogy of πιστεύειν εἴς ri,—that eis τ. 
ἐπ. is perhaps the immediate object of 
διακρίνεσθαι: α. ἃ. ‘did not disbelieve 
in the promise of God’), but was strong 
(lit. “ was strengthened,’ ‘shewed himself 
strong’) in faith (dat. of reference, ‘ with 


- 


regard to faith. τῇ am. and τῇ πίστ., 
because both are here strictly abstract, 

being set against one another as oppo- 
sites). δοὺς δόξ. τῷ θ.] viz. by re- 
cognizing His Almighty power (see reff., 

especially Luke). 21.) wAnp., see ch. 
xiv. 5, being fully persuaded. ἐπήγ- 
γελται is not passive (nor ὅ nom.), but 
middle, and ‘God’ the subject; that, 
what He has promised, He is able also 
to perform. 22. διό, on account of 
the nature of this faith, which the Apostle 
has now since ver. 18 been setting forth; — 
because it was a simple unconditional cre- 
dence of God and His promise. Ifwe read 
καί, it imports besides being thus great 
and admirable, it was reckoned to him for 
righteousness :---ἐλογίσθη, viz. τὸ πιστεῦ- 
σαι τῷ θεῷ. 
of that which is said of Abraham, to all 
believers on Christ. 23.] ἐγράφη. was 
written, not the more usual γέγραπται, ‘is 
written :? similarly in the parallel, 1 Cor. 
x. 11; and in our ch. xv. 4. The aorist 


asserts the design of God’s Spirit at the 


time of penning the words: the perfect 
may imply that, but more directly asserts 
the intent of our Scriptures as we now find 
them. Now it was not written for his 
sake alone (merely to bear testimony to 
him and his faith) that it was reckoned 
unto him,—but for our sake also (for our 
benefit, to bear testimony to us of the effi- 
cacy of faith like his. Observe that διά in 
the two clauses has not exactly the same 
sense,—‘ for his sake’ being = (1) to 
celebrate his faith,—and (2) for our sake 
= for our profit ; see on ver. 25), to whom 
it (i.e. τὸ πιστεύειν τῷ θεῷ, as ver. 22) 
shall be reckoned (for righteousness :— 


ABCDF 
KL[P]8 
abcdf 


See hk s 


mnol7 


[17] 


23—25.| Application 


Vie. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 355 


, / A 
οἷς μέλλει ὃ λογίζεσθαι, τοῖς ἢ πιστεύουσιν ὃ ἐπὶ τὸν brver-5ref. 


ς1 Cor. xv. 12 


Ἂν / > “ \ / ~ A 
°eyeipavta Ἰησοῦν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν “ ἐκ νεκρῶν, % ὃς eH 
, \ a , an / ra : i. 2 ; 
ἃ παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ “ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν Kai ἠγέρθη διὰ ἐξ Ὁ 
\ a Eph. ν. 25. 
τὴν 8 δικαίωσιν ἡμῶν. τὰ lil. i 
e ch. v. 15, ἄς 
h , 5. "3 ἢ : EON, ” Matt. vi. 14. 
V. 15} Δικαιωθέντες οὖν ὃ ἐκ πίστεως * εἰρήνην * ἔχωμεν Bai" 


Ps. xviii. 
_& ch. v.18 only$. Levit. xxiv. 22 only. 
k John xvi. 33. Acts ix. 31 only. 


12. Ezek. xviii. 26. 
h ch. iii. 20 reff. 


f = Acts x. 40 reff. 
i= ch. ii. 10 reff. 


24. [wearers F-gr(not G): μελλη P m!(? Ser). ] εγειροντα A. 
z 25. for δικαιωσιν, dixacoowny(sic) D*, δικαιοσυνην a 17. 73-7. 89}. 93 lectt-13-14 Cyr, 
hron,. 


Crap. V. 1. rec exouev, with B? F-gr [P] N-corr! rel Syr(Etheridge: see also 
Mehring p 457 ff) syr Did, Epiph, Cyr,[-p] Sedul: txt AB'(sic: see table) CDKLN! 
fh! m 17 latt(including F-lat) Syr copt [ath arm] Chr; Thdrt Damasc Thl Cc [Tit, 
Orig-int,; Ambrst] Pelag Oros Aug Cassiod. 


μέλλει Aoy. is a future, as ch. 111. 30; 
v. 19 (Thol.),—not, as Olsh. al., spoken as 
from the time and standing of Abraham), 
who believe on (this specifies the ἡμᾶς: 
and the belief is not a mere historical 
but a fiducial belief) Him who raised 
Jesus our Lord from the dead (the central 
fact in our redemption, as the procreation 
of the seed of promise was in the perform- 
ance of the promise to Abraham, see 
ch. i. 4; 1 Cor. xv. 14 ff.; and resembling 
it in the ζωοποιῆσαι τοὺς vexgous). 

24.] ἐκ νεκρῶν is almost (see Col. ii. 12; 
1 Thess. i. 10) always anarthrous, as in- 
deed νεκροί sometimes is (for ‘ the dead’) 
in classic writers, e.g. Thucyd. iv. 14; v. 
10, end: and see Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 19.1. 
The omission may in this phrase be ac- 
counted for by the preposition (Middleton, 
ch. vi.1): but I suspect Winer is right in 
looking for the cause of the absence of the 
article after prepositions rather in the 
usage of the particular substantive than in 
any idiom of general application. 

25.) Here we have another example of 
the alliterative use of the same preposition 
where the meanings are clearly different 
(see above, vv. 23, 24). Our Lord was 
delivered up (to death) for or on account 
of our sins (i. 6. because we had sinned) :— 
He was also raised up (from the dead) for 
or on account of our justification (i.e. not 
because we had been, but that we might 
be justified). This separate statement of 
the great object of the death and resurrec- 
tion of Christ must be rightly understood, 
and each member of it not unduly pressed 
to the exclusion of the other. The great 
complex event by which our justification 
(death unto sin and new birth unto right- 
eousness) has been made possible, may be 
stated in one word as the GLORIFICA- 
TION of Christ. But this glorification con- 
sisted of two main parts,—His Death, and 
His Resurrection. In the former of these, 


He was made a sacrifice for sin; in the 
latter, He elevated our humanity into the 
participation of that Resurrection-life, 
which is also, by union with Him, the 
life of every justified believer. So that, 
when taking the two apart, the Death of 
Christ is more properly placed in close 
reference to forgiveness of sins,—His 
Resurrection, to justification unto life 
everlasting. And thus the Apostle treats 
these two great events, here and in the 
succeeding chapters. But he does not 
view them respectively as the causes, 
exclusively of one another, of forgiveness 
and justification: e.g. (1) ch. v. 9, we 
are said to be justified by His blood, 
and 2 Cor. v. 21 God made Him sin for us, 
that we might become the righteousness of 
God in Him: and (2) 1 Cor. xv. 17, if 
Christ is not raised, we are yet in our sins. 
So that, though these great events have 
their separate propriety of reference to the 
negative and positive sides of our justifica- 
tion, the one of them cannot be treated 
separately and exclusively of the other, any 
more than can the negative side of our 
justification, the non-imputation of our 
sin, without the positive, the imputation 
of God’s righteousness. It will be 
seen from what I have said above that I 
cannot agree with Bp. Horsley’s view, 
that as our transgressions were the cavse 
of Jesus being delivered up, so our justi- 
fication must be the cause of His being 
raised again. Such a pressing of the 
same sense on διά is not necessary, when 
Paul’s manifold usages of the same pre- 
position are considered : and the regarding 
our justification (in the sense here) as a 
fact past, is inconsistent with the very 
next words, δικαιωθέντες ἐκ πίστεως, which 
shew that not the objective fact, but its 
subjective realization, is here meant.— 
In these words (of ver. 25) the Apostle 
introduces the great subject of chaps. v.— 


aaZz 


906 


1 = Acts ii. 
41. xxiv. 16. 
2 Cor. vii. 4. 
1 John iii. 21. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


V. 


] A a 0 Ν ὃ Ἁ cal f e a ᾽ A -“ 

πρὸς τὸν θεὸν διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ, 
᾽ Ka \ \ 

2 δ οὗ καὶ THY ™rposaywyny ἐσχήκαμεν εἰς THY ™ χάριν 


14: / 2 φ « / \ ’ fal 
mints, ταύτην ἐν ἧ ° ἑστήκαμεν, Kal P καυχώμεθα ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι τῆς 


iii. 12 onl 
(in both places, w. art. +. 
xv. 1. 2 Cor. i. 24. 


σι Ξϑ  ν 17. 20, 21. ch. vi. 1 al. fr. 
p ch. ii. 17 reff. νυ. ἐπί and dat. here only. Ps, xlviii. 6. 


o = John viii. 44. 1 Cor, 


2. rec aft ecxnkauey ins τη more (marginal gloss), with CKL{P |X? rel vulg syr 
copt wth-pl [arm] Chr, Thdrt [Cyr-p, Euthal-ms Damase Orig-int,] lat-ff: ἐν τη 
more: A X-corr!(but ev erased) 98. 124 fuld Syr Tit, Chr,: om BDF old-lat zth-rom 


[ Orig-int, ]. 


viii,—DEATH, as connected ugth SIN, 
—and LIFE, as connected with RIGHT- 
EOUSNESS. The various ramifications 
of this subject see in the headings below. 

Cuap. V. 1—11.] The blessed conse- 
\ quences of justification by faith. 1: 
It is impossible to resist the strong manu- 
. script authority for the reading ἔχωμεν in 
this verse. For indeed this may well be 
cited as the crucial instance of overpower- 
ing diplomatic authority compelling us to 
adopt a reading against which our subjec- 
tive feelings rebel. Every internal con- 
sideration tends toimpugnit. If admitted, 
the sentence is hortatory. ‘ Being then 
justified by faith, \et us have peace with 
God. (This is the only admissible sense 
of the first person subjunctive in an af- 
firmative sentence like the present. The 
usage is an elliptical one: ἴωμεν, ‘that we 
go, i.e. ‘it is time, or in an address, 
‘ permit, &c. that we go.’ 
ἔλθωμεν ἀνὰ ἄστυ : 1]. x. 450, wp’, ἅτιν᾽ 
ἔργα τέτυκται. See other examples in 
Kihner, Gramm. ὃ 463. The delibera- 
tive sense, attempted to be given by Dr. 
Tregelles (see Kitto’s Journal of Bibl. 
Lit. No. xiv. p. 465 ff.) can only have 
place in an interrogative or dubitative 
clause, and every example given by Mr. 
Green, whom he cites for his supposed 
sense, as well as by Kiihner (δ 464), is of 
this kind. Besides, to call the sense ‘ we 
ought to have,’ deliberative, seems a mis- 
nomer.) But how can man be exhorted 
to have peace with God? To be recon- 
ciled to God, he may, 2 Cor. v. 20: but 
of this there is no mention here, and 
having (been allowed to believe in and 
enjoy) peace with God, depends on, not 
our reconciliation to Him, not any thing 
subjective in ourselves, but the objective 
fact of His reconciliation to us. If, as 
some say, ἔχωμεν = κατέχωμεν, Heb. x. 
23, the article would be required before 
εἰρήνην, and (perhaps) before πρὸς or διά, 
Besides which there are two objections in 
the form of the sentence to this reading: 
(1) ἔχ. is coupled by xa) (δι᾽ οὗ καί) to 
ἐσχήκαμεν, and this connexion necessitates, 
in my view, that the first verb should assert 
a_fact, as the second undoubtedly does, 
With the former verbinthe subjunctive we 


for χαριν, χαραν A d!: xapvr(sic) m. 


Thus Od. x. 77,. 


for ex, ep D!F. 


aes, hardly have expected the καί where 
it is.{ (2) If ἔχωμεν be hortatory, καυχώ- 
μεθα, in verse 2, must be so likewise: (for 
if we were exhorted to the lesser degree 
of confidence, εἰρήνην ἔχειν, such exhorta- 
tion can hardly be founded on the existence 
already of the greater degree, καυχᾶσθαι 
k.T.A.) which, both as to sense and con- 
struction, is very improbable. I believe 
(but see below) an account of the reading 
may be sought, as in 1 Cor. xv. 49, in a 
tendency of those who transcribed some of 
our Mss. to give such assertions a hor/a- 
tory, or, where interrogative, a deliberative 
form: thus we have σωθησώμεθα in some 
Mss., ver. 10,—(jowuer, ch. vi. 2,---πισ- 
τεύωμεν Or πιστεύσωμεν, ANd συνζήσωμεν, 
ch. vi. 8, -ο-ὑπακούσατε, ch. vi. 17,—7pos- 
εὐξωμαι (bis), 1 Cor. xiv. 16,---πείθωμεν, 
2 Cor. v. 11,--- πιστεύωμεν, John iv. 42,— 
συνζήσωμεν and συμβασιλεύσωμεν, 2 Tim. 
ἢ. 11, 12:—or perhaps the whole ground 
of the account to be given of the w is 
better shifted to a more general habit of 
the Mss. (even the greatest and best, see 
instances in prolegg. to Vol. I. ch. vi. § i. 
36, 37) to confound o and @: so that in 
very many cases, Such variation can hardly 
be called a different reading at all. 

The whole passage is declaratory of the 
consequences flowing from justification 
by faith, and does not exhort, but assert. 
Nor, would it seem, does the place for 
exhortation arrive, till these consequences 
have been in the fullest and freest manner 
set forth,—indeed so fully and freely, that 
the objection arising from their supposed 
abuse has first to be answered. Being 
therefore justified (‘having been justified? 
—it is an act past on the Christian, 
not like sanctification, an abiding and 
increasing work) by (as the ground) faith, 
let us (believers in Christ: I render the 
existing text) have peace (‘reconcilement ;” 
the opposite of ὀργή, see ver. 9) with 
(‘in regard of,’ see reff.) God through 
(by means of) our Lord Jesus Christ. 
With regard to the nature of this peace 
(= state of reconciliation, ‘no more 
condemnation,’ as ch. viii. 1) see above, 
on the reading ἔχωμεν. 2.] Through 
whom we have also (so διὸ [καί], ch. i. 
24; iv. 22, where καί, if read, serves to 


ABCDF 
ΚΙΓΡΊΝ 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7. 


[47] 


{τ 


9 δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ. 


᾿ κατεργάξεται, 47 de * 
ἐλπίδα: δ᾽ ἡ δὲ ἐλπὶς οὐ 


ΠΡΟΣ ῬΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 


901 


3T oy μόνον δέ, τ᾿ ἀλλὰ Kal P nao LEVOU a. ch.ii.7 
Lal a“ reff. 
Péy ταῖς "θλίψεσιν, εἰδότες ὅτι ἡ * με da 


ae Vili. 23. 
ὑπομονὴν oer vili. 19 


idea i : δοκυμήν, ἡ δὲ Y δοκιμὴ εξ μεῖς xiii 
" καταισχύνει, ὅτι ἡ 


Acts vii. 
t0, 1) al. 
2 Kings xxii. 
Nah. i. 7, 


ΣΧ ἀγάπη τοῦ 


θεοῦ " ἐκκέχυται ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν “διὰ * πνεύματος ton wiaaie 


ἁγίου τοῦ δοθέντος ἡμῖν' 


2 Cor. vii. 14 al. 
z Acts xi. 25 reff. 


xxviii. 16). 
Joel ii. 28) al. 


3. aft ov wovoy δὲ ins τουτο D}{ -gr]. 


u ch. iv. 15 reff. 


6 εἴ γε χριστὸς ὄντων ἡμῶν Vhere bis. 


9. viii. 2. ix. 13. xiii. 3, Phil. ii. 22 only +. Ps. Ixvii. 31 Symm. 
x = ch, viii. 39. 


2 Cor. ii. 
w ch. ix. 33 & x. 11 (from Isa. 


2 Cor, xiii. 13. y = Acts ii. 17 (from 


rec καυχωμεθα (mechanical repetition 


Srom preceding ver), with ADFK L(-v-) ΓΡΊΝ rel [vulg copt eth arm spec] Tit, Chr 


Thdrt ΤῊ] Me [ Orig-int, ] Cypr,: 
δ. for nuwy, υμων δ! 


txt BC Orig 


ὦ [Ephr, | Tert,. 


6. rec (for εἰ ye) ert yap, with ACD'K[P]X rel [syr arm] Epiph, Chr, Thdrt 


Damasc [ Orig-int, | : 
yap ετι] fuld! Isid, Aug, : εἰ δε 1, Syr: 
shew the coherence and likelihood of that 
which is asserted,—answering almost to 
our ‘as might be expected’) had our 
access (the persons spoken of having come 
to the Father by Christ,—see Eph. ii. 18, 
—the access is treated of asa thing past. 
τῇ πίστει and ἐν TH πίστει appear to have 
been glosses, explanatory of the method 
_ of access. The access would normally 
take place in baptism) into this grace 
(namely, the grace of justification, appre- 
hended and held fast subjectively (from 
what follows) ; not, τὸ πάντων ἐπιτυχεῖν 
τῶν διὰ βαπτίσματος ἀγαθῶν (Chrys. al.), 
which is inconsistent with ἐν 7 ἑστήκ. :: 
not, ‘the Gospel’ (Fritz.), for the same 
reason ; not, ‘ hope of blessedness’ (Beza), 
for that follows : least of all ‘ the grace of 
the apostolic calling’ (Semler), which is 
quite beside the purpose) wherein we 
stand (see parallels in reff. 1 and 2 Cor.; 
i.e. abide accepted and acquitted with 
God ; see also 1 Cor. x, 12, and ch. xi. 20); 
and (couple to εἰρήν. ἔχωμεν, not to ἐν n 
ἑστήκ.) glory in the hope (xauxdouat is 
found with ἐπί, ἐν, περί, ὑπέρ. and (Thol.) 
with an acc. of the object. In Heb. iii. 6 
we have τὸ καύχημα τῆς ἐλπίδος) of the 
glory of God (of sharing God’s glory by 
being with Christ in His kingdom, John 
xvii. 24, see reff.). 3.] And not only 
so (not only must we triumph in hope, 
which has regard to the future), but glory- 
ing in (not amidst ; the ϑλ. is the ground 
of triumph) [our] tribulations, knowing 
(because we know) that tribulation works 
endurance (supposing, i.e. we remain firm 
under it), and endurance, approval (of, 
our faith and trust, 2 Cor, ii. 9; ix. 15 1] 
not, “proof” (δοκιμασία), as Grot.; nor ‘e 
perience,’ as KE. V.,—‘ δοκιμή est qualit 
ejus, qui est Bdicysos.” Bengel,—the result 
of proof), and approval (fresh) hope; and 
hope (but for αὕτη 7 ἐλπ. as Olsh.) shames 
(us) not (by disappointing us; ‘ mocks us 


evs Tt yap D?F: ut quid enim latt Iren-int, Faustin: εἰ yap h [: εἰ 
txt B. 


not’); because God’s love (not “ the love 


of God, i.e. man’s love for God,—as 
Theodoret, and even Aug., misled by the 
Latin; see reff., and compare the explicit 
τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ἀγάπην eis ἡμᾶς, Which answers 
to this in ver. 8) is (has been) poured out 
(Ἢ effusa,’ not ‘diffusa’ (Vulg.), which 
latter word perhaps misled Aug., owing to 
whose mistake the true interpret: ition was 
lost for some centuries, although held by 
Orig., Chrys., and Ambrose. See Trench 
on St. Augustine, ch. v. Ὁ. 89 :—i. e. ‘ richly 
imparted ’) in our hearts (ἐν may be taken 
pregnantly, ἐκκέχ. eis καὶ μένει ἐν,---ΟΥ 
better, denotes the locality where the out- 
pouring takes place,—the heart being the 
seat of our love, and of appreciation and 
sympathy with God’s love) by means of 
the Holy Spirit (who is the Outpourer, 
John xvi. 14; 1 Cor. ii. 9, 10) which was 
given to us (Olsh. rightly refers the aorist 
part. to the Pentecostal effusion of the 
Holy Spirit). ‘ Prima hee est in hae 
tractatione Spiritus Sancti mentio. Nimi- 
rum ad hune usque terminum quum per- 
ductus est homo, operationem Sp. Sancti 
notanter denique sentit.’ ᾿ Bengel. 

6.] The text here is in some confusion,— 
see var. readd. The whole may perhaps 
have arisen from an ecclesiastical portion 
having begun χριστὸς ὄντων ἡμῶν ἄσθε- 
νῶν ἔτι... When this found its way 
into the text, ἔτι was repeated. This of- 
fended the transcribers: but the first ἔτι 
could not be erased, because yap followed ; 
it may then have been conjecturally 
emended to εἰ (and γάρ to γέ as in B, or 
δέ as in L), or εἰς ri,—some retaining ἔ ἔτε 
in both places. The place of ἔτι is often, 
in the case of absolutes, at the beginning 
of a sentence, with the subject of the sen- 
ence between it and the word or words to 
which it applies ; so ἔτι αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος, 
Matt. xii. 46,---ἔτι δὲ αὐτοῦ μακρὰν ἄπέ- 
χοντος, Luke xy. 20, &c, On reconsidera- 


908 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 
a—icorix. ἡ ἀσθενῶν ἔτι "ἢ κατὰ καιρὸν “ὑπὲρ 4 

22. see 1 Cor. 7 e , Ἢ ς “ \ , \ , a 
iv.10. Prov. 7 © μόλις yap “ ὑπὲρ δικαίου Tis ἀποθανεῖται. 
xxii. 22. Ps. 


evi. 12. 
ὃ = here only. 
Num. xxiii. 
23. (John v. 
4.) see Num. 
ix. 13. 
ς = John vi. 51. 
x. 15. xi. 51, 
52. Luke 
xxii. 19 al. fr. 
d = ch. iv. 5 reff. 
15 only +. Wisd. xiii. 6. xiv. 19 only. 

ich. iii. 7 reff. k Paul (here, &c., four times. 
Matt. vi. 30. Mark x. 48 |i L. see Heb. xii. 9, 25. 
if, wv, ἄς 


9k 


e Acts xiv. 18, xxvii. 7, 8, 16. 


τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ‘raya τὶς καὶ ὃ τολμᾷ ἀποθανεῖν" ὃ ἃ συν- 


᾿.. 


“ὑπὲρ γὰρ 


a ΄ a“ \ \ ¢ A » , 
τωλῶν ὄντων ἡμῶν χριστὸς © ὑπὲῤ ἡμῶν ἀπέθανεν. 
aA lal / a “ (/ 
πολλῷ οὖν ὃ μᾶλλον ! δικαιωθέντες νῦν ' ἐν τῷ αἵματι 


1 Pet. iv. 18 (from Prov. xi. 31) only. f Philem. 
δ: 1Cor. vi. 1 reff. h ch. iii. 5 reff. 

1 Cor. xii. 32. 2 Cor. iii. 9,11. Phil. i. 23. ii. 12) only, exc. 
1 Acts xiii. 39. 1 Cor. iv. 4. vi. 11. Gal. ii. 17. iii, 


rec (aft ac@evwv) om eri, with D3KL[P] rel [Orig-int,]: ins ABCD'FN latt Damase 


Iren-int [Orig-int, }. 
7. μογις N1(txt N-corr!) [Orig, ]. 


om 2nd yap L 2. 32. 62. lect-18 : δε 238. 


8. rec aft nuas ins o θεος (supplementary insertn, as is shewn by the variations in 
its position), with ACK[ P |X rel copt (Orig, Cyr, Euthal-ms Damase] Chr, Ge: bef 
eis ἡμας, DFL latt syr Dial, Chr-ms, Thdrt ΤῺ] Iren-int, [Orig-int,] Aug: [aft] de 


arm: transp freely Syr [eth]: om B. 


om et: 109 Dial,: for ert, εἰ Syr Chr, : εἰ 


er: D®>(and lat!) F tol [spec Orig-int, | Cypr, Hil, Aug, Pelag Ambrs* 


μων bef οντων L Chry. 


9. om ovy D'F fuld! [demid spec] copt arm Dial, Iren-int, [Orig-int, Hil, Ambrst] 


Cypr, 


tion, however, seeing that if we follow the 
most ancient MSS., we must either repeat 
ἔτι, which seems very unlikely to have been 
originally written, or adopt the reading 
of B, I have taken the latter alternative. 
If, that is (on et ye, see note, 2 Cor. v. 3, 
and Eph. iii. 2), Christ when we were 
yet weak (‘ powerless for good ;’—or even 
stronger than that :—there seems in this 
verse to be a tacit reference to Ezek. xvi. 
See especially vv. 7, 8 of that chap. in the 
LXX,—ovd δὲ ἦσθα γυμνὴ καὶ ἀσχημονοῦσα 
καὶ διῆλθον διὰ σοῦ καὶ ἴδον σε, καὶ ἰδοὺ 
καιρός gov.. 
μου ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ ἐκάλυψα τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην 
σου, kal ὥμοσά σοι καὶ εἰτῆλθον ἐν δια- 
θήκῃ μετὰ σοῦ, λέγει κύριος), in due season 
(i.e. at the appointed time; compare reff. 
and Gal. iv. 4, and καιρός in the quotation 
above) Christ died for (‘on behalf of, see 
reff.) ungodly men (not ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, because 
the Apostle wishes to bring out fully by 
this strong antithesis, which he enlarges 
on in the next verses, the greatness of the 
divine Love to man). 1.) The great- 
ness of this Love, of Christ’s death on 
behalf of the impious, is brought out by 
shewing that there is none such among 
men, nay that such a self-sacrifice,—not 
unexampled where a good man, one loving 
his fellow-men and loved by them, is to be 
rescued,—is hardly found to occur on 
behalf of the pious and just. For hardly 
will any one die on behalf of a just man 
(masc.,—not neuter, ‘for justice’ or ‘righte- 
ousness sake,’ as Jer., Erasm., Luth., al. : 
for the matter in hand is Christ’s death on 
behalf of persons)—for (this second ‘for’ 
is exceptive, and answers to ‘but I do not 
press this without exception,’ understood) 


/ \ / / » 
. καὶ διεπέτασα τὰς πτέρυγάς 


aft δικαιωθεντες ins ev (but erased) δξ!. 


on behalf of the good man (the art. as 


> a ? / 
ἀσεβῶν ἀπέθανεν. apcpr 
ΚΙΙΓΡῚΝ 
abcdt 


ghkl 


mnol7 
, 5 \ \ ς ὌΝ “Ὁ > ror, “ » ice [47] 
ἱστηῆσιν OE THV EAVTOV AYATTHV ELS NMAS, OTL ETL apap- 


pointing him out generally, as in the ex- / 


pression, ‘ the fool,’ ‘ the wise man,’ ‘ the 
righteous,’ ‘the wicked’) perhaps (τάχα 
opens a possibility which μόλις eloses) one 
doth even dare (i.e. is evén found to 
venture; the pres. implies habituality—it 
may occur here and there) to die. ee 
The distinction here made between! δίκαιος 
and| ἀγαθός, is also found in Cicero, de Of. 
111, 15, ‘Si vir bonus is est qui prodest 
quibus potest, nocet nemini, recte justum 
virum, bonum non facile reperiemus.’ (But 
some edd. read ‘istum virum bonum.’) 
\ The interpretation which makes 
Sixatos and ἀγαθός refer to the same man, 
and the second clause = “1 do not say that 
such a thing may not sometimes occur,’ is 
very vapid, and loses sight of the antithesis 
between δίκαιος, and ἄδικος (= ἀσεβής = 
auapTwrds). 8.7 But (as distinguished 
from human examples) He (i.e. God. The 
omission of 6 θεός, which critical principles 
render necessary, is in keeping with the 
perfectly general way in which the contrast 
is put, merely with τίς, not ἀνθρώπων Tis. 
The subject is supplied from ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ 
θεοῦ ver. 5) gives proof of (<‘ establishes’ 
(reff.) ;—not ‘commends’) His own love — 
(own, as distinguished from that of men in 
ver. 7) towards us, in that while we were 
yet (as opposed to νῦν in the next verse). 
sinners (= ἀσθενῶν = ἀσεβῶν [ ver. 6], and 
opposed to δίκαιος and ἀγαθός, ver.7 ) Christ 
dred for us. \' 9—11.] The Apostle fur- 
ther shews the blessed fruits of justifica- 
tion, viz. salvation, both from wrath, and 
with life. The argument proceeds from the 
beginning of the chapter: but the con- 
nexion, as so frequent with St. Raul, is 


7—1 2, 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


359 


a f a a , A 
αὐτοῦ ™ σωθησόμεθα δι᾽ αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῆς ™ ὀργῆς" 10 εἰ yap m=Matt.i.21. 


? Νὴ Ὁ ο , a a \ a ee a) 

ἐχθροὶ ὄντες κατηλλάγημεν τῷ θεῷ διὰ τοῦ θανάτου τοῦ 
le} la a ca) / , 

υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, * πολλῷ " μᾶλλον ° καταλλαγέντες © σωθησό- 

“Ὁ A > la 

μεθα Ῥὲν τῇ «ζωῇ αὐτοῦ" 11 τΤοὐ μόνον δέ, 

5 / 5 5 A lal \ la} / ς a ᾽ lal 

καυχώμενοι “ἐν τῷ θεῷ διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ 

“ ὃ 5 - A Ἀ { \ > ΄ 
χριστοῦ, δι᾿ οὗ νῦν τὴν ' καταλλαγὴν ἐλάβομεν. 

19 Διὰ τοῦτο ὥςπερ “du ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία " εἰ 

ἘΣ 


reff. q 
xi. 15. 2 Cor. v. 18, 19 only Ζ. 
v= WIsp. xiv. 14 (3). see Johni, 9, 


= 2Cor. iv. 10, 11, 12. 


10. A omits from τω θεω to τω θεω ver 11. 


σωθησωμεθα L 9}.] 


11. att ov μονον δε ins tovro D!F fuld! arm Ambrst. 
h m latt [(Syr) eth] arm ΤῺ] (Orig-int, Ambrst]: καυχωμεν F. 


immediately with the parenthetical sen- 
tences just preceding. Much more then 
(it He died for us when sinners, a fortiori 
will He save us now that we are righteous 
by virtue of that His death) having been 
now justified by His blood (see remarks 
on ch. iv. 25) we shall be saved by Him 
from the wrath (to come, or of which we 
know : force of the art.). 10.] The 
same is substantiated in another form: 
“we were enemies (see below) when He 
died and reconciled us: much more now 
that we have been reconciled, and He 
lives, shall we by His life be saved.’ For 
if, being enemies (ἐχθροί may either be 
active, as Col. i. 21, ‘ haters of God ;’ so 
ἐχθρά, ch. viii. 7; Eph. ii. 15: or passive, 
as ch. xi. 28,—‘ hated by God.’ But here 
the latter meaning alone can apply, for the 
Apostle is speaking of the Death of Christ 
and its effects as applied to all time, not 
merely to those believers who then lived: 
and those unborn at the death of Christ 
could not have been ἐχθροί in the active 
sense), We Were reconciled (καταλλάσσεσ- 
θαί τινι also may be taken of giving up 
anger against any one,—see ref. 1 Cor., 
and Jos. Antt. vi. 7.4, ob γὰρ ἑώρα τὸν θεὸν 
διαλλαττόμενον,-“-ΟΥ of being received into 
Javour by any one,—see 1 Kings xxix. 4, 
ἐν τίνι διαλλαγήσεται οὗτος τῷ κυρίῳ 
αὐτοῦ ; and Jos. Antt. ν. 2. 8, διαλυσά- 
μενος τὰς μέμψεις, καταλλάττεται πρὸς 
avThy,—the latter of which meanings, 
were received into favour with God, must 
for the reason above given be here adopted) 
to God by means of the death of His Son 
(this great fact is further explained and 
insisted on, in the rest of the chapter), 
much more, having been reconciled (but 
here comes in the assumption that the 
corresponding subjective part of reconcilia- 
tion has been accomplished, viz. justifica- 
tion by faith: compare 2 Cor. v. 19, 20, 
θεὸς ἣν ἐν χριστῷ κόσμον καταλλάσσων 


(Isa. ix. 5.) 2 Mace. v. 20 only. 


Aets ii. 40. 
Jer. xxxvii. 
(χχχ.,) 7. 

n Matt. iii. 7. 
ch. i, 18. iii. 


5. 
r GANA καὶ oC) here dis. 
1 Cor. vii. 11, 
2 Cor. v. 18, 
19, 20 only ζ. 
(Jer. xxx. 
[xlviii.] 39.) 
Macc. i. 5. 
vii. 33. viii. 
29 only. 
p = Acts xi. 14 
8 ch. il. 17 reff. t (=) ch. 
u = Acts xxiv, 2 reff. 


> 


r ver. 3. 


om Ist του F(but not 6). 


καυχωμεθα 1, Ὁ (c ἃ -o-) 
om χριστου Β. 


ἑαυτῷ... . δεόμεθα ὑπὲρ χριστοῦ, καταλ- 
λάγητε τῷ θεῷ. Both these, the objective 
reception into God’s favour by the death of 
Christ, and the subjective appropriation, 
by faith, of that reception, are included), 
we shall be saved by means of His Life 
(not here that which he now does on our 
behalf, but simply the fact of His Life, 
so much enlarged on in ch. vi.: and our 
sharing in it). 11.] A further step 
still—not only has the reconciled man con- 
fidence that he shall escape God’s wrath, 
but triumphant confidence,—joyful hope 
in God. But (aber) not only so, but 
(fondern) glorying in God (particip. not as 
the finite verb, but in every case either 
the consequence of an anacoluthon, or find- 
ing its justification in the construction : 
so here “not only shall we be saved,” but 
that in a triumphant manner and frame 
of mind. See Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 45. 6 [a]}) 
through our Lord Jesus Christ, through 
whom we have now (not in contrast with 
the future glory, ‘ even now,’ as Thol., for 
that would be more plainly expressed,—but 
as in ver. 9) received (our) reconciliation 
(to God [not as in Εἰ. V. “ the atonement,” 
at least in the common theological accept- 
ance of the term: for that is not here 
treated of, but our reconcilement to God ]). 
12—VIII. 39.] THE Power oF 
Gop (ch. i. 16) IS SET FORTH AS FREEING 
FROM THE DOMINION OF SIN AND DEATH, 
AND ISSUING IN SALVATION. 12—19.] 
The bringing in of RECONCILIATION and 
LIFE by Curist in its analogy to the 
bringing in of SIN and DEATH by ADAM. 
12.] ‘This verse is one of acknow- 
ledged difficulty. The two questions meet- 
ing us directly are (1) To what does διὰ 
τοῦτο refer? (2) ὥςπερ, ‘like as,’ may 
introduce the first member of a comparison, 
the second being to be discovered ; or may 
introduce the second, the first having to- 
be discovered. 1 shal: endeavour to answer 


900 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 


V. 


Ά Υ a \ Ν - ΄ , . ΄ 
acts wie, τὸν γ᾽ κόσμον Y εἰςῆλθεν, καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτιας oO θάνατος, 


xvii. 33. 
xxviii. 14. 
ch. xi. 26. 
1 Cor. xi. 28. 
xiv. 25. 

x 2 Cor. i. 16 


reff. y 2 Cor. v. 4. 


καὶ © οὕτως 5 εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους [ὁ θάνατος] * διῆλθεν 
i , ee 
Υ ἐφ᾽ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον. 


see Matt. xix. 9. Acts iii. 16. 


13 2 ἄχρι γὰρ νόμου ἁμαρτία ἣ' 


2 =ch.i. 18 al. 


12. εἰς τον κοσμον bef ἡ auapria DF latt(am fuld ἄς though not vulg-ed) Ambr,. 

rec aft ανθρωποὺυς ins 0 θανατος (marginal gloss specifying the subj of διηλθεν, 

as is shewn by the varr), with ABCKL[P]X rel vulg [(Syr) Orig,(int,) Kuthal-ms 

Damasc] Thl (ec [Ambrst] Augarig; aft διηλθεν arm Chr, Thdrt,: bef εἰς π. a. syr-w- 
ast: om DF [fuld zth Orig, ] Augsepe Ambr, Pac, Leo, Bede. 


both questions in connexion. (1) I con- 
ceive διὰ τοῦτο to refer to that blessed 
state of confidence and hope just described : 
‘on this account,’ here meaning, ‘que 
cum ita sint:’ ‘this state of things, thus 
brought about, will justify the following 
analogy.’ Thus we must take ὥςπερ, 
either (a) as beginning the comparison, 
and then supply, ‘so by Christ in His 
Resurrection came justification into the 
world, and by justification, lite;’ or (8) 
as concluding the comparison, and supply 
before it, ‘it was,’ or ‘Christ wrought.’ 
This latter method seems to me far the 
best. For none of the endeavours of Com- 
mentators to supply the second limb of the 
comparison from the following verses have 
succeeded: and we can hardly suppose 
such an ellipsis, when the next following 
comparison (ver. 16) is rather a weakening 
than a strengthening the analogy. We 
have example of this use of ὥςπερ, in 
Matt. xxv. 14, and of καθώς, Gal. iii. 6. 

Consequently (the method of God’s 
procedure in introducing life by righteous- 
ness resembled the introduction of death 
by sin: ‘it was’) like as by one man 
(the Apostle regards the man as involving 
generic succession and transmitting the 
corrupt seed of sin, not the woman: but 
when he speaks of the personal share 
which each had in the transgression, 1 Tim. 
ii. 14, he says, ‘Adam was not deceived, 
but the woman being deceived was in the 
transgression’) sin (as a POWER ruling 
over mankind, see ch. iii, 9, and ver. 21,— 
partly as a principle which exists in us 
all, and developes itself in our conduct, 
partly as a state in which we are involved ; 
but the idea here must not be confined 
(Calv.) to original sin, as it reaches much 
wider, to sin both original and actual: 
nor to the habit of sinning (as Olsh.): 
nor is it merely the prapensity to sin (as 
Rothe): nor is sin personified merely as 
in ch. vii. 8,11) entered into the world 
(not ‘esse ccepit,’ ‘primum commissa est,’ 
as Reiche, Fritz., and Meyer : but diteral- 
-ly,—‘ entered into,’ ‘gained access into,’ 
the moral world,—for sin involves moral 
‘responsibility. So Gal. 11]. 23, πρὸ τοῦ δὲ 
ἐθλεῖν τὴν πίστιν, ‘ before the faith came 


in’), and by means of sin (as the ap- 
pointed penalty tor sin, Gen. ii. 17 ; ili. 19) 
death (primarily, but not only, physical 
death: as ἁμαρτία, so θάνατος, is general, 
including the lesser in the greater, 1. e. 
spiritual and eternal death. See ch. vi. 
16, 21; vii. 10; viii. 6; 2 Cor. vii. 10), 
and thus (by this entering in of sin and 
death ; i.e. in fact, by this connexion of 
sin and death, as appears by ἐφ᾽ ᾧ πάντες 
ἥμαρτον) death (whether 6 θάν. be genuine 
or not, death is the subject of διῆλθεν) 
extended to all men (see reff. De W. 
well says that πάντ. ἄνθρ. differs from 
κόσμον, as the concrete part from the ab- 
stract whole, and διέρχ. from eisépxeobai, 
as the going from house to house differs 
from the entering a town. Obs., 
that although the subject of διῆλθεν is 
plainly only death, not stn and death, yet 
the spreading of sin over all men is taken 
for granted, partly in the οὕτως, partiy in 
the following clause), because (ἐφ᾽ ᾧ, lit. 
of close juxtaposition : and so ‘on ground 
of,’ ‘on condition that, which meaning, 
if rightly applied, suits the case in hand. 
Life depended on a certain condition, 
viz. obedience : Death on another, viz. dis- 
obedience. Mankind have disobeyed: the 
condition of Death’s entrance and diffusion 
has been fulfilled: Death extended to all 
men, as a consequence of the fact, that,— 
posito, that, = because, all have sinned. 

Orig., Aug., Beza, and Estius render it 
as Vulg., ‘in quo’ (Adam): Chrys., Theo- 
phyl., (Ee., Elsner, ‘ propter quem : Grot., 
‘per quem’) all sinned (see ch. 111. 23 :-— 
not ‘were sinful,’ or ‘were born in sin,’ 
as Calvin would restrict the meaning : δὴ, 
as above remarked, is here, throughout, 
both original and actual; in the seed, as 
planted in the nature by the sin of our 
forefather: and in the fruit, as developed 
by each conscious responsible individual in 
his own practice. So that Calvin’s argu- 
ment,—‘ hic non agi de actuali. peccato, 
colligere promptum est: quia si reatum 
quisque sibi arcesseret, quorsum conferret 
Paulus Adam cum Christo?’ does not 
apply, and the objection is answered by 
Paul himself, where he says, distinguishing 
between the παράπτωμα and the χάρισμα 


ABCDF 
KL[P]x 


abcd fs 


ghk 1 
mnol7 


[47] 


13, 14. 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 


361 


᾽ ’ e / δὲ οἰ 8 5 A \ ” f 
ἐν KOTLW, ἁμαρτία OE οὐκ ὃ ελλογεῖται μὴ ὄντος νομοῦ, «here only. 


14. ἀλλὰ ὃ ἐβασίλευσεν ὁ θάνατος ἀπὸ ᾿Αδὰμ 4 μέχρι 


~yav,Philem. 
18 only +. 
ΒΞΞ νυ, 17, 21. 
h. vi. 12. 


M Ἂ Ν c ᾽ \ \ \ ΄ , e 5 \ A c 
ωυσεως καὶ “ETL TOUS μὴ αμαρτησαντας © ETL TH ¢tukei. 33 


27. Gen. xxxvii. 8. 


e Lukei. 59. Ezraii.6l. Neh. vii. 63. 


xix. 14, 
ἃ of time, Matt. xi. 23. Acts x. 30. xx. 7. 1 Tim. vi. 14 41: Ps. civ. 19. 


13. cAAoyaro A N-corr!-marg[-ra:]: ελλογείτω f, ενελογειτο (imputabatur) δξϊ 
([eAoy.] 52. 108) vulg(but not am) G-lat syrr copt eth lat-ff: λελόγισται lect-19: 


ευλογειται 71-7. 
14. (αλλα, so BD.) 
[ Orig-int | Jer. 


below, vv. 15, 16, τὸ δὲ χάρισμα ἐκ πολ- 
λῶν παραπτωμάτων εἰς δικαίωμα. The 
παράπτωμα was not only that of one, the 
original cause of the entry of sin, but 
the often repeated sins of individual men: 
—nor, ‘suffered the punishment of sin,’ 
as Grot. and Chrys., θνητοὶ γεγόνασι). 
Observe how entirely this asser- 
tion of the Apostle contradicts the Pela- 
gian or individualistic view of men, that 
each is a separate creation from God, 
existing solely on his own exclusive re- 
sponsibility,—and affirms the Augustinian 
or traducian view, that all are evolved 
by God’s appointment from an original 
stock, and though individually responsible, 
are generically involved in the corruption 
and condemnation of their original. 
13. ] How, consistently with ch. iv. 15, could 
all men sin, before the law? This is now 
explained. For up to (the time of) the 
law (= ἀπὸ ᾿Αδ. μέχρι Μωυσ. ver. 14: 
not ‘during the time of the law,’ as Orig., 
Chrys.,—rod νόμου δοθέντος,.. .. ἕως ὁ 
νόμος ἦν,---ΤηὩροαογοῦ,----4} allowable ren- 
dering of the words, but manifestly incon- 
sistent with the sense ;—nor, ‘as far as 
there was law, there was sin,’ as Dr. Bur- 
ton,—which is both inadmissible from the 
μέχρι Μωυσέως following, and would not 
answer to the simple matter of fact, ἦν ἐν 
κόσμῳ) there was sin in the world (‘ men 
sinned,’ see Gen. vi. 5—13 ; committed ac- 
tual sin: not, men were accounted sinners 
because of Adam’s sin; the Apostle reminds 
us of the historical fact, that there was sin 
in the world during this period) : but sin is 
not reckoned (as transgression) where the 
law is not. ἐλλογεῖται has given rise 
to much dispute. Very many Commenta- 
tors (Aug., Ambr., Luth., Melance., Calv., 
Beza, Riickert, Tholuck, Stuart, al.) ex- 
plain it of consciousness of sin by the sin- 
ner himself, as in ch. vii. 7: but (1) as De 
’ Wette observes, this is not the natural sense 
of the word, which implies Two parties, one 
of whom sets down something to the ac- 
count of the other (ref.) : (2) this interpre- 
tation would bring in a new and irrelevant 
element,—for the Apostle is not speaking 
“an this chapter at all of subjective human 
consciousness, but throughout of objective 


for 2nd em, ev B, in similitudine (or -nem) latt Iren-int 


truths with regard to the divine dealings: 
and (3) it would be altogether inconsistent 
with the declarations of ch. ii. 15.— where 
in this sense the éAAoyiouds of sin by the 
νόμον μὴ ἔχοντες is distinctly asserted. 

Tam persuaded that the right sense of ἐλλ. 
is, reckoned, ‘set down as transgression, — 
‘put in formal account,’ by God. In the 
case of those who had not the written law, 
ἁμαρτία is not formally reckoned as παρά- 
βασις, set over against the command: but 
in a certain sense, as distinctly proved ch. 
ii. 9—16, it is reckoned and they are con- 
demned for it. Nor is there any inconsis- 
tency, as Tholuck complains, in this view. 
Other passages of Paul’s writings support 
and elucidate it. He states the object of 
the law to be, ch. vii. 18, ἵνα γένηται καθ᾽ 
ὑπερβολὴν ἁμαρτωλὺς ἡ ἁμαρτία διὰ τῆς 
ἐντολῆς. The revelation of the law exag- 
gerated, brought into prominent and for- 
mal manifestation, the sinfulness of sin, 
which was before culpable and punishable, 
but in a less degree. With this view also 
agree Acts xvii. 30; ch. ii. 12, ὅσοι ἀνόμως 
ἥμαρτον, ἀνόμως καὶ ἀπυλοῦνται,---ἃπα iii. 
25, in so far as they state an analogous case. 
The objection to taking οὐκ ἐλλογεῖται 
relatively, ‘is not fully reckoned, will 
hardly be urged by those who bear in mind 
the Apostle’s habit of constantly stating 
relative truths as positive, omitting the 
qualifying particles: see 6. g. ch. vil. 7, 
where with ἁμαρτίαν and with οὐκ ἤδειν 
both, we must supply qualifications (see 
notes there). 14. But (notwith- 
standing the last assertion that sin is not 
fully reckoned where the law is not) death 
reigned (was a power to which all suc- 
cumbed) from Adam to Moses (μέχρι 
Μωυσ. = ἄχρι νόμου above) : i. 6. although 
the full ἐλλογισμός of sin did not take 
place between Adam and Moses, the uni- 
versality of death is a proof that all sinned, 
—for death is the consequence of sin :—in 
confirmation of ver. 12. καὶ ἐπὶ τ. 
μὴ Gp.) even (notwithstanding the dif- 
ferent degrees of sin and guilt out of. and 
under, the law) over those who sinned 
not according to the similitude (reff.) 
of the TRANSGRESSION of Adam. (1) em 
τῷ ou. belongs to ἅμαρτ. and not to ἐβασί- 


362 ἯΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. VY. 
f c / A g / ᾽ , “ ’ h , 
rachvind Γὁμοιώματι τῆς παραβάσεως ᾿Αδάμ, ὅς ἐστιν ἢ τύπος ἈΒΟΌΥ 
i. 23 reff.). yee / a 3 ΄ \ ἊΣ ΚΙ, ΡΝ 
Ε ΡΟ ref trop | μέλλοντος, 15 ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ὡς τὸ * παράπτωμα, οὕτως αὖ ἤν 
δὲ. a ἢ > Ν A Ae ΕΝ ἢ ghki 
5 Matt. xi, KGL TO ἰχάρισμα' εἰ γὰρ τῷ τοῦ ἑνὸς * παραπτώματι mnoi7 
ΠΟΘ τον k ch. iv. 25 reff, 1= ch. vi. 23. xi. 29. [ 


15. om Ist και B [Syr copt]. 


λευσεν (asChrys., Theophyl., Bengel, Elsn., 
al.),—for that would bring in, in the words 
τοὺς μὴ ἁμαρτήσαντας, an absolute con- 
tradiction to ἐφ᾽ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον, by 
asserting that there were some who did 
not sin, (2) The emphasis lies on παρά- 
Baots, as distinguished from ἁμαρτία. 
Photius (in De W.),—6 μὲν (AS.) ὧρισ- 
μένην K. νομοθετηθεῖσαν ἐντολὴν παρέβη 
K. ἥμαρτεν οἱ δὲ ἡμάρτανον τὸν αὐτο- 
δίδακτον τῆς φύσεως λόγον ἐνυβρίζοντες. 
They all stnned : but had not, like Adam, 
transgressed a positive revealed command. 
(3) There is no reference here, as some 
Commentators (Beza, al.) have supposed, 
to the case of children and idiots,—nor 
(as Grot., Wetst.) to those who lived pious 
lives. ‘The aim is to prove, that the seed 
of sin planted in the race by the one man 
Adam, has sprung up and borne fruit in 
all, so as to bring them under death ;— 
death temporal, and spiritual ;—of these, 
some have sinned without the law, i. e. not 
as Adam did, and as those after Moses 
did: and though sin is not formally 
reckoned against them, death, the conse- 
quence of sin, reigned, as matter of his- 
torical fact, over them also. It is most im- 
portant to the clear understanding of this 
weighty passage to bear in mind, that the 
first member of the comparison, as far as 
it extends, is this: ‘ As by Adam’s trans- 
gression, of which we are by descent in- 
heritors, we have become (not by imputa- 
tion merely, but by propensity) s¢nners, and 
have thus incurred death, so &e.’ ..... 
(see below). ὅς ἐστιν τύπος τ. μέλλ.] 
who is ἃ figure (or type: not thus used by 
~LXX, see Umbreit’s note) of the future 
(Adam [the second Adam, viz. Christ ]). 
This clause is inserted on the first mention 
of the name Adam, the one man of whom he 
has been speaking, to recall the purpose for 
which he is treating of him,—as the figure 
(ref.) of Christ. τοῦ péAX., not ‘qui futu- 
rus erat,’ as Beza [and E. V.], Reiche; but 
spoken from the Apostle’s present standing, 
‘who is to come.’ The fulfilment of the 
type will then take place completely, when, 
as 1 Cor. xv. 22, ἐν τῷ χριστῷ πάντες ζωο- 
ποιηθήσονται. Still less, with Koppe, can ὅς 
be taken by attr. for 6, and τοῦ μέλλοντος 
be interpreted ‘ of that which is to come,’ 
viz. life and salvation: see 1 Cor. xv. 45. 


Many suppose these words ὅς ἐστ. TUm. , 


aft moAAw ins ovy A Syr. 


τ. u€AA. to be the apodosis of ver.12: but 
see there. 15—17.|] Though Adam 
and Christ correspond as opposites, yet 
there is ὦ remarkable difference, which 
makes the free gift of grace much more 
eminent than the transgression and its 
consequences, and enhances the certainty 
of its end being accomplished. But not 
(in all points) as the act of transgression 
(of Adam, as the cause inducing sin and 
death on his race), so also is the gift of 
grace (i. 6. justification: nota direct con- 
trast, as ὑπακοή in ver. 19: the Apostle 
has more in mind here the consequence of 
the παραπτ., and to that opposes the 
χάρισμα. De W.). 15. εἰ yap «.7.A. ] 
Distinction the first, in DEGREE :—and in 
the form of a hypothetical inference ‘a 
minori ad majus.’ For if by the trans- 
gression of the one (man) the many 
(have) died, much more did the grace of 
God, and the gift abound in (by means of) 
the grace of the one man Jesus Christ to- 
wards the many. (1) The first question 
regards πολλῷ μᾶλλον. Is it the ‘a for- 
tiori’ of logical inference, or is it to be 
joined with ἐπερίσσευσεν as quantitative, 
describing the degree of abounding? 
Chrys. (πολλῷ γὰρ τοῦτο εὐλογώτερον), 
Grot., Fritz., Thol., adopt the former, and 
provided only the same thing is said here 
as in ver. 17, the usage there would decide 
it to be so: for there it cannot be quanti- 
tative. But I believe that not to be so. 
Here, the question is of abounding, a mat- 
ter of degree, there, of reigning, a matter 
of fact. Here (ver. 16) the contrast is 
between the judgment, coming of one sin- 
ner, to condemnation, and the free gift, of 
(see note below) many offences, to justiti- 
cation. 
sense the better, and join πολλῴ μᾶλλον 
with ἐπερίσσευσεν, in the sense of much 
more abundant (rich in diffusion) was 
the gift, &c. (2) χάρις, not the grace 
working in men, here, but the grace 
which zs in, and flows from, God. (8) ἐν 
χάριτι TH Tod ...., not to be joined 
(Thol.) with ἣ δωρεά, as if it were ἡ ἐν 
χάρ. (which would be allowable), but with 
ἐπερίσσ. The grace of our Lord Jesus 
Christ (His self-offering love, see 2 Cor. 
vili. 9) is the medium by which the free gift 
is imparted to men. (4) The aorist ἐπερίσσ. 
should here be kept to its indefinite his- 


So that I think the quantitative | 


a 


15—17. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


363 


e \ » , A a , lal ~ β 
™ οἱ πολλοὶ ἀπέθανον, "πολλῷ " μᾶλλον ἡ χάρις τοὺ θεοῦ m =ver. 19 bis. 
ἐ ch. xii. ὃ 


Ν id 0 ὃ XS 2 ’ὔ’ A nw C.% > θ / 4 | a 

Kat ἢ WMpEea εν χάρίτι TH του ενος ἂν ρώπου ησου 
fal Ρ >’ m \ \ q b] / 

χρίστου ELS τους πολλοὺς εἐπερισσεῦύυσεν. 


1 Cor. x17; 
33. 
n vv. 9, 10 reff. 


16 \ , i 
Kab ουχ o Acts ii. 38 
reff. Wisd. 


- ὃ ? CoEN e ΄ Ὁ ὃ μ . ᾿ x xvi. 25. 
ως ὑ ενος αἀμαρτησαντος TO ὠρήημα' TO μεν yep pch. viii. 18. 


8 Ἂ t 2 xe ΣΟΥ͂ 5 \ δὲ 1 4 
κριμα ἐξ ἑνὸς “ets ᾿ κατάκριμα, τὸ de ' χάρισμα 
λλῶν ἢ reap Nels. ΓΕΘ 

πολλῶν “παραπτωμάτων “ εἰς LKALM La. 


tive. 
u=ch.i. 5. xvi. 26. 
iii. 9. vii. 3.) 


r James i. 17 only t. 
1 Pet. i. 22. 


om ev F-gr. 


te 2 Cor. i. 5. 
ΕΚ q ch. iii. 7 al. 
constr., Eph. 
17 Ἰ X i. 8. 2’Cor. 
εὖ yap ix. 8, but 
περ. transi- 


s see 1 Pet.iv.17. Rev. xx. 4. t ch. ii. 29 reff. 


v here bis. ch. viii. 1 only+. (-vetv, ch. ii. 1. -σις, 2 Cor. 
w = here only. see note and ch. i, 32 reff. 


16. for auaptnoaytos, ἁμαρτήματος D(and lat!) F [vulg-clem demid] fuld!(not am 


harl! al) Syr [eth Orig-int,(txt Orig,) Aug,(txtsepe): auaptntos(sic) δὲ}. 
at end add (wns D!(and lat!) fuld? eth. 


F-gr 45 lect-19, syr has it w-ast. 


torical sense, and not rendered as a per- 
fect, however true the fact expressed may 
be : both are treated of here as events, their 
time of happening and present reference 
not being regarded. 16.}| Distinction 
the second, in KIND. The former ditfer- 
ence was quantitative: this is modal. 
And not as (that which took place) by 
one that sinned, so is the gift. Itisa 
_question whether any thing, and what, is to 
be supplied before 5? ἑνὸς Guapr. Rothe, 
Meyer, aud Tholuck (and so Εἰ. V.), would 
supply nothing, and render, ‘And not as 
by one having sinned, so is the gift.2 But 
(De W.) this has against it, (1) that since 
the ydp following gives the reason for this 
sentence, this must contain implicitly all 
that that next expands in detail; which is 
not merely the distinction between spring- 
ing from ove man and out of many offences, 
but much more: and (2) that thus διά 
would = ἐκ or vice versa, whereas διά cha- 
racterizes the bringer in, and ἐκ the occa- 
sion. Others have supplied τὸ κρῖμα (Ben- 
gel, Kéllner): τὸ κατάκριμα (Theophyl., 
Reiche): 6 θάνατος eisjA@ev (Grot., Es- 
tius, Koppe) :—but inasmuch as it is pur- 
poseiy left indefinite, to be explained in the 
next verse, it is better to supply an inde- 
finite phrase which may be thus explained : 
e.g. TO γενόμενον, ‘that which took place 
by one, |or ‘(it was) through one, | Ke. 
τὸ μὲν yap «.7.A.] For the judg- 

ment (pronounced by God upon Adam) 
came of (was by occasion of) one (man 
having sinned,—supply ἁμαρτήσαντος : 
παραπτώματος would be hardly allowable, 
and would not help the sense, inasmuch 
as many simmers, as well as many sins, 
are implied in πολλ. παραπτ. below), unto 
condemnation (its result, in his own case 
and that of his posterity: supply, as in ver. 
18 is expressed, (ἐγένετο) εἰς πάντας ἂν- 
Opémovs); but the gift of grace was by 
occasion of many transgressions (where 
sin abounded, ver. 20, there grace much 
more abounded: the existence of the law 


‘om ‘yap 


being implied in παραπτ.) unto justifica- 
tion. The only difficulty here is the sense 
of δικαίωμα. ‘The ordinary meaning of 
the word is τὸ ἐπανόρθωμα τοῦ ἀδικήματος, 
‘the amendment of an evil deed: so Aris- 
totle, Eth. Nicom. v. 10, διαφέρει δὲ τὸ 
ἀδίκημα καὶ τὸ ἄδικον, καὶ τὸ δικαίωμα 
καὶ τὸ δίκαιον. ἄδικον μὲν γάρ ἐστι τῇ 
φύσει ἢ τάξει: τὸ αὐτὸ δὲ τοῦτο ὅταν 
πραχθῇ, ἀδίκημά ἐστι; πρὶν δὲ πραχθῆναι 
οὔπω, ἀλλ᾽ ἄδικον. ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ δικαίωμα" 
καλεῖται δὲ καὶ τὸ κοινὸν μᾶλλον δικαιο- 
πράγημα, δικαίωμα δὲ τὸ ἐπανόρθωμα τοῦ 
ἀδικήματος. But this, which Aristot. in- 
sists on as the proper, but not perhaps 
usual sense of the word, is not to be 
pressed in the N. T., and does not, though 
upheld by Calv., Calov., Wolf, and Rothe, 
suit the context as contrasted with κατά’ 
κριμα. Other renderings are, ‘an abso- 
lutory sentence’ (Meyer, Fritz., al.): “ὦ 
righteous act, as in ver. 18; Baruch ii. 
19; ‘ righteousness,” as in Rev. xix. 8 
(where see note): ‘a righteous cause,’ or 
plea (XX, Jer. xi. 20): ‘justification ἢ 
(E. V., Luth., De Wette, al.). The first 
seems to me to be right, as standing most. 
exactly in contrast with κατάκριμα; the use 
of the -μα being partly perhaps accounted 
for by the alliteration of the ending 
marking more strongly the antithesis. 
Thus as κατάκριμα is a sentence of condem- 
nation, sO δικαίωμα will be a sentence of ac- 
quittal. This in fact amounts to justifi- 
cation. 17.1 Distinesion the third, 
also in KIND; that which came in by the 
one sinner, was the reign of DEATH: that 
which shall come in by the One, Jesus 
Christ, will be a reigning in LIFE. For 
(carrying on the argument from ver. 15, 
but not so as to make parenthetical (Rothe) 
ver. 16—for δικαιοσύνης presupposes δι- 
kalwua) if by the transgression of the one 
(man ; the reading ἐν (τῷ) ἑνὶ παραπτώματι 
goes with ἁμαρτήματος for ἁμαρτήσαντος 
in ver. 16: both have evidently been 
corrections) death reigned by means of 


964 TIPOS POMAIOTS. Vv. 
A al o. 4 k , e θ ΄ Χ 2B ‘Xr 
α νεῖ. 14 τοῦ! Τῷ τοῦ EVOS “παραπτώματι 0 θάνατος * ερασίιλεύσεν apcoF 
y 2 Cor. Vill. ~~ pe e Ἢ y , ag ΚΙΓΡΊ ἢ 
xs. James Set τοῦ ἑνός, ” πολλῳ μᾶλλον οἱ τὴν 5, περισσείαν τῆς adcdf 
Eccles. i. 3 al. δι ο ὃ a n ὃ ΄, x Ba ghkl 
z = Matt. xviii. χάριτος καὶ τῆς ὠρεᾶς τῆς ΠΡ ΡΥΌΡΗΝ αμβανοντες τὰ 3 ol” 
8,9. John v. 47 | 
29 al. fi Ζ a 
πες ἐν ζωῇ βασιλεύσουσιν si τοῦ ἑνὸς Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ. 
Revivz10 18 ὈὕΆΑρᾳ ὃ οὖν ὡς δι’ ἑνὸς * παραπτώματος “ εἰς πάντας 
Xxii. 5. u .? ν᾽ / “ \ ὃ 4 ὦ ἃ d ὃ 
bch. vii. 8, 25, ἀνθρώπους εἰς ἣ κατάκριμα, οὕτως καὶ OL EVOS ικαιυ- 
Vill. . SS ; , , oe 
16,18 xiv, , @waTos “ὃ εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους “els “ SiKaiwow ζωῆς 
vi. 10 413. P. 10,» τ 5 \ an f A a es ᾽ θ ͵ 
c = ver. 12. ὥςπερ yap Ola τῆς * παρακοῆς τοῦ ἐνὸς ἀνθρώπου 


d = Rev. xv. 
4only. Baruch i ii. 19. see note on ver. 16. 
6. Heb. ii.2 only +. (-ovetv, Matt. xviii. 17.) 


17. for tw του evos, ev ενι AF; ev tw em D-gr: 
»: Tw 44: txt BCKLN[P 47!-marg rel] vulg{-clem fuld] D-lat Syr [syr copt 
zeth ar ἸῺ Chr, Thdrt Thl ec [Euthal-ms Damase Orig- int, | Aug, 
Chr-comm, Iren-int, Auggsepe : 


al) Orig, 


‘ dwpeas B 49 Orig, 
syrr Chr-2-mss, διὰ, Thdrt Ambrst Pelag. 
int; ins TH ‘bef (wn Lk 17. 98. 
a7. 47. 77. 91 Orig, Chr,[(txt,) Damasc]. 
(int; ] Iren-int). 


18. aft evos ins ανθρωπου &}(N3 disapproving) [eth]. 
for δικαιωβματος, To δικαιωμα DG [m]; καὶ δικαίωμα 


delictum) m 46 | Syr (copt) ]. 
F (per unius justitiam). 


the one (man), much more (logical—a 
fortiori) shall they who receive the 
abundance of the grace and of the gift 
of righteousness (ver. 15: beware of the 
shallow and weakening notion, that it is 
“for τῆς δικαιοσύνης δεδωρημένης ᾿) reign 
in life (eternal) by means of the one 
(Man) Jesus Christ. περισσεία an- 
swers to ἐπερίσσευσεν, ver. 15: τῆς χάριτος, 
to 7 x. τοῦ θευῦ; only here, as at ch. i. 
5, the word signifies not only the grace 
flowing from God, but the same grace 
implanted and working in man :--- δωρεᾶς, 
to δωρεά there, but qualified by τῆς δικαιο- 
σύνης, answering to δικαίωμα in ver. 16. 

The present λαμβάνοντες, instead of 
λαβόντες, is not merely used in a substan- 
tive sense, receptores (as Fritz. and Meyer), 
but signifies that the reception is not one 
act merely, but a continued process by 
which the περισσεία is imparted. (So 
Rothe, De W., Thol.) ἐν ζωῇ Bac. | 
“ Antithesis to 6 θάνατος ἐβασ. Weshould 
expect ἡ (wh βασιλεύσει, but Paul design- 
edly changes the form of expression that 
he may bring more prominently forward 
the idea of free personality. ζωή is not 
only corporeal (the resurrection), but also 
spiritual and moral,—as also in θάνατος 
we must include διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ver. 12. 
βασιλεύσουσιν is brought in by the anti- 
thesis: but it is elsewhere used (see reff.) 
to signify the state of blessedness, partly 
in an objective theocratic import (of the 
reign of the saints with Christ), partly in 
a subjective moral one,—because reigning 
is the highest development of freedom, 
and the highest satisfaction of all desires.” 
De Wette. 18.] Recapitulation and 


ech. iv. 25 only $. Levit. xxiv. 22 


only. f 2 Cor. x. 


ev evos 47 -txt] am(with demid 


om τῆς 
την Baneey 672 ΤῊ: add και 63 vulg 
om Ts δικαιοσ. ( 70! Orig, [ins, and 
βασιλευουσιν [ D3(appy, Tischdf) "Ὁ 
xp. bef τἡσου B Orig,(agst Orig, 


παραπτωμα (per unius 


co-statement of the parallel and distinc- 
tions. Therefore (ἄρα οὖν, see reff., is 
placed by Paul at the beginning of a sen- 
tence, contrary to classical usage) as by 
means of one trespass (not, ‘the trans- 
gression of one, as Erasm., Luth., Calv., 
Koppe, Fritz., Thol. [similarly E. V.], 


which is contrary to usage, and to ver. 


17, where that meaning is expressed by 
τῷ Tov ἑνὸς παραπτώματι. In this sum- 
ming up, the Apostle puts the antithetical 
elements as strongly and nakedly as pos- 
sible in contrast ; and therefore abridges 
the ‘trespass of one’ and ‘the righteous 
act of one’ into ‘one trespass’ and ‘one 
righteous act’) it came upon (ἐγένετο, 
indefinite, being supplied) all men unto 
condemnation,—so also by means of one 
righteous act (the Death of Christ viewed 
as the acme of His Obedience, see Phil. 
ii. 8 = ἡ ὑπακοὴ τοῦ ἑνός below; not as 
in ver. 16,—nor Righteousness, as Thol., 
which would not contrast with παραπτ., 
a single act) it came upon all men (in 
extent of grace,—zm posse, not in esse 
as the other) unto justification of (con- 
ferring, leading to) life. 19.] For 
(in explanation of ver. 18) as by the dis- 
obedience of (the) one man the many 
(= πάντες ἄνθρωποι above, but not so ex- 
pressed here, because in the other limb of 
the comparison πάντ. ἄνθρ. could not be 
put, and this is conformed to it: see there) 
were made (not, ‘were accounted as’ 
(Grot. al.): nor ‘became by imputation’ 

(Beza, Bengel) : nor ‘were proved to be’ 

(Koppe, Reiche, Fritz.) : see reff.) sinners 
(not ὑπεύθυνοι κολάσει, as Chrys., Theo- 
phyl.: ‘actual sinners by practice,’ is 


18----90. 


ΤΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 565 


8 ἁμαρτωλοὶ ἢ κατεστάθησαν ioi πολλοί, οὕτως καὶ διὰ gchiii7 rer. 


τῆς 


k ς A na Crux δί h f i γ 
ὑπακοῆς τοῦ ενὸς OlKaLoL ἃ κατασταθήσονται i οἱ 


h = 2 Pet. i. 5, 
3 Macc. iii. 5. 
Deut. xxviii_ 


, A \ 13. 
πολλοί. *9 νόμος δὲ ᾿ἱ παρειςῆλθεν, ἵνα τὰ πλλεονασῃ τὸ i ver. 15 reff 


ch. i. 5 reff, 


@ &\ ,ὔ 7 fe 
" παράπτωμα. οὗ δὲ "ἐπλεόνασεν ἡ ἁμαρτία, ° ὑπερεπερίσ- 1Gal. ii. 4 


λάθρα νυκτὸς ἐντὸς τῶν τειχῶν, Polyb. ii. 55. 8. 


al4.) only, exc. 2 Pet. i.& 2 Chron. xxiy. 11, 


Mark vii. 37.) 


only +. 

παρειςῆλθε 
ch. vi. 1. "2 Cor. iv. 15 
ο 2 Cor. vii. 4 only +. (-@s, 


m Paul (here bis. 
n ver. 15. 


19. aft 2nd evos add avépwrov D'F Iren-gr, Cyr,[-p(om,)] Aug,(om,jiq) Ambr, 





[om, ].—rov evos av@p. bef υπακοης F. 
20. for 1st de, yap L. 


meant, the disobedience of Adam having 
been the inlet to all this: compare ἐφ᾽ ᾧ 
πάντες ἥμαρτον ver. 12 and the notes, on 
the kind of sin spoken of in this whole 
passage, as being both original and actual), 
so also (after the same manner or analogy 
likewise) by means of the obedience (unto 
death, see on last verse) of (the) One (man) 
shall (future, because, as in ch. iii. 30, 
justification, as regards the many, is not 
yet completed. De W.) the many (= πολ- 
Aoi, compare Matt. xxvi. 28; Mark x. 45, 
but thus expressed because πολλοί would 
not have answered in the other limb of 
the comparison. Jn order to make the 
comparison more strict, the πάντες who 
have been made sinners are weakened to 
the indefinite of πολλοί, the πολλοί who 
shall be made righteous are enlarged to the 
indefinite of πολλοί. Thus a common term 
of quantity is tound for both, the one ex- 
tending to its largest numerical inter- 
pretation, the other restricted to its small- 
est) be made (see above) righteous (not 
by imputation merely, any more than in 
the other case: but ‘shall be made really 
and actually righteous, as completely so 
as the others were made really and actu- 
ally sinners... When we say that man has 
no righteousness of hs. own, we speak of 
him as out of Christ: but in Christ and 
united to Him, he is made righteous, not 
by a fiction, or ¢mputation only of Christ’s 
righteousness, but by a real and living 
spiritual union with a righteous Head as a 
righteons member, righteous by means of, 
as an effect of, the righteousness of that 
Head, but not merely righteous by trans- 
terence of the Righteousness of that Head; 
just as in his natural state he is united to 
a sinful head as a sinful member, sinful by 
means of, as an effect of, the sinfulness of 
that Head, but not merely by transference 
of the sinfulness of that Head). See 
the whole question respecting πάντες and 
οἱ πολλοί treated in Tholuck’s Comm. in 
loc. 20.| How the law (of Moses) 
came in, in the divine economy. But (i.e. 
the two things spoken of ver. 19 did not 
simply and immediately happen) the law 
(of Moses: not daw, in the abstract, nor 


for οὗ, οπου F, 


‘the law of nature, as Dr. Peile,—nor 
even the law of God in its general sense, 
as often in ch. i. ii. ;—but here strictly 
THE LAW OF ΜΟΒΈΒ, as necessitated by 
vv. 13, 14 in this same argument) came 
in besides (besides the fact of the many 
being made sinners, and as a transition 
point to the other result: formed a third 
term, besides these two, in the summary 
of God’s dealings with man: compare 
πρυφετέθη, Gal. 111. 19: not πρὸς καιρὸν 
ἐδόθη, Theophyl.: not, came in between 
Christ and Adam (the fact, but not the 
interpretation) as Theodoret and Calv.:— 
not = eisjA@ey merely),—in order that 
(τελικῶς, its design,—not merely ἐκβατι- 
k@s, its result, as Chrys., al.; here, and 
every where else. So of ver. 21) the 
trespass (created by the law; for where 
no law, no transgression, ch. iv. 15:—not 
merely the knowledge of sin, but actual 
transgression) might be multiplied (in 
actual fact: not ‘be abundantly ex- 
hibited,’ or any such evasive sense). No 
possible objection can be taken to this. 
statement by those who view the Law as 
a preparation for Christ. If it was so, 
then the effect of the Law, the creating 
and multiplying transgression, was an end 
in the divine purposes, to bring out the 
necessity of One who should deliver from 
sin and bring in righteousness. ‘Those 
who weaken this telic ἵνα into ‘so that,’ 
in order to guard the Apostle from what 
seems to them a doctrine unworthy of God, 
overlook equally his firm standing on the 
acknowledged ground of historic fact and 
actuality, as the humility with which here, 
as ever (ch. xi. 33, 34), he bows before the 
mystery of the οἰκονομία τοῦ θεοῦ." Um- 
breit. But (this terrible end, the multi- 
plying of transgression, was not, however, 
God’s ultimate end: He had a further and 
gracious one) where (‘when,’ De Wette, 
after Grot., al.: but Tholuck justly remarks 
that instances of this meauing of of in 
prose are wanting. In verse it seems to 
occur, Eur. Iph. Aul. 96, but even there 
may be rendered ‘in the case where’) sin, 
(the generic of the specific παράπτωμα) 
was multiplied, (God’s) grace did beyond 


906 


p ver. 14 reff. 
q ver. 16 reff. 
r ch. iii. 5 reff. 


[4 “Ὁ 
(exc. John ων. 
viii. 7.) of La 

(Exod. xii. 
39 B. 
t ch. v. 20 reff. 
uch. iii. 4 reff. 
v Acts x. 41 
reff, 
w = and 
constr., Gal. ἈΝ Νὲ 
ii. 19. (ver. 10. ch. xiv. 8.) w. απὸ, Col. ii. 20. 


y = Col. (ii. 20.) iii. 7 only. 


21. om τω F. 
ina. B. 


CuHap. VI. 1. rec emmevovuer, with rel Chr, 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


z= ch. ii. 4. iii. 29. 


for βασιλευση, -σει KL cl! ο [47] 77. 115-6-21-2. 


ὙΠ. 


Ls U 91 “ [4 Pp > Χ 4 Si.» “ 3 
σευσεν ἡ χάρις, 31] ἵνα ὥςπερ Ῥ ἐβασίλευσεν ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐν 
5 θανάτῳ, οὕτως καὶ ἡ χάρις Ρ βασιλεύση διὰ δικαι 
τῷ θανάτῳ, οὕτως ἡ χάρις Ῥ βασιλεύσῃ ο- 
σύνης ἃ εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου 


V I 1 r Τ , 9 τ 3 A ἘΝ 5) , roe / “ ες 
; L οὖν * ἐροῦμεν ; ὃ ἐπιμένωμεν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ. ἵνα ἡ 
χάρις ᾿ πλεονάσῃ ; 3 ἃ μὴ γένοιτο. 
A ς , x a y+ y / y ᾽ > A 3 Z x a 3 wn 
τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ, * πῶς ἔτι Y ζήσομεν ἡ ἐν αὐτῇ ; 27% 5 ἀγνοεῖτε 


Υ οἵτινες ἡ ἀπεθάνομεν 


x=ch.ili.6. 1Cor.xv.12. Ο581.1τ.9. Gen. xxxix. 9. 
ach. i. 13 reff. 


xp. bef 


Thdrt Gennad-c Diod-ec Thl Ee Tert 


[perseverabimus (perferemus Tert-ms)!, permanebimus vulg G-lat [F-lat Orig-int,| 
Augsepe: emmevouey KX[P ἃ n 47] 1. 57. 68. 109 lect-13 copt [Euthal-ms]: emmer- 


νωμεν L [k] 93. 124: txt ABCD ΕἾ -οΥ] Ὁ m ο 17 Syr Damasc. 


ins ev bef ty 


A[ Woide, e contra Cowper, expr], in peccato latt. 


2. aft οιτινες ins yap F latt syrr (not Tert). 


measure abound (not ‘did much more 
abound,’ as Εἰ. V.: for words compounded 
with ὑπέρ have a superlative, not a com- 
parative signification, e.g. ref. ὑπερλίαν, 
ὑπερνικάω, ὑπερυψόω, x.T.A..—and Paul 
often uses these compounds. The E. V. 
has likewise destroyed the force of the 
comparison by rendering the different 
words πλεονάζω and περισσεύω both by 
one word ‘ abound’). 21.| The pur- 
pose of this abounding of grace :—its 
ultimate prevalence and reign, by means 
of righteousness, unto life eternal. That, 
as sin reigned (the historic indefinite past, 
because the standing-point of the sentence 
is, the restitution of all things hereafter) 
in death (ἐν, of that in and by which the 
reign was exercised and shewn: death was 
the central act of sin’s reign. He does 
not here say, ‘ death reigned by sin, as in 
vv. 12—14, because sin and grace are the 
two points of comparison, and require to 
be the subjects), so also grace may reign 
by means of (not ἐν here, though it might 
be so, if δικαιοσ. applied to our being made 
righteous: but as it applies to the Righte- 
ousness of Christ making us righteous, it 
is διά) righteousness, unto (leading to) 
life eternal through (by means of) Jesus 
Christ our Lord (‘Jam ne memoratur 
quidem Adamus, solius Christi mentio vi- 
get.’ Bengel). 

Cuap. VI.—VIII.] THe MoRAL FF- 
FECTS OF JUSTIFICATION. VI. 1—14.] 
No encouragement given hereby (see ch. 
v. 20) to a life in sin: for the baptized are 
dead to sin, and walk in a new (vv. 1—7) 
life, and one (vv. 8—11) dedicated to 
God. 1.) What then shall we say ἢ 
—the introduction of a difficulty or ob- 
jection arising out of the preceding argu- 
ment, and referring to ch. y. 20. See ch. 


(nowuerCFL 17 Diod Chr-ms,. 


iii. 5. ἐπιμένωμεν, ‘must we think 
that we may persist,—the deliberative 
subjunctive. So εἴπωμεν ἢ σιγῶμεν, Eur. 
Ion 758: παρέλθω δόμους, Med. 1275. See 
Kihner, Gramm. § 464, and note on ch. 
v. 1. [Are we to continue (‘Must we 
think that we may persist,’ in other 
words | “ May we persist”’) in (our natural 
state and commission of) sin, that (God’s) 
grace may be multiplied (ch. v. 20)? 

2.) μὴ yév. (see reff.), used of some 
inference in itself abhorrent from reverence 
or piety, or precluded by some acknow- 
ledged fact inconsistent therewith. The 
latter is here the ground of rejection. An 
acknowledged fact in the Christian life 
follows, which precludes our persisting in 
our sin. We who (οἵτινες describing 
quality, not merely matter of fact) died 
(historic aorist, not perf. as in E. V. [the 
true reference is thus most unfortunately 
lost]: the time referred to being that of 
our baptism) to sin (reff. and examples in 
Wetst.:—became as separate from and 
apathetic towards sin as the dead corpse 
is separate from and apathetic towards the 
functions and stir of life: μένειν ἀκίνητον 
ὥσπερ τὸν νεκρόν, Chrys. ‘ Sin,’ τῇ au. = 
as above), how shall we live any longer 
therein (= περιπατεῖν év—but not, as De 
W., (ἣν with a dative: ζῆν ἔν τινι is a fur- 
ther step than (ἣν τινι, implying introition, 
and not merely sympathy)? 3.] Or 
(supposing you do not assent to the argu- 
ment in the last verse, see reff.) are ye 
ignorant (the foregoing axiom is brought 
out into recognition by the further state- 
ment ofa truth universally acknowledged) 
that all we who were (i.e. all of us, hav- 
ing been [not as E. V., again most unfor- 
tunately, “so many of us as were ;” giving 
it to be understood that some of them had 


ABCDF 
KL[P |X 
abcdf 
ghkl 

mnol?7 


[47] 


VI. 1—5. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


567 


e e b 4s 4 6 b.? \ ? A his ΗΝ mee 
ὅτι ὅσοι ἢ ἐβαπτίσθημεν ὃ εἰς χριστὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, ὃ εἰς τὸν ὃ Acts viii. 16 
reff. 


, > 5 

θάνατον αὐτοῦ » ἐβαπτίσθημεν ; * ° συνετάφημεν οὖν αὐτῷ 
\ a / 5 \ ΄, 

διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος εἰς τὸν θάνατον, ἵνα ὥςπερ 4 ἠγέρθη 


d 
fi 


χριστὸς ἐκ 
καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐν 


c Col. ii. 12 
only +. 

d 1 Cor. xv. 12 
reff. 

e see John xi. 


“ \ rat / a ΄ 
νεκρῶν διὰ τῆς “ δόξης τοῦ πατρός, οὕτως, ὅδ᾽ vii. 6 only. 
καινότητι ζωῆς 8 περιπατήσωμεν. 


Ezek. xlvii. 
12 only. 
g = Acts xxi. 


5 ef yap 


" σύμφυτοι γεγόναμεν τῷ | ὁμοιώματι τοῦ θανάτου αὐτοῦ, 2. κ. ἐν, 


2 reff. 


h here only $. Amosix.13. Zech. xi. 2 only. 


Cor. iv. 
i ch. i. 23 reff, 


3. om τησοὺυν B [(a)] 31-9. 73. 109-18-20-24 lect-8 [Euthal-ms} Chr Th] [Orig-int, 


(ins,)]: eno. bef xpior. [0] 80 Syr eth. 
4. om τον D'F k!, 


not beenthus baptized |)baptized into Christ 
Jesus (‘into participation of, ‘into union 
with,’ Christ, in His capacity of spiritual 
Mastership, Headship, and Pattern of con- 
formity) were baptized into (introduced 
by our baptism into a state of conformity 
with and participation of) His death? 
The Apostle refers (1) to an acknowledged 
fact, in the signification, and perhaps 
also in the manner (see below) of bap- 
tism—that it put upon us (Gal. iii, 27) 
a state of conformity with and participa- 
tion in Christ ;—and (2) that this state 
involves a death τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ even as He 
died τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ (ver. 10);—the meaning 
being kept in the background, but all 
the while not lost sight of, that the dene- 
fits of His Death were likewise made ours 
by our introduction into the covenant. 
4.| A further explanation of the 
assertion in the last verse proceeding (οὖν) 
on its concession by the reader. We were 
then (not the temporal but inferential 
‘then τ: q.d. “ You grant my last position: 
Wellthen,” .. .) buried with Him (καθάπερ 
ἔν τινι τάφῳ τῷ ὕδατι καταδυόντων ἡμῶν 
τὰς κεφαλὰς ὁ παλαιὸς ἄνθρωπος θάπτεται, 
καὶ καταδὺς κάτω κρύπτεται ὅλως καθάπαξ, 
Chrys. on John iii. Hom. xxv. 2, vol. viii. 
p. 151) by means of our baptism into 
(His) death (τοῦ βαπτ. cis τὸν θάνατον 
belong together, not συνετάφ. εἰς τ. θ., 
which would hardly bear any sense. The 
absence of the art. before eis is no objec- 
» tion to this ;—it is unnecessary, because 
no distinction from any other baptism is 
brought out, and τὸ βάπτ.-εἰς-τὸν-θάν. is 
connected as one idea); in order that, as 
Christ was raised from the dead by the 
glory (δόξα and δύναμις are cognate ideas; 
compare the import of the Heb. ty and the 
LXX in Ps. Ixviii. 35 (Ixvii. 34 LXX), 
Isa. xii. 2: and τὸ κράτος τῆς δόξης in 
Col. i. 11. The divine δόξα includes all 
that manifests the Creator to the creature: 
and hence also his Almightiness. Tholuck. 
The renderings ‘in Dei gloriam’ (Beza, 
Bretschneider), and ‘because He is the 


for δια, υπο D1(appy). 


image of the Father’ (Dr. Burton, altern.), 
are inadmissible for διά with a gen.) of the 
Father (Theodoret makes ἡ δόξα τοῦ πα- 
τρός = 7 οἰκεία θεότης of the Son, which 
is manifestly wrong), thus we also should 
walk in newness of life (not = ‘a new 
life ;;>—mnor are such expressions ever to be 
diluted away thus: the abstract καινότητι 
is used to bring the quality of newness, 
which is the point insisted on, more into 
prominence, compare 2 Thess. ii. 11; 
1 Tim. vi. 17 [and notes]; Winer, edn. 
6, ὃ 34. 3. The comparison is not 
only (as Stuart) between our Lord’s phy- 
sical death and resurrection, and our 
spiritual; but reaches far deeper: see 
notes on vv. 10, 11). 5.] The 
Apostle confirms the last verse by a 
necessary sequence that those who are 
united to Him in His Death, shall be also 
in His resurrection. For (confirmatory) 
if we have become united with the like- 
ness of His Death (σύμφυτος = either (1) 
‘congenital,’ —as διὰ τὴν σύμφυτον δικαιο- 
σύνην, spoken of Samuel, Jos. Antt. vi. 
3. 3,—or (2) ‘ cognate,’ of like nature,— 
or (8) ‘arising simultaneously,’—or (4) 
‘grown together,’—or (5) ‘ planted with,’ 
‘consitus.’ The rendering of Syr., Vulg., 
Luth., Εἰ. V., ‘planted together,’ is inad- 
missible, -φυτος being not from φυτεύω, 
but from φύω : as also is that of Erasm. 
and Calv.,—‘ insititii.’ The fourth mean- 
ing, ‘grown together,’ ‘intimately and pro- 
gressively united,’—‘ coaluimus,’ as Grot., 
—seems here to apply best. Obs. σύμφ. 
is to be connected with τῷ 6u., not with τῷ 
χριστῷ understood, as in ver. 6: in which 
case we should have to supply τῷ ὁμοιώματι 
again before τῆς ἀναστάσεως, which would 
be not only grammatically difficult, but 
would not correspond to the sense: for 
Christians, it is true, partake of the Ζέζε- 
ness only of Christ’s death, but of His 
actual Resurrection itself, as the change of 
construction shews: see below), so shall we 
be also (ἀλλά after a hypothetical clause 
serves to strengthen the inference: see 


508 ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ: VIL 
Ὁ = ͵΄ , , 
k=1Cor.iv. ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς 'avactacews ἐσόμεθα, ὃ τοῦτο γινώσκον- 
15 reff. Hom. Ψ © mn \ e Ἐξ m » n , 
iLa.si,t. TES, OTL ὁ ™madralos ἡμῶν '' ἄνθρωπος " συνεσταυρώθη, 


© a“ “ a Le / a / 

iva °xatapynOn τὸ ἢ σῶμα τῆς Ρ ἁμαρτίας, 4 τοῦ μηκέτι 
lal fal 4 \ > Ν 

τ δουλεύειν ἡμᾶς τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ: 70 γὰρ ἀποθανὼν " δεδι- 

ὃς Π 

n Matt. xxvii. 44} Mk. J. Gal. ii. 20 only +. 


13. Col. ii. 11. q 1 Cor. x. 13 reff. 
s Acts xiii. 39 only. 


see 1 Cor. v. 


n., = ch. vii, 23, 24. viii. 


ο ch, iii, 3 reff. p ge 
6al. Deut, xiii. 4 A Ald. 


ΕΞ 
τ Matt. vi. 24. ch. vii. 
Sir..xxvi. 29. 


5. for adda, aua F latt. aft avaor. ins αὐτου F Syr [copt eth] arm. 


6. ins xa bef τουτο B: rovto δε 179. 


reff., and Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. p. 40) 
with His Resurrection (a change of con- 
struction : because it could not well have 
been said σύμφυτοι τοῦ ὁμοιώματος τ. θ. 
above, the gen. after adjectives compounded 
with σύν denoting the thing actually par- 
taken (cf. Kiihner, ὃ 519, and Bernhardy, 
Syntax, p. 171: who cites examples in 
σύντροφος, Soph. Philoct. 209,---σύννομος, 
Eur. Hel. 1508,---σύμφωνος, Aristoph. Av. 
θῦ8,---συμφυής, Plato Legg. iv. p. 721,— 
συνήθης, ib. v. p. 799,---σύμψηφος, Cratyl. 
p. 398), and hardly the mere figure or like- 
ness of it,—and similarly it could not well 
here be said σύμφ. τῇ ἀναστάσει, because 
the dat. would not be strong enough to 
denote the state of which we shall be actual 
partakers. The future is used perhaps 
because of the inference, as a logical se- 
quence,—‘ If, &e.,. . . . A shall =B?’— 
but more probably with a deeper meaning, 
because the participation in His Resurrec- 
tion, however partially and in the inner 
spiritual life, attained here, will only then 
be accomplished in our entire being, when 
we ‘shall wake up after his likeness’). 

6.| Knowing (recollecting) this, 
that our old man (former self, personality 
before our new birth—opposed to καινός 
or νέος ἄνθρ., καινὴ KTiots,—see Col. iii. 
10; 2 Cor. v.17; Eph. iv. 22—24,—not 
merely the guilt of sin, nor the power of 
sin, but the man. The idea is not Jewish, 
as Tholuck has shewn: the passage quoted 
from the Sohar-chadasch not bearing the 
meaning commonly given to it,—and if it 
did, that book itself being a production 
probably of the sixteenth century) was (at 
our baptism) crucified with Him (the 
great key to our text is ref. Gal. As the 
death of the Lord Jesus was by crucifixion, 
the Apostle uses the same expression of our 
death to our former sinful self, which is not 
only by virtue of, but also in the likeness 
of, Christ’s death,—as signal, as entire, as 
much a death of cutting off and putting to 
shame and pain), in order that (the aim 
and end of the συσταυρωθῆναι) the body 
of sin might be annulled (“ τὸ c@p. τῆς 
ἅμαρτ. belongs together, and τῆς auapr. 
is not to be joined with καταργ. as being = 
ἀπὸ τῆς auapt.(Theodoret, Wahl) ;—nor is 
τὺ σῶμ. τ. au., ‘the totality of sin’ (Orig. 


Kkatapynon A wth. 


2, Theophyl. 1, Grot.); nor ‘ the substance 
or essence of sin,’ after the Heb. (Rab- 
binical) usage of oy and Ἢ" (Schéttg.): 
nor, ‘the mass of sin’ (Thol. 1);—nor a 
mere figure to carry out the idea of being 
crucified with Christ (Calov., Wolf, Reiche, 
Olsh., Stuart 2, al.);—nor=% σὰρξ τ. 
Guapt.; but “ the body, which belongs to 
or serves sin, in which sin rules or is ma- 
nifested, = τὰ μέλη, ver. 13, in which is 
6 νόμος τῆς ἁμαρτίας, ch. vii. 29,---τὸ σῶμα 
τ. θανάτου, ch. vii. 24,—ai πράξεις τοῦ 
σώματος, ch. vili. 19,--τὸ σῶμα τῆς σαρκός, 
Col. ii. 11. De Wette: with whom agree 
Orig. 1, Theophyl. 2, Beza, Bengel, Meyer, 
Tholuck, Stuart 1, al. But as De W. 
further remarks, we must not understand 
that the body is the seat of sin, or at 
all events must not so understand those 
words as if the principle of sin lay in the 
body, which is not true, for it lies in the 
will). καταργηθῇ, might be rendered 
powerless (annulled as far as regards ac- 
tivity and energy. The word occurs twenty- 
five times in Paul’s Epistles (elsewhere, 
Luke xiii. 7, Heb. ii. 14 only), and does 
not appear to signify absolute annihilation, 
but as above. Gregory of Nyssa has gone 
into the meaning in his discourse on 1 Cor. 
xv. 28, vol. i. p. 1325), that we might no 
longer be in bondage (be slaves to) sin 
(i.e. that the body should no longer be 
under the dominion of sin, see below, ver. 
12). 7.} The difficulty of this verse 
arises from the Apostle having in a short 
and pregnant sentence expressed a whole 
similitude, joining, as he elsewhere does in 


ABCDF 
ΚΙΓΡῚΝ 
ανοαῖ 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[17] 


such cases, the subject of the first limb οὐ 


the comparison with the predicate of the 
second. Fully expressed, it would stand 
thus: ‘ For, as a man that is dead is ac- 
quitted and released from guilt and bond- 
age (among men: no reference to God’s 
judgment of him): so a man that has died 
to sin is acquitted from the guilt of sin 
and released trom its bondage.’ I express 
dedix. by this periphrasis in both cases, 
because I believe that all this is implied in 
it: ‘is acquitted,’ ‘has his quittance,’ from 
sin, so that Sin (personified) has no more 
claims on him, either as a creditor or as 
a master: cannot detain him for debt, 
nor sue him for service. A larger refers 


6—12. ΟΣ POMAIOT®S. 5369 
4 5 > ‘\ “ 4 7] 8 , δὲ t >, θ , \ 
καίωται Sato τῆς apapTias. εἰ 0€ ᾿ἰἀπεθάνομεν συν t =2Cor.v. 15. 
- , “ \ ΄ > A Oe 3 , a rite age 
χρίστῳ, " πιστεύομεν “ OTL Kat * συνζήσομεν AUTO, elderes erate 
ὅτι χριστὸς Wéyepbels ἐκ “vexpav οὐκ ἔτι ἀποθνήσκει: ὃ τοῦτο 
en. 
Ox wee i ] v2 Cor. vil.3. 
, > a 5) ” x ΄ 10 γἃ 6 2 Tim. ii. 11 
θάνατος αὐτοῦ οὐκ ετι * κυριεύει. ὃ yap ἀπεθανέν, fire.” 
-“ > ΄ \ “ ~ lal “ yer. 4. 
τῇ “ ἁμαρτίᾳ ἀπέθανεν ὃ ἐφάπαξ' YO δὲ ζῇ, " ζῇ τῷ θεῷ. x here bis. 
\ a / ς \ \ ‘ A uke xxii. 
11 οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς “ λογίζεσθε 4 ἑαυτοὺς “νεκροὺς μὲν τῇ %. cb. vil 
« , Ὁ “σ᾿ δὲ A 6 a 3 a Ἴ a 12 . 1.24. 1 Tim 
ἁμαρτίᾳ, ὃ ζῶντας δὲ τῷ θεῷ ἐν χριστῷ ΪΙησοῦ. fet) vic 15 only. 
-P. Gen. 
iii. 16. y acc. of object, Gal. ii. 20. Rev. xviii. 7. z dat., Col. iin, 23 al. 
a — Heb. vii. 27. ix. 12. x. 10 (1 Cor. xv. 6) only +. Ὁ = Gal. ii. 19. 1 Pet. ii. 24. ο = and 


constr., ch. xiv. 14. Phil. iii. 13. Wisd. xv. 15. 
here only. see ch. vii. 8. 


d 2nd pers., 2 Cor. vii. 11 reff. e constr., 

8. for δε, yap F[-gr] tol: ovy Syr. (G-lat has autem aut enim.) rec (for συν.) 
ov¢., with BCKL[P] rel: txt AB! DEX n 17.—-wuey CK[P] Καὶ [Bas, Damase] ΤῊ] : 
συνζησομεθα F. for avtw, τω χριστω D'F latt(not demid fuld tol [spee]) Syr 
Aug,| (txt,). 17 def. ] 

11. ree aft νεκροὺς μεν ins εἰναι, with KL[P|N% rel [vulg spec syr Orig-c(and int.) 
Chr-ed, Euthal-ms] Did, Thdrt Hil, [Ambrst]: bef vexp. μεν, BCR! Damasc: om 
ADF 17 [Syr arm] copt eth Chr-ms, Tert,. rec at end adds τω κυρίῳ ἡμων, with 
CKL[P]X rel [vulg-clem arm] Syr(but pref to xp. io.) copt Chr, Thi [Did, Orig- 
int,} Ambrst: om ABD F{(but a space is left) spec am fuld] demid flor harl tol eth 
syr Bas, Cyr[-p,] Thdrt Thl-comm Ce-comm Tert, Hil, Aug(sepe) Pelag Sedul Bede. 


ence is thus given to δεδικ. than the pur- 
poses of the present argument, which is 
treating of the power, not the guilt of sin, 
required: but that it is so, lies in the 
nature of ἁμαρτία, the service of which is 
guilt, and the deliverance from whose ser- 
vice necessarily brings with it acquittal. 
8—11.] This new life must be 
one dedicated to God. 8. | Now 
(continuing the train of argument) if 
we died with Christ, we believe that 
we shall also (the future as in ver. 5,— 
’ because the life with Him though here 
begun, is not here completed: and the 
πιστεύομεν used more of dogmatic belief, 
than of trust, though the latter meaning is 
not altogether absent) live with Him. 
9.1 This and the following verse explain 
what sort of a life with Christ is meant, 
by what we know of the Resurrection-life 
of Christ himself. The only difficulty 
here is in οὐκ ἔτι κυριεύει, as implying 
that Death had dominion over Christ, 
which we know it Aad not: see John x. 
17, 18; ii. 19; Acts i1..24 But this 
vanishes, when we remember that our 
Lord, by submitting to Death, virtually, 
and in the act of death, surrendered Him- 
self into the power of Death. Death 
could not hold Him, and had no power 
over Hin further than by his own suffer- 
ance: but power over Him it had, inas- 
much as He died. 10.1 For (the 
proof of the foregoing) the death which 
He died (not ‘in that He died,’ as E. V., 
nor is 6 for καθ᾽ 6, either here or in ref. 
Gal, but the accus. objective, governed by 
the verb. So also of ὃ δὲ (7 below), unto 
sin He died (De Wette well remarks that 
Vou. II. 


we must in expressing this verse abide by 
the indefinite reference to sin in which the 
death of Christ is placed; if we attempt to 
make it more definite, ‘ for sin,’ or ‘to that 
state, in which He suffered the punish- 
ment of sin,’ we shall lose the point of 
comparison, which lies in ‘ to sin,’ and ‘to 
God.’ If we are to expand the words 
‘died to sin,’ we must say that our Lord 
at death passed into a state in which He 
had ‘no more to do with sin’—either as 
tempting Him (though in vain), or as re- 
quiring to be atoned for (this having been 
now effected), or as met by Him in daily 
contradiction which He endured from sin- 
ners) once for all (so that it is not to be 
repeated: see reff.); but the life which 
He liveth (see above) He liveth unto God 
(indefinite again, but easily filled up and 
explained : to God,—as being glorified by 
and with the Father, as entirely rid of con- 
flict with sin and death, and having only 
God’s (properly so called) work to do,—as 
waiting till, in the purposes of the Father, 
all things are put under Him :—and ἕο 
(for) God, as being the manifestation and 
brightness of the Father’s glory). 11.) 
An exhortation to realize this state uf 
death unto sin and life unto God with 
Christ. Thus (after the same manner as 
Christ) do ye also (imperative: Meyer only 
holds it to be indic.) account yourselves . 
(better than ‘infer yourselves to be,’ as 
Chrys. and Beza,—see reff. and on ch. iii. 
28) dead (indeed) unto sin (as ver. 2 aud 
following), but alive unto God in Christ 
Jesus (i.e. ‘by virtue of your union with 
Him? not through (διά) Christ Jesus; in 
this chapter it is not Christ’s Mediator- 
BB 


370 ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. VE; 
f=chvt οὖν f βασιλευέτω ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐν τῷ ὃ θνητῷ ὑμῶν σώματι, 


ech. viii. ll. h g? 2 ς 7 - 1.3 θ > a 
” 1 Cor. xv. 53, εἰς τὸ =~UTAKOVELY ταις ETTLOVELLALS αυτου. 


54. 2 Οοτ. k , | , C2. LA m “ > ΄ a. ΥἿΝ , 
iv 11. το ὦ παρίστανετε TA! μέλη ὑμῶν ™ ὅπλα ἀδικίας τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ, 
only. 90 ᾽ \ ἢ 7 ε \ a A . \ > ~ 
. 23. n 
πε pc ref. ἀλλὰ οὐρα νὰ νόμον ἑαυτοὺς τῷ θεῷ ὡςεὶ ἐκ νεκρῶν 
ich. i. 24 4 a \ , e a ov / A a 
ko here ke ζῶντας, Kal τὰ | μέλη ὑμῶν πὶ ὅπλα δικαιοσύνης τῷ θεῷ. 
(5 times). ΄ ' \ ΄ a > ΄ > ΄ > ε \ 
ii. 22, 14 x < oO 
apd apapTia yap be ass ov “κυριεύσει: ov yap ἐστε © UTO 
> ’ > \ e / 
Iraul{here νόμον, ἀλλὰ ° ὑπὸ χάριν. 
bis. 
bis. 1 Cor. vi. 15 [366] 9122.) only, exc. Matt. v. 29, 30. James iii. 5,6, iv. 1, Exod. xxix. 17 al. m here 
bis. John xviii. 3. ch. xiii. 12. 2 Cor. vi. 7. x. 4 ‘only. Jer. xxi. 4, n ver. 11. ΟἹ Cor. ix. 20 τοῦ, 


12. exaxovew F [ Meth-ms, 1. rec αὐτὴ ev Tats επιθ. αὐτου (appy a combination 
of the two readings), with C3KL[P] rel syr [Bas, Euthal-ms}] Chr, Thdrt Thi Gc: 
ἀυτη, omg the rest, DF spec Iren-int, [Orig-int,] Tert, Vict- tun, : txt ABC & [47] vulg 
(not F- lat) D?-lat Syr coptt «th arm Orig,[ints |} Epiph, Antch, Damase Jer Aug;sepe} 
Sedul Bede. 

13. rec (for wser) ws, with DFKL[P] 17 rel [Bas,] Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] Gc: “txt ABC 
[47] Epiph, Damasc. ζωντες DIF, om ta (bef 2nd μελη) B. 

14. for 1st ov, οὐκετι N}(nurked for erasure by &% but the marks erased) [Καὶ Orig-e, 
Thdrt}. (aAAa, so BCD! FR?) 


13 μηδὲ ; 


ship, but His Headship, which is pro- 
minent.—év yp. Ἴησ., is not (Reiche, 
Meyer, Fritz.) to be joined with both 
vexp. TH ἅμ. and ζῶν. τ. θ., but only with 
the latter, next to which !t stands, and 
of which it is literally and positively, 
whereds of the other it is only figuratively 
(τῷ ὁμοιώμ., ver. 5) and negatively true). 
12, 13.] Hor tatory inferences from 
ver. 11: from μή to τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ, negative, 
answering to νεκροὺς τῇ au.—then posi- 
five, answering to ζῶντας τῷ θεῷ. 
12.| βασιλευέτω answers to the imagery 
throughout, in which Sin is a master or 
lord. [Ὁ is hardly right to lay a stress on 
it, and say (as Chrys.) οὐκ εἶπε μὴ οὖν 
(ζήτω ἡ ἧ σὰρξ μηδὲ ἐνεργείτω, ἀλλ᾽, ἢ ἅμαρ- 
τία μὴ βασιλευέτω. οὐ γὰρ τὴν φύσιν 
ἦλθεν ἀνελεῖν, ἀλλὰ τὴν προαίρεσιν διορ- 
θῶσαι: it is no matter of comparison be- 
tween reigning and indwelling merely, but 
between reigning and being deposed. 
But why τῷ θνητῷ iu. σώματιῦ᾽ ΟΊ; al., 
explain it ‘dead to sin,’ which it clearly 
cannot be. Chrys., Theodoret, Grot., and 
Reiche suppose the word inserted to re- 
mind us of the other life, and the shortness 
of the conflict, or (Theophyl.) of the short- 
ness of sinful pleasures; Kéllner,—to point 
out that it is dishonourable to us to serve 
Sin, whose reign is confined to the mortaé 
body ; Fritzsche, “ quoniam, qui peccato 
ministrum se praebet, adhuc in mortali cor- 
pore lwerere nec nisi fragilis vitee meminisse 
videtur ;’ De Wette, Tholuck, al., that the 
Apostle, wishes to keep in view the con- 
nexion between sin and death on the one 
hand, and that συν(ὴν which is freed from 
death on the other. This last view seems 
the most probable. See 2 Cor. iv. 11 and 
note. There is considerable uncertainty 


in the reading of the latter part of this 
verse. ‘That which I have adopted is sup- 
ported by the primary Mss. and has the 
approval of Lachinann, Tischendorf, Meyer, 
and De Wette. 13. | Nor render (see 
reff. ;—us a soldier renders his service to 
his sovereign, or a servant to his master) 
your members (more particular than ‘ your 
bodies ;’ the individual members being in- 
struments of different lusts and sins) as 
instruments (or, ‘weapons, as Vualg., 

most of the Greek expositors, and Luth., 

Calv., Beza, Tholuck, which latter defends 
this rendering by Paul’s fondness for 
military similitudes, and by the occurrence 
of ὀψώνια below, ver. 23;—but as De W. 
observes, the compurison here is to servi- 
tude rather than soldiership) of unright- 
eousness to sin; but render (the present 
imperat. above denotes habit,—the ex- 
hortation guards against the recurrence 
of a devotion of the members to sin: this 
aorist imperat., on the other hand, as in 
ch. xii. 1, denotes an act of self-devotion 
to God once for all, not a mere recurrence 
of the habit) yourselves (not merely your 
members, but your whole selves, body, 
soul, und spirit) to God, as alive from 
having been dead (as in vv. 4 ff. and Eph. 
ii. 1—5), and your members as instru- 
ments (see above) δὲ righteousness to God 
(dat. ‘commodi,’ as indeed is τῇ auapr. 
above, the dat. after wapior. being there 
left to be supplied, because of τῇ au. tol- 
lowing). 14. An assurance, con- 
firming (by the ydp) the possibility of the 
surrender to God commanded in the last 
verse, that sin shall not be able to assert 
and maintain its rule in those who are 
not under the law but under grace. The 
future κυριεύσει cannot be taken as a 


15—16. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


911 


15 p , > e ΄ “ 5) > \ ort) ° γι: 
Τί οὖν; ἁμαρτήησωμεν, ὃτι οὐκ ἐσμὲν ὕπο νόμον » εν. ii. 9. 
Xi. ἐ. 


ἈΝ \ 
ἀλλὰ ο ὑπὸ χάριν ; 4“ μὴ γένοιτο. 


lees AD “ ᾿ τ 
Οὐκ OLOATE OTL W qch. ili.4 reff. 
rch. v. 16 reff. 


e \ , > , a 
K παριστάνετε ὃ ἑαυτοὺς δούλους ' εἰς " ὑπακοήν, δοῦλοί ἐστε Fok Us τοῖο" 


t e ς ΄ A ig f r > Q ΄ δ κα .Ὁ a 
@ UTTAKOUVETE, TOL αμαρτιαᾶς Els AVQaTOV ἢ UTTAKONS 


t constr., Matt. 
ΧΙ LT. Sz 
24. 


15. rec awaprnoouev, with rel Chr, Thdrt, {Damasc] ΤῊ] (c: ἡμαρτησαμεν F, 
peccavimus am [fuld] harl D%-lat G-lat: txt ABCDKL/ PIX ὁ mn 17 [47 Euthal-ms] 


Clem,. 
Syr sah arm-zoh(1805) [Orig-int, | Aug. 


command or exhortation, which use of 

the future would if not always, yet cer- 

tainly here, require the second person,— 

and would hardly suit a personification like 

ἁμαρτία. The second part of the verse 

refers back to ch. v. 20, 21, where the law 

is ctated to be the multiplier of transgres- 

sion,—and accords with 1 Cor. xv. 56, 

ἢ δύναμις τῆς ἁμαρτίας, 6 νόμος. The 

stress is on κυριεύσει : 4. d. ‘ Your efforts 

to live a life of freedom from the tyranny 

of sin shall not be frustrated by its after 

all tyrannizing over you and asserting its 

dominion: for ye are not under that law 

which is the strength of sin, but under that 

grace (here in the widest sense, justifying 

and sanctifying,—grace in all its attributes 

and workings) in which is no condem- 

nation,’ ch. vili. 1. [0 will be seen from 

the above, that Liuterpret κυριεύσει rather 

of the eventual triumph of sin by obtaining 

domination over us, than of its reducing us 

under its subjection as servants in this life. 

This is necessary, both to fit this verse into 

the context, and to suit the question which 

arises in the next. See Calvin’s masterly 

note. So also Tholuck and De Wette. 
The discussions (in Stuart and al.) as 

to whether νόμ. is the moral or ceremonial 
law, and as to whether we are bound by the 
former, are irrelevant here: the assertion 
being merely that of the general matter of 
fact, about which there can be no question, 
that we (Christians) are not under the law, 
placed in a covenant of legal obedience, but 
under grace,—placed in a covenant of justi- 
fication by faith and under the promise of 

the indwelling Spirit—subjects of a higher 
law—even the law of the spirit of life in 
Christ Jesus, ch. viii. 2. Whether we are 

bound by the law, and how far, depends on 
how far the law itself spoke the immutable 
moral truth of God’s government of the 

world, or was adapted to temporary observ- 

ances and symbolic rites now abolished,— 

the whole of which subject is not under 

consideration here. i make these remarks 
to justify myself for not entering into those 
long and irrelevant discussions with which 
many of our commentaries are interrupted, 
and the sense of the Apostle’s argument 





(adda, so BCFR! [ Damasc ].) 
16. ins 7 bef ave D'F demid flor harl! sah Sedul. 


om es θανατὸον DE [am] 


confounded. 15—23.] The being 
under grace (free from the condemnation 
of sin) and not under the law, is no en- 
couragement to sin: for (vv. 16—19) we 
have renounced the service of sin, and 
have become the servants of righteous- 
ness: and (vv. 20—23) the consequences 
of the service of sin are terrible and fatal, 
whereas those of the service of righteous- 


ness are blessed and glorious. 15. | 

τί οὖν (sc. ἐστίν) ; = τί οὖν ἐροῦμεν; 
«ε 4 

ver. 1. ἁμαρτήσωμεν) Must we 


imagine that we may sin? may we sin t— 
the aor. because he is speaking of com- 
mitting acts of sin [not of a habit of living 
in sin, although that would be induced 
by such acts]: on the deliberative sub- 
junctive, see ver. 1. This question is 
not, any more than that of ver. 1, put into 
the mouth of an objector, but is part of 
the Apostle’s own discourse, arising out 
of what has preceded, and answered by 
him in the following verses. 16. ] 
‘You are the servants either of God or of 
sin,—there is no third course.’ The former 
part of the verse as far as ὑπακούετε re- 
minds them merely of an universal truth, — 
that the yielding ourselves servants for 
obedience to any one, implies the serving, 
being (in reality) the servants of such per- 
son. ‘Then this is applied in the form of a 
dilemma, implying that there is no third 
service, 4. 4. * Now this must be true of 
you with regard either to sin or to God. 
Know ye uot, that to whom ye yield 
yourselves servants with a view to obe- 
dience, his servants ye are to whom ye 
obey, (and in this case) either (ἤτοι---ἤ 
only occurs here in N. Τ. ἤτοι in alter- 
natives is exclusive, cf. Herod. i. 11, δίδωμε 
αἵρεσιν, ὁκοτέρην βούλεαι τραπέσθαι .. . 
ἤτοι κεῖνόν γε τὸν ταῦτα βουλεύσαντα 
δεῖ ἀπόλλυσθαι, ἢ σὲ τὸν ἐμὲ. . « - ἴξοογ. 
ἀντιδ. p. 817, ἦλθεν ἂν ἤτοι κατηγορήσων 
ἢ καταμαρτυρήσων, and see Hartung, Par- 
tikellehre, ii. 355 f.) (servants) of sin, 
unto death (‘ with death as the result,’— 
not physical death merely, nor eternal 
death merely, but DEATH (by sin) in its 
most general sense, as the contrast to (life 
by) RIGHTEOUSNESS, —the state of misery 


Se - 


372 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


VI. 


, , ry , ‘\ 7 ”~ cal 
wach. vias. Tels δικαιοσύνην ; 17 χάρις δὲ τῷ θεῷ, ὅτι ἧτε δοῦλοι 


1 Cor. συ. δ. 
2 Cor. ii. 14. 
viii. 16. ix. 

5 


v Mark xii. 30, 


Iv. 29. 

W constr., ch. 
1. 24. see 
note. 

Acts xxiii. 
25. 3 Macc. 
iii. 30. y Acts ii. 42 reff. 
1.21 Ald. 2 Macc. i. 27. ii. 22 only. 
.Ἱ Cor. ii. 3 reff. d ver. 13. 
ch. i. 24 reff. g ch. iv. 7 reff. 


τῆς ἁμαρτίας, ὑπηκούσατε 
Y παρεδόθητε * τύπον Y διδαχῆς, 18 5 ἐλευθερωθέντες δὲ 
i. ἀπὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὅ ἐδουλώθητε τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ. 
θρώπινον λέγω διὰ τὴν “ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς ὑμῶν. 
ov \ d ΄ 4 d ͵ "a a e - a 
ὥςπερ yap ἃ παρεστήσατε Ta “*peAn ὑμῶν “δοῦλα τῇ 
f2 / \ a 8 ? / h > \ 8 > / “ 

ἀκαθαρσίᾳ καὶ τῇ ἕ ἀνομίᾳ “eis τὴν ὃ ἀνομίαν, οὕτως 


h ch. ν. 16 reff. 


δὲ ἡ ἐκ καρδίας * εἰς ὃν 


190 ἀν- 


z John viii. 32, 36. ver. 22. ch. viii. 2,21. Gal. ν. 1 only+. Sir. 
a Acts vii. 6 reff. 


. see ch. ili. 5. 
e adj. here bis only. Wisd. xv. 7. Eur. Hec. 137. 
Acts xi. 18 reff. ν 


b Acts xvii. 25 ref. 


17. ins καθαρας bef καρδιας A 13. 26 Chr,-inss(txty. 1), ex toto corde eth. 
18. for δε, ovy CR! [arm]: om m 89. 62 lect-12 tol (copt). 


19. for δουλα (twice), δουλευειν F latt [Orig-int, Ambrst ]. 


B Syr Sedul. 


induced by sin, in all its awful aspects and 
consequences :—and so throughout this 
passage and ch. vii.), or of obedience (τοῦ 
θεοῦ, sc.—obedience to Him who alone 
ought to be obeyed) unto righteousness 
(with righteousness as its result; not im- 
puted merely, nor implanted merely, but 
RIGHTEOUSNESS in its most general sense 
as the contrast to death,—the state of 
blessedness induced by holiness, and in- 
volving in it, as a less in a greater, eternal 
life: and so throughout this passage)? 

17, 18.] The dilemma solved for 
them by reference to the matter or fact: 
that they were once servants of sin, but on 
receiving the gospel, obeyed its teaching : 
and consequently were freed from the 
service of sin, and became the servants of 
righteousness :—and this in the form of a 
thanksgiving to God (1 Cor. i. 14) whose 
work in them it was. There is a stress 
on ἦτε as referring to a state past. So 
Eph. v. 8: on account of which stress 
apparently the μέν, which would naturally 
follow it, is omitted. Ἰ τ eo 
διδαχῆς) Attr.: the simple construction 
would be ὑπηκούσατε τῷ τύπῳ Tis διδ. εἰς 
ὃν (or ὃν) παρεδόθητε, ye obeyed (ὑπ. on 
account of ὑπακοή above) from the heart 
(reff.) that form of teaching (so μόρφωσις 
ch. ii. 20: see examples in Fritzsche, 
vol, i. p. 418 ; most probably used of the 
practical norma agendi accompanying the 
doctrine of the gospel; so Calv., Luth., 
Beza, Reiche:—De W. thinks it is the 
Pauline form of teaching, of justification 
by faith, distinguished from the Judaistic) 
to which ye were delivered ({not as E. V., 
‘which was delivered you’) this inver- 
sion to the passive agrees admirably with 
τύπος, as a mould, exemplar, or pattern 
after which they were to be fashioned : 
50 κατὰ τὰ δόγματα τυποῦσθαι, Arrian. 
Enchir. ii. 19 (Thol.): and Beza,—‘ hoc 
dicendi genus magnam quandam emphasin 


om εἰς THY ανομιαν 


videtur habere. Ita enim significatur evan- 
gelicam doctrinam quasi instar typi cujus- 
dam esse, cui veluti immittamur, ut ejus 
figure conformemur, et totam istam trans- 
formationem aliunde provenire.’ (Thol.) 
And Chrys. remarks, τὸ παραδοθῆναι, τὴν 
τοῦ θεοῦ βοηθείαν αἰνίττεται. See on the 
construction, Winer, edn. 6, § 24. 2. b). 

18: ᾿ἔλευθ. τ (Ge δικαιοσ.) And (this 
verse is closely united with the foregoing ; 
Riickert, Reiche, and Meyer think that 
it might be stated as a syllogistie conclu- 
sion, of which the dilemma is the major, 
and the fact of ver. 17 the minor) being 
freed from sin, ye were enslaved (see on 
next verse) to righteousness. 19. ] 
For the expression ἐδουλώθητε the Apostle 
apologizes: ‘it is not literally so; the 
servant of righteousness is no slave, under 
no yoke of bondage; but in order to set 
the contrast between the former and the 
new state better before you, I have used 
this word : I speak as a man (according 
to the requirements of rhetorical anti- 
thesis) on account of the (intellectual, as 
De W. and Thol.: not moral, as Meyer 
and Olsh.) weakness of your flesh (i.e. 
‘ because you are σαρκικοί and not mvevua- 
τικοί, and want such figures to set the 
truth before you.’ Orig., Chrys., Theo- 
doret, Calv., Estius, Wetst., al., take these 
words in a totally different sense: "7 
require of you nothing which your fleshly 
weakness will not bear’): for (explana- 
tory of ἐδουλώθ.) like as ye (once) ren- 
dered up your members (as) servants to 
impurity and to lawlessness (two divi- 
sions of auaprla—impurity, against a 
man’s self,—lawlessness against God), 
unto lawlessness (both which, axa. and 
avou., lead to ἀνομία, result in it: ‘qui 
justitie serviunt, proficiunt : ἄνομοι, ini- 
qui, sunt inigui, nihil amplius” Bengel: 
not ‘from one ἀνομία to another, as 
(Kcum., Theophyl., Luth., Grot., Erasm., 


«αὔραν een 


a | 


17—238. 
πα ἢ 

νὺν 

Besides 
εἰς * ἀγιασμον. 


ἐλεύθεροι are τῇ * δικαιοσύνῃ. 


ΤΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


0 ὅτε γὰρ δοῦλοι ἦτε τῆς ἁμαρτίας, 


373 


, \ d r c lal e§ a A ὃ s β : 
παραστήσατε Ta“ μέλη ὑμῶν © OOVAA TH OLKALOTUIN i Paul (here bis 


ver. 22. 

1 Cor. i. 30 
al5.) only, 
exc. Heb. xii. 
14. 1 Pet. 


9 t = ‘ 
21 τίνα οὖν * καρπὸν 
i. 2. 2 Macc. 


ἱ εἴ ε / τ ΠῚ ᾿ ’ fore “ n ’ / θ \ \ ‘ iv. 36 
of TE TOTE 5 Ep OLS νυν επαισχυνεσ €, TO μὲν yap aa Υ̓ 


ο τέλος ἐκείνων θάνατος. 


τῆς Pawaptias, ἢ δουλωθέντες δὲ τῷ θεῷ, 


ἱκαρπὸν ὑμῶν ἢ 


νιον, 39 τὰ γὰρ 4 ὀψώνια τῆς 


δὲ ᾿χάρισμω τοῦ θεοῦ ζωὴ αἰώνιος ἐν χριστῷ “Inood κ᾿ 


aii. 19. p ver. 18. 
ili. 28. xiv. 32 only. 


aft ovrws ins xa Καὶ 7 tol Syr [coptt] arm Tert, Sedul. 
rec om μεν, with ACD°KL[P JN! rel [vulg copt arm] 


21. [wore D!-gr(appy). ] 


22 νυνὶ δὲ Ρ ἐλευθερωθέντες ? ἀπὸ 


> ; / \ , \ 
els ἰ ἁγιασμόν, τὸ δὲ 9 τέλος ζωὴν αἰώ- 


q Luke iii. 14. 
τ ΞΟ Valo, 262 xis ous 


dat., ver. 2 
reff. 1 Cor. 
xiv. 20. 

l ch. i. 13 reff. 


] ¥ ; sp 
EYETE TOV m= Lukeii. 
x τ 47. Acts iii. 
/ 10, 12. iv. 21. 
Jer. i. 12. 


. nch. i. 16 reff. 
ο = 2 Cor. zi. 
Te 15. Phil. iii. 
19. Heb. vi. 
1 Pet. iv. 
Wisd. 
1 Macc. 


ἁμαρτίας θάνατος, 


17. 


1 Cor. ix. 7. 2Cor.'xi. 8 only +. Esdr. iv. 56, 


for 2nd SovAa, οπλα A. 


Clem, Chr, Thl Gc [Damase Orig-int, Tert, Ambrst]: ins BD!FX3 syr Chr-mss 


Thdrt. 
22. for δε, re(but corrd) δὲ", 


at end ins ἐστιν F latt(not fuld) | Orig-int, |. 


[23. om ra yap to αιωνιος (passing from αἰων. to αἰων.) P.| 


al.: because (De W.) ἀνομία is not an 
act, but a principle), 80 now render up 
your members (as) servants to righteous- 
ness (see ver. 16) unto (leading to, having 
as its result, perfect) sanctification (con- 
trast to ἀνομία, and both embracing their 
respective consequences). 20—23.] 
_ As a further urging of the above exhor- 
tations, the Apostle contrasts the end of 
their former life with that of their pre- 
sent. 20.] yap introduces a motive 
for the foregoing: but the verse [ properly ] 
belongs to the following: for ver. 22 is 
the contrast to it. Meyer and Fritz. think 
it to be an explanation of ver. 19, but are 
certainly mistaken. For when ye were 
servants of sin, ye were free in relation 
to (dat. of regard or reference, Winer, 
edn. 6, § 31. 1) righteousness. There 
is doubtless a latent irony in the use of 
ἐλεύθεροι here; but it must not be brought 
out too strongly: it does not appear, till 
the end of that freedom is declared. 
21.] ‘ Well, then, ye were free: and what 
was the benefit ?’ οὖν concedes and assumes. 
There are two ways of pointing: 
(1) that of E. V., carrying on the ques- 
tion to ἐπαισχύνεσθε, and supplying ἐπ᾽ 
ἐκείνοις before ἐφ᾽ οἷς, adopted by Chrys., 
(Ec., Vulg., Beza, Grot., Estius, Bengel, 
Reiche, Meyer, Fritz., Stuart, al. But 
this though good as far as construction is 
concerned, is inconsistent with the N. T. 
meaning of καρπός, which is ‘ actions,’ the 
JSruit of the man considered as the tree, 
not ‘ wages,’ or ‘reward, the fruit of his 
actions; see below, ver. 22, and ch. i. 13, 
note. So even Phil. i. 22 (see note). 
So that I much prefer (2. the punctuation 
of Theod. Mops., Theodoret, Theophyl., 
Luth., Melancth., Koppe, Flatt, Tholvek, 


Rickert, K6éllner, Olsh., Lachm., Griesb., 
De Wette, al., placing the interrogation 
at τότε, and making ἐφ᾽ οἷς v. ἐπαισχ. the 
answer. What fruit then had ye at that 
time? (Things, deeds) of which ye are 
now ashamed. TO μὲν yap TEX. ἐκ. 
9.] the reason of their present shame. 
For the end (= virtually ὀψώνια, ver. 23, 
and would be a mere repetition of καρπός 
on the first method of punctuation above) 
of those things (those καρποί consisting 
of sinful acts) is death (death in the 
widest sense, see note on ver. 16,—phy- 
sical, which has been the end of sin, in 
which we are all involved,—-and spiritual 
and eternal, which will be the end of 
actual sin if followed out). 22. ] 
Contrast of your present state to that 
former one: freedom from sin as a mas- 
ter,—-servitude (compare ἀνθρώπινον λέγω, 
ver. 19) to God (a higher description than 
merely δικαιοσύνη, the actual antithesis to 
ἁμαρτία, ver. 18. The devil would be 
the corresponding antithetical power : and 
not unfrequently appears in the teaching 
of Paul: but usually in casual expressions, 
as Eph. iv. 27; vi. 11; 2 Tim. ii. 26, not 
as the principal figure in a course of argu- 
ment),— fruit (see on καρπός, above, ver. 
21,—and remark τὸν καρπόν, your fruit, 
fruit actually brought forth, q. ἃ. ἔχετε 
καρπόν, kal ὃ καρπὸς ὑμῶν ἁγιασμός) unto 
(leading unto perfect) sanctification,— 
and the end (governed by ἔχετε) life 
everlasting. 23.] The ends of the 
two courses placed pointedly and anti- 
thetically, and the inherent difference, 
that whereas death (see above)’ is the 
wages (6). = pay, or ration, of soldiers ; 
compare the similitude in ver. 13, and 
remarks there) of sin, earned and paid 


374 ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. Vii. 
, ΄ ~ 7, Ἂ ΕῚ -. , 
meh.vin3 TO κυρίῳ ἡμῶν. VII. 1 Ἢ ™ ἀγνοεῖτε, ἀδελφοι, γινώ- aBcoF 
(reff.). , rn “ ¢ , , - ΚΙΓΡῚΕ 
nch-vi914 σκουσιν γὰρ νόμον λαλῶ, ' ὅτι ὁ νόμος " κυριεύει ° τοῦ ad Ἢ δ 
Ὁ : : , > 4? “ 4 A δ e \ 7 hkl 
Katt xix ὦ; ἀνθρώπου Ped P ὅσον P χρόνον ζῇ; 3 ἡ yap 4 ὕπανδρος (ὃ πο 17 
Mark il. 27 al, \ A a > \ r , ͵ 4. \ ΕῚ ΄ ΄ [47] 
ΡῚ Cor. vit. 38. γυνὴ τῷ ζῶντι ἀνδρὶ " δέδεται νόμῳ: ἐὰν δὲ ἀποθάνῃ ὁ 
3 τΥ, ἃ. . © 
2 ᾽ ey > / “ 3 Ν »" ΄ “ / 
18. Deu. ἀνήρ, δ΄ κατήργηται “ ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου " τοῦ ἀνδρός. ὃ ἡ dpa 
xii. 19. nr an ‘ ’ 4λ 
here only. w ᾿ i x ὶ vf 
4 here ¢ Me οὖν ζῶντος ‘ro ἀνδρὸς μοιχαλὶς ΧΡΉΜΘΥΟΔΟΣ ἐὰν 
to si’ “yévntat ἀνδρὶ ® ἑτέρῳ' ἐὰν δὲ ἀποθάνῃ ὁ ἀνήρ, ἐλευθέρα 
9. xli. 21 
only. r — 1 Cor. vii. 27, 39. s ch. iii. 3 reff. tver.6. Gal. v. 4. Ἧι — ch. 
vi. 18,22. 2Cor. xi. 3, v gen. of reference, Mark 1. 4. John v. 29 bis. 2 Cor. ix. 13 al. Winer, edn. 
6, 3 30. 2. B. w ch. vy. 18 reff. x here bis. Matt. xii. 39. xvi.4\|)Mk. Jamesiv.4. 2 Pet. 
ii. 14only. Ezek. xvi. 38 al. == Acts xi. 26 only. 


z~ here 3ce only. Levit. xxii. 12. 


Cuap. VII. 1. γιγνωσκουσιν L. 
3. aft ζωντος, add yp G. 


Syr. 


down,— eternal life is no ὀψώνιον, nothing 
earned, but the free gift of God to His 
soldiers and servants ;—and that in (not 
‘ through,’ —true enough, but not implied 
in ἐν, see above on ver. 11) Christ Jesus 
our Lord. VII. 1—6.] The explana- 
tion and proof of the assertion ch. vi. 14, 
οὐ γάρ ἐστε ὑπὸ νόμον, ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ χάριν : 
the answer to the question of νὶ. 1ὅ having 
occupied vi. 16—23. 1—4.] The 
Christian is dead to the law by being 
dead with Christ, and has become His. 
1.] Connect with ch. vi. 14, which 
is in fact the sentence immediately pre- 
ceding. Reiche and Meyer connect with 
vi. 23; ‘The gift of God is eternal life in 
Jesus Christ our Lord: this you can only 
doubt by being ignorant,’ &e. 
Krehl believes ch. vii. to be the expansion 
of ‘Death is the wages of sin,’—and ch. 
vili., of ‘the free gitt of God is eternal 
life” But not only does this division not 
hold, for much of ch. viii. regards the con- 
flict with sin and infirmity,—but the pro- 
minence of νόμος as the subject here for- 
bids the connexion with ὀψώνια τῆς auapr. 
θάνατος. The steps of the proof are 
these: Zhe law binds a man only so 
long as he lives (ver. 1):—e.g. a married 
woman is only bound to her husband so 
Jong as he lives (vv. 2, 3):—so also the 
Christian being dead with Christ and alive 
to Him is freed from the law (ver. 4). 
ἀδελφοί) Not addressed particularly 
to Jewish Christians : see below : but gene- 
rally to the Roman church. γινώσ- 
κουσιν γ. νόμ. AaA.] For I am speaking 
(writing) to men acquainted with the 
law; i.e. the persons to whom I address 
this epistle are such as know the law: not 
“1 speak to those who know the law,’ as if 
he were now addressing a different class 
of persons,—which would require τοῖς γὰρ 


a Deut. xxiv. 2 (4). 


ἐχρημάτιζε βασιλεύς, Diod. Sic. xx. 53. 
> : 


Jer. iii. 1, ver. 23 reff. 


2. om 2nd του F(but not G). 


C χρημ. bef μοιχ. DEF latt goth [copt Orig-int, }. 
add ἡ γυνὴ A cupt Orig,[om,(and int,)] Chr,[om, }. 


att o ἀνὴρ ins avtns DF [d] 


γινώσκουσιν τὸν νόμον τοῦτό φημι, see Gal. 
iv. 21. Nor does the knowledge of the 
law here affirmed of the Romans prove 
that the majority of them were Jewish 
Christians: they may have been Gentile 
prosely tes. ὅτι ὁ νόμ. κυρ. τοῦ 
ἀνθρ. ΡΣ 1 that the (Mosaic: for of 
that, and not of any other law, is the whole 
argument) law hath power over 8 man 
(not ὁ νόμ. Tod ἀνθρώπου, ‘a man’s law,’ 
and κυριεύει absolute, ‘ has dominion,’ —as 
Hawm. and Dr. Burton, which is very 
questionable Greek and still worse sense) 
as long time as he (the man, see vv. 4 
and 6:—not the law, as Origen, Erasm., 
Grot., Estius, al., which would introduce 
the irrelevant question of the abrogation of 
the law, whereas the whole matter in argu- 
ment is the relation of the Christian to the 
law) lives. 2.1 For (not merely =e. ¢., 
but, as Thol., the example is itself the 
proof) the married (ref.) woman is bound 
by the law to the living husband: but 
if the husband die, she is set free from 
(lit. annulled from) the law of (‘ regard- 
ing, compare reff. and 6 νόμος τοῦ λεπροῦ, 
Levit. xiv. 2) the husband (no hypallage). 

3.1 And accordingly (ἄρα οὖν, ‘ from 
the same consideration, it follows that’) 
while her husband lives she ehali be 
called (see ref, :—and on this use of the 
future, as declaring what shall follow on a 
condition being fulfilled, Winer, edn. 6, 
§ 40. 6) an adulteress, if she attach her- 
self to (become the wife of) another man: 
but if her husband die, she is free from 
the law (τοῦ avdpds), so that (it matters 
little whether τοῦ μή is the resulé or the 
purpose: it is better always to keep the 
latter in view, and to regurd the result in 
such sentences as for the moment spoken 
of as the purpose to which its constituents 
contributed) she is not an adulteress, 


1—5. 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 


Τὺ 


’ ἊΝ la) r A = \ , 
ἐστὶν ἃ ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμον», ° τοῦ μὴ εἶναι αὐτὴν * μοιχαλίδα ©} Cor. x.13 
ret. 


τὰ γενομένην ἀνδρὶ *” ἑτέρῳ. 


ἃ ἐθανατώθητε © τῷ νόμῳ διὰ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ χριστοῦ, εἰς 


\ ᾿ , [ὦ nw e ΄ al 
τὸ τὰ γενέσθαι ὑμᾶς ὃ ἑτέρῳ, TH ! 
£ καρποφορήσωμεν τῷ θεῷ. 
e dat., ch. vi. 10, 11. 


i. 6,10 only. Hab. iii. 17, Wisd. x. 7 only. 


4. καὶ vues bef αδελῴφοι μου δὲ [goth arm Damasc ]. 


and -φορεσαι in ver ὃ F, 


5. nunv D![-gr]. 


though she have attached herself to 
another man. So far all is clear. 
Kut when we come to the application of 
the example, ¢his must carefully be borne 
in mind, as tending to clear up all the 
confusion which has here been found by 
Commentators :—that the Apostle is insist- 
ing on the fact, that DFATH DISSOLVES 
LEGAL OBLIGATION : but he is not draw- 
ing an exact parallel between the persons 
in his example, and the persous in his ap- 
plication. The comparison might be thus 
made in terms common to both : (1) Death 
has dissolved the legal obligation between 
man and wife: therefore the wife is at 
liberty to be married to another :—(2) 
Deuth has dissolved the legal obligation 
between the law and us: therefore we are 
at liberty to be married to another. So 
far the comparison is strict. Further it 
will not hold: for in the example, the 
liberated person is the survivor,—in the 
thing treated, the liberated person is the 
dead person. And so tar from this being 
an oversight or an inaccuracy, it is no 
more than that to which, more or less, all 
comparisons are liable; and no more can 
be required of them than that they should 
fit, in the kernel and intent of the simili- 
tude. If it be required here to apply the 
example further, there is no difficulty nor 
inconsistency in saying (as Chrys. al.) that 
our first Husband was the Law, and our 
second is Christ; but then it must be 
carefully borne in mind, that we are freed, 
not by the law having died to us, (which 
matter here is not treated,) but by our 
having died to the law. It is not necessary 
with Caly. and Tholuck, to suppose that 
in ver. 4 there is an euphemistic inversion, 
‘we are dead to the law,’ instead of ‘the 
law is dead to us;? indeed such a supposi- 
tion would, from what is said above, much 
weaken the argument, which rests on our 
being slain with Christ, and so freed from 
the law. 4.) So then (inference both 
trom ver. 1, the general fact, and vv. 2, 3, 
the example), my brethren, ye also (as 
well as the woman in my example, who is 
dead to the law of her husband) were 


4 ὥςτε ἀδελφοί μου, καὶ ὑμεῖς 


ἐκ νεκρῶν ἴ ἐγερθέντι, ἵνα 
- ff \ eo “ ' 
ὃ ὅτε yap ἣμεν ἐν TH" σαρκί, 


f 1 Cor. xv. 12 reff. 
(-pos, Acts xiv. 17.) 


om Ist ev F[-gr]. 


d Matt. x. 21 
al5. ip 
Gospp. ch. 
vill. 13, 36 
(from Ps. 
xliii. 22). 

2 Cor. vi. 9. 

1 Pet. iii. 18. 

2 Chron. 
xxiii. 15. 
Matt. xiii. 23 ||. Mark iv. 28. 
h = ch. viii. 12 al. 


g here bis. Col. 


see note. 


μοι F, καρποφυρεσωμεν 


slain to the law (crucified, see Gal. ii. 19, 
20. The more violent word is used instead 
of ἀπεθάνετε, to recall the violent death of 
Christ, in which, and after the manner of 
which, believers have been put to death to 
the law and sin,—and the historic aorist 
to remind them of the great Event by 
which this was brought about) by means 
of the (crucified) Body (compare διὰ τῆς 
mpostopas Tod σώματος τοῦ Ino. xp., Heb. 
x. 10) of Christ, that you should become 
attached to another, (even) to Him who 
was raised from the dead (alluding both 
to the comparison in vv. 2, 3, γένηται 
ἀνδρὶ ἑτέρῳ, and to ch. vi. 4, 5, ἵνα ὥςπ. 
ἠγέρθη χριστὸς x.7.A.), that we should 
(here strictly final, as Thol., Meyer, De 
W., ἄς. Not merely ecbatic, as Fritzsche) 
bring forth fruit (alluding to καρπόν, 
ch. iv. 22, and at the same time (Luke 
i. 42) carrying on the similitude of mar- 
riage. Not that this latter must be pressed, 
for there is only an allusion to it: nor on 
the other hand need the least objection 
be raised to such an understanding of the 
words, as any one conversant with St. Paul’s 
way of speaking on this subject will at once 
feel: compare 2 Cor. xi.2; Eph. v. 30—82) 
to (dat. commodi, ‘to the honour of’) God. 

5, 6.1 In the fleshly state (betore 
we died with Christ) sznful passions which 
were by the Law worked in us and brought 
forth fruit to death: but now that we are 
dead to thelaw,we are no longer servants vin 
the oldness of the letter, but in the newness 
of the spirit. The Law (ch. v. 20, alluded 
to again vi. 14) was the multiplier of sin 
To this thought, and the inferences from 
it, the Apostle now recurs, and contrasts 
the state under the jaw in this respect, 
with that of the believer in Christ. For 
when we were in the flesh (= virtually, 
“under the Jaw:” see the antithesis in 
ver. 6: so almost all Commentators, an- 
cient and modern,—except Beza, Bengel, 
Reiche, and Thol., who take it to mean 
the mere: fleshly state, in which the Spirit 
is not yet energizing, and Ambrst., Calov., 
Olsh., al., who interpret it of the state of 
the unregenerate. But how doce ἐν TH 


O76 


i Paul, ch. viii. 
18al7. Heb. 
i179, 10. x, 
32. 1 Pet. 

i. 11 al3. 
only t. 

k gen. 6bj., ch. 
i. 26. 

1 Acts iii. 16. 

1 Pet. i. 21. 

m Matt. xiv. 2 
| Mk. Paul, 
1 Cor. xii. 

6 4115. 

James v. 16 

only. Isa. xli. 4. 
v. 4. ch. i. 18. 


n ch. vi. 13 reff. 
2 Thess. ii. 6. 
t ch. ii. 29. 2 Cor. iii. 6. 


only. 
w ch. iil. 4 reff 


v ch. iii. 5 reff. 


6. [for vu, νυν F.] 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


Ὁ ver. 12 reff. 
rch. vi. 6. Acts xx. 19 reff. 


Vi: 


. , fn et. ~ ! ~ ΄ 9 
τὰ ἱπαθήματα τῶν * ἁμαρτιῶν ta’ διὰ τοῦ νόμου ™ ἐνηρ- 
γεῖτο ἐν τοῖς " μέλεσιν ἡμῶν 5 εἰς τὸ ὃ καρποφορῆσαι 
τῷ θανάτῳ ὃ νυνὶ δὲ P κατηργήθημεν ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου. 
» “ 3 δι q , θ ef Τ᾿ ὃ , e lal 
ἀποθανόντες ἐν ᾧ “4 κατειχόμεθα, ὥςτε * δουλεύειν ἡμᾶς 
, ΄ \ > U ΄ 
ἐν " καινότητι ' πνεύματος καὶ οὐ ἃ παλαιότητι ‘ γραμματος.᾿ 
a € fe Ἁ ΄ 
7ν Τί οὖν " ἐροῦμεν ; ὁ νόμος ἁμαρτία ; © μὴ γένοιτο" 


p ver. 2. q = (John 
sch. vi.4 only. Ezek. xlvii. 12 
u here only+. Eurip. Hel. 1062. (-ος, ch. vi. 6.) 


rec αποθανοντος (see note): του θανατου DF latt Jer: txt 


ABCKL[P] rel am! syrr copt goth «th arm Bas, Chr, Cyr[-p Did, Euthal-ms] 


Thdrt Damase [Orig-int, | Tert. 


σαρκί denote ‘under the law?’ Some say, 
on account of its carnality, as more or less 
Theodoret, (Ec., Hammond, Grot., al.: 
some, on account of the power of sin under 
the law,—as Chrys., Theophyl., Calv., al. : 
best of all is it to understand it, with 
Rickert, Kéllner, Meyer, Fritz., De Wette, 
as pointing to the period before death 
with Christ, in which we were sensual and 
sinful: so that ἐν τῇ σαρκὶ εἶναι forms a 
contrast with θανατωθῆναι. But, as De 
W. observes, it must not with Fritz. be 
rendered ‘ quum viveremus,’ as this is never 
the sense of ἐν (τῇ) σαρκὶ (elvar),—not 
even 2 Cor. x. 3: nor, I may add, Phil. 
i. 24) the stirrings (‘passions of sins,’ 
objective gen., which Jed to sins: not by 
hendiadys for παθήμ. ἁμαρτωλά, which, as 
always, destroys the force) of sins, which 
were by means of the law (the zncite- 
ments,—not the sins, in this place, though 
ultimately it was so, the incitement lead- 
ing tothe sin. The full meaning of διὰ τοῦ 
νόμου must be kept, ‘which were by means 
of the law :’ i. 6. the law occasioned them. 
Locke argues for the rendering, ‘ under the 
law,’ ‘in the time of the law,’ which would 
destroy the force of the argument connect- 
ing the law with sin, here put so strongly as 
to require the question of ver. 7) wrought 
(‘energized :’ not pass., but middle: see 
note on Gal. v. 6) in our members (the in- 
struments of sin, ch. vi. 13) to the bring- 
ing forth of fruit (see on τοῦ μή ver. 3: 
the καρποφ. was the final object of their 
energizing, not the mere result. In 
καρποφ. here, the allusion to progeny is very 
distant, if it exists at all. Meyer makes it 
refer to an adulterous state, and personifies 
θάνατος ; but this can hardly be) unto 
death (only a verbal antithesis to τῷ θεῷ : 
—‘ whose end was death ’): 6.| But 
now (opposed to ére, ver. 5) have we been 
delivered (annulled) from the law, having 
died (to that) wherein we were held 
(the reading ἀποθανόντος cannot even be 


om nuas BF { Tert, ]. 


brought into discussion, as it appears to be 
only a conjecture of Beza’s, arising from a 
misunderstanding of the text (and of Chry- 
sostom’s commentary, who did not read 
it),—-see the analogy explained on ver. 1: 
the other reading, τοῦ θανάτου, is a cor- 
rection to suit ver.5. So chat ἐν @ either 
refers directly to νόμου, ἀποθανόντες being 
absolute and parenthetic, or we must under- 
stand ἐκείνῳ aft. ἀποθ. 1 prefer the latter, 
as suiting better the style of tle Apostle 
and the whole connexion. The omission 
of the demonstrative pron. probably is 
cecasioned by a desire to give especial 
prominence to the fact of ἀποθανόντες, 
or perhaps on account of the prepos. 
ἀπό in composition, as in ch. x. 14, πῶς 
οὖν ἐπικαλέσωνται εἰς ὃν οὐκ ἐπίστευσαν ;), 
so that we serve (not ‘should serve, as 
E. V.: the pres. describes the actual state : 
—understand ‘ God’ after serve) in the 
newness of the Spirit (i.e. of the Holy 
Spirit of God, who originates and pene- 
trates the Christian life:—the first men- 
tion of the Spirit so much spoken of in 
ch. viii.) and not in the oldness of the 
letter (the law being only a collection of 
precepts and prohibitions, but the Gospel 
a service of freedom, ruled by the Spirit, 
whose presence is liberty). καινότης and 
παλαιότης are not as in ch. vi. 4, καινότητι 
(wis, attributes of the genitives which 
follow them, but states in which those 
genitives are the ruling elements. 

7—25.| An explanation of the part 
which the law has in bringing out sin, by 
example of the Apostle’s own case. In 
this most important and difficult passage, 
it is of the first consequence to have a clear 
view of the form of illustration which the 
Apostle adopts, and of the reason why he 
adopts it. The former has been amply 
treated of by almost all Commentators : the 
latter, too generally, has escaped their en- 
quiry. But it furnishes, if satisfactorily 
treated, a key to the other. I ask then first, 


Ne 


j 
{ 


ΑΣΑ, 


ἀλλὰ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ. 


ll. Gal. iv. 15. 
why St. Paul suddenly changes here to the 
Jirst person? Aud the auswer is, because 
he is about to draw a conclusion negativing 
the question (6 νόμος auaptta;) upon purely 
subjective grounds, proceeding on that 
which passes within, when the work of the 
law is carried on in the heart. And he is 
about to depict this work of the law by an 
example which shall set it forth in vivid 
colours, in detail, in its connexion with sin 
inaman. Whatexample then so apposite, 
as his own ? Introspective as his character 
was, and purified as his inner vision was by 
the Holy Spirit of God, what example would 
so forcibly bring out the inward struggles 
of the man which prove the holiness of the 
law, while they shew its inseparable con- 
nexion with the production of sin ? If 
this be the reason why the first person is 
here assumed (and I can find no other 
which does not introduce into St. Paul’s 
style an arbitrariness and caprice which it 
least of all styles exhibits), then we must 
dismiss from our minds all exegesis which 
explains the passage of any other, in the 
first instance, than of Paul himself : him- 
self indeed, as an exemplar, wherein others 
may see themselves: but not himself zn the 


vidual men. This being done, there arises 
now a question equally important,—Of 
what self is it that he speaks throughout 
this passage? Is it always the same? Ifso, 
is it always the carnal, unregenerate self ? 
or alwaysthe spiritual, regenerate? Clearly 
not the latter always; for to that self the 
historical account of vv. 7—13 will not 
apply, and still less the assertion, in the 
present, of ver.14, Clearly net the former 
always : for to that the assertion of ver. 22 
will not apply, nor that of ver. 25. Is it 
always the complex se/f, made up of tlie 
prevailing spiritual-regenerate, with the 
remains of the carnal-unregenerate? Wot 


always this : although this seems nearer to 


satisfying the conditions: for i in the descrip- 
tion ver. 9, ἐγὼ ἔζων χωρὶς νόμου ποτέ, and 


_in ἐγὼ σάρκινός εἶμι κιτ.Χ. Ver. er. 14, there is 


no complexity, but the ἐγώ is clearly the 


carnal man. Therefore not always the 
same. If not always the same, where is the 
distinction? If we look carefully, the 
Apostle himself will guide us to it. Having 
carried on the ἐγώ unqualified and unex- 
plained till ver. 18, he there has occasion to 
say οὐκ οἰκεῖ ἐν ἐμοὶ ἀγαθόν. But he is con- 
scious that, as he had written to the Cor. 
(1 Cor. iii. 16), τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ οἰκεῖ ἐν 
ὕμιν: he therefore finds it necessary to cor- 


ΤΡ POMALOTS:; 


*éyvwv εἰ μὴ διὰ νόμου: THD > 


Winer, edn. 6, 


911 


Y TE x av omitted, 
John ix. 33. 
xv, 22. X1x. 
[2 Cor. x. 8.1 


ἢ 42. 2. γ — Chui ΠΣ 
rect himself by an explanation, what ἔγώ he 
meant, and adds to ἐν ἐμοί,---τουτέστιν ἐν 
τῇ σαρκίμου. So that ἐγώ there is equiva- 
lent to 7 σάρξ μου, i.e. ‘myself in my 
state of life to the law and sin, and acting 
according to the motions of sin.’ Again, 
when the approval of the law of God is 
affirmed (not the mere θέλω, which I will 
treat by and by), it is not barely ἐγώ, but to 
avoid confusion, in ver. 22 the Apostle adds 
κατὰ τὸν ἔσω ἄνθρωπον, and in ver. 25, 
pretixes αὐτός ; in both cases shewing that 
(see notes below) he speaks of the complex 
man, himself made up of an ἔσω, and an 
ἔξω υλυραεθε, of ὁ νοῦς and ἡ σάρξ. Are 
we then justified in assuming, that up to 
ver. 22 the carnal-unregenerate self is 
spoken of, but after that the complex self? 
Such a supposition would not be consistent 
with the assertion of the θέλω from ver. 15 
onwards: 70 such will existing in the car- 
nal unregenerate man. 1 believe the true 
account will be nearly as follows :—from 
ver. 7—18 incl. is historical, and the ἐγώ 
there is the historical self, under the work- 
ing of conviction of sin, and shewing the 
work of the law; in other words, the car- 
nal self in the transition state, under the 
first motions towards God generated by the 
law, which the law could never have per- 
fected. Then at ver. 14, Paul, according to 
a habit very common to him, keeps hold of 
the carnal self, and still having it in view, 
transfers himself into his present position, 
—altering the past tense into the present, 
still however meaning by ἐγώ (in ver. 14), 
n σάρξ μου. But, having passed into the 
present tense, he immediately xaingles with 
this mere action of the law upon the natural 
conscience, the motions of the will towards 
God which are in conflict with the motions 
towards sin in the members. And hence 
arises an apparent verbal confusion, because 
the ἐγώ e. g. in ver. 17, of whom it is said, 
οὐκ ἔτι ἐγὼ κατεργάζομαι αὐτό, being the 
entire personality, the complex self, is of 
far wider extent than the ἐγώ of whom it 
is said οὐκ οἰκεῖ ἐν ἐμοί, τουτέστιν ἐν TH 
σαρκί μου, ἀγαθόν. But the latter ἐγώ, in 
this part of the chapter, is shewn to be 
(vv. 17, 20) no longer properly ἐγώ, but 7 
οἰκοῦσα ἐν ἐμοὶ duaptia,—and so it passes 
altogether out of sight after ver. 20, and 
its place is taken by the actual then exist- 
ing complex self of Paul, compounded of 
the regenerate spiritual man, sympathizing 
with God’s law, serving God’s law, in con- 
flict with the still remaining though deca- 
dent carnal man, whose essence it is to serve 
the law of sin, to bring captive to the law 


378 MPO: PEM AIOE: VII. 
chit ἡ γὰρ * ἐπιθυμίαν οὐκ ἤδειν, εἰ μὴ ὁ νόμος ἔλεγεν Οὐκ 
of sin. This state of conflict and division that, but .... There surely is no con- 
against one’s self would infallibly bring trast to ὁ νόμ. ἁμαρτία. see ver. 8. 
about utter ruin, and might well lead to οὐκ ἔγνων) ‘non cognoscebam, ni... οὗ 
despair (ver. 24), but for the rescue which - 1 was living in a state of ignorance 
God’s grace has provided by Jesus Christ of sin, wereitnot.... This construction 
our Lord. And this rescue hus been such, comprehends in it οὐκ ἂν ἔγνων as a con- 
that I, the αὐτὸς ἐγώ of ver. 25, the real sequence, and is therefore often said to be 
self, the nobler and better part of the man, put for it; but it has its propriety, as here, 
serve, with the νοῦς (see there), the law of where a historical state is being described, 
God: whereas it is only with the flesh, ac- and the unconditional indicative is more 
cording to which (ch. viii. 4) Jdo not walk, appropriate. Tholuck makes it = ‘non 
but overcome and mortify it, that 1 serve cognoveram, ni....,’ in which ease the 
(am still subject to) the law of sin. Then  indic. expresses more plainly than the con- 
this subjection of the flesh to the law of junctive the absolute dependence of the 
sin, to the δουλεία τῆς φθορᾶς, is fully set fact on the condition. There is some 
out, in its nature,—consequences to the car- difficulty in understanding the mutual 
nal,—and uses to the spiritual,—in ch. viii. relation of the clauses, τὴν du. οὐκ ἔγνων, 
Any thing like a summary of the exe- and τήν Te yap ἐπιθ. οὐκ ἤδειν. [Ὁ is well 
gesis of this passage would be quite beyond known that τε differs from καί, in not 
my limits. 1 must refer the student tocom- coupling things co-ordinate, but attach- 
mentaries on this epistle alone,—and espe- ing things subordinate, to a former. Thus 


cially to that of 'Tholuck, where a complete 
and masterly history is given. It may 
suffice here to say, that most of the ancients 
suppose ἐγώ to represent mankind, or the 
Jews generally, and the whole to be taken 
chronologically,—to ver. 9 as before the 
law, after ver. 9 as under the law. This 
was once Augustine’s view, Prop. 44 in Ep. 
ad Rom. vol. iii. p. 2071, but he afterwards 
changed it (Retract. 1. 23, vol. i. p. 620) and 
adopted in the main that advocated above. 
The default of a history of the exegesis 
will be found to be in some measure com- 
pensated by the account of opinions given 
under the separate verses below. 
7.] τί οὖν ép., see note, ch. vi. 1. 
ὁ v. Gpaprtia;| Is the law (not, as Jowett, 
‘ vonscience, but in our case, the revealed 
law of God, which awoke the conscience 
to action) sin t—not ‘the cause of sin,’ 
which in one sense the Apostle would not 
have denied,—but sin, abstract for cou- 
crete, sinful, or, as Bengel, ‘causa peccati 
peccaminosa.’ 6 νόμος itself being ab- 
stract, that which is predicated of it is 
abstract also. he contrast is, 6 νόμος 
ἅγιος, ver. 12. The question itself refers 
back to ver. 5, τὰ παθήματα τῶν Guap- 
τιῶν τὰ διὰ τοῦ νόμου. It is asked, not 
by an objector, but by the Apostle himself, 
in anticipation of an objection. ἀλλά] 
Is but here in contrast to 6 νόμ. ἅμαρτ., 
meaning, ‘so far from that, —or is it a 
qualification of μὴ γένοιτο, meaning ‘ but 
still it is true, that....?’ Neither ex- 
planation exactly suits the context, which 
is, by a proper elucidation of the law’s 
working as regards sin, to prove it to be 
holy. 1 would rather understand ἀλλά, 
but what I mean is... .,—I say not 


Thucyd. i. 9 begins ᾿Αγαμέμνων τέ μοι 
Sone? . . . .» .on which Poppo remarks 
(cited by ‘Thol.). ‘Sequitur exemplum 
aucte Grecorum opulenti#.... ductuin 
ex rebus Agamemnonis et causis expedi- 
tionis Trojane ;’ an example being a subor- 
dinate verification of a general categorical 
statement. ‘The yap also shews that the 
second clause is subordinated to, and ai- 
leged in substantiation of the first. Then 
what is apaptia? Is it sin in act, or sin 
in principle,—the principle of sin? Not 
sin in act, so that au. οὐκ &yv. should 
mean, 
with sin, i.e. ‘had not sinned? as Fritz.: 
for then the law would have truly and 
actually been the cause of sin: nor, sin in 
act, so that the meaning were, ‘I had not 
known the nature of a sinful act : for this 
would not agree with the subordination of 
ἐπιθυμία below: the ἐπεθ. being more gene- 
ral (πᾶσαν ἐπιθ.) than the particular acts 
which it induced. But the reference must 
be to sin in principle, the principle of sin : 
I had not recognized such a thing as 
sin, but by means of the law. So Calv., 
Melancth., Calov., Riickert, Kélln., Olsh., 
Thol., De Wette. The law here is in 
the full sense of the Mosaic law as regarded 
himself,—not excluding the wider sense on 
which I have insisted in the former part of 
the Epistle when applied to others. 

τήν τε yap...) For neither (‘neque 
enim’) had I known (by experience: 
‘known any thing of’) coveting (the 
motisns of the flesh towards sin,—whether 
acted on or not,—whether consented to or 
not :—this motion he would not have per- 
ceived, hecause he was simply moving with 
it) if the law had not said, Thou shalt 


ABCDF 
KL[P jx 
abcaf 
ghk) 
mn ol7 


[11] 


‘I had not entered into contact 


ae ee ee βκ...».}ε 


8, 9. 


a2 , Seo by? \ ον lal ie ut a , διὰ « τῆς Exon. 
ἐπιθυμήσεις ἀφορμὴν δὲ λαβοῦσα ἡ ap PTla ola Peers = 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 919 


ἘσΈΥ. 


ὁ ἐντολῆς ‘xatnpyucato ἐν ἐμοὶ “ πᾶσαν ὅ ἐπιθυμίαν" 2 Aho 
. is γὰρ νόμου ἁμαρτία ὅ νεκρά. 9 ἐγὼ δὲ " ἔζων fy wpig jamesiv.3 
@MpOt = . € James iv. 2, 
x p τ p ,ὔ Α k > ᾿ τ ὃ Ν C “ c ῃ “ e ΄ x μ᾿ tanya 
νομου 'TTOTE. eAGovons o€ “τῆς " ἐντολῆς ἢ ApapTia ΡΣ δες 
v. 12. xi. 
12 bis. Gal. v.13. 1Tim.v. 14 only. P. Ezek. v. 7 only. ce = Luke xxiii. δ6. 1 Tim. vi. 14. 
d ch. iv. 5 reff. e -- Acts xx. 19 reff. f ch. iii. 21 reff. g = James ii. 17 al. 


h (subjective, here only. 


7. om τε F latt [copt Orig-int,]. 
8. om δε D!(and lat’). 


i — John ix. 13. ch. xi. 30 al. 


for 2nd νομὸς, Aovyos L. 
rec κατειργασατυ, with AB2CFKLR rel: txt BID[P] d, 
ins 7 bef auapria δὲ [Meth, Chr, Gennad-e, Isid-e, ]. 


« = but objective, Gal. iii, 23, 20. 


επιθυμησης Ki P}. 


aft νεκρὰ ins nv F 


latt Syr fcopt arm Orig-int,] Jer Aug Sedul Ambrst Pel [pref K goth]. 


9. εν B: εζουν 17. 


not covet (reff Exod. Deut.). “ Covet,’ in 
the above sense. The Apostle omits all 
the objects there specified, and merely lays 
hold of the idea contained in ἐπιθυμήσεις. 
And it may well be said and strictly, that 
the ‘ coveting’ there spoken of would lead 
to all kinds of sin—therefore murder, 
adultery, &c., if carried out: and that the 
prohibition of desire there serves as an 
example of what the law actually forbids 
elsewhere. 8.] But (proceeding with 
the development of sin by means of the law) 
sin (the sinful principle or propensity, but 
without any conscious personification on 
the part of the Apostle,—see some excellent 
remarks on personification in Tholuck) 
having found occasion (ἀφορμή, as its 
derivation shews, means more than mere 
opportunity,—it indicates the furnishing 
the material and ground of attack, the 
wherewith and whence to attack. The 
words here are not to be joined, as Luth., 
Olsh., Meyer, with διὰ τ. ἐντολῆς [which 
belongs to κατηργάσατο, see below | :—for 
(1) ἀφορμ. λαβεῖν διά would not express 
whence the ἀφορμή is taken, as παρά or 
ex, but only by what means some ἀφ. is 
taken from some source,—which would 
not here suit the Apostle’s meaning, seeing 
that the source itself was the command- 
meut,—and (2) ver. 13, διὰ Tod ay. κατεργ.; 
decides the matter here,—-but absolutely, 
as frequently, see Wetst.) by means of the 
commandment (not = τοῦ νόμου, but the 
tenth commandment, the prohibition in 
question) wrought in me (not ‘ wrought 
out,’ ‘brought into action,’ but ‘origi- 
nated’ [using this commandment as its 
instrument ]) all (manner) of coveting ; 
for without the law sin is (not ‘was:’ 
the omission of the verb substantive shews 
the sentence to be a locus communis,— 
and compare ch. iv. 15) dead (powerless 
and inactive: compare 1 Cor. xv. 56, 7 
δύναμις τ. ἁμαρτίας 6 vdpos). This 
deadness of sin without the law must not 
be understood as meaning that sin was 
committed but not recognized, the con- 
science being not informed nor awakened : 


such a statement would be frve, but would 
not touch the matter argued here. Eras- 
mus (Thol.) well explains the vexpa,— 
‘Qnum ante legem proditam (but see be- 
low) quedam peccata nescirem, quedam 
ita scirem, ut mihi tamen licere putarein, 
quod vetita non essent,—levius ac lan- 
guidius sollicitabatur animus ad peccan- 
dum, ut frigidius amamus ea, quibus ubi 
libeat potiri fas sit. Ceeteruim legis indicio 
proditis tot peccati formis, universa cupidi- 
tatum cohors irritata prohibitione ccepit 
acrius ad peccandum sollicitare.?, Compare 
also Prov. ix. 17, and (Wetst.) Ovid. Amor. 
ii. 19. 8, ‘Quod licet ingratum est, quod 
non licet acrius urit:? and ib. iii. 4. 17, 
‘ Nitimur in vetitum semper, cupimusque 
negata :’ and Seneca, de Clem. i. 23 (Thol.)}, 
‘ Parricide cum lege ccperunt, et illis 
facinus pena monstravit ’ and a remark- 
able passage from Cato’s speech in Livy 
xxxiv. 4, ‘Nolite eodem loco existimare, 
Quirites, futuram rem, quo fuit, antequam 
lex de hoc ferretur. Et hominem improbum 
non accusari tutius est, quam absolvi, et 
luxuria non mota tolerabilior esset, quam 
erit nunc, ipsis vinculis, sicut fera bestia, 
irritata, deinde emissa.’ 9.1 It is a 
great question with Interpreters, of what 
period Paul here speaks. Those who sink 
his own personality, and think that he 
speaks merely as one of mankind, or of 
the Jews, understand it of the period 
before the law was given: some, of Adam 
in Paradise before (?) the prohibition: 
those who see Paul himself throughout 
the whole think that be speaks,— some, of 
his state as a Pharisee: this however 
would necessitate the understanding the 
legal death which follows, of his conver- 
sion, which cannot well be: some, of his 
state as a child, before that freedom of 
the will is asserted which causes rebellion 
against the law as the will of another: so 
Meyer, Thol., al. Agreeing in some mea- 
sure with the last view, 1 would extend 
the limits further, and say that he speaks 
of all that time, be it mere childhood or 
much more, before the law began its work 


980 


ITPOS) ῬΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂ΣΙ 


VIE 


, / \ ’ 
itukexv.21 1 ἀνέζησεν, 10 ἐγὼ δὲ ἢ ἀπέθανον" καὶ τι εὑρέθη μοι ἡ ἐντολὴ 


(32. ch. xiv. 
9. Rev. xy. 
5 v.r.) only t. 

m = 1 Cor. iv. 
2 reff. 

n ellips., ver. 5. 
o — Matt. xix. 
17. Deut. 

xxx. 15. 
p= ch. v.12, 
q ver. 8 reff. 
rch. xvi. 18. 
1 Cor. iii. 
18. 2 Cor. ᾿ 
xi. 3. 2 Thess. li. 3. 


> “ ΑΗ , 
δι᾿ αὐτῆς " ἀπέκτεινεν. 


t μέν solitar.. Actsi. 1 (and note). iii. 18. Col. ii. 23. Heb. xii. 9 al. 


ν ch. ii. 10 reff. w ch. iii. 4 reff. 


ἡ " εἰς °Cwnv, αὕτη "els Ρ θώνατον. 


/ ‘ ? \ 
ἃ ἐντολὴ ἃ ἁγία Kai δικαία καὶ ἀγαθή. 


1 Tim. ii. 14 only. P. Exod. viii. 29 Β &c. only. 


11) yap ἁμαρτία 


Tadopunv λαβοῦσα διὰ τῆς ἐντολῆς " ἐξηπάτησέν με, Kal 
ς © e \ / c μὴ ΄ 
12 ὥςτε ὁ ' μὲν νόμος ἅγιος, καὶ ἡ 


13 ν Τὸ οὖν " ἀγαθὸν 


> \ > 4 θ 4 Ww \ , = >] ’ Cue / ‘7 
ἐμοὶ ἐγένετο θάνατος ; “un yEevolTo’ ἀλλ ἡᾶμαρ Tia, wa 


s%= 2 Cor, in. 6. 
u 2 Pet. ii. 12. 


Susan. 56 Theod 
Winer, § 63, i. 2. e. y- 


10. om 2nd ἡ Lm! 48. 77. 100 [Meth,} Chr-ms. 


13. [for ro ουν, τιουν ro P Meth. ] 


rec for eyevero, yeyove (corrn, the historic aor 


not being understood), with KL rel Chr Cyr-c Gennad-e Thdrt ec Thi: om F: txt 


ABCDN[P 47(Tischdf) ] Meth. Damasc. 


within him,—before the deeper energies of 
lis moral nature were aroused (see on 
ἐλθούσης below). But (ἔζων opposed, 
but only formally, to νεκρά, and so having 
δέ: so Meyer and De W.) I was alive 
(not merely ‘lived, ‘went on,’ but em- 
phatic, ‘vivus eram, as Aug., i.e. ‘lived 
and flourished,’—contrasted with ἀπέθανον 
below) without the law (the law having 
no recognized place in my moral existence) 
once; but when the commandment (above, 
ver. 8) came (purely subjective ; not ‘was 
enacted,’ ‘came in,’ —but ‘ came to me,’ as 
we say, ‘ came home to me,’ “ was brought 
home to me’), sin sprung into life (not 
‘revived ? however true it may be that 
sin was merely dormant, the idea insisted 
ov here, is, that it was dead and came to 
life, began to live and flourish :—but this 
is not to be compared with ἀνέβλεψα in 
John ix. 11; see note there), 10. | 
but I died (ceased to live-and-flourish as 
before,—fell into that state of unhappiness, 
which even afterwards under the gospel 
he calls θάνατος, ver. 24, ch. viii. 2): 
and (not an additional particular, but = 
‘and so,’ merely changing the subject 
from ‘I,’ to ‘the commandment’) the 
commandment which was for (tending to) 
life (compare ch. x. 5, 6 ποιήσας αὑτὰ 
ἄνθρωπος ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς, and reff. there : 
the life is one of prosperity primarily, but 
capable of, and indeed requiring (x. 5) 
a higher interpretation), this (very com- 
mandment) (αὕτη directs attention in a 
marked way to the antecedent subject : so 
frequently αὐτός and ἐκεῖνος : see Matt. 
xxiv. 13: Winer, edn. 6, § 23. 4) was 
found (subjective—oi« εἶπεν ὅτι ἣ ἐντολὴ 
γέγονέ μοι θάνατος, ἀλλ᾽ εὑρέθη, τὸ και- 
νὸν καὶ παράδοξον τῆς ἀτοπίας οὕτως 
ἑρμηνεύων, Chrys.) by me (to be) unto 
(tending to) death (explained on ἀπέθ. 
above). - 11.) For (explanatory how 
ver. 10 happened) sin (the sinful prin- 
ciple within me) having found occasion 


αλλ, so BCF[ P] a Καὶ m[ (Scr, e contra 
( L L( 


(absol. as in ver. 8, where see note’,—by 
means of the commandment deceived me 
(there is a plain reference to the Tempter 
deceiving Eve, which was accomplished by 
means of the commandment, exciting doubt 
of and objection to it, and lust after the 
forbidden thing: 536 reff. 2 Cor., 1 Tim.), 
and by it slew me (i.e. brought me into 
the state of misery and death, mentioned 
in ver. 10;—but there is an allusion again 
to the effect of the fall as the act of the 
Tempter). 12.| So that (seeing it 
was not the law in general, nor this par- 
ticular commandment, that wrought covet- 
ing in me, but the sinful principle in me 
taking advantage of these, which them- 
selves were given εἰς ζωήν and not eis 
θάνατον) the law (indeed) is holy (μέν, 
as understanding a δέ to fellow—‘ but it 
was sin,’ &c.: which does follow in an ex- 
panded form, in ver. 13), and the com- 
mandment (οὐκ ἐπιθυμήσεις, ver. 8) holy 
and just and good (Theodoret thus ac- 
counts for the epithets: ἁγίαν mposnyd- 
pevoey ws τὸ δέον διδάξασαν᾽ δικαίαν δέ, 
ὡς ὀρθῶς τοῖς παραβάταις τὴν ψῆφον ἐξ- 
eveykovoay’ ἀγαθὴν δέ, ὡς ζωὴν τοῖς φυλάτ- 
τουσιν εὐτρεπίζουσαν. See also 1 Tim i. 
8). 13.] Did then the good (= ‘ that 
which was good,’ i. 6. 7 ἐντολή, but made 
abstract for the sake of greater contrast) 
become death (so 6 νόμ., ἁμαρτία, ver. 7) 
to me? Was it, after all, the command- 
ment itself that became to me this death 
of which I speak ? Far from it: but 
(it was) sin (that became death to me. 

The construction adopted by Vulg., Luth., 
al, ἀλλὰ ἡ ἁμαρτία, ἵνα φανῇ au., διὰ τ. 
ay. μοι κατεργαζομένη [ἣν] θάνατον, is 
hardly admissible) ; -- αὖ it might appear 
(be shewn to be) sin, (by) working death 
to me by means of the good (that which 
was good: see above. The misuse and 
perversion of good is one of the tests 
whereby the energy of evil is detected; so 
that sin, by its perversion of the (good) 


A®CDF 
KL[P JS 
abcedft 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[17] 


td 


}0—15. 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 


331 


A ς me , ὃ Ν vy χὰ ς ὩΣ θ a x rd = 
φανῇ ἁμαρτία, διὰ ἡ τοῦ " ἀγαθοῦ μοι * κατεργαζομενη «ch. ii.9 reff 
y=e 


Ω , / > \ ΄ ‘ 
θάνατον, ἵνα ¥ γένηται * καθ᾽ * ὑπερβολὴν ὃ ἁμαρτωλὸς 1) 


Ὁ ’ \ an > “- 
apapTla διὰ τῆς ἐντολῆς. 


d 2 anne se 4 , . f . i. 13 only. 
TTVEVUMLATLKOS εστιν, EYW δὲ σαρκινος EL Lb TET PALLEVOS ἃ y 


ὑπὸ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν. 


ech. 11. 2. ili. 19. viii. 22, 28. 
π We ΤΥ lial. 
xi. 19. xxxvi. 26 only. (-ικός, ch. xv. 27.} 
15. (Acts iv. 34 rett.) 


Treg) 47]. (A uncert.)) 


1 Cor. viii. 1, 4. 


15 δ \ x re 7, > , é (z). 
O Yap “ κατεργάζομαιν οὐ γινώσκω" ἵν.τ,1τ. 
only. P.+ (-βάλλειν, 2 Cor. iii. 10. -λλόντως, 2 Cor. xi. 23.) 


ZOOL. Vals 
e 1 Cor. iii. 1. 


. iil. 4. 


“YG. “1 Cori 
xiii. 1 al. 
14 ¢ ἫΝ \ ο “΄ ΄ ͵ z 1 Cor. xii. 31, 
οι αμεν yap oTlt O VOLLOS 2 Gor..¥ 9. 


iv. 172 (Gal, 


as above 
2 Cor. 


xii. 7 
Ὁ = here only. (ch. iii. 7 reff.) 
dch.i. 11. 1 Cor. 
2 Chron. xxxii. 8. Ezek. 
4 Kings xvii. 17. 1 Macc. i. 


1 Join iii. 2, 14 al. 
2 Cor. iii. 3. Heb. vii. 16 only. 
f = here only. 


ἡ auaptia bef αμαρτωλος DF tol [copt] arm Ang, Ambrst. 


14. tor yap, δὲ A D/-gr] L syr-mg Orig,/int, Bas,| Cyr{-p,} Thdrt Ang,: om eth 
arm Aug, Jer,: txt BCFK[ PN rel [latt syrr copt goth] Orig,[int, Meth, ] Tit, Did, 


Chr, { Damasc Hil, ]. 


rec σαρκικος (corrn to more usual and appy more appro- 


priate word ? but the two are constantly confused), with K(e sil) Li P|&*% Orig, Chr, 
{ Euthal-ms] Thdrt, Phot, Thi (Ec: txt ABCDFX! b! 0 17 Meth, Ephr, Nyss, Bas, 


[mss vary] Cyr[-p, | Damase. 


commandment into a cause (evil) of death, 
was shewn in its real character as sin. 
That this is the rendering is evident by the 
following clause, which is parallel with it. 
Erasm., Walla, Elsner, Dr. Burton, al., 
make ἁμαρτία the subject: ‘that sin might 
appear to be working death, ὅσο. (‘so that 
sin appears to have effected my death,’ ἄς. 
Dr. Burton, most ungrammatically): there 
is no objection to this on the ground of 
ἅμαρτ. being anarthrous, as even Bp. Mid- 
dleton himself reluctantly acknowledges ; — 
the objection lies in the context, as above), 
that (explains and runs parallel with the 
former ἵνα, as in 2 Cor. ix. 8, where he adds 
to the 2nd ἵνα, καθὼς ἔλεγον) by means 
of the commandment sin might become 
exceeding (above measure) sinful: i.e. 
that sin, which was before unknown as 
such, might, being vivified and brought 
into energy by (its opposition to) the com- 
mandment, be brought out as being (not 
merely ‘ skewn to be’) exceedingly sinful 
(sinful in an exaggerated degree— promi- 
nent in its true character as the opponent 
of God). 14.) On the change into 
the present tense here, see above in the 
remarks on the whole section. Hitherto 
has been historical: now the Apostle 
passes to the present time, keeping hold 
yet of the carnal ἐγώ of former days, 
whose remnants are still energizing in the 
renewed man. For (by way of explaining 
and setting in still clearer light the relative 
pesitions of sin and the law, and the state 
of inner conflict brought about by their 
working) we know (it is an acknowledged 
principle amongst us, see reff.) that the 
law is spiritual (sprung from God, who is 
a Spirit, and requiring of men spiritual 
purity. These meanings, which have been 
separately held by different Commentators, 
may, as Thol. and De W. observe, well be 
united): but I (see beginning of section) 


am carnal ([subject to the law of the 
flesh, and in bondage to it, see below] 
σάρκινος, stronger than σαρκικός ; carneus 
rather than carnalis, but it is doubtful 
whether the two endings were not used 
indiscriminately : see Tholuck), sold (into 
slavery, see reff.; but the similitude must 
not be exacted in all particulars, for it 
is only the fact of slavery, as far as its 
victim, the man, is concerned, which ‘is 
here prominent) under (to, and so as to be 
under the power of) sin. Tholuck (who 
differs from the view of this section advo- 
cated above, yet) adds here: “The ἐγώ 
appears here in its totality as sinful, while 
in vv. 16, 20 it is distinguished from sin. 
That Paul does not here bear in mind th:s 
distinction, may be justified by the maxim, 
‘a potiori fit denominatio ;’ the ἐγώ is a 
slave, and has not his own will: as ver. 23 
shews, the ἐγώ which is hostile to sin, 
the νόμος τοῦ νοός, is under coercion, and 
the man isa captive. So Arrian in Epict. 
ii. 22: ὅπου yap τὸ ἐγὼ καὶ τὸ ἐμόν, ἐκεῖ 
ἀνάγκη ῥέπειν τὸ ζῶον, εἰ ἐν σαρκί, ἐκεῖ 
τὸ κυριεῦον εἶναι, εἰ ἐν προαιρέσει, ἐκεῖνο 
(qu. ἐκεῖ ?) evar.” The latter clause 
of the verse is the very strongest asser- 
tion of man’s subjection to the slavery of 
sin in his carnal nature. 15.| For 
(a proof of this πεπράσθαι under sin, viz. 
not being able to do what I would, vv. 
15—17) that which 1 perform (am in the 
habit of doing) I know not (act blindly, at 
the dictates of another: which is proper to 
a slave. oxorovua φησί, συναρπάζομαι, 
ἐπήρειαν ὑπυμένω, οὐκ vida πῶς ὑποσκελί- 
Couat, Chrys. The meaning, “1 approve 
not, introduced by Aug. and held by 
Erasm., Beza, Grot., Estius, Semler, al., 
is not sanctioned by usage,—see note on 
1 Cor. viii. 3,— and would make the follow- 
ing clause almost a tautology): for (expla- 
nation of last assertion, shewing how such 


A 


΄ A » x, A “ a aA 
ghere only. Οὐ γὰρ ὃ θέλω, τοῦτο πράσσω, ἀλλ᾽ ὃ μισῶ, τοῦτο ποιῶ. ay 
Xen. Anab. ᾿ . : ΕἾ ay .: Ρ' Py Z ne 2 
wee, 10 εἰ δὲ ὃ ov θέλω, τοῦτο ποιῶ, ὃ σύμφημι τῷ νόμῳ OTL avedt 
isi iv 56 ἢ καλός. 11 νυνὶ δὲ ἰ οὐκ ἔτι ἐγὼ " κατεργάξομαι αὐτό, mn O17 
below (p) καλός. νυνὶ VK € γ ργάζομ ,mno 
i= ch. Xi. 6. > \ ΄ lm Ε] ἂὰ ] 5 ΕῚ Ἀ ξ΄ 7 13 an \ ov > [47] 
x ver, 2 ἀλλὰ ἢ οἰκουσα “εν EOL ἀμαρτια. 5 οἰδα ‘yap OTL οὐκ 


l here 3ce. ch. 
viii. 9, 11. 

1 Cor. iii. 16. 
Gen. iv. 16. 
xvi. 3. 

m us above (1) 
1 Cor. vii. 12 
13. 1 Tim. 
vi. 16 only. 

n Acts xix. 4 reff. 


Anab. vii. 3. 22. p here bis. 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 


5. Oe 2 ion , » κ , > AG 
OLKEL “εν EfLOL, τουτέστιν EV Τῇ GACKL μου. ayavov, 


Viti 


TO 


s ᾽ὔ me 

yap θέλειν ο παράκειταί μοι, τὸ δὲ " κατεργάζεσθαι ? τὸ 
i - > ἃ , “ ἃ , 

Ρ καλὸν οὔ. 19 οὐ γὰρ ὃ θέλω ποιῶ ἀγαθόν, ἀλλὰ ὃ οὐ θέλω 


o here only Ὀἷβ τ. ‘Sir. xxxiv. (xxxi.) 16. Hom. Od. x. 65. Polyb. iy. 38. 7. iii. 57.8. Xen. 
2 Cor. xiii. 7. 


Gal. vi. 9. 1 Thess, τ. 21 only. Amos v¥. 14. 


15. om Ist τουτο DF goth Meth, [Orig-int, ] Pelag (copt om both): ins ABCKL[P]& 
rel vulg [syrr eth arm] Orig,[int, | Meth, Chr, (Bas, Euthal-ms] Thdrt Aug, | Ambrst]. 


αλλα &. 
16. συνφημι DFR. 
17. (adda, so BDF Lfe sil, Tischdf ].) 


for καλος, καλον εστιν F. 


for οἰκουσα, ενοικουσα BX [Meth,(in 


Phot-ms)] Ambrst (evot«es am Ambrst in follg ver). 


18. ins το bef αγαθον F Meth, Cyr[-p, Thdrt-c, ]. 
αγαθον F { Euthal-ms Damase Orig-int Ambrst, }. 


for δε, yap, and for καλον, 
rec (for ov) ovx evpiokw, with 


DFKL[P] rel [vulg syrr goth (eth)] arm-mg Chr, Thdrt Jer Sedul : txt ABCR [47] 
copt arm Meth, Cyr[-p] gr-mss-mentd-by-Aug Augszpe- 


19. ins rovto bef row ( ὁ vulg [Orig-int, | Jerarig- 


(adda, so BD!N.) 


for ov θελω, wow F vulg-sixt(with F-lat) Thdrt [Orig-int,(txt,)]: om G. 


blind service comes to pass) not what I 
desire, that do I (this θέλω is not the full 
determination of the will, the standing 
with the bow drawn and the arrow aimed; 
but rather the znelination of the will,— 
the taking up the bow and pointing at the 
mark, but without power to draw it :—we 
have θέλω in the sense of to wish, 1 Cor. 
vii. 7, 32; xiv. 5; 2 Cor. xii. 20), but 
what I hate (= οὐ θέλω, ver. 19: no dis- 
tinction in intensity between θέλω and 
μισῶ), that I do (no distinction here be- 
tween πράσσω ind ποιῶ, as apparently in 
John iii. 20, 21, where see note: for they 
are interchanged in vv. 19, 20). The 
Commentators cite several parallel pas- 
sages from profane writers: 6. g. Seneca, 
Hippol. 604, ‘ Vos testor omnes ccelites, hoc 
quod volo, me nolle;’—Epictetus, Enchiri- 
dion ii. 26, ἐπεὶ yap ὁ ἁμαρτάνων οὐ θέλει 
ἁμαρτάνειν, ἀλλὰ κατορθῶσαι, δῆλον ὅτι 
ὃ μὲν θέλει οὐ ποιεῖ, καὶ ὃ μὴ θέλει ποιεῖ: 
— the well-known lines of Ovid, Met. vii. 
19, ‘ aliudque cupido, Mens aliud suadet : 
video meliora proboque, Deteriora sequor :’ 
— Plautus, Trinummus iii. 2. 31, ‘Scibam 
ut esse me deceret, facere non quibam 
miser :’—e. 16.] But if (= ‘ now 
seeing that ;’ takes up the foregoing and 
draws an inference from it) what I wish 
not, that I do, I agree with (bear witness 
to) the law that it is good (viz. ‘in that 
the Jaw prohibits what J also dislike,—the 
law and 1 are as one in proscribing the 
' thing,—the daw, and my wish, tend the 
same way’). 17.) Now however 
(‘quod autem quum ita sit,’ not of time, 
as Grot., ‘nune post legem datam,’—or 


Koppe, ‘ ex quo Christianus factus sum ”) 
it is no longer (not a chronological, but a 
logical sequence, ‘zt can no more be said, 
that ;’ see reff.) I that perform it (κατεργ. 
as recalling vv. 8—15), but sin that dwell- 
eth inme. Here the ἐγώ is not the com- 
plex responsible self, by which the evil 
deed is wrought, and which incurs the 
guilt of working it: but the self of the 
WILL in its higher sense, the ἔσω ἄνθρωπος 
of ver. 22. The not bearing this in mind 
has led to error in interpretation and doc- 
trine: e.g. when it is supposed that the 
Christian is not responsible for his sins 
committed against his spiritual will and 
higher judgment ; whereas we are all re- 
sponsible for the ἔργα of the sin that 
dwelleth in us, and it is in this very sub- 
jection to and involution with the law of 
sin in our members, that the misery con- 
sists, which leads to the ery in ver. 24. 

18.] An explanation of the οἰκοῦσα 
ἐν ἐμοὶ ἁμαρτία of the last verse, For I 
know (by experience, detailed in the next 
verse) that there dwells not in me, that 
is, in my flesh, (any) good (thing). I 
said, sin that dwelleth in me, because I feel 
sure, from experience, that im me (meaning 
by ‘ me’ not that higher spiritual self in 
which the Spirit of God dwells, but the 
lower carnal self: see on this important 
limitation the remarks at the beginning of 
the section) dwells no good thing. And 
what is my proof of this? How has expe- 
rience led me to this knowledge? For 
(the proof from experience) the wish (to 
do good) is present with me (7ap., not 
metaphorical, see reff., but, as προκεῖμαι in 


16—25. 


κακόν, τοῦτο πράσσω. 
ποιῶ, 
ἱ ἐν ἐμοὶ ἁμαρτία. 
ἐμοὶ ποιεῖν ἢ τὸ ἢ καλόν, ὅτι ἐμοὶ § 


ΕΞ ᾿συνήδομαι γὰρ τῷ νόμῳ τοῦ θεοῦ κατὰ τὸν 
> ζ " / \ “ὦ ΄ A 
" ἄνθρωπον, 35 " βλέπω δὲ “ ἕτερον νόμον ἐν τοῖς * μέλεσίν 


iv. 16. 1 Pet. iii. 4. 


w = Matt. viii, 21. vv. 3,2 al. xch 


29. rec aft θελω ins eyw (corrn for emphasis: 

with AKL[P JX rel syr copt goth Chdrt [Damasc Orig-int, | Augszpe : 
Jatt SyrLappy | eth arin [Meth ] Chr-mms, Cyr Ambr Ambrst Pelag Aug). 
BDR®. 


21. om or: to παράκειται F. 


Homer, used commonly of me:ts served up 
to, lying before, any one); but to perform 
that which is good, is not (the absence 
οἵ εὑρίσκω in ABCR, and the variations of 
γινώσκω and ἔχω in one or two mss. and 
versions,—and besides, the somewhat un- 
usual termination of the sentence with οὐ, 
—are too strong presumptions of its being 
an interpolation, to allow of its retention) 
(present with me). 19.| And this οὐ 
παρακεῖσθαι of the doing good is shewn by 
my acts, in that 1 do not the good that 1 
wish (to do), but the evil which 1 do not 
wish, that Z do, 20.] ‘lhe inference 
of ver. 17 restated, with the premiss of 
ver. 16 in the place of νυνὶ δέ :-—but its 
meaning is now clearer and deeper than 
then ; we know now that the ἐγώ which 
in the present verse does not the evil 
thing, is the better ἐγώ of the ἔσω ἄνθρω- 
mos,— whereas the ἐμοί in which sin dwells 
and rules, though included in the complex 
self, is the lower ἔγώ, ἡ σάρξ μους And so 
the way is now prepared for at once set- 
ting forth the conflict within us between 
these two. 21.] I find then (i.e. as 
appears from what has been detailed) the 
(this) law (presently to be defined as the 
law of sin in my members, and exemplitied 
in the following words: so τοῦ ῥήματος 
τοῦ κυρίου, ws ἔλεγεν, Acts xi. 16 :---τῶν 
λόγων τοῦ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ, ὅτι αὐτὸς εἶπεν, 
Acts xx. 35 (De W.). This is the view of 
Calv., Beza, Grot., Estius, Wolf, Winer, 
Meyer (ed. J, but in subsequent editions 
he has altered his view more than once), 
De Wette, al. It cannot well be re- 
ferred to the Mosaic law, as, with various 
forced arrangements and constructions, 
Chrys., Theophyl., Theodoret, Tholuck, 
Olsh., Fritz., Kéllner ; the great objection 
being, that all these do violence to the con- 
text. Tholuck’s remark, that had νόμον 
meant as above, it would have been anar- 
throus, or τοῦτον τὸν νόμον, is sufficiently 
answered by the above examples: and the 
dative after εὑρίσκω, to which he also ob- 


ΠΡῸΣ ῬΩΜΑΊΟΥΣ. 


20 εἰ δὲ ὃ 
: , Sa We ΄, \ 

ἱ οὐκ ἔτι ἐγὼ * κατεργάζομαι αὐτό, ἀλλὰ ἡ ™ οἰκοῦσα 
9 Mage) ” \ , A = 
21 4 εὑρίσκω nee Tov * ecm τῷ θέλοντι 55. 


ὃ ἐντὸς ἄνθρ., Plato Rep. ix. p. 589. 
. vi. 13 reff. 


383 


TOUTO q — Acts xix. 


19. xxvii. 28. 
1 Chron. xx. 
2. 


ov θέλω [ἐγώ], 


ch. ii. 9 reff. 
8 t here only tf. 

ὃ τὸ § κακὸν ἐπ αφ ον Ken, Mee 

iii. 11. 10. 


"ecw Herod. iii. 36. 
Eurip. Med. 


136. 

u Eph. iii. 16. 
see 2 Cor. 

v — and constr., Heb. x. 25. 


or for conformity with eyw below 7), 
om BCDF bo 
(aAAa, 50 
22. for θεου, κυριου 34: voos B. 
jects as inadmissible in any language, is 
justitied by Soph. Gd. Col. 966, οὐκ ἂν 
ἐξεύροις ἐμοὶ ἁμαρτίας ὄνειδος οὐδέν, -- 
and by Plato, Rep. iv. p. 421, ἕτερα .. τοῖς 
φύλαξιν εὑρήκαμεν, ‘alia invenimus nos- 
tris custodibus observanda,’ Ficin.) to me 
(for inyself) wishing to do good, that 
(consisting in this, that) evil is present 
with (see above, ver. 18) me. 
22, 23.| Explanation of the conflict above 
alleged to exist. For I delight in (σύν not 
signifying participation with others, but 
as perhaps in συνλυπούμενος, Mark iii. 5, 
and in the phrase σύνοιδά μοι; denoting 
‘apud animum meum.’ Thol. συνήδομαι 
is ἃ stronger expression than σύμφημι, Ver. 
16) the law of God after the inner man 
(= νοῦς, ver. 25,—see retl.—and compare 
Peter’s 6 κρυπτὸς τῆς καρδίας ἄνθρωπος, 
ref. 1 Pet. But not merely the mental 
and reasoning part of man:—for that 
surely does not dclight in the law of God: 
—it is absolutely necessary to presuppose 
the znfluence of the Holy Spirit, and to 
place the man in a state of grace before 
this assertion can be true. And it is sur- 
prising to find Commentators like Tholuck 
aud De Wette, while they acknowledge that 
συνήδομαι is stronger than σύμφημι, yet 
denying the gradual introduction ot the 
spiritual man in the description of this 
conflict. True, THE SPIkIT is not yet in- 
troduced, because purposely kept back until 
treated of as the great deliverer from this 
state of death; the man is as yet described 
as compounded of the outer and inner inan, 
of ἡ σάρξ and ὁ νοῦς, and the operations 
of the two are detailed as if unassisted,— 
even the term πνεῦμα for the human spirit 
being as yet avoided,—but all this is done, 
because the object is to set the conflict and 
misery, as existing even in the spiritual 
man, in the strongest light, so that the 
question in ver. 24 may lead the way to the 
real uses and blessed results of this conflict 


in ch. viii.); but I see (= ‘find ?—as if he 


were a spectator of that which is going on 


384 


y here only +. 
z Luke xxi. 
24. 2 Cor. 
x.5. 2 Tim. 
iii. 6 only. 
3 Kings 
viii. 46. 
(-ros, Luke 
iv. 18 


τοῖς * μέλεσίν μου. 


i. 10 4]. Exod. vi. 6. 


23. [for Ist μου, μοι F-gr. | 


τω οντι A. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


ΛΠ. 24,28 


᾽ f “ ΄ an , \ 9 
μου ὃ ἀντιστρατευόμενον τῳ ἵνομῳ TOV νοῦς μου, Kal * aLy- 
/ / 2 lal , a ~ ΄ , -“ wv ᾽ Ξ 
μαλωτίζοντά με [ἐν] τῷ νόμῳ ὃ τῆς ἁμαρτίας τῳ OVTL ἐν 
ζ “ 3 \ ” / 
24 ὃ ταλαίπωρος ἐγὼ ἄνθρωπος" Tis με 
΄ὔ » ’ -“ / , Oc / 
© ῥύσεται ἐκ τοῦ σώματος *tT00 θανάτου τούτου ; * ἃ χάρις 
only. -τεύειν, Eph. iv. 8 only. -σία, ib. and Rev. xiii. 10 bis only.) 


Ὁ Rev. iii. 17 only. Isa. xxxiii.1. (-pta, ch. iii. 16. -pecv, James iv. 9.) 
ν΄. ἀπό, Matt. vi. 13. ch. xv. 31 al. 


a genit., — ch vi. 6 reff. 
ς — and constr., Luke i. 74. 2 Cor. 


Ps. cxxxix. 1. d = ch. vi. 17 reff. 


αντιστρατ. κ. αἰχμαλ. (omg ue) Tw νομ. του νοῦς μου 
rec om 2nd εν, with (A)CL rel syrr [arm] Meth, Cwes, Chr, Cyr[-p, 


Danmrasc:] ins BDFK[P]& b!' ck mn ὁ 17 latt coptt goth Clem, Thdrt [Euthal-ms 


Orig-int, Ambrst. [47(sic). }] 


25. rec for xapis Tw θεω, εὐχαριστω Tw θεω (see notes). with AKLN' rel syrr goth 
Orig, Chr (Ec Thl: ἡ χαρις του θεου 1) vulg [ Orig-int, Ambrst Jer, |, 7 xapis Tov κυριου 
F: txt B 213 sah (eth) Meth, Orig,, and x. δε tw θ. C*(C! uncert) δὲ. τουτὶ 10-7. 31. 73. 


within) a different law (differing in kind 
and aim, not = ἄλλος merely) in my 
members (= ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου, ver. 18), 
warring against (/in continual dissension 
and conflict with] ἀντιστρ. is not to be 
joined with βλέπω so as to = ἀντιστρατεύ- 
εσθαι, though that would be an allowable 
construction, see Acts viii. 23; 1 Cor. viii. 
10,—but βλέπω---μου forms an indepen- 
dent sentence antithetic to συνήδομαι --- 
ἄνθρωπον) the law of my mind (the con- 
sent viz., to the law of God, which my 
mind yields; not = the law of God, any 
more than the different law in my mem- 
bers = the law of sin,—but both meaning 
the standard or rule set up, which inclina- 
tion follows :—the one in the νοῦς, in har- 
mony with the law of God,—the other in 
the μέλη or σάρξ, subservient, and causing 
subservience, to the principle or law of 
sin), and bringing me (the whole complex 
self—the ‘ me’ of personality and action) 
into captivity with (ἐν, not exactly ‘ by 
means of, but pointing out the department 
in which, the investiture with which, the 
taking captive has place. Nor would the 
simple dative be ‘by means of,’ as Chrys., 
Theodoret, Theophyl.,—but merely ‘to? 
the dat. commodi aft. aiyuaad.) the law 
of sin (the sinful principle, of resistance to 
God’s law, ἡ ἁμαρτία as awakened and set 
energizing, ver. 9, by that law) which is 
in my members. Commentators have 
much disputed whether the ἕτερος νόμος, 
and the νόμος τῆς auapt., both ἐν τοῖς 
μέλεσίν μου, are different, or the same. 
The former view is held by Calv., Beza, 
Kdllner, Riickert, De W.: the latter by 
Reiche, Meyer, Fritz., Tholuck. It ap- 
pears to me (see above) that the identity 
cuunot be maintained without introducing 
great confusion into the sentence. 

24.| The division of the man against him- 
self,—his inward conflict, and miserable 
stale of captivity to sin in the flesh, while 
with the mind he loves and serves the law 
of God. From this wretched condition, 
which is a very death in life, who shall 


deliver him? σώματος cannot well be 
figurative, ‘ untversitas vitiorum,’ or ‘ mor- 
tifera peccati massa,’ but must, on account 
ot the part which 7 odpé and τὰ μέλη have 
hitherto borne, be literal. Then how is 
τούτου to be taken? Some (Syr., Erasm., 
Calv., Beza, Olsh., Winer) join it with 
σώματος, and (not Winer) justify the 
construction asa Hebraism: but Winer has 
refuted the notion (edn. 6, § 34. 3. b) of 
a Hebraism, and the arrangement has no 
Greek example. It can only be joined with 
θανάτου ;—and that most fitly, as the state 
which he has been describing is referred to 
by τοῦ θανάτου τούτου. .Then the body 
of this death will mean, ‘ the body whose 
subjection to the law of sin brings about 
this state of misery,’ compare σῶμα τῆς 
auaptias, ch. vi. 6. From this body, as 
the instrument whereby he is led captive to 
the law of sin and death, he cries out for 
deliverance: i.e to be set free, as ch: 
viii. 2, from the law of sin and death. 
Some Commentators, misled by the notion 
of a Hendiadys (σώματος τοῦ 0. = θνητοῦ 
g#uatos), a most fruitful source of error in 
exegesis, have imagined that the verse im- 
plies a wish to be delivered from the body 
(by death), and expresses a weariness of life. 
The cry is uttered, as De Wette well 
observes, in full consciousness of the de- 
liverance which Christ has effected, and 
as leading to the expression of thanks 
which follows. And so, and no otherwise, 
is if to be taken. 25.} The rec. εὐ- 
χαριστῶ has but slender authority, and 
in the great variety of readings, it is 
not easy to determine. 7 χάρις τοῦ 
θεοῦ is evidently a correction to answer 
to tis above; so that our choice lies be- 
tween χάρις τῷ θ. and χάρις δὲ τῷ θ. 
The sentence is (not, of course, construc- 
tionally, as the var. readg. ἡ χάρις τοῦ 
θεοῦ, but logically) an answer to the pre- 
ceding question: Thanks to God (who hath 
accomplished this) by means of Jesus 
Christ our Lord. This exclamation and 
thanksgiving more than all convince me, 





VGiTF. I, 2. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 385 


al - YY. nr a lal / ΄ lal 5 
τῷ θεῷ διὰ Ἰησοῦ χριστοϑ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν. * ἄρα " οὖν ech.v. 18 ref. 
f = ver. 23. 


\ \ A ἃ ‘A. / / lal lal \ \ 
αὐτὸς ἐγὼ τῷ μὲν ‘vol ὃ δουλεύω νόμῳ θεοῦ, TH SE σαρκὶ s6,2 Thess. 


͵ ς ΄ Η os » ove mes 
νόμῳ ἁμαρτίας. VIII. 1 οὐδὲν ἄρα viv ὃἣ κατάκριμα ® iret το 

A an? Yl OR , ἢ , « παν, 16,18 
τοῖς ἐν χριστῷ Ιησοῦ" 3, ὁ γὰρ νόμος Tov! πνεύματος τῆς | only. 


i (ver. 10.) Rev. 
xi. 11. 

Ezek. xxxvii.5. 

80. 93 copt arm Cyr[-p, ]. eyw bef avros D}(and lat) vulg [spec Orig-int, 

Ambrst ]. om wey FR? latt [Orig-int, | lat-ff 


Cuap. VIII. 1. om νυν D'[-gr 47-marg] Syr eth arm Cyr[-p,] (Jer,) Victorin, 
Preedest,. rec at end ins uy κατα σαρκα περιίπατουσιν (so far, with AD? vulg 
[spec F-lat] Syr goth arm Bas, Chr, lat-ff) αλλα κατα πνευμα (supplied from ver 4, 
from a misunderstanding of the argument: see notes), with D?KL[P]&* rel [syr] 
Thart ΤῊ] (ἔς : om BCD! ΕἸ -gr(a space is left) δὲ! [47-txt] coptt 2th Orig-schol Ath, 


Dial Cyr[-p, Orig-int, ] Aug,. 


that Paul speaks of none other than him- 
self, and carries out as far as possible the 
misery of the conflict with sin in his mem- 
bers, on purpose to bring in the glorious de- 
liverance which follows. | Compare 1 Cor. 
xv. 56, 57, where a very similar thanks- 
giving occurs. ἄρα οὖν x.7.r.] These 
words are most important to the under- 
standing of the whole passage. We must 
bear in mind that it had begun with the 
question, Is THE LAW sIN? The Apostle 
has proved that it is ΝΟΥ, but is HOLY. 


He has shewn the relation that it holds to. 


sin, viz. that of vivifying it by means of 
man’s natural aversion to the command- 
ment. He has further shewn, that in him- 
self, even as delivered by Christ Jesus, a 
conflict between the law and sin is ever 
going on: the misery of which weuld be 
death itself, were not a glorious deliverance 
- effected. He now sums up his vindication 
of the law as holy; and at the same time, 
sums up the other side of the evidence 
adduced in the passage, from which it 
appears that the flesh is still, even in the 
spiritual man, subject( essentially, not prac- 
tically and energetically) to the law of sin, 
—which subjection, in its nature and con- 
sequences, is so nobly treated in ch. viii. 
So then (as appears from the foregoing), 
I myself (1, who have said all this against 
and in disparagement of the law; I, who 
write of justification by faith without the 
deeds of the law: not ‘JZ alone,’ without 
Christ, as opposed to the foregoing,—as 
De Wette, Meyer: nor, ‘ego idem,’ [, one 
and the same person, as Beza, Erasm., 
Calv., Olsh.: nor ‘tlle ego,’ as Grot., Thol. 
See, for the meaning given above, ch. viii. 
26 (αὐτὸ τὸ πνεῦμα); ix. 3; xv. 14; 
2 Cor. xii. 13, in all which places (see on 
ch. xv. 14) it has the same force) with 
my mind (indeed) (6 νοῦς = 6 ἔσω ἄνθρ. 


as in ver. 23) serve the law of God (cf. 


συνήδομαι, ver. 22), but with my flesh 
(the ἐγώ of ver. 18; and the σάρξ through- 
Vou. Ii. 


out of ch. viii.) the law of sin: It re- 
mains to be seen how this latter subjection, 
which in the natural man earries all with 
it, is neutralized, and issues only in the 
death of the body on account of sin, ia 
those who do not walk after the flesh, but 
after the Spirit. Cuap. VIII. 1—39.] 
In the case of those whe are in Christ 
Jesus, this divided state ends im the glo- 
rious triumph of the Spirit over the flesh: 
and that (vv. 1—17), though incompletely, 
not inconsiderably, even here in this state, 
—and (vv. 18—30) completely and glo- 
riously hereafter. And (vv. 31—39) the 
Christian has no reason to fear,.but all 
reason to hope ; for nothing ean sever him 
Srom God’s love in Christ. 1—17.] 
Although the flesh is still subject to the 
law of sin, the Christian, serving not the 
flesh, but walking aecording to the Spirit, 
shall not come into eondemnation, but to 
glory with Christ. 1.) There is there- 
fore (an inference from ch. vii. 25, because 
with their mind, and that mind dwelt in 
and led by the Spirit of Christ, they 
serve, delight in, the law 6) God) now 
(this viv is emphatic, and follows upon 
the question and answer of vil. 24, 28, 
—rebus sie stantibus,—now that a de- 
liverance has been effected from the body 
of this death, by Christ. This is eertain 
from the γάρ which follows, setting forth 
the fact of the deliverance) no eondemna- 
tion (retf.; = the penal consequence of sin 
original and actual) to those (who are) in 
Christ Jesus. The expression ἐν xp “Inc. 
refers particularly to the last place where 
God’s gift of life eternal in Christ Jesus 
our Lord was spoken of, ch. vi. 23,—and 
generally to all that was said in that ehap- 
ter of our incorporation into and union 
with Him. The words μὴ κατὰ σάρκα 
περιπατοῦσιν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ πνεῦμα, ‘ walking 
as they do not according to the flesh but 
aecording to the Spirit, are probably a 
gloss introduced from ver. 4, right enough 
: Cec 


986 


l see Acts xiv. 


Sreff. constr τῆς ἁμαρτίας Kal τοῦ θανάτου. 


nom., see 
Neb. viii. 1. 
acc., 2 Cor. 
xii. 17. 


m = Heb. ii.18. n = 2 Cor. xiii. ὃ. 


2. [om ev xp. ino. K Chr, Tert,.] 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


Viti 


i ΄- » “a > “-“- k > ,ὔ / -ς > ¥ -“ , 
woh. vi. 18 ret. | ζωῆς ἐν χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ ὃ ἠλευθέρωσέν ὃ με ἀπὸ TOU νόμου 


3 \ ‘ l 10U ral 
TO Yap αἀουνατον TOU 


/ m > φ n > / \ “ ΄ « θ Ἁ \ « lal 
νόμου, ἢ ἐν ᾧ " ἠσθένει διὰ τῆς σαρκός, ὁ θεὸς τὸν ἑαυτοῦ 


* oe BEN spec Syr Chr.(but mss vary) 


[‘Tert,]; ἡμας copt eth Dial, Meth,: με ACDKL[P] rel vulg syr sah goth φῦ [arm 
(but some mss om) Clem, Didaiie Ath, ] Chr, Thdrt [Cyr,-p Damase Orig-int,] Tert, 


Ambr Jer. 


in sense (see there), but out of place here, 
because this moral element of ‘those in 
Christ’ is not yet brought in: the present 
assertion is general, and is made good in 
detail by and by. See digest. 2. | 
For (a reason why there is no condemna- 
tion) the law (norma, method = influence, 
as in ἕτερον τόμον, ch. vii. 23,—used here 
erhaps for sharper contrast to the νόμος 
auapt. below) of the Spirit of life (the 
Lord and Giver of life—lite used in an 
incipient higher sense than ἔζων in ch. vii. 
9,—see below) freed me (aor., referring to 
the time of his conversion. There is no 
stronger proof to my mind of the identity 
of the speaker in the first person through- 
out with the Apostle himself, than this 
extension of that form of speaking into this 
chapter: nothing more clearly shews, that 
there he was describing a really existing 
state within himself, but insulating, and as 
it were exaggerating it (as so often), to 
bring out more clearly the glorious de- 
liverance to follow. If σε be read, the ad- 
dress is a general one to the reader, leading 
on to the ἡμῖν below: and the foregoing 
argument does not apply) in Jesus Christ 
(1 follow the more regular grammatical 
arrangement in taking ἐν yp. "Inc. with the 
verb. Thus also Thol. and De Wette. 
It may be taken (notwithstanding the 
absence of the art., at which indeed only 
tiros will stumble) with ζωῆς, as Luther, 
which seems to suit ch. vi. 23,—or with 
Tov mv.T. ¢., as Piscator and Flatt,—or with 
ὁ vou. τ. π. τ. ©, as Calv.) from the law 
of sin (vii. 25) and death (death again 
here bears a higher meaning than in ch. 
vii. We are now on higher ground :— 
. κατάκριμα having been mentioned, which 
is the punishment of sin, death now in- 
volves that, and is not only temporal 
misery, but eternal ruin also. This 
‘law of the Spirit of life’ having freed 
him from the law of sin and death, so that 
he serves another master, all claim of sin 
on him is at an end—he is acquitted, and 
there is no condemnation for him). 
9.) For (explanation of ver. 2, shewing 
the method of this liberation) that which 
Was not in the power of the law (the 
construction is a nominativus pendens, as 
in ref. Heb., in apposition with the follow- 
ing sentence, 6 θεὸς k.7.A.: so Riickert, 


Meyer, Fritz., De W., Tholuck: Winer, 
ὃ 32. 7, makes it an acc. governed by 
ἐποίησεν understood (stating however in 
edn. 6, the nom. pendens as an alternative; 
see also ὃ 63. I. 2. d): Olsh. al., make it 
an acc. absol. or supply kara: Camerarius 
and Beza, διά ;—-but the above seems the 
simplest. τὸ ἀδύνατ. τοῦ νόμου may 
mean either, ‘that part of the law which 
was impossible,’ —‘could not be obeyed,’ — 
as τὸ γνωστὸν Tov θεοῦ, ch. i. 19;—or, 
‘the inability of the law’ = ἡ ἀδυναμία 
τ. ν., as TO χρηστὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, ch. ii. 4;— 
or, ‘that which was unable to be done by 
the law.’ Of these, the first is out of the 
question, because νόμος must be the sub- 
ject of ἐν ᾧ ἦσθ. x.7.A.:—the second would 
give the first clause the meaning, ‘that 
wherein the inability of the law shewed 
itself,’ viz. its powerlessness διὰ τ. σαρκός. 
The third yields by far the best meaning: 
see below on διὰ τ. σ.) in that (this clause 
gives a reason and explanation of the adv- 
vatov, see however the note on ref. Heb.) 
it was weak (the Apostle keeps in mind 
his défence of the holiness of the law 
undertaken in ch. vii., and as Chrys. ob- 
serves, δοκεῖ μὲν διαβάλλειν τὸν νόμον, εἰ 
δέ τις ἀκριβῶς προΞξέχοι, καὶ σφόδρα αὐτὸν 
ἐπαινεῖ. . . οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπε τὸ πονηρὸν τοῦ 
νόμου, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἀδύνατον καὶ πάλιν ἐν 
ᾧ ἠσθένει, οὐκ, ἐν ᾧ ἐκακούργει, ἐν ᾧ 
ἐπεβούλευε. Hom. xiv. p. 563) through 
the flesh (i.e. in having to act through the 
flesh: not, ‘on account of the flesh,’ i.e 
of the hostility, or weakness of the flesh, 
which would be διὰ τὴν σάρκα. The flesh 
was the medium through which tke law, — 
being a νόμος ἐντολῆς σαρκίνης, Heb. vii. 
16,—wrought, and of ἐν σαρκί the objects 
on which. So the gen. here is similar to 
that in 2 Cor. ii. 4, ἔγραψα ὑμῖν διὰ πολ- 
λῶν δακρύων, and 1 Pet. v. 12, δ ὀλίγων 
ἔγραψα, indicating the state in or medium 
through which, the action is carried on), 
—God (did) sending His own Son (the 
stress is on ἑαυτοῦ, and the word is preg- 
nant with meaning :—His own, and there- 
fore like Himself, holy and sinless. This 
implication should be borne in mind, as 
the suppressed antithesis to auapr., three 
times repeated afterwards. Another anti- 
thesis may be implied—é€autov, and there- 
fore spiritual, not acting merely through 


ABCDF 
KL[P]x 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


3, 4. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 


987 


εχ , > ont ΄ Ρ Ν p e / \ q \ rand 
υἱὸν πέμψας ἐν ° ὁμοιώματι Ρ σαρκὸς ἢ ἁμαρτίας καὶ 4 περὶ och. 1. 38 rt 
\ ς / a“ \ 
ἁμαρτίας " κατέκρινεν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἐν TH σαρκί, * ἵνα τὸ ἔξοχ. ο, 


the flesh, though in its likeness, but bring- 
ing a higher spiritual life into the man- 
hood) in the likeness of the flesh of sin 
(the flesh whose attribute and character 
was SIN. The gen. is not = ἁμαρτωλοῦ, 
but implies far more—[not merely the con- 
tamination by, but] the belonging to and 
being possessed by. De Wette observes, 
‘The words ἐν ὁμοιώμ. capk. au. appear 
almost to border on Docetism; but in 
reality contain a perfectly true and con- 
sistent sentiment. σὰρξ auapt. is flesh 
(human nature, John i. 14; 1 John iv. 2; 
Heb. ii. 14) possessed with sin: tne Apostle 
could not then have said ἐν σαρκὶ au. 
without making Christ partaker of sin: 
nor could he have said merely ἐν σαρκί, for 
then the bond between the Manhood of 
Jesus, and sin, would have been wanting: 
he says then, ἐν ὁμοιώμ. cap. au.,—mean- 
ing by that, He had a nature like sinful 
human nature, but had not Himself a sin- 
Jul nature,—compare Heb. iv. 15: ov 
yap ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα μὴ δυνάμενον συν- 
παθῆσαι ταῖς ἀσθενείαις ἡμῶν, πεπειρασ- 
μένον δὲ κατὰ πάντα καθ᾽ ὁμοιότητα χωρὶς 
ἁμαρτίας. The likeness must be referred 
not only to σάρξ, but also to the epithet 
τῆς ἅμ. :---ἰῦ did not however consist in 
this, that He took our sins (literally) on 
Himself, and became Himself sinful (as 
Reiche), which would not amount to like- 
ness of nature,—but in this, that He was 
able to be tempted, i.e. subjected to sen- 
suous incitements, 6. g. of pain, which in 
ether men break out into sin, but in Him 
did not.’ See Phil. ii. 7, and note. 

σάρξ is not = σῶμα, but as in John i. 14, 
the material, of which man is in the 
body compounded),—and on account of 
sin (to be joined with πέμψας, not as 
Chrys. al. Vulg., with κατέκρινεν : least 
of all as Luther, “und verdammete die 
Stinde in Fleisch durch Siinde.” The 
‘for, or ‘on account of, sin, is at present 
indefinite, and not to be restricted to 
Christ’s death as a sin-offering, which is 
not just now the subject. ‘On account of 
sin’ then, = to put away sin, as reff. 
Heb.), condemned sin in the flesh (not 
‘the sin which was in the flesh,’ which 
would probably (not certainly) have been 
τὴν ἐν τ. σ., and which is against the 
context, in which au. is throughout an 
absolute principle. κατέκρινεν is 
allusive to κατάκριμα ver. 1. Hence it 
has been taken to mean that God con- 
demned, punished, sin in the flesh by the 
death of Christ: so Orig., Erasm., Calv., 


p constr., Phil. 

iii. 21 bis. 

18. Num. 
viii. 8. Lev. v. 11. rch. ii. 1 reff, 
Melancthon, Calov., Olsh., al. But that 


can hardly be the meaning here, for several 
reasons. 1. The Apostle is not speaking of 
the removal of the guz/t, but of the practice 
of sin, and of the real fulfilment of the law 
in those who are in Christ. It is this which 
even in ver. 1 is before him, grounding as 
he does the οὐδὲν κατάκριμα on the dov- 
λεύω νόμῳ θεοῦ -- on the new and sanctify- 
ing power of the Spirit by Christ, in spite 
of the continued subjection of the flesh to 
the law of sin. 2. The context shews that 
the weakness of the law was, its having no 
sanctifying power ;—it could arouse sin, 
but it could not condemn and cast it out. 
This indeed is the burden of ch. vii. The 
absence of justifying power in the law has 
already been dealt with. 3. The following 
verse clearly makes the fulfilling the δι- 
καίωμα of the law no matter of mere im- 
putation, but of περιπατεῖν κατὰ πνεῦμα. 

We must then look for the meaning of 
κατακρίνειν in the effects and accompani- 
ments of condemnation, —victory over, and 
casting out of sin. See, for example, John 
xii. 31, where κρίσις τοῦ κόσμου τούτου 18 
explained by 6 ἄρχων τοῦ κόσμου τούτου 
ἐκβληθήσεται ἔξω, and ib. xvi. 11. As 
early as Irenzus (Har. ili. 20. 2, p. 214) 
this was seen to be the sense: ‘ut con- 
demnaret peccatum, et jam quasi condem- 
natum projiceret illud extra carnem :’—so 
Chrys., ἐνίκησεν αὐτήν, τὴν δύναμιν αὐτῆς 
ἐξέλυσε,---(Εσατῃ. 2, πῶς ἐξῆρε; κατακρίνας 
αὐτὴν---καὶ δείξας ἁλοῦσαν. πῶς οὖν ἑάλω 
καὶ ἥττηται; ἐν τῇ σαρκὶ αὐτοῦ. προ-- 
ιέναι γὰρ βουληθεῖσα κ. μὴ ἰσχύσασα ἑάλω 
kK. ἥττηται,---ἀῦτκὐΣ Theophyl. (τὴν σάρκα) 
ἡγίασε Kk. ἐστεφάνωσε, κατακρίνας τὴν 
ἁμαρτίαν ἐν τῇ σαρκὶ προςληφθείσῃ καὶ 
δείξας ὅτι οὐ φύσει ἁμαρτωλὸς ἡ σάρξ. 
And so, in modern times, Reza, Vitringa, 
Bengel, the Schmidts, Rosenm., Meyer, 
De Wette, Tholuck, Locke, Stuart, al., 
and mainly Grot., Reiche, and Fritz., who 
however render it ‘interfecit’ or ‘sup- 
plicio affecit,’ and understand the occa- 
sion to have been the Death of Christ,— 
though the condemnation of sin is owing 
to His sinlessness, nut to His sacrifice. 
I have dwelt at length on this question, 
as being very important to the right 
apprehension of the whole chapter, in 
this part of which not the justification, 
but the sanctification, of Christians is 
the leading subject. It is a strong con- 
firmation of the above view, that God’s 
condemnation of sin in the flesh by 
Christ is stated in ver. 3 as the ground of 


388 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOT®. ΙΗ 
; r 5 , a ΄ ς Xr An 5 FQ, wn Ά t Q 
r= chi. ικαίωμα TOD νόμου ὃ πληρωθῇ ἐν ἡμῖν τοῖς μὴ * κατὰ 
Pe oe “ ‘ a ¢ ἈΝ 
s=ch.xili8al. t σάρκα " περιπατοῦσιν, ἀλλὰ ‘kata πνεῦμα. ὃ οἱ γὰρ 
68}. \ a ‘ nw e » 
ae) gem, ἡ κατὰ ἱ σάρκα ὄντες " τὰ τῆς σαρκὸς δ᾽ φρονοῦσιν, οἱ δὲ 
"o28 Luke tata ' πνεῦμα τὰ τοῦ πνεύματος. ὃ τὸ γὰρ * φρόνημα 
ii. 49. ch. ii. τῷ Μ' . yap ρΟνΉΜ 
14. Thue a \ ΄ \ \ x ΄ a ΄, \ 
nisi, τῆς σαρκὸς θάνατος, τὸ δὲ * φρόνημα τοῦ πνεύματος ζωὴ 
= att. . , ΄ , x , A Ἀ yy 5 
za Mk. ch. καὶ εἰρήνη. 7 * διότι τὸ * φρόνημα τῆς σαρκὸς * ἔχθρα εἰς 
Phil. iii. 19. Se ES. , κα GE OF , 5 RACAL ON 
Βα αι. 19. Θεόν" τῷ yap νόμῳ τοῦ θεοῦ οὐχ " ὑποτάσσεται, οὐδὲ Yap 
xheresee δύναται" 8 οἱ δὲ ὁ ἐν “ σαρκὶ ὄντες θεῷ ἃ ἀρέσαι οὐ δύνανται 
ver. 27 } Pp ; rn p . 


enly+. 2 Macc. vii. 21. xiii. 9 only. 


a Luke xxiii. 12. Gal. v.20. Eph. ii. 15, 16. 


y — ch. ii. 10 reff. 
James iv. 4 only. 


z= ch. 1. 21. 
ν΄. εἰς, here only. 


1 Cor. xv. 9. 


Gen. iii. 15. b Luke 


ii. 51 al. Dan. vi. 13 Theod. 1 Chron. xxix. 24. ς ch. ii. 28 reff. d Acts vi. 5 reff. ch. 
xv. 1, ἄς. 1 Cor. vii. 32, ἄς. 1 Thess. iv.1. 2Tim.ii.4. Prov, xii. 21. 
ἡ. for διοτι, οτι F. for δυναται, ουναται &?. 8. ins τω bef θεω D. 


‘ver, 2) my being freed from the law of sin 
and death : because, viz. Christ’s victory 
over sin is mine, by my union with Him 
and participation in His Spirit. ἐν τῇ 
σαρκί is not ‘in His flesh,’ or ‘by means 
of His flesh, as Orig., Syr.(Peschito), 
Reza, Grot., Reiche, Olsh., al., but ‘in the 
flesh, which Christ and ourselves have in 
common), 4. in order that (the pur- 
pose of God’s condemning sin in the flesh) 
the righteous demand (or, requirement) of 
the law (= all its requirements (statutes), 
but here combined in one for the sake of 
more distinct objectivity. The variations 
in interpretation of ver. 3 have given rise 
to corresponding ones here. But here the 
matter has been more complicated still by 
the Vulg. rendering δικαίωμα, ‘justificatio,’ 
which has thrown the weight of the 
Romanist interpreters on the side of ‘ jus- 
titia imputata.’ The usage of the word 
itself would preclude any such reference 
here, besedes the considerations urged in 
the note above) might be fulfilled in us 
(find its full accomplishment ;—not mere- 
ly = ‘be performed by us, —for the Apos- 
tle has a much deeper meaning, viz. that 
the aim of God in giving the Law might 
be accomplished in us, in our sanctifica- 
tion, which is the ultimate end of our 
redemption, Eph. ii. 10; Col. i. 22. The 
passive is used, to shew that the work is not 
ours, but that of God by His grace, Olsh., 
Thol., De Wette) who walk (not ‘walking 
as we do,’ which would be anarthrous, — 
buta description of αὐ those of whom the 
above is true) not after the flesh but after 
the Spirit (who, notwithstanding that we 
are bound up with a σὰρξ ἁμαρτίας, do not 
walk in our daily life according to, or led 
by, the νόμος τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὃ ἐν τοῖς μέλε- 
σιν ἡμῶν, but according to and led by the 
νόμος Tov πνεύματος τῆς ζωῆς, in Christ 
Jesus—members of Him, and participating 
in that victory over sin which He obtained, 
by which the power of sin in our flesh is 
broken). 5. | For (explanation of the 
last) those who live according to the flesh 


(ὄντες not quite = περιπατοῦντες, but 
nearly :—the latter is the evidence of the 
former, and a consequence of it: οἱ κατὰ 
σάρκα ὄντες = of σάρκινοι) mind (‘ think 
of, ‘care for, and strive after,’ see reff.) 
the things belonging to the flesh (its 
objects of desire): but those (who live) 
according tothe Spirit (= of πνευματικοί, 
see above), (mind) the things belonging 
to the Spirit (the higher aims and objects 
of desire of the spiritual life). 

6. | For (the spiritual man cannot seek the 
things of the flesh, because) the mind 
(thoughts, cares, and aims as above) of 
the fiesh is (ends in—the copula (=), as 
when it joins the two signs of an algebraic 
operation;—‘ amounts to, being worked 
out’) death (not merely physical, nor mere 
unhappiness, as sometimes in ch, vii., but 
as in ver. 2, in the largest sense, extending 
to eternity); but the mind (thoughts, 
cares, and aims) of the Spirit, is (see 
above) life and peace (in the largest 
sense, as above). In this argument there 
is a suppressed premiss, to be supplied 
from ver. 2; viz. ‘The Spirit is the Spirit 
of life. Hence it follows that the spiri- 
tual man cannot mind the things of the 
flesh, because such mind is death. The 
addition καὶ εἰρήνη seems to be made to 
enhance the unlikelihood of such a 
minding,—the peace of the Spirit being a 
blessed contrast to the tumult of the flesh- 
ly lusts, even in this life. 7.) Be- 
cause (reason why the mind of the 
flesh is death) the mind of the flesh is 
enmity (contrast to εἰρήνη above) against 
God (it being assumed that God is the 
source of ζωή, and that ἔχθρα against Him 
is the absence of all true peace): for it 
does not submit itself (better [than the 
passive of the E. V.}) to the law of God,— 
for neither can it (this was proved in ch. 
vii.) : 8.] but (takes up the other 
and inferential member of the proposi- 
tion, answering to a suppressed μέν pre- 
ceding,—7d μὲν φρόνημα k.7.A. [bringing 
in a further consequence: if the mind of 


ABCDF 
KL[P]x 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 
[47] 


5271. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 389 


e r \ ᾽ 3 \ \ , 
" ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐκ ἐστὲ " ἐν “ σαρκὶ ἀλλὰ " ἐν πνεύματι, f εἴπερ « - Jobnw. 


: 3. Eph. vi. 
πνεῦμα θεοῦ 8 οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν. “ed δέ τις πνεῦμα χριστοῦ 18. οἱ. 1.8. 
i i μ XP see Rey. i. 10 


z > \ \ Toma 
10 ef δὲ χριστὸς ἐν f ch. iii. 30. 


ver. 17. 


h » i ” ee ’ ” 5 n 
OUK EVEL, ου.ὃς οὐκ EOTLY AUTOD. 


Clin \ \ a . AS) ue , \ \ a \ J ade 
ὑμῖν, TO μὲν σῶμα νεκρὸν διὰ ἁμαρτίαν, TO δὲ πνεῦμα ζωὴ 190. viii. 5. 
ὃ \ ὃ ΠΝ 1] ΠΝ \ a CED) 5 ἢ \ 2 Cor. v. 3 
ta δικαιοσύνην. |! εἰ δὲ TO πνεῦμα τοῦ * ἐγείραντος [τὸν] τ. Γ΄ 2 Thess. 
3 a k 2 Η a or > res | rt ON ς k 2 7 Ἢ Ee 1. 6. 1 Pee 
5 . 3 only. 
Ἰησοῦν * ἐκ νεκρῶν ὅ οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν, ὁ " ἐγείρας χριστὸν * ἐκ ὃν δ only, 


> a Τὰ \ \ \ f A ἡ 
νεκρῶν | ζωοποιήσει καὶ τὰ ™ θνητὰ σώματα ὑμῶν, διὰ τὸ κ Μαῖι. xvi. 
42. 1 Cor. 


il Cor. vii. 40. Jude 19. k 1 Cor. xv. 12 reff. l ch. iv. 17 reff. 


Vil. 9. 
m ch. vi. 12 reff. 


9. (adda; so BD' [ Meth, J.) 

10. om εἰ de xp. ev vy. F. aft σωμα ins εστιν F. (δια αμ.. so ABCD3F 
16 sil, Tischdf (δὲ Treg) ] ἃ g m.) for (wn, ζὴ F vulg(not am fuld harl!) arm. 

11. ins τὸν bef inc. ABN! ο [47]: om CDFKL[P JN? rel (Clem,) | Meth, Euthal- 
ms | Cyr-jer, Chr, Thdrt, ΤῊ] He. rec ins τὸν bef χριστον, with K Li P j&3 rel 
Hipp, [Ps-Ath, Sevrn,] Thdrt Thl @c: om AB(C)D!3FR! [ Valent, Meth, Epiph 
Bas, Dial-trin, (and, adding mo., Ath, Did, Cyr-p Damasc)].—for χριστον, xp. ino. 
A(att vexp.) D! Ni(aft vexp. [so Cyr,-p]) [Ath, Did, Cyrg-p Damase]}: imo. xp. C(aft 
vexp.) vulg copt eth[-rom arm-use Ath, Did, Cyr,-p Orig-int, Aug, |: τὸν ησουν lect-13, 
tov κυριον 114-5, τ. κυρ. nu. ino. xp. Syr [Orthod,]: txt BD?FKL/P] rel syr sah 
{zth-pl arm-zoh Vaient, &c(as above) Orig-int, Ambrst] Iren-int, Tert, Hil,. om 


και AX 39. 47 [arm-edd Orig, Meth, Epiph, ]. 


the flesh cannot be subject to God’s law, 
then they who are in the flesh, and are led 
by that mind, cannot please God}. Calv., 
Beza, al. render it ‘therefore, and so 
E. V., “50 then,’ erroneously) they who are 
in the flesh (as their element of life and 
thought: nearly = κατὰ σάρκα ὄντες above, 
which however denotes the rule which 
they follow. In 2 Cor. x. 3, the two are 
distinguished: ἐν σαρκὶ yap περιπατοῦν- 
τες οὐ κατὰ σάρκα στρατευόμεθα) Can- 
not please God. Melancthon remarks 
(Thol.),—* Hic locus maxime refutat Pela- 
gianos et omnes qui imaginantur homines 
sine Spiritu Sancto legi obedire.’ 9. | 
But (oppos. to of κατ. odp. dvtTes) ye are 
not in the flesh (see above), but in the 
Spirit, if so be that (‘provided that;’ 
not ‘since, as Chrys., Olsh., al., which 
would be ἐπείπερ: Chrys. tries to prove 
εἴπερ = ἐπείπερ here by adducing ref. 
2 Thess., where, however, as here, the 
meaning is, ‘if so be that, ‘if at least. 
That this is the meaning here is evident by 
the exception which immediately follows). 
But (this must be rightly understood: for) 
if any man has not ([not ‘have not,’ as 
E. V.; the case is put as an existent one | 
οὐκ, and not μή, because it belongs to the 
verb and not to εἰ. De W. See Winer, 
edn. 6, § 55. 2. d) the Spirit of Christ 
(=7v. θεοῦ above. Obs. here that πν. 
θεοῦ, mv. χριστοῦ, and χριστός, are all 
used of the Holy Spirit indwelling in the 
Christian), he is not His (belongs not to 
Him, in the higher and blessed sense of 
being united to Him as a member of Him). 

10.] Now ({in slight | contrast to 
the last verse [he brings out one point, 


elz δια του EVOLKOVYTOS αὐτου TYEU- 


which might seem to be an exception to 
the blessed consequences of the life-giving 
power of Christ indwelling in us]) if 
Christ is in you (= mv. θεοῦ οἰκεῖ ἐν ὕμ., 
see 2 Cor. iii. 17), the (your) bedy indeed 
is dead on account of sin (still remains 
dead, see 2 Cor. iv. 11—14, under the 
power of death physical (and eternal ?) 
because of sin which it, per se, stands in, 
and serves), but the (your) spirit (τὴν 
ψυχὴν λέγει, ὡς mvevvaTiKhy ἤδη yeyevn- 
μένην. Schol.. ap. Matthei (Thol.): or 
rather perhaps he [now] uses πγεῦμα, 
regarding our spirits as possessed and 
penetrated by God’s Spirit) is life (this 
would hardly be said if only our human 
spirits were meant, but the description 
would be in the adjectival form) on ‘ac- 
count of righteousness (not here the 
imputed righteousness of justification, 
which is not now under treatment, but 
the implanted righteousness of the sanett- 
fication of the Spirit. This appears not 
only from the context, but also from the 
διὰ ἁμαρτίαν, which answers to it). 

11.] But (δέ takes up and continues the 
supposition in the former verse, witk 
which in fact this is nearly identical, but 
with the important additional particular 
(whence the contrast) τοῦ ἐγείραντ. K.7.A.) 
if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus 
from the dead, dwells in you (which 
Spirit is therefore powerful over death, 
and besides renders you partakers of 
Christ's Resurrection), He who raised 
Christ from the dead (the personal name, 
JEsus, reminds more of the historic fact 
of the resurreetion of the one Person, 
Jesus: the official and mystical name, 


390 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. VIII. 
n2Cor. vi.16. ἢ ἐνοικοῦν αὐτοῦ πνεῦμα ἐν ὑμῖν. 13 ο ἄρα " οὖν, ἀδελφοί, age 
Col. iii. 15. pa 3 : Ν 
zTim-ia Ρ ὀφειλέται ἐσμὲν οὐ τῇ σαρκὶ « τοῦ "κατὰ " σάρκα ζῆν, εὐ ἀ τ 
a Mae ᾿ 4 
ot weer, 19 εἰ γὰρ 'xaTa'odpKa ζῆτε, ὃ μέλλετε ἀποθνήσκειν" εἰ δὲ min ΟἹ 
p ch. i. 14 reff. , 


VA ME “ 43 f u fa “ νὰ θ » 
4 pe σσ, σπινευματι τας Tpa ELS TOV σώματος aVaTOUTE, ησέεσῦσε. 


Σ. 13 
rch. i. 3 reff. t = Acts xix. 18 reff. 


v = Heb. x. 38. 


ματος (see notes), with ACN[P? rel mss-in-]Dial-trin (Dial iii. 20, Athanas. Opp. vol 
iv. p 452 [1234, ed. Migne}. The Maced. has previously said οὕτως ob γέγραπται Διὰ 
rov . . ἀλλὰ Διὰ τό... and adds ἐὰν οὖν που ἕν ἢ δεύτερον ἀντίγραφον εὑρεθῇ ἐσφαλ- 
μένον παρ᾽ ὑμῖν... . to which the Orthodox replies, ἔχομεν δεῖξαι ὅτι ἐν ὅλοις ἀρχαίοις 
ἀντιγράφοις οὕτω γέγραπται' ἐπεὶ δὲ νομίζεις τοῦτο ἀντιλεγόμενον εἶναι, πληροφορήθητι 
καὶ ἐξ ἄλλης γραφικῆς ἀποδείξεως. Maced. εἰπέ, τοῦτο γὰρ ἀντιλέγεται) syr copt eth 
[sah-woide arm] Clem, Hipp, Cyr-jer, Ath, Did,[int, Meth,(and ms,)] Bas, Epiph, 
Chr, Cyr[-p Damasc] Mac, Ambr Augsepe Vig: txt BDFKL[P!] bef g h kl nol7 
[47] latt Syr sah Orig,{int. Euthal-ms} Meth, Chr, Thdrt Sevrn, Iren-int, Tert, Hil, 
Ambrst Jer Ambrajic Aug, Pelag Sedul Fulg. 

13. for του σωματος, τὴς capkos DF latt [Ephr,] Iren-int Orig,[int,] Did{-int, ] 
Tert, Cypr, Ambrst Ambr Jer Aug Pelag Sedul Bede: txt ABCKL[P)JX rel [syrr 


s = Acts xxi. 27. xxviii. 6. u ch. vii. 4 reff, 


xii. 9. 


copt zth] sah Orig, Chr, Thdrt [Did, Damasc]. 


Curist, of the body of which He is the 
Head and we the members,—all raised 
with Him by the one Spirit dwelling in 
all) shall quicken (not merely ἐγερεῖ, be- 
cause it is not merely the resurrection of 
the body which is in the Apostle’s view, — 
see below) even your mortal bodies (the 
higher phase of the ζωοποιεῖν takes place 
in the spirit of man: and even of that 
which takes place in the body, there are 
two branches—one, the quickening it from 
being a tool of unrighteousness unto death 
(eternal), —the other, the quickening it out 
of death (physical) to be a new and glori- 
fied body. And the καί joined with θνητά, 
here, signifies that the working of the 
πνεῦμα ζωοποιοῦν shall not stop at the 

urely spiritual resurrection, nor at that 
of the body from dead works to serve the 
living God, but shall extend even to the 
building up the spiritual body in the future 
new and glorious life), on account of His 
Spirit which dwells in you. Here the 
reading is much disputed, whether it be 
the acc. or gen.: see var. readd. The 
gen. can only mean, ‘by means of,’ 
‘through,’ His Spirit, &c.: this the ace. 
may include, (it not being specified for 
what reason it is on the Spirit’s account, 
and leaving it open to be His presence, 
or His agency,) but must be rendered ‘ on 
account of,’ or ‘because of,’ His Spirit, 
ἄς. Thus both may imply that the Holy 
Spirit is the agent in the quickening; but 
the gen. cannot bear the other meaning, 
that God will quicken, &c. because of His 
Spirit, ἄς. Hence in dispute with the 
Macedonians, who denied the divinity of 
the Holy Spirit, the gen. reading was im- 
portant to the orthodox, as expressing 
agency, and that atoue. But it seems 
pretty clear that the variation was oldev 
than the time of this heresy, and, how- 


ever it may then have been appealed to, 
its origin cannot be assigned to any falsi- 
fication by either of the then disputant 
parties. As to how far the Holy Spirit 
is the direct Agent in the resurrection 
of the body, see note on πνεῦμα ζωοπ., 
1 Cor. xv. 45, and on 2 Cor. v. 5.. Here, 
His direct agency cannot be in any way 
surprising, for it is the whole process of 
bringing from death to life, extending 
even to the mortal body, which is here 
spoken of—and unquestionably, ‘the Lord 
and Giver of Life’ is the agent throughout 
in this quickening. ‘Non de ultima resur- 
rectione, que momento fiet, habetur sermo, 
sed de continua Spiritus operatione, que 
reliquias carnis paullatim mortificans, ce- 
lestem vitam in nobis instaurat.’ Calv. :— 
but perhaps ‘non solwm de ultima resur- 
rectione,’ would have been more correct : 
for it certainly is one thing spoken of. 

12, 13.] So then, brethren, we are 
(inference from the assurance in the last 
verse) debtors (we owe fealty: to what 
or whom, he leaves the reader to supply 
from ver. 11), not to the flesh, to live 
according to the flesh (Chrysostom well 
explains the qualification, τοῦ κατὰ o. ¢.,— 
καὶ yap πολλὰ αὐτῇ ὀφείλομεν, Td τρέφειν 
αὐτήν, τὸ θάλπειν, τὸ ἀναπαύειν, τὸ θερα- 
πεύειν νοσοῦσαν, τὸ περιβάλλειν, καὶ μυρία 
ἕτερα λειτουργεῖν. iW οὖν μὴ νομίσῃς 


“ > 
Sr. ταύτην ἀναιρεῖ τὴν διακονίαν, εἰπὼν" 


οὐκ ἐσμ. ὀφ. τῇ σαρ., ἑρμηνεύει αὐτὸ 
λέγων τοῦ κ. σ. Civ’... τουτέστι μὴ 
ποιῶμεν αὐτὴν κυρίαν τῆς ζωῆς THs ἡμετέ- 
pas. Hom, xiv. p. 576): for if ye live ac- 
cording to the flesh, ye [must (or, ] will, 
μέλλετε of the certain end of your present 
course) die (Civ and ἀποθν. here in their 
full and pregnant sense, involving body and 
soul here and hereafter: but not to be un- 
derstood as excluding the carnal from any 


12—15. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOT®S. 991 


14. “ x , θ a wt ° xi. ΦΎΣΙΣ 
oa ol yap σπινευματι εου αγονται, OUTOL VLOL ELOLV w= and 


a κ᾿ 2 = constr., Gal. 
θεοῦ. 1 οὐ yap " ἐλάβετε ¥ πνεῦμα * δουλείας πάλιν ὃ εἰς γ.18. 2 Tim. 
΄ \ ~ / a e ΄ 2 ΄ rer. 19 reff. 
Φόβον, ἀλλὰ Y ἐλάβετε "5 πνεῦμα * υἱοθεσίας, 4 ἐν ᾧ “ἴ κρά- ¥ Acts vii 15 

z constr., 2 Cor. iv. 13. et ΤΕ lone ὴ 


xx. 2 ἘΠῚ - ch. v. 16 reff. 
a = Gali wis.t: e Gal. iv. 6. 


aver. 21. Gal. iv. 24. vy. 1. Heb. ii. 15 only. Exod. 

ce ver. 23. ch. ix. 4. Gal. iv.5. Eph. i. 5 only t. 

f Mark x. 48|| L. Ps. Ixxvi. 1. evi. 6, &c. 
14. rec εἰσιν viot θεου (corrn of order, as is also v. 0. €1.), with KL[P] rel [vulg- 
clem(with harl tol) copt syr arm Clem,] Chr, Thdrt [Cyr,-p Euthal-ms Gennad-c 
Orig-int, ] Iren-int,: vs. θε. εἰσ. ACDN [47 spec] fuld eth Orig,[int, 14,7 Damase 
Cypr, [Ambrst] Cassiod Gaud: txt BF am(with demid al) Syr Orig,[int,] Did[-int, ] 


Hil, Aug Bede. 
15. (adda, so ΑΒΟΝ [Clem, Orig, ].) 


resurrection—only from that which is truly 
(jv,—any more than the spiritual are 
exempted from all death, but only from 
that which is truly θάνατος): but if by 
the Spirit ye slay (abolish, annul) the 
deeds (hardly as Thol. ‘sensu obscceno,’ 
but as Col. iii. 9, the whole course of habits 
and action which has the flesh for its 
prompter) of the body (= τῆς σαρκός, but 
here concrete to give more vivid reality : 
compare τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός, Gal. v. 19), 
ye shall live (not μέλλετε ζῆν, this Life 
being no natural consequence of a course 
of mortifying the deeds of the body, but 
the gift of God through Christ : and com- 
ing therefore in the form of an assurance, 
‘ye shall live,’ from Christ’s Apostle. On 
ζῆν, see above). 14.] For (ground of 
the assurance contained in ζήσεσθε) as 
many as are led by (reff. ;—the slaying 
the deeds of the body by the Spirit, implies 
the being under the Spirit’s guidance) the 
Spirit of God, these (emphatic—‘ these 
and no others’) are sons of God. 

vids @. differs from τέκνον 0. in implying 
the higher and more mature and conscious 
member of God’s family, see Gal. iv. 1—6, 
and note on 6. Hence our Lord is never 
called τέκνον but always υἱὸς θεοῦ. This 
latter, applied to a Christian, signifies ‘ one 
born of God’ in the deepest relation to 
him,—and hence a partaker of His nature, 
1 John iii. 9; 1 Pet. i. 23 (Tholuck, simi- 
larly Olsh.). 15, 16.] Appeal to the 
CONSCIOUSNESS of the Christian to confirm 
the assertion (assumed for the moment 
that he 15 led by God’s Spirit) that he is 
a son of God. For (confirmantis) ye did 
not receive (at your becoming Christians) 
the spirit ot bondage (= ‘ the Spirit which 
ye received was not a spirit of bondage.’ 
mv. is not merely a spirit, a disposition, 
but evidently refers to the same πν. which 
afterwards is mv. υἱοθεσ., and αὐτὸ τὸ mr. 
The Apostle seems however in this form 
of expression, both here and elsewhere, see 
reff., to have combined the objective Πνεῦμα 
given to us by God with our own subjective 
πνεῦμα. In the next verse they are sepa- 
rated) [leading back (or,j again[; but 
the latter word is undesirable, as] it has 


been imagined here that the πάλιν must 
refer to a former bestowal of the πνεῦμα 
δουλείας, and consequently that the refer- 
ence is to the O. I. dispensation. In this 
two different sets of Commentators have 
found difficulties ; (1) those, as Chrys.,— 
who would hold from John vii. 39, that the 
Holy Spirit was absolutely not given under 
the O. T., and (2) those, as Cocceius, who 
holding Him to have been given, deny that 
His character was mv. δουλείας. But 
there seems to me to be no occasion to go 
back for the reference of πάλιν to the 
O.T. The state of the natural man is 
δουλεία : the Holy Spirit given to them, 
the agent of their birth into, and sustainer 
of, a new state, was not a mv. δουλείας 
πάλιν εἰς ., a spirit merely to retair 
them in, or take them back into their old 
state, viz. a state of slavery :—to whom, 
or whether to different masters, is not 
here in question, but the state merely— 
the object of the gift of the Holy Spirit 
was not to lead them back into this) 
towards fear (so as to bring about or 
result im fear, see ch. vi. 19. πάλιν can 
hardly, as De W., be taken with eis φόβ.), 
but ye received the Spirit of (the Spirit 
whose effect was, see above) adoption (this 
stricter meaning, and not that of mere 
sonship, is plainly that intended by the 
Apostle, both here and in reff. So Fritz., 
Meyer, Olsh., Harless on Eph. i. 5, Tho- 
luck: on the other hand Luther, Winer, 
Riickert, De Wette, al., see on ver. 23. 
Of course, the adoption to be a son involves 
sonship, but not the converse), in whom 
(compare ἐν πνεύματι ch. ii. 29, and ver. 9. 
Luth. and Tholuck, ‘through, by means 
ot, whom: but τὸ mredjua = Him in 
whom, not merely Him ὅψ whom, not 
being merely an external agent, but an 
indwelling and pervading power) we cry 
(the earnest expression of supplieating 
prayer, see reff. LXX) Abba, Father (I 
have said, on ref. Mark, that ὁ mar. does 
not appear to be a mere explanation of 
wax, but to have been joined to it in one 
phrase, as a form of address: expressing 
probably, a corresponding ‘my father,’ 
‘28, in the Heb. expression. Luther, to 


992 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


VIL 


,’ lal ς a a 
g Gal. as above Comey ® ABA ξὸ πατήρ. 16 αὐτὸ "τὸ πνεῦμα ἱσυμμαρτυρεῖ 
ark 


(60). M 
xiv. 36 only. 
th absol., Acts 
x. 19 reff. 
i ch. ii. 15. ix. 
1 only t. 


τῷ k 


- / « fal .“ 9 \ l 6 ] ω 
TTVEULATL μων OTL ἐσμεν “τέκνα θεοῦ. 


17 εἰ δὲ τέκνα, 


καὶ ™ κληρονόμοι" ™ κληρονόμοι μὲν θεοῦ, " συγκληρονόμοι 


ase \ a / 7 \ a“ 
k = λον νι, δὲ χριστοῦ" ° εἴπερ ? συνπάσχομεν, iva καὶ 4 συνδοξασθῶ- 


1 = ver. 21 ch 


ix.8. Johni. 12. xi,52. Phil. ii. 15. 1 John iii. Listes 10. Shae 


n Eph. iii. 6. Heb. xi. 9. 
1 Kings xxii. 8 Symm. [or Anon.] 


iv. 13 reff. 
p 1 Cor. xii. 26 only t+. 


16. at beg ins wore D[-gr 


1 Pet. iii. 7 only +. 


(see Gal. iv. 28,31. Eph. vy. 8.) 
(-μεῖν, Sir. xxii. 23.) 
q here only t. 


m ch, 
o ver, 9 reff. 


71: aft αὐτὸ ins yap 115-24 vulg(demid harl! mar!: not 


am [fuld tol |) Thdrt ΤῺ] { Orig-int, Did-int,] Pel. 


17. for 1st KAnpov., συνκληρονομοι D1[-gr |. 


A[P b (m) 17. 47 Tert, Cypr, ].) 


express the familiarity of Abba, renders 
‘lieber Vater,’ ‘dear Father’). See on 
the whole, the strictly parallel place, ref. 
Gal. 16.} And this confidence is 
grounded on the testimony of the Spirit 
itself. So Chrys.: ov yap ἀπὸ τῆς φωνῆς 
loxupiCouat μόνον, φησίν, ἀλλὰ Kal ἀπὸ 
τῆς αἰτίας ad hs ἡ φωνὴ τίκτεται 
οὐ γὰρ τοῦ χαρίσματός ἐστιν ἣ φωνὴ 
μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῦ δόντος τὴν δωρεὰν 
παρακλήτου αὐτὸς γὰρ ἡμᾶς οὗτος ἐδί- 
dake διὰ τοῦ χαρίσματος οὕτω φθέγγεσθαι. 
Hom. xiv. p. ὅ79. This verse being with- 
out copula, is best understood to refer to 
the same as the preceding, and the asser- 
tion to concern the same fact as the last 
verb, xpaCouev,—as if it were αὐτοῦ τοῦ 
πν. συμμαρτυροῦντος K.T.A., grounding that 
fact on an act of the indwelling Spirit 
Himself. See again Gal. iv. 6. The 
Spirit itself (not ‘zdem Spiritus, as Erasm. 
and similarly Luth., Reiche, al.: the αὐτό 
expresses the independence, and at the same 
time, as coming from God, the precious- 
ness and importance of the testimony) 
testifies to our spirit (see ch. ii. 15, and 
note: not ‘una testatur:’? the σύν in 
composition does not refer to τῷ mv. Hu, 
but to agreement in the fact, as in ‘ con- 
testari,’ ‘ confirmare ᾽) that we are chil- 
dren of God. What is this witness of the 
Spirit itself? All have agreed, and indeed 
this verse is decisive for it, that it is some- 
thing separate from, and higher than, all 
subjective inferences and conclusions. But 
on the other hand it does not consist in 
mere indefinite feeling, but in a certitude 
of the Spirit's presence and work con- 
tinually asserted within us. It is mani- 
fested, as Olsh. beautifully says, in His 
comforting us, His stirring us up to prayer, 
His reproof of our sins, His drawing us to 
works of love, to bear testimony before 
the world, &c. And he adds, with equal 
truth, “On this direct testimony of the 
Holy Ghost rests, ultimately, all the regene- 
rate man’s conviction respecting Christ 
and His work. For belief in Scripture itself 
(he means, in the highest sense of the term 
‘belief,’ =‘ conviction personally applied’) 
has its foundation in this experience of the 


(cuvracx., so AB1'CDFR.—xouev 


divine nature of the (influencing) Principle 
which it promises, and which, while the 
believer is studying it, infuses itself into 
him.” The same Commentator remarks, 
that this is one of the most decisive pas- 
sages against the pantheistic view of the 
identity of the Spirit of God and the spirit 
of man. However the one may by reno- 
vating power be rendered like the other, 
there still is a specific difference. The 
spirit of man may siz (2 Cor. vii. 1), the 
Spirit of God cannot, but can only be 
grieved (Eph. iv. 30), or quenched (1 ‘Thess. 
v. 19), and it is by the infusion of this 
highest Principle of Holiness, that man be- 
comes ONE SPIRIT with the Lord Himseif 
{{ Cor? 37} τέκνα θεοῦ] Here, 
(not viol) because the testimony respects 
the very ground and central point of son- 
ship, likeness to and desire for God: the 
testimony of the Spirit shewing us by our 
yearnings after, our confidence in, our re- 
gard to God, that we are verily begotten 
of Him. 17.| CONSEQUENCES of our 
being children of God. But (announcing 
a result, as in a mathematical proposition : 
‘but, if &e.’) if children, also heirs 
(which is the universal rule of mankind : 
but «Anp. here must not be carried to the 
extent of the idea of hezr in all directions : 
it is merely the one side of inheriting by 
promise, which is here brought out: the 
word referring back probably to ch. iv. 
13, 14, the promise to Abraham); heirs 
of God (as our Father, giving the inherit- 
ance to us), and joint-heirs with Christ 
(whom God has made κληρονόμον πάντων, 
Heb. i. 2. Tholuck remarks: “ It is 
by virtue of their substantial unity with 
the father, that the children come*fthto 
participation of his possession. —The Roman 
luw regarded them as continuators of his 
personality. The dignity of the inherit- 
ance is shewn (1) by its being God’s pos- 
session, (2) by its being the possession of 
the Firstborn of God. By the Roman law, 
the share of the firstborn was no greater 
than that of the other children,—and the 
N. T. sets forth this view, making the 
redeemed equal to Christ (ver. 29), and 
Christ’s possessions, theirs ; 1 Cor. iii, 21— 


ee 


ABCDF © 
KL[PJx 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 





16—19. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


593 


/ \ δ “A 
μεν" 18 τ λογίζομαι yap ὅτι οὐκ * ἄξια τὰ ἃ παθήματα ¥ τοῦ = andconstr., 


νῦν " καιροῦ δ" πρὸς 


τὴν *Y μέλλουσαν ¥* δόξαν 5 atroxa- , (. 
19 £ \ ο 7 ὃ / Aad / t= 
ἡ γὰρ “ ἀποκαραδοκία τῆς “ κτίσεως ". 


ch, ii. 3 reff, 
28.) 

s here only. 

- Gen. xxili. 


Cf b ς᾽ Ἑ “ 
λυφθῆναι ὃ εἰς ἡμᾶς. 4 Glin: 
xxi. 22, 
24. Prov. iii. 15, viii. 11. Sir. xxvi. 15. (see note.) u ch. vii. ὃ reff. v ch. iii. 26 reff. 
w = Jer. xxiii. 28. x = ver. 13. w. inf. aor., Gal. iii. 23. Rev. i. 19. iii. 2. xii. 4. transp. of 
words, Gal. iii. 23. 1 Cor. xii. 22. y 1 Pet. v..1. z = ch. ii. 7 reff. a = Luke 
xvii. 30. ch. i. 18. b = here only. ce Phil. i. 20 only+. (-κεῖν, Ps. xxxvi. 


7 Aq. Jos. B. J. iii, 7. 26. 


18. for yap, δε Α[Ρ] 9 eth: 


Polyb. xvi. 2. 8.) 


23; John xvii. 22. In the joznt-heirship we 
must not bring out this point, that Christ 
is the rightful Heir, who shares His in- 
heritance with the other children of God: 
it is as adoptive children that they get the 
inheritance, and Christ is so far only the 
means of it, as He gives them power to 
become sons of God, John i. 12”); if 
at least (see above on ver. 9) we are suffer- 
ing with Him, that we may also be 
glorified with Him: i.e. ‘if (provided 
that) we are found in that course of par- 
ticipation in Christ’s sufferings, whose aim 
and end, as that of His sufferings, is to be 
glorified as He was, and with Him. But 
the εἴπερ does not regard the subjective 
aim, q. ἃ. ‘ If at least our aim in suffering 
is, to be glorified,—but the fact of our 
being partakers of that course of sufferings 
with Him, whose aim is, wherever it is 
found, to be glorified with Him. 

Thol. takes the ἵνα as dependent on συγ- 
KAnp. (= ὥςτε), and εἴπερ συνπ. as quasi- 
parenthetical ; but the above seems to me 
more satisfactory. The connexion of 
suffering with Christ, and being glorified 
with Him is elsewhere insisted on, see 
2 linea. 110 LoPet.ived3'; ve i 

This last clause serves as a transition to 
vv. 18—30, in which the Apostle treats 
of the complete and glorious triumph of 
God’s elect, through sufferings and by 
hope, and the blessed renovation of all 
things in and by their glorification. 

18.] For (= this suffering with Him in 
order to being glorified with Him is no 
casting away of toil and self-denial, seeing 
that) reckon (implying, ‘I myself am one 
who have embraced this course, being con- 
vinced’) that the sufferings of this pre- 
sent period (of trial and sorrow, contrasted 
with the period of triumph following the 
παρουσία of Christ) are insignificant. (οὐκ 
ἄξια = avdtia,—no gen. or verb under- 
stood. ἄξιος and ἀνάξιος are found in 
the sense of ‘worthy (or unworthy) to be 
compared with’ in the classics: so Hom. 
Il. @. 234, viv δ᾽ οὔθ᾽ ἑνὸς ἄξιοι ἐσμὲν 
“Extopos, and Plato, Protag. (Wetst.), 
ἀνάξιά ἐστι τ᾽ ἀγαθὰ τῶν κακῶν, and again 
τίς ἄλλη Gvakia ἡ)ονὴ πρὸς λύπην ἐστίν ;) 
in comparison with the glory which is to 
be revealed (μέλλ. put first, as in reff., but 
apparently not, as De W., for the sake of 


= Mark xvi. 15. (ver. 39.) Judith xvi. 14. 


ergo Ambrst [om Lucif, 1. 


emphasis. Thol. cites Demosth., p. 486. 
10, ἐν τοῖς οὖσι νόμοις κυρίοις, in which 
there is no emphasis. as neither in ref. 
1 Cor. ἄποκαλ., at the ἀποκάλυψις 
of Christ. On the sentiment, see 2 Cor. 
iv. 17) with regard to us (not merely 
ἡμῖν, as spectators, but eis ἡμᾶς, as the 
subjects of the revelation; the E. V. is 
not far wrong, ‘im us,’ taking the eis in 
a pregnant sense as ἦν κηρύσσων εἰς τὰς 
συν., Luke iv. 44 [but it must not be 
understood as meaning wethin us, in our 
hearts }). Bernard amplifies this—de Con- 
vers. ad Cleric. 6. xxi. 37 (30), vol. i. p. 
494,—* non sunt condigne passiones hujus 
temporis ad preeteritam culpam que re- 
mittitur, non ad presentem consolationis 
gratiam que immittitur, non ad futuram 
gloriam que promittitur nobis.’ 
19 ff.] The greatness of this glory is shewn 
by the fact that ALL CREATION, now under 
the bondage of corruption, shall be set free 
Srom it by the glorification of the sons of 
God. For (proof of this transcendent 
greatness of the glory, not, as De W., of 
the certainty of its manifestation, though 
this secondary thought is perhaps in the 
background) the patient expectation 
(hardly = ἡ σφόδρα mposdoxia, as Chrys., 
whom Luther and E. V. follow; but better 
mposdoxia eis τὸ TEAOS,—the ἀπό denoting, 
as also in ἀπεκδέχεται, that the expectation 
continues till the time is exhausted, and 
the event arrives) of the creation (= all 
this world except man, both animate and 
inanimate: see an account of the exegesis 
below) waits for (see above) the revelation 
of the sons of God (‘revelatur gloria: et 
tum revelantur etiam filii Dei.’ Beng. 
υἱῶν, not τέκνων, because their son- 
ship will be complete, and possessed of all 
its privileges and glories). ἡ κτίσις 
has been very variously understood. There 
is a full history of the exegesis in Tholuck. 
De Wette sums it up thus: “The Crea- 
tion,—i.e. things created,—has by many 
been erroneously taken in an arbitrarily 
limited sense; 6. g. as applying only, I. to 
inanimate creation, as Chrys., Theophyl., 
Calv., Beza, Aret.,‘mundimachina,’ Luther, 
the Schmidts, al., Fritz., ‘mundi machina, 
celi sidera, aer, terra ? —against this are 
the words οὐχ ἑκοῦσα and συνστενάζει κ. 
συνωδίνει, implying life in the κτίσις,---- 


‘ 
994 ΠΡΟΣ ῬΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. ΨΠΠΙ. 
“- νυ e cal ’ , 9 an 
echii.s. τὴν " ἀποκάλυψιν τῶν f υἱῶν τοῦ θεοῦ 8 ἀπεκδέχεται. 50 τῇ cre 
1 Cor. 1. 7. \ ; Ξ- ; ᾿Ξ - ᾿ Fe ἣν ᾿ A 
2 Thess. i. 7 h d i k 
2 Thess.i-7 yap ἢ ματαιοτητί ἡ “ κτίσις ' ὑπετάγη οὐχ cen oe ἊΣ ed 
, Do \ \ e / 5 > / ΄] 
fMattv-%, διὰ τὸν | ὑποτάξαντα, ™ém ἐλπίδι, 31 ὅτι καὶ “αὐτὴ ἡ πὶ nol? 
i. Gal. tik 26. Rev. xxi. 7. g here &c.,3ce. 1 Cor.i.7. Gal.v.5. Phil. iii. 20. Heb. ix. 28. 1 Pet. [ J 
iii. 20 only τ. ἢ = here (Eph. iv. 17. 2 Pet. ii. 18) only. Eccles. i. 2. (-ova@at, ch. i. 21.) 
i ver. 7 reff. k 1 Cor. ix. 17 only. Exod. xxi. 13 only. lact., 1 Cor. xv. 27 & Heb. ii. 8, from 
Ps. viii. 6. Eph. i. 22. Phil. iii. 21. m ch. iv. 18 reff. 
19. om tov F. 20. for ovx εκουσα, ov θελουσα ΕΚ, ed B'D'I FR. 
21. διοτι DFR. om 7 F 
for to set these down to mere personifica- ing by that reference: see ver. 11. He 


tion is surely arbitrary:—and one can 
imagine no reason why bestial creation 
should be excluded. II. to /éving creation: 
(1) to mankind ; Aug., Turret., all., take 
it of men not yet believers : (2) Locke, 
Lightf., Hammond, Semler, of the yeé 
unconverted Gentiles: (3) Cramer, Gers- 
dorf, al., of the yet unconverted Jews : (4) 
Le Clere, al., of the converted Gentiles : 
(5) al., of the converted Jews ; (6) al., of 
all Christians ?’—* but,” as he proceeds, 
“ against (II.) lies this objection, that if 
the Apostle had wished to speak of the en- 
slaving and freeing of mankind, he hardly 
would have omitted reference to sin as the 
ground of the one and faith of the other, 
and the judgment on unbelievers. But on 
the other hand we must not extend the 
idea of κτίσις too wide, as Theodoret, who 
includes the angels, Kéllner, who under- 
stands the whole Creation, animate and 
inanimate, rational and irrational, and 
Olsh., who includes the unconverted Gen- 
tiles : nor make it too indefinite, as Koppe 
and Rosenm.: ‘tota rerum universitas.’ 
The right explanation is, all animate and 
inanimate nature as distinguished from 
mankind : so Irenzus, Grot., Calov., Wolf, 
Rickert, Reiche, al., Meyer, Neander, 
Schneckenburger, Thol.” The idea of the 
renovation and glorification of all nature 
at the revelation of the glory of our re- 
turned Saviour, will need no apology nor 
seem strange to the readers of this com- 
mentary, nor to the students of the fol- 
lowing, and many other passages of the 
prophetic word: Isa. xi. 6 ff. ; Ιχν. 17 ff. ; 
Rev. xxi.; 2 Pet. iii. 13; Acts ‘iii. 21. 

20.| Haplanation of the REASON WHY 
all creation waits, ὅδ. For the creation 
was made subject to vanity (= 527, Ps. 
XXXI1X. 6,—where (xxxvili. 5) the LXXx 
have τὰ σύμπαντα ματαιότης. So also 
Eccles. i. 2 and passim. It signifies the 
instability, liability to change and decay, 
of all created things) not willingly (‘cum 
a corruptione natura res omnes abhor- 
reant.’ Bucer in Thol.) but on account 
of (διά is so far from losing its proper 
meaning by the reference of τὸν ὑποτάξ- 
avra to God, as Jowett affirms, that it 
gains its strictest and most proper mean- 


is the occasion, and His glory the end, of 
creation’s corruptibility) Him who made it 
subject (i.e. God. Chrys., al., inter- 
pret it of Adam, who was the occasion of 
its being subjected ; and at first sight the 
acc. with διά seems to favour this. But i 
very much doubt whether this view can be 
borne out. For (1) does not ὑποτάξαντα 
imply a conscious act of intentional sub- 
jugation, and not merely an unconscious 
occasioning of the subjugation? Thus we 
have it said of God, ref. 1 Cor., πάντα γὰρ 
ὑπέταξεν ὑπὸ τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ" ὅταν δὲ 
K.T.A., δῆλον ὅτι ἐκτὸς τοῦ ὑποτάξαντος 
αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα. And (2) the ace. aft. διά 
is in reality no reason against this. He is 
speaking of the originating cause of this 
subjection, not of the efficient means of it. 
He says that creation was not subjected 
ἑκοῦσα, i.e. διὰ τὸ θέλημα ἑαυτῆς, but 
διὰ τὸν ὑποτάξαντας, At the same time 
such a way of putting it, removing as it 
were the supreme will of God to a wider 
distance from corruption and vanity, and 
making it not so much the worker as the 
occasion of it, as well as this indefinite 
mention of Him, is quite intelligible on 
the ground of that reverential awe which 
so entirely characterizes the mind and 
writings of the Apostle. If the occasion 
pointed at by ὑποτάξαι be required, 1 
should hardly fix it at the Fall of man, 
but at his creation, in the eternai counsels, 
—when he was made capable of falling, 
liable to change. The explanation of 6 
ὑποτάξας as meaning ‘the devil’ (Locke, 
al.), hardly needs refutation. See Matt. 
Χ. 28, and note),—in (‘on condition of,’ 
‘in a state of, see ch. iv. 18, and note on 
ἐφ᾽ @, ch. v. 12) hope (ἐπ᾽ éanibemust not 
be joined with ὑποτάξαντα, because then 
the ἐλπίς becomes the hope of the ὑπο- 
tdéas,—but with ὑπετάγη, being the hope 
of the ὑποταγεῖσα), because (not “ that,’ 
after ἐλπίς,---ἴον then it is not likely that 
αὐτὴ ἡ κτίσις would be so emphatically. 
repeated : the clause now announces a new 
Jact, and thus the emphasis is accounted 
for. To suppose the whole clause subjec- 
tive to the ἐλπίς, would be to attribute to 
the yearnings of creation, intelligence and 
rationality,—consciousness of itself and of 


20—23, 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


395 


ἃ κτίσις " ἐλευθερωθήσεται ἀπὸ τῆς ° δουλείας τῆς Ῥ φθορᾶς x ob. vi. 18 ree. 
ο 


» \ ῇ an / -“ ΄ A Ξ »“ 
εἰς τὴν 1 ἐλευθερίαν τῆς " δόξης τῶν " τέκνων τοῦ 5 θεοῦ. 
ῶ 7 \ rd a e ΄ 
22 οἴδαμεν γὰρ ὅτι πᾶσα ἡ ἃ κτίσις ' συνστενάζει καὶ ἃ συν- 
7 le “ ζ 
ὠδίνει τ ἄχρι τοῦ “νῦν 385 χοὐὺ μόνον δέ, " ἀλλὰ καὶ 


ver. 15 reff. 
p = 1 Cor. xv. 
42,50. Gal. 


19 only. 
Jonah ii. 7. 
2 Cor. iii. 17. 


>’ \ \ “ A 
αὐτοὶ τὴν ἀπαρχὴν τοῦ πνεύματος ἔχοντες ἡμεῖς καὶ “ames τ, 35. 


ii. 12 al. 


b] A c , 5 
αὐτοὶ ἐν * ἑαυτοῖς * στενάζομεν, ὃ υἱοθεσίαν ° ἀπεκδεχόμενοι, τῶν. xix. 20. 


t here only +. 


s ver. 16 ref. 
i w Phil. i. 5. 


iii. 14, Gal. iv. 2 al. 


ἃ here only t. 


v=:ch.i. 13. 1Cor.iv. 11. 2Cor. 


x ch. v. 3. 2 Cor. viii. 19 al. fr. ch. xi. 


bf 
Exod. xxiii. 19 al. fr. 


16. xvi. 5. 1 Cor. xv. 20, 23. xvi. 15. 2 Thess. ii. 13. Jamesi. 18. Rev. xiv. 4 only. 
z Ist pers., 2 Cor. iil. 1 reff. Mark vii. 34. 2 Cor. ν. 2,4. Heb. xiii. 17. James v.9 only. Isa. 
xxiv. ἡ. b ver. 15 reff. c ver. 19. 


22. for yap, δε A: om eth. 


ωὠδυνει F, 


(συνστεναζει, so B'DF 17.) 


for συνωδ., 


23. rec 2nd καὶ bef nues, with (DF)KL[P] 17 rel [syr] Chr, Thdrt,(readg κ. nu. 
avt. before) [ΤῊ] (ic: txt ACN [47] Damasec.—DF transpose kat ἡμεις avto: and και 
αυτοι: B[ Meth, Orig-int, Aug,] (omg ἡμει5) have καὶ avtoe both times: for other 


variations see Scholz. 
DF Ambrst. 


God) the creation itself also (not only 
we, the sons of God, but even creation 
itself) shall be delivered from the bond- 
age of corruption (its subjection to the 
law of decay, see Heb. ii. 15) into (preg- 
nant: shall be delivered from, &c., and 
admitted into) the freedom of the glory 
(beware of the fatal hendiadys : ‘ the free- 
dom of the glory ’ is not in any sense = ‘the 
glorious freedom ;’ in the latter, ‘ glorious’ 
is merely an epithet whereby the freedom 
is characterized, as in ‘ His rest shall be 
glorious :’ in the former the freedom is de- 
scribed as consisting in, belonging to, being 
one component part of, the glorified state 
of the children of God: and thus the 
thought is carried up to the state to which 
the freedom belongs) of the children 
(τέκνων and not υἱῶν here, perhaps as em- 
bracing God’s universal family of creation, 
admitted, each in their share, to a place in 
incorruptibility and glory). 22. ] For 
we know (said of an acknowledged and 
patent fact, see ch. ii. 2; iii. 19; vii. 14) 
that the whole creation groans together 
and travails together (not, groans and 
travails with us or with mankind, which 
would render the ov μόνον δὲ ἀλλά of the 
next verse superfluous. On the figure in 
συνωδίνει see John xvi. 21, note) [until 
now (1.6.1 up to this time = from the 
beginning till now: no reference to time 
future, because οἴδαμεν yap expresses the 
results of experience). 23.] The text 
here is in inextricable confusion (see var. 
read.), but the sense very little affected. 
But (moreover) not only (the creation), 
but even ourselves, possessing (not ‘who 
possess, οἱ ἔχοντες, but ‘though we pos- 
sess’) the firstfruit of the Spirit (i.e. the 
indwelling and influences of the Holy 
Spirit here, as an earnest of the full har- 
vest of His complete possession of us, 
πνεῦμα and σάρξ and ψυχή, hereafter. 


συνστεναζομεν (or συστ.) D f 38. 72. 


om υἱοθεσιαν 


That this is the meaning, seems evident 
from the analogy of St. Paul’s imagery re- 
garding the Holy Spirit: he treats of Him 
as an earnest and pledge given to us, Eph. i. 
14; 2 Cor. i. 22; v. 5, and of His full work 
in us as the efficient means of our glorifica- 
tion hereafter, ver. 11 ; 2 Cor. iii. 18. Va- 
rious other renderings are,— (1) ‘ the first 
outpouring of the Spirit, in point of time, 
—Wetst., Reiche, K6lln., Mey., al..— which 
would be irrelevant : (2) ‘the highest gifts 
of the Spirit, as the Schmidts, al. The 
gen. mv. may be partitive or subjective :— 
the firstfruit of the Spirit,—which Spirit 
is the harvest,—or the firstfruit of the 
Spirit,—which the Spirit gives :—or even 
in apposition, the firstfruit of the Spirit, 
i.e. which consists in (the gift of) the 
Spirit. I prefer the first, from analogy— 
the Spirit being generally spoken of as 
given, not as giving,—and God as the 
Giver), even we ourselves (repeated for 
emphasis, and ἡμεῖς inserted to involve 
himself and his fellow-workers in the 
general description of the last clause. 
Some (Wolf, K@élln.) have imagined the 
Apostles only to be spoken of: some, that 
the Apostles are meant in one place, and 
all Christians in the other) groan within 
ourselves, awaiting the fulness of [the 
(ον, our) adoption (ἀπεκδ., as above, ver. 
19, but even more strongly here, ‘ wazt 
out,’ “ wait for the end of.’ Our adoption 
is come already, ver. 15, so that we do 
not wait for it, but for the full manifesta- 
tion of it, in our bodies being rescued 
from the bondage of corruption and sin. 
This which in Gr. is expressed by the verb, 
in Eng. must be joined to the substantive. 
The omission of the art. before υἷοθ. is pro- 
bably on account of its preceding its verb, 
—viod. amexd. = ἀπεκδ. τὴν viod., for 
emphasis’ sake) the redemption (in appo- 
sition with υἷοθ., or rather with the fulness 


990 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. VIII. 


dch.iii 4 ret. Τὴν ὃ ἀπολύτρωσιν TOD σώματος ἡμῶν. 38 TH γὰρ ἐλπίδι ABCDF 


e = 2 Cor. iv. sichelied : KL[PJx 
5 4 s).. ¢ δ λ 6 4 > Μ i, ge a! 

εὐξ δῆσον, ἐσώθημεν, ἐλπὶς δὲ “ βχλεπομένη οὐκ ἔστιν ἐλπίς" ὃ γὰρ abe as 
30. ; , ͵ ° \ > ' ΟΣ > \ aA > ‘ 

gHeb.xiit. βλέπει τίς, ἴ τί [Fai] ἐλπίζει; 38 εἰ δὲ ὃ οὐ βλέπομεν, (ὦ ποιῇ 

h ch. ii. 7 reff. 4 - a > gh © at ee ; 96 i; , [47] | 

11 Cor.xi25 ἐλπίζομεν, 8 δι᾿ δι ὑπομονῆς “ ἀπεκδεχόμεθα. 538 ' ὡςαύτως 

k Luke x. 40 


δὲ \ \ a k / , ° ] > θ / af A 
only. Gen. O€ καὶ TO πνεῦμα * συναντιλαμβάνεται TH |! aT EVELA ἡμῶν. 
xxx. 8 Ed- 


vat(Bdef) πὰ τὸ yap τί προςευξώμεθα ° καθὸ δεῖ οὐκ οἴδαμεν, GAN 


Exod. xviii. 


22, Num. x} men \ a p< δ ΄ 4 a ΡΥ ye : 

11. Ps. αὐτὸ TO TVEVULa UTTEDEVTUYV QAVEL OTEVAYMOLS § AAAANTOLS 

Ixxxviii. 21 

only. (av7tA-, Acts xx. 35.) 1 Matt. viii. 17. 1 Cor. ii. 3 reff. m art., Mark τ 23. Lukei. 
62. Acts xxii. 30. 1 Thess. iv. 1. aap στὸ ΠΡ. Winer, edn. 6, 3 18. 3. o 2 Cor. viii. 12 (bis). 1 Pet. 
iv. 13 only. Levit. ix. 5 Β. p here only t. q Acts vii. 34 only. Job iii. 24 al. r here 


only+. = ἄνεκλ., 1 Pet. i. 3. 


24. ins ἡ bef BAerouern F 55. om tt Bl(added by original scribe: see table) 
XN! [47 copt}. ree ins καὶ, with ACKLN[P 471]: om BDF 47-marg(noting τὸ πα- 
λαιὸν οὕτως ἔχει [ὁ yap Brewer Tis ελπιζει7) latt. for ελπιζει, υπομενεὶ AN! 47-marg 
[but see above]: exspectat syrr Ambry. 

26. rec ταις ασθενειαις (see note), with KL[P] 17 rel [syr copt] Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] ce: 
τὴ" denoews F: txt ABCDN m [47] vulg Syr [eth arm] Cyr-jer, Damase [Orig-int, | 
lat-tf. [om ἡμων D'(and lat?). | mposevioueba DKL{ P] rel Orig, Naz Cyr- 
jer, Mac, Chr, (Cyr,-p] Damase (Kc: mposevxoueda F: txt ABC Chr, Thdrt, Thi. 

rec aft ὑπερεντυγχανει ins ὑπερ quev, with CKL[ P]N3 17 rel vulg D8-lat [F-lat] 
Syr [syr copt arm-mss] Cyr-jer, [Eus,] Did Epiph[-ms,] Chr, Thdrt Aug,epe Jer: 
[pref 47 Hil, :] om ABDFN! arm{-zoh] Orig. (always adds tw θεω) Epiph{-ed}] Damase 


Aug). 


of sense implied in υἷοθ. ἀπεκδ.. q.d. ‘ ex- 
pecting that full and perfect adoption 
which shall consist in...) of our body 
(ποῦ, ‘rescue from our body,’ as Erasm., 
Le Clere, Reiche, Fritz., al.,—which though 
allowable in grammar,—see Heb. ix. 15,— 
is inconsistent with the doctrine of the 
change of the vile and mortal into the glo- 
-rious and immortal body,—Phil. iii. 21; 
2 Cor. v. 2—4,—but the (entire) redemp- 
tion,—rescue,—of the body from corrup- 
tion and sin). 24, 25.] For (confirma- 
tion of the last assertion, proving hope to 
be our present state of salvation)—in hope 
were we (not, ‘are we,’ nor ‘have we been’) 
saved: i.e. our first apprehension of, and 
appropriation to ourselves of, salvation 
which is by faith in Christ, was effected in 
the condition of hope: which hope (Thol.) 
is in fact faith in its prospective attitude, 
—that faith which is ὑπόστασις ἐλπιζο- 
μένων, Heb. xi. 1. The dat. ἐλπίδι is not 
a dat. of reference,—‘ according to hope,’ 
—but of the form or condition. Now 
hope that is seen (the object or fulfilment 
of which is present and palpable) is not 
hope: for that which any one sees, why 
does he [also (or, at all)] hope for? If 
καί is to stand in the text, it conveys, after 
an interrogative word, a sense of the utter 
superfiuity of the thing questioned about, 
as being irrelevant, and out of the ques- 
tion. ‘Qui interrogat τί χρὴ προςδοκᾷν ; 
exspectat aliquid, sed dubius est quid eve- 
niat. Qui interrogat τί χρὴ καὶ mpos- 
δοκᾶν ; desperat de salute, nec eam usquam 
exspectari posse existimat.’ Bremi in De- 
mosth. Phil. i. 46, cited in Hartung, Par- 


tikellehre, i. 137. 25.] But if that 
which we do not see, we hope for, with 
patience we wait for it. Patience (en- 
durance) is the state, in which,—through 
which as ὦ medium,—our waiting takes 
place: hence δι᾽ ὑπομονῆς, as ἔγραψα 
du. διὰ πολλῶν δακρύων, 2 Cor. ii. 4. 

26.] Likewise (another help to 
our endurance, co-ordinate with the last 
—our patience is one help to it, but not 
the only one) the Spirit also (the Holy Spi- 
rit of God) helps our weakness (not, helps 
us to bear our weakness, as if the weakness 
were the burden, which the Spirit lifts for 
and with us,—but, helps our weakness,— 
us who are weak, to bear the burden of 
ver. 23. And this weakness is not only 
inability to pray aright, which is only an 
example of it, but general weakness. This 
has been seen, and the reading consequent- 
ly altered to the plural, which was at first 
perhaps a marginal gloss). For (example 
of the help above mentioned ;—the τό bind- 
ing together the clause,—ssee feff.,—and 
here implying ‘exempli gratia,’ —‘ for this 
viz. what to &c.’) what we should pray as 
we ought (two things ;—what we should 
pray,—the matter of our prayer;—and how 
we should pray it,—the form and manner 
of our prayer) we know not: but the Spirit 
itself (Thol. remarks,—airé brings into 
more prominence the idea of the πνεῦμα, 
so as to express of what dignity our Inter- 
cessor is,— an Intercessor who knows best 
what our wants are) intercedes (ὑπέρ here 
does not intensify the verb, as in émep- 
νικᾷν and the like, and as (£c., Erasm., 
Luth., Bengel, render it,—but implies 


24—28, 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


5397 


27 ὁ be Se νῶν TA bb i ( τὸ ἢ ‘ 5) sJohn v.39. vii. 
ὁ δὲ " ἐρευνῶν Tas καρδίας oidev τί τὸ ᾿ φρόνημα TOD sJobny.29. 


7 “ u \ u θ μ᾽ v2 / e \ w S / 
πνεύματος, ὅτι “Kata ἃ θεὸν " ἐντυγχάνει ὑπὲρ * ἁγίων. 
9) f Lg a > a“ \ lal 
28 οἴδαμεν δὲ OTL τοῖς * ἀγαπῶσιν τὸν * θεὸν πάντα ¥ συνεργεῖ 


v Acts xxv. 24 reff. 
y Mark xvi. 20, 


u 2 Cor. vii. 9—11. 
x 1 Cor. viii. 3 reff. 
vii. 2. 1 Mace. xii. 1 only. (-yos, ch. xvi. 3.) 


27. (εραυνων N: txt B(Verc expr, Tischdf) [ &c.: evpeywy m].) 


L[ Tischdf] 73: ἐνντυγχανι &. 


the advocacy,—‘ convenire aliquem super 
negotio alterius,’ as Grot.,—to express 
which the ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν of the rec. has been 
inserted) with groanings which cannot 
be expressed:—i.e. the Holy Spirit of 
God dwelling in us, knowing our wants 
better than we, Himself pleads in our 
prayers, raising us to higher and holier 
desires than we can express in words, 
which can only find utterance in sighings 
and aspirations: see next verse. So De 
W., Thol., Olsh. Chrys. (Hom. xiv., p. 
586) interprets it of the χάρισμα of prayer 
—and adds 6 yap τοιαύτης καταξιωθεὶς 
χάριτος, ἑστὼς μετὰ πολλῆς τῆς KaTa- 
νύξεως, μετὰ πολλῶν τῶν στεναγμῶν τῶν 
κατὰ διάνοιαν τῷ θεῷ προςπίπτων, τὰ συμ- 
φέροντα πᾶσιν ἥἤτει :—similarly (Ec. and 
Theophyl. Calv. understands, that the 
Spirit suggests to us the proper words of 
acceptable prayer, which would otherwise 
have been unutterable by us : and similarly 
Beza, Grot. ἀλαλήτοις may bear three 
meanings—1l, unspoken: 2, that does not 
speak,—mute (see LXX, Job xxxviii. 14; 
Sir. xvili. 33 compl.): 3, that cannot be 
spoken. The analogy of verbals in -ros in 
the N. T. favours the latter meaning: com- 
pare ἀνεκδιήγητος, 2 Cor. ix. 15,—appnzos, 
2 Cor. xii. 4,—avexAdAnrtos, 1 Pet. i. 8 
(Thol.). Macedonius gathered from 
this verse that the Holy Spirit is ὦ crea- 
ture, and inferior to God, because He 
prays to God for us. But as Aug. Tract. 
vi. in Joan. 2, vol. iii. p. 1425, remarks, 
‘non Spiritus Sanctus in semetipso apud 
semetipsum in illa Trinitate gemit, sed in 
nobis gemit, quia gemere nos facit.’ 
intercession in heaven is here spoken of, but 
a pleading im us by the indwelling Spirit, 
of a nature above our comprehension and 
utterance. 27.| But (opposed to 
ἀλαλήτοι---- though unutterable by us’) 
He who searcheth the hearts (God) know- 
eth what is the mind (intent, or bent, as 
hidden in those sighs) of the Spirit. A 
difficulty presents itself in the rendering of 
the next clause. If ὅτε be causal, because 
‘He (the Spirit) pleads for the saints ac- 
cording to the will of God, it would seem 
that οἶδεν must bear the meaning ‘ ap- 
proves, otherwise the connexion will not be 
apparent; and so Calv. and Riickert have 
rendered it. Hence Grot., Reiche, Meyer, 
Fritz. render ὅτι, ‘that, and construe,— 


No. 


a) a Corsn. 
10. 1 Pet. 
i. 1]. Rev. 
li. 23 only. 
Prov. xx. 27. 
t vv. 6,7 reff. 
w ch. i. 7 al. fr. Acts ix. 13 reff. 
1 Cor. xvi. 16. 2 Cor. vi.l. James ii. 22 only+. Esdr. 


UTEPEVTUY XGVEL 


‘knows what is the mind of the Spirit, — 
that He pleads with God (so Reiche and 
Fritz., and Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 49. ἃ, for κατὰ 
6.) for the saints : justifying the repetition 
of θεόν, implied before, by 1 John iv. 8, 6 
μὴ ἀγαπῶν οὐκ ἔγνω τὸν θεόν, ὅτι 6 θεὸς 
ἀγάπη ἐστίν. But I must confess that the 
other rendering seems to me better to suit 
the context: and I do not see that the or- 
dinary meaning of οἶδεν need be changed. 
The assurance which we have that God the 
Heart-Searcher interprets the inarticulate 
sighings of the Spirit in us, is,—not strictly 
speaking, His Omniscience,—but the fact 
that the very Spirit who thus pleads, does 
it κατὰ Oedv,—in pursuance of the divine 
purposes and in conformity with God’s good 
pleasure. So that, as its place before the 
verb would suggest, κατὰ θεόν is emphatic, 
and furnishes the reason of the οἶδεν. A 
minor objection against the explicative ὅτε 
is, that we have οἴδαμεν ὅτε immediately 
following. All these pleadings of the 
Spirit are heard and answered, even when 
tnarticulately uttered ; we may extend the 
same comforting assurance to the imper- 
fect and mistaken verbal utteranees of 
our prayers, which are not themselves 
answered to our hurt, but the answer is 
given to the voice of the Spirit which 
speaks through them, which we would ex- 
press, but cannot. Compare 2 Cor. xii. 
7—10, for an instance in the Apostle’s own 
case. 28. | Having given an example, 
in prayer, how the Spirit helps our weak- 
ness, and out of our ignorance and discou- 
ragement brings from God an answer of 
peace, he now extends this to all things— 
all circumstances by which the Christian 
finds himself surrounded. ‘These may seem 
calculated to dash down hope, and surpass 
patience ; but we know better concerning 
them. But (the opposition seems most 
naturally to apply to ver. 22, the groaning 
and travailing of all creation) we know 
(as a point of the assurance of faith) that 
to those who love God (a stronger desig- 
nation than any yet used for believers) all 
things (every event of life, but especially, 
as the context requires, those which are ad- 
verse. To include, with Aug. de Corrept. et 
Grat., 6. ix. (24), vol. x. pt. 1. p. 930, the sins 
of believers in this πάντα, ἃ5 making them 
‘humiliores et doctiores,’ is manifestly to 
introduce an element which did not enter 


998 


» > / ~ 
z=ch.xiiié ἜΣ εἰς Τ ἀγαθόν, τοῖς 
rer. 
a Acts xxvii. 
13 reff. 
b ch. i. 7 al. 


e ch. xi. 2. 


d 1 Cor. ii. 7 reff. 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 


VIII. 


κατὰ “πρόθεσιν ὃ κλητοῖς οὖσιν. 
29 ὅτι ods “ προέγνω, καὶ “ προώρισεν © συμμόρφους τῆς 


Acts xxvi. 5. 1 Pet. i. 20. 2 Pet.iii. 17 only+. Wisd. vi. 13. viii. 8. xviii. 6. (-yvwous, Acts ii. 23.) 
e Phil. iii. 21 only +. (-φέζεσθαι, Phil. iii. 10.) 


28. *aft συνεργει ins ὁ θεὸς AB (Orig, [eth]): om CDFKL{PN] rel vulg [syrr 
copt arm] Clem, Orig,{int, Eus, Cyr-c,} (Cyr-jer,) Chr, Thdrt (Ee ΤῊ] Lucif, Ambr 


AUg{szpe}- 


ins to bef αγαθον 1, ἃ f k 48. 57. 72-3-4. 109-77 lectt-8-13 Clem, Orig, 


Cyr-jer, Chr-ms [Ephr, Thdrt-txt Antch, ] ΤῊ]. 


into the Apostle’s consideration; for he 
is here already viewing the believer as 
justified by faith, dwelt in by the Spirit, 
dead to sin) work together (συνεργεῖ, 
absolute, or ἀλλήλοις implied: not, ‘work 
together for good with those who love 
God, —‘ loving God’ being a ‘ working 
for good :’ which, though upheld by Thol., 
seems to me harsh, and inconsistent with 
the emphatic position of τοῖς ay. τ. 0. 
Surely also in that case πάντα would 
have been ta πάντα, all things, as one 
party working, set over against of aya- 
πῶντες τ. θ., the other party working: 
whereas πάντα συνεργεῖ gives rather the 
sense of all things co-operating one with 
another. If the reading of AB be 
adopted, we should understand either (1) 
that God causeth all things to work, ἄς. : 
taking συνέργει as from συνέργω, con- 
cludo: or (2) that, as Syr. renders it, “ia 
every thing He helpeth them for good.” 
But in this last case, we should require 7a 
πάντα) for (towards, to bring about) good 
{their eternal welfare ;—the fulfilment of 
the purpose of the ἀγάπη τ. θεοῦ ἡ ἐν 
χριστῷ ᾿Ἰησοῦ τ. κυρ. ἡμῶν, ver. 39),—to 
those who are called (not only invited, but 
effectually called—see below) according to 
(His) purpose. In this further descrip- 
tion the Apostle designates the believers 
as not merely loving God, but being be- 
loved by God. ‘he divine side of their 
security from harm is brought out, as 
combining with and ensuring the other. 
They are sure that all things work for their 
good, not only because they love Him who 
worketh all things, but also because He 
who worketh all things hath loved and 
chosen them, and carried them through the 
successive steps of their spiritual life. The 
calling here and elsewhere spoken of by the 
Apostle (compare especially ch. ix. 11) is 
the working, in men, of “the everlasting 
purpose of God whereby before the founda- 
tions of the world were laid, He hath de- 
creed by His counsel secret to us, to deliver 
from eurse and damnation those whom He 
hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and 
to bring them by Christ to everlasting sal- 
vation.” Art. X. of the Church of England. 
To specify the various ways in which this 
calling has been understood, would far ex- 
ceed the limits of a general commentary. 


It may suffice to say, that on the one hand, 
Scripture bears constant testimony to the 
fact that all believers are chosen and called 
by God,—their whole spiritual life in its 
origin, progress, andcompletion, be.ng from 
Him :—while on the other land its testi- 
mony is no less precise that He willeth all 
to be saved, and that none shall perish 
except by wilful rejection of the truth. So 
that, on the one side, GOD’s SOVEREIGNTY, 
—on the other, MAN’S FREE WILL,—is 
plainly declared to us. To receive, believe, 
and act on both these, is our duty, and 
our wisdom. They belong, as truths, no 
less to natural than to revealed religion: 
and every one who. believes in a God must 
acknowledge both. But all attempts to 
bridge over the gulf between the two are 
JSutile in the present imperfect condition of 
man. The very reasonings used for this 
purpose are clothed in la framed on 
the analogies of this lower world, and wholly 
inadequate to describe God regarded as He 
is in Himself. Hence arises confusion, mis- 
apprehension of God, and unbelief. I have 
therefore simply, in this commentary, en- 
deavoured to enter into the full meaning of 
the sacred text, whenever one or other of 
these great truths is brought forward ; not 
explaining either of them away on account 
of possible difficulties arising from the re- 
cognition of the other, but recognizing as 
fully the elective and predestinating decree 
of God where it is treated of, as I have 
done, in other places, the free will of man. 
If there be an inconsistency in this course, 


it is at least one in which the nature of 


things, the conditions of human thought, 
and Scripture itself, participate, and from 
which no Commentator that I have seen, 
however anxious to avoid it by extreme 
views one way or the other, has been able 
‘to escape. See, for a full treatment of the 
subject, Tholuck’s Comm. in loc. 

29, 30.] The Apostle now goes backward 
from κλητοῖς, to explain how this CALLING 
came about. It sprung from God’s fore- 
knowledge, co-ordinate with His fore-deter- 
mination of certain persons (to be) con- 
formed to the image of His Son, that 
Christ might be exalted as the Head of 
the great Family of God. These persons, 
thus foreknown and predetermined, He, in 
the course of His Providence actually, but 


29—32. 


f = ΄ A can > - g » \ 3 > \ n s 
elLKOVOS TOV υἱου AUTOD, εἰς TO ElLVaAL AUTOV TT pWTO- 


Toxov ἐν ἱπολλοῖς ἀδελφοῖς. 


7, δ᾽ ΣᾺ aN ᾿ \ A k 2 7, ΄, \ 
πουτοὺς Kal εκωαλέσεν" καὶ OUS ἐκάλεσεν, TOUTOUS καὶ al. 
] ὃ 7 Ε ἃ δὲ l ὃ / ΄ Ἢ m > , 
EOLKALWOEV* OUS OE “ἐδικαίωσεν, τούτους καὶ ™ ἐδόξασεν. 
81 aT; Ss n2 -“ \ a > ς \ e \ ¢ A 
L οὖν "ἐροῦμεν πρὸς ταῦτα; εἰ ὁ θεὸς ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, 
7 ο θ᾽ ς al a 32 Ο cal af cr > ᾽ / 
τίς “καθ ἡμῶν; °~ OS γε τοῦ ἰδίου υἱοῦ οὐκ P ἐφείσατο, 
i Matt.xx.28. Heb. ii. 10. ix. 28. 


. 1 ch. ii. 18 reff. 
passim. Ofwus, here only. see Esther iii. 1. vi. 6, 7. 


iv. 4 al. 
v.8. Eph.iv.1. 2 Thess. ii. 14 al. 


xii. 30. Gal. 111. 21. v. 23. 


30. for προωρισεν, mpoeyyw A | Orig-int, 1. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 399 


f Matt. xxii. 
A ᾿ F 201}. ch. i 
30 ods δὲ 4arpowpicev, %-,15% 


26. 27. 
g ch. iv. 11 reff. 
h Luke ii. 7. 
Col. i. 15, 18. 


k = ch.ix.11. 1Cor. vii.15. Gal. 
_m = (of Christ), John vii. 39 and 
n ch. iii. ὃ reff. o = Matt. 


p ch, xi. 31 reff. Gen. xxii. 16. 


kat ous εδικ. A eth [ Syr Orig-int, ]. 


32. os ovde viov ἰδιου εφεισ. F ; os (add ye D3) ovde του ιδιου viov εφεισ. Ὁ, 


in His eternal decree implicitly, called, 
bringing them through justification to 
glory ;—and all this is spoken of as past, 
because to Him who sees the end from the 
beginning,— past, present, and future ARE 
Not, but ALL IS ACCOMPLISHED WHEN 
DETERMINED. Because whom He fore- 
knew (but in what sense? This has been 
much disputed: the Pelagian view,—‘ eos 
quos presciverat credituros, is taken by 
Orig., Chrys., @c., Theophyl., Augustine 
{prop. 55, in Ep. ad Rom. vol. iii. p. 2076), 
Ambr., Erasm. in paraphrase, Calov., 
Reiche, Meyer, Neander, and others; the 
sense of fore-loved, by Erasm. in commen- 
tary, Grotius, Estius, the Schmidts, &c.: 
that of fore-decreed, by Thol. edn. 1, and 
Stuart,—which however Thol. in subse- 
quent editions suspects to be ungram- 
matical without some infinitive following, 
and prefers a sense combining foreknow- 
ledge and recognition-as-His:—that of 
elected, adopted as His sons, by Calvin,— 
‘Dei autem precognitio, cujus hic Paulus 
meminit, non nuda est prescientia, ut 
stulte fingunt quidam imperiti, sed adop- 
tio qua filios suos ab improbis semper dis- 
crevit,’—Riuckert, De Wette, al. That this 
latter is implied, is certain: but 1 prefer 
taking the word in the ordinary sense of 
foreknew, especially as it is guarded from 
being a ‘nuda prescientia’ by what fol- 
lows: see below and Gal. iv. 9), He also 
fore-ordained (His foreknowledge was not 
a mere being previously aware how a series 
of events would happen: but. was co-ordi- 
nate with, and inseparable from, His having 
pre-ordained all things) conformed (i.e. to 
be conformed) to the image of His Son 
(the dat. and gen. are both found after 
words like σύμμορφος ; compare σύμφυτος, 
ch. vi. 5. The mage of Christ here 
spoken of is not His moral purity, nor His 
sufferings, but as in 1 Cor. xv. 49, that en- 
tire form, of glorification in body and sanc- 
tification in spirit, of which Christ is the 
perfect pattern, and all His people shall be 
partakers. Toaccomplish this transforma- 
tion in us is the end, as regards us, of our 
election by God; not merely to rescue us 


from wrath. Compare 1 John iii. 2, 3; 
Phil. 111. 21: and on the comprehensive 
meaning of μορφή, Phil. ii. 6, 7,—where it 
expresses both ‘ the form of God’ in which 
Christ was, and ‘the form of a servant’ in 
which He became incarnate), that He 
might (or may, as Calv., but the refer- 
ence in the aorist is to the past decree of 
God) be firstborn among many brethren 
(i. 6. that He might be shewn, acknow- 
ledged to be, and glorified as THE SON ΟΕ 
GoD, pre-eminent among those who are 
by adoption through Him the sons of God. 
This is the further end of our election, as 
regards Christ : His glorification in us, as 
our elder Brother and Head): 980.7 but 
whom He fore-ordained, those he also 
called (in making the decree, He left it 
not barren, but provided for those circum- 
stances, all at His disposal, by which such 
decree should be made effectual in them. 

ἐκάλεσεν, supply, eis τὴν ἑαυτοῦ 
βασιλείαν καὶ δόξαν 1 Thess. ii. 12; other 
expressions are found in 1 Cor. i. 9; 
2 Thess. ii. 14; 1 Tim. vi. 12; 1 Pet. v. 
10): and whom He called, these He also 
justified (the Apostle, remember, is speak- 
ing entirely of God's acts on behalf of the 
believer : he says nothing zow of that faith, 
through which this justification is, on his 
part, obtained): but whom He justified, 
them He also glorified (He did not merely, 
in His premundane decree, acquit them of 
sin, but also clothe them with glory: the 
aorist ἐδόξασεν being used, as the other 
aorists, to imply the completion in the 
divine counsel of all these, which are to 
us, in the state of time, so many successive 
steps,—simultaneously and irrevocably. So 
we have the perfect in John xvii. 10, 22). 

381—39.] The Christian has no 
reason to fear, but all reason to hope; 
Sor nothing can separate him from God's 
love in Christ. 81.) What then shall 
we say to these things what answer can 
the hesitating or discouraged find to this 
array of the merciful acts of God’s love on 
behalf of the believer)? If God is for us 
(and this He has been proved to be, vv. 
28—30,-——in having foreknown, predesti- 


400 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. ΥΠΙ|Ι. 


> A ς \ ς a ΄ q , 9 ; aA > 
«το τ ἤν ἀλλὰ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν πάντων ἃ παρέδωκεν αὐτὸν, πῶς οὐχ 
Acts xxy. ll, 
; 16. ᾿ 1 Cor. ii. καὶ 
12. 2Cor. 
ii. 1. 10 al.t 


\ thee \ ΄ ΝᾺ ἋΣ / 0m Yi pits 
συν avUTwW TA TAVTA μιν XaAPloeT atl ; τις y= 


7 \ lal an \ [ὦ ᾽ nr 
i. 7 Walt καλέσει κατὰ “ ἐκλεκτῶν ἃ θεοῦ ; θεὸς ὁ " δικαιῶν ; 53 τίς Γ. θεοῦ 


lii. 33. ΄ 
s Acts xix. 38 Oo 


a / \ e , A . 
“ κατακρίνων ; χριστὸς ὁ ἀποθανών, * μᾶλλον δὲ [καὶ] ΑΒΟΡΕ 


be ae pia fae ΙΝ mle, ται Bae 5. ὃ ΕΣ ae 
here only. Υ̓͂ ὀγερθείς, ὃς καὶ ἔστιν “ἐν “ δεξιᾷ τοῦ θεοῦ, ὃς καὶ edfeh 
loct. 328 mn 


. Isa. xxviii. 16. u Col. iii. 12. Tit. i. 1. gen., ch. i. 6, 7. ν ver. 30. 

w Matt. xxvii. 8. (John viii. 10, 11.) ch. ii. Lal. Esth. ii. 1. x = Gal. iv.9. Eph. iv. 28. v. 1}. 

y ver. 1]. z = Eph.i. 20. Col. iii. 1. Heb. i. 3. viii. 1. x. 12. xii. 2.’ 1 Pet. iii. 22 only. Ps. xv. 1, 

a = and w. ὑπέρ. Heb. vii. 25. (Acts xxv. 24 reff.) b Matt. xix. 6. Ezek. xlvi. 19. w. ἀπό, 
ver. 39. Heb. vii. 26. Wisd. i. 3. 

(adda, so BD!FR.) om ta DIF [arm]. 

84. aft χριστὸς ins τἡσους ACFLN 17 vulg copt eth arm Did, Cyr[-p] Damase 
[Orig-int,] Aug, Maximin,: om BDK rel syrr Cyr-jer, Chr, Thdrt {Euthal-ms Iren- 
int, Hil, }. rec ins Ist «a, with DFKL rel latt(but not am!) [Syr(omg μαλλον 
de) ] syr Cyr-jer, Chr, Thdrt, Iren-int Hil, Ambr Aug Maximin: om ABCN g k117 
copt [ath arm] Did, Damase [ Orig-int,]. (καὶ is left out in B ed Mai, as in Tisehdf 
and in the collations of Btly and Bch; but Mai has got into some confusion with re- 
gard to Bch’s reading.) aft eyep9. add ex vexpwy ACR'(om N3?) 17 copt 
eth[ (‘ut solet,” Tischdf) Did,] Chr, Damasc. om ka (bef ἐστιν) ACR' beo 
[47] vulg D!-lat copt [goth] Cyr-jer Did, Chr, Cyr[-p, Damase] Thdrt Iren-int, [ Orig- 


int, Hil, Ambr, Aug, |: ins B D[and lat?] FKLN* am harl? syrr @e ΤῺ] Maximin, 


Ambrst. om του Bo. 


35. aft τις ins ovy F latt(not am) [arm Orig-int,)insgepe). 


(txtsxpe)- | 


nated, called, justified, glorified us), who 
(is) against us? $2.] (God) Who 
even (taking one act as a notable example 
out of all) did not spare His own Son (His 
OWN,— His υἱὸς: μονογενής, the only one of 
God’s sons who is One with Him in nature 
and essence, begotten of Him before all 
worlds. No other sense of ἰδίου will suit 
its position here, in a clause already made 
emphatic by ‘ye, in consequence of which 
whatever epithet is fixed to υἱοῦ must par- 
take of the emphasis), but delivered Him 
up (not necessarily εἰς θάνατον only, but 
generally, as ἔδωκεν, John iii. 16: ‘largitus 
est, quem sibi retinere poterat,’ as Tho- 
luck, from Winer) on behalf of us all (so 
that every one of us believers, even the 
most afflicted, has an equal part in Him. 
Of others, nothing is said here), how shall 
He not (how can it be that He will not) 
also with Him (in consequence of and in 
analogy with this His greatest gift: it is 
a question ‘a majori ad minus’) give 
freely to us all things (all that we need 
or hope for; or even more largely, all 
created things for ours, to subserve our 
good, and work together for us: compare 
1 Cor. iii. 22)? 33.] The punctua- 
tion of these verses is disputed. Many 
(Aug., Ambr., Reiche, Kollner, Olsh., 
Meyer, De Wette, and Griesb., Knapp, 
Lachmann) follow, in vv. 33, 34, the un- 
doubted form of ver. 35, and piace an in- 
terrogation after each, clause, as in the 
text; while Luther, Beza, Grot., Wolf, 
Tholuck, al., make θεὸς 6 δικ. and χριστὸς 
ὁ ἀποθ. x.7.A. the reply to and rejection of 


xwpon A c Orig, 


the questions preceding them. The former 
method is preferable, as preserving the form 
of ver. 35, and involving no harshness of con- 
struction, which the other does, in the case 
οἵ χριστός followed by the two participles. 
Who shall lay (τι) any charge against 
the elect of God (ἐγκαλέω usually with a 
dat. see reff.)? Shall God (ἐγκαλέσει), 
who justifies them (Chrys. strikingly says, 
οὐκ εἶπε “Oeds ὁ ἀφεὶς ἁμαρτήματα," ἀλλ᾽ 
ὃ πολλῷ μεῖζον ἣν θεὸς 6 δικαιῶν. ὅταν 
yap ἡ τοῦ δικαστοῦ ψῆφος δίκαιον ἀἄπο- 
φήνῃ, καὶ δικαστοῦ τοιούτου, τίνος ἄξιος ὃ 
κατηγορῶν ; Hom. xv. p. 597): Who is 
he that condemns them (the pres. part. 
as expressing the official employment, ‘is 
their accuser,’ is better than the fut., as cor- 
responding more closely with δικαιῶν) (18 
it) Christ who died, yea who rather is also 
risen, who also is at‘he right hand of 
God, who also intercedes forus? “Allthe 
great points of our redemption are ranged 
together, from the death of Christ to 
His still enduring intercession, as reasons 
for negativing the question above.” De W. 
35.] Who (i. e. what: but masc. 

for uniformity with vv. 33, 34) shall se- 
parate us from the love of Christ? Is 
this (1) our love to Christ, or (2) Christ's 
love to us, or (3) owr sense of Christ's love 
to us? The first of these is held by Origen, 
Chrys., Theodoret, Ambr., Erasm., al. But 
the difficulty of it lies in consistently inter- 
preting ver. 37, where not our endurance in. 
love to Him, but our victory by means of 
His love to us, is alleged. And besides, it 
militates against the conclusion in ver. 39, 


7 [47] 





ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 40] 


᾽ / A Lal Lal 
ἀγάπης τοῦ χριστοῦ ; ° θλῖψις ἢ © στενοχωρία ἢ “ διωγμὸς - eh. ii. 9(rett, 
; A i " A ' Jor. xii. 10 
ἡ “ λιμὸς ἢ ᾿γυμνότης ἢ 8 κίνδυνος ἢ ἃ μάχαιρα; 36 καθὼς τοῦ. σοι. 
; ᾿ oe x ig , θ o \ ἘΠ xi. 27 only. 
γέγραπται ὅτι ἕνεκεν σοῦ ᾿ θανατούμεθα ὅλην τὴν ἡμέραν, AetsxiWal. 


f 2.Cor: xi. 27. 


kl > / ] e / m nr 37 > > 5 / FE 
7 ᾿ ~ Rev. iii. 18 
ἐλογίσθημεν ὡς όβατα. σφαγῆς ἱ ἀλλ᾽ ἐν sot τ Ὁ 
τοις πᾶσιν " ὑπερνικῶμεν διὰ τοῦ “5 ἀγαπήσαντος ° ἡμᾶς. ται 48 
38 Ρ , \ a ” q θ , ” q , ΗΝ 2 Cor. xi. 26 
πέπεισμαι γὰρ OTL οὔτε «θάνατος οὔτε “ ζωή, οὔτε (ὃ πε) 
aryryen, A Ee ee. O52 5 ἥτε αἱ μέλλ αὶ τ τε 
ἄγγελοι οὔτε " ἀρχαί, οὔτε “" ἐνεστῶτα οὔτε % μέλλοντα, “δ og 


Jer. ix. 10. 
2 Cor. x.2. Job xli. 20. 
n here only +. 
acc. and inf., 
r = (see note) 1 Cor. xv. 24. Eph.i.2lai. Dan. 
t Acts xxiv. 25 reff. 


ich. vil. 4 reff. Psa. xliii. 22. k = ch. ix. 8 reff. 11 Cor. iv. 1. 
m Acts viii. 32. James v. 5 only. 1.c. Isa. xxxiv. 2,6. gen., Zech. xi. 4. 
o of Christ, Gal. v. 20. Eph. v. 2. p constr., ch. xiv. 14. xv. 14. 2 Tim. i. 5, 12. 
2 Mace. ix. 27. q so 1 Cor. iii. 22. 
vii. 27 Theod. 8 = 1 Cor. vii. 26 reff. 


for χριστου, θεου B([adding] της ev χριστου ιησουὴ ὃὲ a! [Cyr-p,(txt,) ]. om 2nd 7 
D}(and lat!) F-gr]. 

36. rec evexa (so LXX-B), with CK [Ephr, Bas,] Thdrt Damasc ΤῊ] (c: txt (so 
Lxx-A®) ABDFL® m n 17 [47] Clem, Orig, Meth, Chr,. 

87. τὸν αγαπησαντα DF latt [Tert, Cypr, Hil, Lucif,]. 

38. ayyeAos DF [copt] Aug, Ambrst: not Hil, Augszpe- aft ovre apya add 
ovte εξουσιαι (see Col ii. 15 al) C f n 46. 73. 80. 109-21 syr-w-ast (Bas, Antch, | : 
pref, Di not D!-lat]}. rec ovte duvauets bef ovte ενεστωτα o. μ., with KL rel 
vulg{-ed demid harl?] Syr goth Chr, Thdrt, (Εο Thl Aug: txt ABCDFX m [47 am 
fuld harl'] tol syr copt [ath arm-zoh | Kus, Ephr, Cyr[-p, | Damase Orig[ -intszpe | lat-ff 
(our. duv. has been suspected as spurious (Fritz., Tholuck, in De Wette): but no mss 
omit it, unless (appy) {116 ](Mét) and [ Clem, Antch, Orig-int, and] one or two lat-ff 


who have ouvte εξουσιαι). 


which ought certainly to respond to this 
question. The third meaning is defended 
by Calvin. But the second, as maintained 
by Beza, Grot., Est., al., Thol., Reiche, 
Meyer, De Wette, appears to me the only 
tenable sense of the words. For, having 
shewn that God’s great love to us is such 
that none can accuse nor harm us, the Apos- 
tle now asserts the permanence of that love 
under all adverse cireumstances— that none 
such’ ean affect it,—nay more, that it is 
by that love that we are enablea to obtain 
the victory over allsuch adversities. And 
finally he expresses his persuasion that no 
created thing shall ever separate us from 
that love, i.e. shall ever be able to pluck 
us out of the Father’s hand. 36. | 
The quotation here expresses,—‘ all which 
things befall us, as they befell God’s saints 
of old,—and it is no new trials to which we 
are subjected :— What, if we verify the an- 
cient description ?’ 87.) But (ne- 
gation of the question θλῖψις... . μάχαι- 
pa;) in all these things we are far the 
conquerors (hardly, ‘more than conque- 
rors :’ the ὑπέρ intensifies the degree of 
νικᾷν, as in ὑπερπερισσεύειν and the like, 
but does not express a superiority over 
νικᾷν) through Him who loved us (i.e. so 
far from all these things separating us 
from His love, that very love has given 
us a glorious victory over them). 

The reading διὰ τὸν ἀγαπήσαντα ἡμᾶς 
would amount to the same in meaning :— 
‘on account of Him who loved us’ im- 


Vous LE 


plying, as in vv. 11, 20, that He is the. 
efficient cause of the result. It is 
doubted whether ‘He who loved us’ be 
the Father, or our Lord Jesus Christ. 
This is, I think, decided by τῷ ἀγαπῶντι 
ἡμᾶς Kal λούσαντι ἡμᾶς .... ἐν τῷ αἵματι 
αὐτοῦ, Rev. i. 5. The use of such an ex- 
pression as a title of our Lord in a doxo- 
logy, makes it very probable that where 
unexplained, as here, it would also desig- 
nate Him. 38.] For I am per- 
suaded (a taking up and amplifying of the 
ὑπερνικῶμεν --τΟῸ victory is not only over 
these things, but Idare assert it over greater 
and more awful than these) that neither 
death, nor life (well explained by De W. 
as the two principal possible states of man, 
and not as = ‘any thing dead or living,’ 
as Calvin and Koppe), nor angels, nor 
principalities (whether good or bad; ἀρχή 
is used of good, Col.i. 16; ii. 15 (see note) ; 
of bad (1 Cor. xv. 24 ?), Eph. vi. 12; here, 
as Eph. i. 21, generally. ἄγγελοι, abso- 
lutely, seems never to be used of bad angels: 
if it here means good angels, there is no ob- 
jection, as Stuart alleges, to the rhetorical 
supposition that they might attempt this 
separation, any more than to that of an 
angel from heaven preaching another 
gospel, Gal. i. 8), nor things present nor 
things to come (no vicissitudes of ‘7me), 
nor powers (some confusion has evidently 
crept into the arrangement. Ephr. Syr. 
reads, οὔτ. ἀρχαὶ οὔτ. ἐξουσίαι οὔτ. ἐνεστ. 
οὔτ. μέλλ. οὔτ. δυνάμεις οὔτ. ἄγγελοι; 

ἶ ἢν 


402 ΤΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. VIII. 39. 
ῇ , ὦ / / ” 
cea, οὔτε ἃ δυνάμεις, 39 οὔτε "ὕψωμα οὔτε * βάθος, οὔτε Tis 
v. 29 Il. J , , e “ \ an ΄ 
ΡΟΣ ii.22. X κτίσις Y ἑτέρα δυνήσεται ἡμᾶς ξ χωρίσαι ἀπὸ τῆς * ἀγά- 
Isa. xxxiv. 4. : ry 
2 Cc res Aa An - "» a? r a / € aA 
»2Cors 3 πῆς τοῦ " θεοῦ τῆς ἐν χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν. 
iv. 24. ΕΣ , , b) A b 7 
judithxa. = ΙΧ 10 Αλήθειαν λέγω “ἐν χριστῷ, ov “ ψεύδομαι, 
«ἘΠ Ως is al. Tea. vii 1. LX Zhe i 25. (ve. 19, &e.) Heb. iv. 13. Judith ix. 12. 5 at 
iii. 9. Ἷ «1. 10. z ver. 30. a - ch. v.5. 2 Cor. xii. 18, = or. 
aa 6. Eph. iv. 25. Ps. xiv. 2. ce = 2Cor. xii. 19. Eph. iv. 17. ἃ 2 Cor. xi. δι. Gal. 
i.20. 1 Tim. ii. 7. 


39. om tis DF latt syrr [copt goth eth Orig,(txt,)-int,(txt,) Tert, Hil, Ambrst 


Augsepe }- του kupiov AC ΕἾ -gr }. 
Basil, οὔτε &yy. οὔτ. apx. οὔτ. ἐξουσ. οὔτ. 
δυνάμεις οὔτ. ἐνεστ. οὔτ. μέλλ. I follow, 
with Griesb., Lachm., Tischdf., the very 
strong consent of the ancient Mss.), nor 
height nor depth (no extremes of space), 
nor any other created thing (κτίσις can- 
not here be the whole creation, as Chrys., 
— λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστιν εἰ καὶ ἄλλη 
τυσαύτη κτίσις ἦν ὅση ἡ ὁρωμένη, ὅση 7 
νοητή, οὐδὲν ἄν με τῆς ἀγάπης ἐκείνης 
améoTnoe,—but any creature, such as are 
all the things named) shall be able to 
sever us from the love of God which is 
in Christ Jesus our Lord (here plainly 
enough God’s love to us in Christ,—to us, 
as we are in Christ, to us, manifested in 
and by Christ). 


Cnap. IX.—XI.] The Gospel being now . 


established, in its fulness and freeness, as 
the power of God unto salvation to every 
one that believeth,—a question naturally 
arises, not unaccompanied with painful dif- 
ficulty, respecting the exclusion of that 
people, as a people, to whom God’s ancient 
promises were made. With this national 
rejection of Israel the Apostle now deals: 
first (ix. 1—5) expressing his deep sym- 
pathy with his own people: then (vv. 
6—29) justifying God, Who has not (vv. 
6—13) broken His promise, but from the 
first chose a portion only of Abraham’s 
seed, and that (vv. 14--29) by His un- 
doubted elective right, not to be murmured 
at nor disputed by us His creatures: ac- 
cording to which election a remnant shall 
now also be saved. ‘Then, as to the rejec- 
tion of so large a portion of Israel, their 
own self-righteousness (vv. 30—33) has 
been the cause of it,and (x. 1—12) their ig- 
norance of God’s righteousness,—notwith- 
standing that (vv.13 —21)their Scriptures 
plainly declared to them the nature of the 
Gospel, and its results with regard to 
themselves and the Gentiles, with which 
declarations Paul’s preaching was in per- 
fiet accordance. Has God then east off 
his people (xi. 1—10) 7 No—for a rem- 
nant shall be saved according to the elec- 
tion of grace, but the rest hardened, not 
however for the purpose of their destruc- 
tion, aut (xi. 11—24) of mercy to the 
Gentiles: which purpose of mercy being 


Sulfilled, Israel sha?l be brought in again 


to its proper place of blessing (xi, 25—32). 
He concludes the whole with @ humble 
admiration of the unsearchable depth of 
God's ways, and the riches of His Wisdom 
(xi. 33—36). 

In no part of the Epistles of Paul is it 
more requisite than in this portion, to bear 
in mind his habit of INSULATING the one 
view of the subject under consideration, 
with which he is at the time dealiny. The 
divine side of the history of Israel and the 
world is in the greater part of this portion 
thus insulated: the facts of the divine 
dealings and the divine decrees insisted on, 
and the mundane or human side of that 
history kept for the most part out of sight, 
and only so much shewn, as to make it 
manifest that the Jews, on their part, failed 
of attaining God’s righteousness, and so lost 
their share in the Gospel. 

It must also be remembered, that, what- 
ever inferences, with regard to God’s dis- 
posal of individuals, may justly lie from the 
Apostle’s arguments, the assertions here 
made by him are universally spoken with 
a national reference. Of the eternal salva- 
tion or rejection of any individual Jew there 
is here no question: and however logically 
true of any individual the same conclusion 
may be shewn to be, we know as matter of 
fact, that in such cases not the divine, but 
the human side, is that ever held up by the 
Apostle—the universality of free grace for 
all—the riches of God’s mercy to all who 
call on Him, and consequent exhortations 
to all, to look to Him and be saved. De 
Wette has well shewn, against Reiche and 
others, that the apparent inconsistencies 
of the Apostle, at one time speaking of ab- 
solute decrees of God, and at another of cul- 
pability in man,—at.one time of the elec- 
tion of some, at another of a hope of the 
conversion of all,—resolve themselves into 
the necessary conditions of thought under 
which we all are placed, being compelled 
to acknowledge the divine Sovereignty on 
the one hand, and human free will on the 
other, and alternately appearing to iose 
sight of one of these, as often as for the 
time we confine our view to the other. Ὁ 

1X.1—5.] The Apostle’s deep sympathy 





a ee 


IX. 1—3. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 408 


᾿συμμαβο μοι σῇ: μοι τῆς  συνειδήσεώς μου ἐν πνεύματι eens 


ig / 
ἁγίῳ, 3 ὅτε λύπη μοί = μεγάλη καὶ 58 ἀδιάλειπτος “5 Ser 12 
Ω 7 g2 Tim. i. 3 
h ὀδύνη τῇ καρδίᾳ pov. ὃ Ἰηὐχόμην yap * ἀνάθεμα εἶναι only +, (τως, 
> \ \ rn A \ n n ch. i. 9. 
αὐτὸς ἐγὼ ᾿ἀπὸ τοῦ χριστοῦ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀδελφῶν μου, »1 Tim. v.10 
viii, 18. i Acts xxvii. 29 reff. imperf., = Acts xxv. 22 reff. k Acts xxiii. ii. 1 Cor. 


xii. 3. xvi. 22. Gal. i.8,9 only. Deut. vii. 26. = ch. vii. 2. 2 Cor. xi. 3. Col. 
ii. 20. 2 Thess. i. 9. 


Cuap. IX. 1. aft xpiorw add imoov D![and lat] F [arm-mss Orig- -int,(om,)] Ps- 


Ath, Ambrst. for 2nd ev, συν F[-gr]. 

2. της καρδιας Καὶ 17. 2191. 

3. evxxouny DKL ck 1n 17 [Orig-c,] Thdrt-ms: evyoua 41. εἰναι bef avabeua 
X. rec autos eyw bef αναθεμα εἰναι, with CKL rel vss [Orig-c, -int,} Ath, Thdrt 


[ Damasc]} Cypr,: txt ABDF(X) syr goth Chr, [Orig-int,] Ambr, Pac,. υπὸ DG. 


with his own people Israel. The subject ἐνεδέχετο, Phot. The sense of the imperf. 
ou which he is about to enter, so unwel- in such expressions is the proper and strict 
come to Jews in general, coupled with their one (and no new discovery, but common 
hostility to himself, and designation of him enough in every schoolboy’s reading): the 
as a πλάνος (2 Cor. vi. 8: compare also act is unfinished, an obstacle intervening. 
2 Cor. i. 17; 11. 17; iv. 1, 2; vii. 2 al.), So in Latin, ‘faciebam, ni... ,’ the com- 
causes him to begin with a mpotapaitnois pleted sentence being, ‘ faciebam, et per- 
or deprecation, bespeaking credit for sim- fecissem, ni.. .’) that I myself (on αὐτὸς 
plicity and earnestness in the assertion ἐγώ see ch. vii. 25; it gives emphasis, as 
which is to follow. This deprecation and ἐγὼ Παῦλος, [2 Cor. x. 1] Gal. v. 2: “1, 
assertion of sympathy he puts in the fore- the very person who write this and whom 
front of the section, to take at once the ye know”) were a curse (a thing accursed, 
ground from those who might charge him, ἀνάθεμα in the LXX = 077, an irrevocable 
in the conduct of his argument, with devotion to God, or, a thing or person so 
hostility to his own alienated people. devoted. All persons and animals thus 
I say (the) truth in Christ (as a Christian, devoted were put to death; none could be 
—as united to Christ ; the ordinary sense redeemed, Levit. xxvii. 28, 29.. The sub- 
of the expression ἐν χριστῷ, so frequent sequent scriptural usage of the word 
with the Apostle. It is not an oath, arose from this. It never denotes simply 
‘by Christ,—for though ἐν with ὄμνυμι an exclusion or excommunication, but 
bears this meaning, we have no instance always devotion to perdition,—a curse. 
of it where the verb is not expressed),—I Attempts have been made to explain away 
lie not (confirmation of the preceding, by the meaning here, by understanding ex- 
shewing that he was aware of what would communication, as Grot., Hammond, Le 
be laid to his charge, and distinctly re-.. Clene; &e. ; or even natural death only, 
pudiating it),—my conscience bearing as Jerome, al.: but excommunication in- 
me witness of the same (the σύν in com- cluded cursing and delivering over to 
position, as in reff., denoting accordance Satan:—and the mere wish for natural 
with the fact, not joint testimony ) in the death would, as Chrys. eloquently re- 
Holy Spirit (much as ἐν χριστῷ above:— marks, be altogether beneath the dignity 
a conscience not left to itself but informed of the passage. Perhaps the strangest 
and enlightened by the Spirit of God. interpretation is that of Dr. Burton: “St. 
Str angely enough, Griesb., Knapp, and Paul had been set apart and consecrated 
Koppe take these words alas for a formula by Christ to His service; and he had 
jurandi, and connect them with od petdo- prayed that this devotion of himself might 
μαι), that (not because, or for, as Bengel: be for the good of his countrymen :”—it 
ὅτι, as in 2 Cor. xi. 10, introducing the js however no unfair sample of a multitude 
matter to which the asseveration was di- of others, all more or less shrinking from 
rected,—I say the truth, when I say, that the full meaning of the fervid words of 

- +) I have great sorrow and unceasing the Apostle) from Christ (1, 6. cut off and 
anguish i in my heart. The reason of this | separated from Him for ever in eternal 
grief is reserved for a yet stronger descrip- perdition. No other meaning will satisfy 
tion of his sympathy in the next verse. the plain sense of the words. ἀπό in the 
8.1 For I could wish (the imperf. is not sense of ὑπό, making Christ the agent of 
historical, alluding to his days of Phari- the curse, would be hardly admissible: 
saism, as Pelag. and others, but quas7- 501] less the joining,—as Carpzov and 
optative, as in reff. ‘I was wishing, had Elsner,—ard with ηὐχόμην. On this 
it been possible,—nvxounv ei ἐνεχώρει, ef wish, compare Exod. xxxii. 32) in behalf 

: bp2 


404 


m = ch. xvi. 7, 
ἄς. (32) Levit. 
xxy. 45. 

n ch. i. 3 reff. 

o = Actsx.41 Ὁ 


reff. “ 
p ch. vill. 

eff. 
q = Heb. ix. 5. 


Exod. xl. 34. W 
3 Kings viii. 
11 


τ = Acts iii. 25. vii. 8. Heb. passim. (plur., Gal. iv. 24. Eph. ii. 12 only.) Gen. xvii. 2 al. 


only+. 2 Mace. vi. 23 only. (-θετεῖν, Heb. vii. 11. 
1. Heb. ix.1,6 only. Exod. xii. 25, 26. ᾿ 
Acts vii. 19 reff. w = Eph. iv. 6 al. 


y (see note.) as above (x). Mark xiv. 61. Luke 1. 68. 


om adeAg. μ. των Bins B?-marg(see table). 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOT:. 


2 Cor. i. 3. 


IX. 


ad m “ n \ n / 4. ΠῚ “ / » τ 
τῶν ™ συγγενῶν μου " κατὰ " σάρκα, * ° οἵτινές εἰσιν ἴσρα- 

A - ς e / \ ς ᾽ \ e 
ηλῖται, ὧν ἡ Ὁ υἱοθεσία καὶ ἡ “ δόξα καὶ αἱ 


: διαθῆκαι καὶ 


ἡ "νομοθεσία καὶ ἡ ' λατρεία καὶ αἱ " ἐπαγγελίαι, ὃ ὧν 017 [47 
e a ¢ \ \ \ / gk ut 
οἱ ᾿ πατέρες, καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ χριστὸς τὸ " κατὰ " σάρκα, ὁ ὧν 
΄ \ ‘ \ 5». ΄ 
ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς *¥ εὐλογητὸς * εἰς τοὺς * αἰῶνας, ἀμην. --αμην 


s here 

«τῆς, James iv, 12.) t John xvi. 2. eh. xii. 
usee ch. iv. 13, xv. 8. Gal. iii. 16. “vabsol., 

x ch. i. 25. 2 Cor. xi. 3]. Ps. lxxxviii. 52. 


Eph. i. 3. 1 Pet. i. 3 only. 


om 2nd μον D! ΒΤ -gr goth 


Chr, Ambr, Aug, ]: add toy DF a? Syr Cyr{-p, Bas-2-mss, | ‘Thdrt. 


4. om wy 7 vi0d. to επαγγελίιαι A: om καὶ αἱ διαθ. K. ἡ νομοθ. L. 


ἢ διαθηκη BD 


F[-gr vulg-clem] demid harl? [wth Ps-]Ath Chr-mss Cypr, Jer, Sedul: txt CKR rel latt 
(inelg am harl! tol) syrr copt goth [arm] Epiph, Chr, ‘Thdrt Phot, [Euthal-ms Damase 


Orig-int,] Hil, [Ambrst Augy]. 
5. om οἱ F. 
Aug). 


of (in the place of; or, if thus I could be- 
nefit, deliver from perdition) my brethren, 
my kinsmen according to the flesh. 

The wish is evidently not to be pressed as 
entailing on the Apostle the charge of in- 
consistency in loving his nation more than 
his Saviour. It is the expression of an 
affectionate and self-denying heart, willing 
to surrender all things, even, if it might 
be so, eternal glory itself, if thereby he 
could obtain for his beloved people those 
blessings of the Gospel which he now en- 
joved, but from which they were excluded. 
Nor does he describe the wish as ever 
actually formed; only as a conceivable 
limit to which, if admissible, his self-de- 
votion for them would reach. Others ex- 
press their love by professing themselves 
ready to give their life for their friends; 
he declares the intensity of his affection by 
reckoning even his spiritual life not too 
great a price, if it might purchase their 
salvation. 4.) Not only on their re- 
lationship to himself does he ground this 
sorrow and this self-devotion: but on the 
recollection of their ancient privileges and 
glories. Who are Israelites (a name 
of honour, see John i, 48; 2 Cor. xi. 22; 
Phil. iii. 5); whose (is) the adoption (see 
Exod. iv. 22; Deut. xiv. 1; xxxii. 6; Isa. 
i. 2 al.), and the glory (perhaps their 
general preference and exaltation, conse- 
quent on the vio@ecta,—but far more pro- 
bably, as all the other substantives refer 
to separate matters of fact,—the Shechinah 
or visible manifestation of the divine Pre- 
sence on the mercy-seat between the che- 
rubims: see reff.), and the covenants (not, 
the two tables of the law,—as Beza, Grot., 
al..—which formed but one covenant, and 
are included in νομοθεσία; nor, the Old 
and New Testament Covenants,—as Aug., 
Jer., Calov., Wolf.—see Gal. iv. 24 ff: 
but the several renewals of the covenant 





ἡ επαγγελια D [copt] Chr-mss: επαγγελια Εἰ. 
om καὶ F Hip, [Epiph, Hil,] Cypr, Pelag (not Iren{-int, Hil,] 
for το, τα C1: om το F Epiph, Th Irt,. 


with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and finally 
with the whole people at Sinai :—see Gen. 
xv.9—21; xvii. 4, 7,10; xxvi.24; xxviil. 13; 
Exod. xxiv. 7, 8 al.), and the law-giving 
(‘si alii Solonibus et Lycurgis gloriantur, 
quanto justior est gloriandi materia de 
Domino!’ Calv. νομοθ. is both the act 
of giving the Law, and the Law thus 
given), and the service (ordinances of 
worship: see ref. Heb.), and the promises 
(probably only those to the patriarchs, of 
a Redeemer to come, are here thought of, 
as tle next two clauses place the patriarchs 
and Christ together without any mention 
of the prophets. So Abraham is described, 
Heb. vii. 6, as τὸν ἔχοντα τὰς ἐπαγγελίας), 
—whose are the fathers (probably to be 
limited to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob :— 
so De W., but Stephen gives of mar. a 
much wider meaning in Acts vii. 11, 12, 
19, 39, 44, and so apparently Paul him- 
self, Acts xiii. 17. In all those places, 
however, except Acts vii. 19, ἡμῶν follows, 
whereas here the word is absolute: so 
that the above kanitation may be true),— 
and of whom is Christ, as far as regards 
the flesh (rdé,—acc., as also in ch. xii. 18, 
—implies that He was not entirely sprung 
from them, but had another nature: q. d. 
‘on his human side, —‘ duntaxat quod at- 
tinet ad corpus humanum,’ as Erasmus), 
who is God over all (prob. neuter; for τὰ 
πάντα, not of πάντες, is the equivalent 
nominative in such sentences: see ch. xi. 
36) blessed for ever. Amen. The 
punctuation and application of this doxo- 
logy have been much disputed. By the 
early Church it was generally rendered 
as above, and applied to Christ,—so 
Iren., Tert., Orig. h. 1., Athan., Epiph., 
Chrys., Theodoret, Theophyl., ic. Wet- 
stein has, it is true, collected passages 
from the fathers to shew that they applied 
the words 6 ἐπὶ πάντων θεός to the Farmer 









ABCD 
ΚΝ ἃ 
cdf gi 
kiwn 


] 


ΑΒΕ 
KLyNa 
οὐ τά 
kil mn 
o 17 (47 


ee 


4. 6. ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOYS. 405 
6 οὐχ Ῥ οἷον δὲ ὅτι * ἐκπέπτωκεν ὁ ὃ λογος τοῦ ὃ θεοῦ: οὐ - < here only. 
iner, edn. 
a= fs ΠΕΣ see James i. 11. = πίπτειν, Luke ανὶ. 17. διαπ., Josh. xxi. 43 (45). Judith vi. 9. Koa. ἘΠ 
xi. 1 reff. 


alone, and protested against their applica- 
tion to the SON; but these passages them- 
selves protest only against the erroneous 
Noetian or Sabellian view of the zdentity of 
the Father and the Son, whereas in Eph. 
iv. 5, 6, εἷς κύριος, and εἷς θεὸς x. πατὴρ 
πάντων, ὃ ἐπὶ πάντων, are plainly dis- 
tinguished. That our Lord is not, in the 
strict exclusive sense, 6 ἐπὶ πάντων θεύς, 
every Christian will admit, that title being 
reserved for the Father: but that He is ἐπὶ 
πάντων θεός, none of the passages goes to 
deny. Had our text stood ἐξ ὧν ὁ xp. τὸ 
κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς ὁ εὐλογητὸς 
εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, it would have appeared to 
countenance the above error, which as it 
now stands it cannot do. The first 
trace of a different interpretation, if it be 
one, is found in an assertion of the emperor 
Julian (Cyril, p. 821. Wetst.) τὸν γοῦν 
Ἰησοῦν οὔτε Παῦλος ἐτόλμησεν εἰπεῖν θεόν, 
οὔτε Ματθαῖος οὔτε Μάρκος, ἀλλ᾽ 6 χρησ- 
τὸς Ιωάννης. The next is in the punctua- 
tion of two cursive mss. of the twelfth 
century (5 and 47), which place a period 
atter σάρκα, thus insulating ὁ ὧν ἐπὶ πάν- 
Τῶν .... ἀμήν, and regarding it as a 
doxology to God over all, blessed for ever, 
This is followed by Erasm., Wetst., Sem- 
ler, Reiche, Kéllner, Meyer, Fritzsche, 
Krehl, al. The objections to this rendering 
are, (1) ingenuously suggested by Socinus 
himself (Thol.), and never yet obviated,— 
that without one exception in Hebrew or 
Greek, wherever an ascription of blessing 
is found, the predicate εὐλογητός (73) 
precedes the name of God. (In the one 
place, Ps. Ixvii. 19 LXX, κύρ. 6 0. εὐλογη- 
τός, εὐλογητὸς Kup. ἡμέραν καθ᾽ ἡμέραν, 
which seems to be an exception, the first 
evA. has no corresponding word in the Heb. 
and perhaps may be interpolated. So 
Stuart, and even Eichhorn, Einleit. ins 
A. T. p. 320. In Yates’s vindication of 
Unitarianism, p. 180, this is the only in- 
stance cited. Such cases as 3 Kings x. 9; 
2 Chron. ix. 8; Jobi. 21; Ps. exii. 2, are 
no exceptions, as in all of them the verb 
εἴη or γένοιτο is expressed, requiring the 
substantive to follow it closely.) And this 
collocation of words depends, not upon the 
mere aim at perspicuity of arrangement 
(Yates, p. 180), but upon the circumstance 
that the stress is, in a peculiar manner, in 
such ascriptions of praise, on the predicate, 
which is used in a pregnant sense, the 
copula being omitted. (2) That the ὦν, 
on this rendering, would be superfluous 
altogether (see below). (3) That the 
doxology would be unmeaning and frigid 


in the extreme. It is not the habit of the 
Apostle to break out into irrelevant ascrip- 
tions of praise ; and certainly there is here 
nothing in the immediate context requiring 
one. If it be said that the survey of all 
these privileges bestowed on his people 
prompts the doxology,—surely such a view 
is most unnatural: for the sad subject of 
the Apostle’s sympathy, to which he im- 
mediately recurs again, is the apparent 
tnanity of all these privileges in the exelu- 
sion from life of those who were dignified 
with them. If it be said that the incar- 
nation of Christ is the exciting cause, the 
τὸ κατὰ σάρκα comes in most strangely, 
depreciating, as it would on that supposi- 
tion, the greatness of the event, which 
then becomes a source of so lofty a thanks- 
giving. (4) That the expression εὐλογητὸς 
εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας is twice besides used by 
Paul, and each time unquestionably not 
in an ascription of praise, but in an asser- 
tion regarding the subject of the sentence. 
The places are, ch. i. 25, ἐλάτρευσαν τῇ 
κτίσει παρὰ Toy κτίσαντα, bs ἐστιν εὐλογη- 
τὸς εἰς τυὺς αἰῶνας. auhv,—and 2 Cor. 
xi. 31, ὁ θεὸς κ. πατὴρ τ. κυρ. ᾿Ἰησοῦ οἶδεν, 
ὁ ὧν εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ὅτι οὐ 
ψεύδομαι : whereas he twice uses the phrase 
εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεός as an ascription of praise, 
without joining εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. (5) That 
in the latter of the above-cited passages 
(2 Cor. xi. 31), not only the same phrase 
as here, but the same construction, 6 ὥν, 
occurs, and that there the whole refers to 
the subject of the sentence. I do not 
reckon among the objections the want of 
any contrast to τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, because 
that might have well been left to the readers 
to supply.. Another mode of punctuation 
has been suggested (Locke, Clarke, al.), 
and indeed is found in one ‘ms. of the same 
date as above (71): to set a period after 
πάντων and refer ὁ ὧν ἐπὶ πάντων to 
Christ, understanding by πάντων all the 
preceding glorious things, or the πατέρες 
only, or even ‘all things.’ This lies open 
to all the above objections except (5), and 
to this in addition, that as Bp. Middleton 
observes, we must in that case read 6 θεός. 

Variety of reading there is none 
worth notice: the very fathers [Ephr. 
Cypr-ed. Hil-ed. Leo] generally cited as 
omitting θεός, having it in the best 
manuscripts and _ editions. Crell 
(not Schlichting, see Thol. p. 484, note, 
edn. 1842) proposed (and is followed by 
Whiston, Whitby, and Taylor) to trans- 
pose 6 ὥν into ὧν 6;—but besides the 
objection to the sense thus arising, evAvyy- 


4006 ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 1X} 

eJobn viii. 33, γὰρ πάντες οἱ ἐξ Ἴσραήλ, οὗτοι ᾿Ισραήλ' 7 οὐδ᾽ ὅτε εἰσὶν BDF 
37. (Acts iii. Ra 
25. vii. 5,6.) ὃ σπέρμα © ABpaup, πάντες τέκνα, ἀλλ᾽ Ἔν ᾿Ισαὰκ “«An-cafgh 
ch. xi. 1. ᾽ ᾽ tine 
Gains θήσεταί σοι σπέρμα. 8." τοῦτ᾽ ἔστιν, οὐ τὰ τέκνα τῆς 017/47] 
Heb. ii. 16. , » , 

Isa. xli.8. π σαρκός, ταῦτα 'ἱ τέκνα τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ τὰ ἕτέκνα τῆς 


ad GEN. xxi. 12. 
+ Isa. xlvili. g ἐπαγγελίας ἢ λογίζεται 
e Acts xix. 4 


reff. 
f ch. viii. 16 
reff. Kal ἔσται τῇ Σάῤῥα υἱός 
ΒΘ ΑΙ ΙΝ: 88 ἢ ὁ“ PPS 
nly 
h ch. ‘ii. 26 ge v. 3, ἄς. viii. 36. Acts xix. Wisd. ix. 6. 
xu, 1, oxrx. j see John xiv. 2. 


Deis σπέρμα. 
e , ὲ "κἍ, \ 
ὁ λόγος οὗτος, ' Κατὰ τὸν 


9 > / \ 

ἐπαγγελίας yap 

ἱ καιρὸν ‘tovtov 1 ἐλεύσομαι 
- , , \ 

10 Koy μόνον δέ, ἀλλὰ καὶ 


i Gen. xviii. 10 (see note). see Acts 


k ch. v. 3, 11. viii. 23. 2 Cor. viii. 19. 


6. for 2nd iopand, ἰσραηλειται DF latt(not tol) [arm] Chr-ms,(and Mtt’s mss.) 


ne -int, ] Ambrst Aug, : 
Tic 
7. ισακ δὰ} DG fuld (so D ver 10) ] 
8. aft rout ἐστιν add or: Bi(sic: 
m 672. 70. 114-20. 
9. om ο ἢ. 


τός would probably in that case (not neces- 
sarily, as Bp. Middleton in loc.) have the 
art.: not to mention that no conjecture 
arising from doctrinal difficulty is ever to 
be admitted in the face of the consensus 
of Mss. and versions. The rendering 
given above is then not only that most 
agreeable to the usage of the Apostle, 
but the only one admissible by the rules 
of grammar and arrangement. It also 
admirably suits the context: for, having 
enumerated the historic advantages of the 
Jewish people, he concludes by stating one 
which ranks far higher than all,—that 
from them sprung, according to the flesh, 
He who is God over all, blessed for ever. 
ἀμὴν implies no optative ascription 
of praise, but is the accustomed ending of 
such solemn declarations of the divine 
Majesty ; compare ch. i. 25. 6—13. | 
God has not broken His promise: for He 
chose from the first but a portion of the 
seed of Abraham (6—9), and again only 
one out of the two sons of Rebecca(10—13). 
6. ‘] Not however that (οὐχ οἷον δέ, 
ὅτι = ov τοῖον δὲ λέγω, οἷον ὅτι. . . 
‘but I do not mean such a thing, as that 
. . , or ‘the matter however is not so, 
as that . .. De W. cites from Athen. 
vi. p. 244, οὐχ οἷον βαδίζει, and from 
Phrynich. p. 332, οὐχ οἷον ὀργίζομαι, in ἃ 
similar sense. The rendering, ‘ it is not 
possible that,’ would require ordinarily 
οἷόν τε with an infinitive,—and St. Paul 
is asserting, not the impossibility, how- 
ever true, of God’s word being broken, 
but the fact, that it was not broken) the 
word (1. 6. the promise) of God has come 
to nothing (see reff., so Lat., excidit) ; 
viz. by many, the majority of the nominal 
Israel, missing the salvation which seemed 
to be their inheritance by promise. 
For not all who are sprung from Israel 
(= Jacob, according to Tholuck: but this 


see table) 83 m 116 [arm] Orig). 


txt ABKLN rel Orig, Cas, [Nys, Cyr-p Procop] Augszpe 


om tov F 


does not seem necessary: Israel here as 
well as below may mean the people, but 
here in the popular sense, there in the 
divine idea), (these) are Israel (veritably, 
and in the sense of the promise). 

7.) Nor, because they are (physically) the 
seed of Abraham, are all children (so as 
to inherit the promise), but (we read), 
“In Isaac shall thy seed be called” 
(i.e. those only shall be called truly and 
properly, for the purposes of the covenant, 
thy seed, who are descended from Isaac, 
not those from Ishmael or any other son. 
Thol. renders καλεῖν here by erwecfen, ‘ to 
raise up’): 8.7 thatis (that amounts, 
when the facts of the history are recol- 
lected, to saying) not [they which are | the 
children of the flesh (begotten by natural 
generation, compare John i. 13, and Gal. 
iv. 29) are the children of God; but the 
children of the promise (begotten not 
naturally, but by virtue of the divine 
promise (Gal. iv. 23, 28), as Isaac) are 
reckoned for seed. 9.] For this word 
was (one) of protfise (not, ‘For this was 
the word of promise,’ i.e. οὗτος γὰρ ὃ A. 
τῆς ἐπαγγ. ‘The stress is on ἐπαγγελίας : 

the children of promise are reckoned for 
seed: for this word, in fulfilment of which 
Isaac was born, was a word of promise), 
According to this time (m7 ny2, ‘when 
the time (shall be) reviviscent, >__as De W., 

Thol., al. :—i.e. next year at this time. 
The citation is a free one; the LXX has 
ἐπαναστρέφων ἥξω πρός σε κατὰ τὸν και- 
ρὸν τοῦτον εἰς ὥρας, κ. ἕξει υἱὸν Σάῤῥα 
ἡ γυνή σου. The change into ἔσται τῇ 
Σάῤῥᾳ υἱός is probably made for the sake 
of emphasis—the promise was to Sarah) 
I will come, and Sarah shall have 8 
son. 10, 11.1 And not only (80) 
(i.e. not only have we an example of 
the election of a son of Abraham by one 
woman, aud the rejectiin of a son by an- 


¢ 


7—12. 1ΤΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 407 


Ῥεβέκκα ἐξ ἑνὸς ἰἱ κοίτην ἔχουσα, ᾿Ισαὰκ τοῦ πατρὸς 1 = here (Luke 
ἡμῶν, 1} ™ μήπω yap γεννηθέντων μηδὲ πραξάντων τὶ sits. “Heb, 
[P τ ex ἀγαθὸν ἢ " φαῦλον, ἵνα ἡ κατ᾽ ο ἐκλογὴν ἢ πρόθεσις TOU med. ix.8 
+ a ᾿ καλοῦντος, 5 Paul, Tit. ii. 


| “ > ͵ ᾽ a 
θεοῦ «μένῃ, οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τοῦ δ την τ᾿ 
. i 
DD 297 4... χὰ ς / , a 
12 ἐῤῥέθη αὐτῇ ὅτι ὁ " μείζων * δουλεύσει τῷ ' ἐλάσσονι, 


iii. 20. v. 29. 
James iii. 16 
only. Prov. 


xxii. 8. o Acts ix. 15. ch. xi. 5,7, 28. 1 Thess.i.4. 2 Pet. i. 10 only τ. Isa. xxii. 7 Aq. 
p Acts xxvii. 13 reff. q = Matt. xi. 23. 1 Cor. iii. 14. 2 Cor. ix. 9. 1 Pet. i. 23, 25, from Isa. xl. 8. 
r = ch. viii. 30 reff. s — Heb. xi. 24. Gen. x. 21. xxix. 16. GEN. xxv. 23. t = John 


viii. 33, Acts vii. 7, from Gen. xv. 11. 
i. 16.) 


11. for unde, ἡ F latt [ Ambrst]. rec (for φαυλ.) κακον (more usual word), with 
DFKL rel Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt ΤῊ] He: txt ABN m [47] Orig, Cyr[-p, ] Damasc. 


ἃ =1 Tim. v. 9 (John ii. 10, Heb. vii. 7) only. 1. 6. (Gen. 


rec tov θεου bef προθεσις, with Chr{-montf,]: txt ABDFKL[ PX rel latt 


Orig,[int, | Chr-2-mss Thdrt. 


mewn Ε [μενεῖ P 17). 


12. rec eppy on, with B?D?L rel Orig, Chr,: txt AB!D!FK[P]JN bd fhkno [Chr, 


Dimasce] Thdrt.[—add yap P ]. 
Ambrst Bede. μειζον RX}, 


other, but also of election and rejection of 
the children of the same woman, Rebecca, 
and that before they were born. οὐ μόνον 
δέ introduces an ἃ fortiors considers tion. 
In the construction supply τοῦτο only), 
but when Rebecca also had conceived (see 
ref. Num. and ch. xiii. 13, where the mean- 
ing is not exactly the same though cognate) 
by one man (in the former case, the chil- 
dren were by two wives; the difference be- 
tween that case and this being, that there, 
was diversity of parents, here, identity. 
The points of contrast being then this di- 
versity and identity, the zdentity of the 
Sather also is brought into view. This is 
well put by Chrys.: 7 yap Ῥεβέκκα καὶ 
μόνη τῷ ᾿Ισαὰκ γέγονε γυνή, Kal δύο 
τεκοῦσα παῖδας, ἐκ τοῦ ᾿Ισαὰκ ἔτεκεν ἀμ- 
φοτέρους" ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως οἱ τεχθέντες τοῦ αὐτοῦ 
πατρὸς ὄντες. THS αὐτῆς μητρός, τὰς αὐτὰς 
λύσαντες ὠδῖνας, καὶ ὁμοπάτριοι ὄντες καὶ 
ὁμομήτριοι, καὶ πρὸς τούτοις καὶ δίδυμοι, οὐ 
τῶν αὐτῶν ἀπήλαυσαν. Hom. xvi. p. 610), 
our father Isaac (τ. mat. ju., probably 
said without any special reference, the 
Apostle speaking as a Jew. If with any 
design it might be, as Thol. remarks, to 
shew that even among the Patriarchs’ 
children such distinction took place. 
Christians being τέκνα ἐπαγγελίας, the 
expression might apply to them: but, as 
tle same Commentator observes, the argu- 
ment here is to shew that not all the 
children of promise belonged to the ἐκ- 
Aoyh. See ch. iv. 1—12. As to the 
construction here, it is best to regard 
ἀλλὰ Kal... ἔχουσα ... ἡμῶν as a sen- 
tence begun but intercepted by the remark 
following, and resumed in another form 
at ἐῤῥ. αὐτῇ), ἴΟΥ (not answering to 
‘furnishes us an example’ supplied after 
ἔχουσα, but elliptically put, answering to 
the apprehension in the Apostle’s mind of 
the force of the example which he is about 
to adduce. For this use of γάρ see John 


om avty D}(and lat) hari! Orig,{ int,(ins int;) | 


iv. 44, note; Herod. i. 8, Γύγη, οὐ yap... «3 
30, ἐεῖνε ᾽Αθ. παρ᾽ ἡμέας yap... . Thucyd. 
i. 72, τῶν δὲ ᾽Αθ. ἔτυχε γὰρ... .; and 
other examples in Hartung, Partikellehre, 
i. 467) without their having been yet 
born (tke subject, the children, is to be 
supplied partly from the fact of her preg- 
nancy just stated, partly from the history, 
well known to the readers. μή instead 
of ov is frequently used by later Greek 
writers in participial clauses: Winer, edn. 
6, ὃ 55.5; so Acts ix.9, qv... μὴ βλέπων 
kK. οὐκ ἔφαγεν... and Luke xiii. 11, μὴ 
δυναμένη ἀνακύψαι. See Schafer, Demosth. 
iii. 395, and Hartung, ii. 130—132) or 
having done any thing good or ill (paiva. 
an unusual word with Paul = properly 
ἁπλοῦν, ῥάδιον, εὐτελές, as Timeus in 
Lex. to Plato, with whom it is a very 
common word in this sense. Ruhknken, 
on the word in Timezus, gives from the 
Lex. Rhetor. MS., τὸ φ. σημαίνει δέκα" 
ἐπί τε mposmmov καὶ πράγματος τὸ κακόν. 
τὸ μικρόν, K. τὸ εὐκαταφρόνητον, K. τὸ 
ἀσθενές. κ. τὸ ἄδοξυν. K. τὸ ἀνόητον, K.T.A. 
This will shew the connexion of the strict 
and the wider meaning), { to the end | that 
the purpose of God according to (purposed 
in pursuance of, or in accordance with, or 
(Thol.) with reference to His) election 
(Thol. prefers taking κατ᾽ ἐκλ. adjec- 
tively, as Bengel has rendered it, ‘* pro- 
positum electivum,’ and as in Polyb. vi. 
34. 8, εἷς ἑκάστης ἀνὴρ λαμβάνεται Kar’ 
ἐκλογήν, ‘electively’) may (not might ; 
the purpose is treated as one in all time, 
which would be nullified if once thwarted) 
abide (stand firm; the opposite of ἐκπίπ- 
τειν, see reff. 1 Pet., Isa.),—mot {depend- 
ing on] works (ch. iii. 20; iv. 2) but on 
Him that calleth,—(this clause does not 
seem to depend on any one word of the 
foregoing or following, as on ἐῤῥέθη, Calv., 
Luth. ;—or μένῃ, Rickert, Meyer ;—or 
κατ᾽ ἐκλογήν, Fritz.;—but tobe a general 


408 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS 
v MAL. i. 2, eit 
w ch. iil. 5 re 9 A , 5: - a : 
x Luke xii 27. ἐμίσησα. 1+ Tr οὖν ἐροῦμεν ; 

Ps. χοὶ. 13. \ / 
yc. “ithe ; 2 μὴ γένοιτο. 

Ε ; ob ? / A xX b , / 

318. 13. Va KTELO®. 
zch. iii. 4 reff. ΜΟῚ sting ai ad ᾿ ν ου ρ 
a Matt χα  QéeNXNovTos OVE τοῦ 

XXXiii. 19. 

-ἂν (pres.) here bis. Jude 23 only. Prov. xxi. 26 A(not F ἄς.) BUN. 
ech, v. 18 reff. ἃ = 1 Cor. ix. 24. Gal. v. 7. 


13. καθαπερ B Orig, 


ΓΡ rel] Thdrt. 
16. rec εἐλεουντος, with B?K [rel Orig 
txt AB!DF[P 8. 


characteristic of the whole transaction ; 
see a similar ἐκ in ch. 1.17. Thol., De 
W. Thus viewed, or indeed however 
taken, it is decisive against the Pelagian- 
ism of the Romanists, who by making 
our faith as foreseen by God the cause 
of our election, affirm it to be ἐξ ἔργων. 
See the matter discussed in Thol.),—it 
was said to her (ὅτι is recitantis; the 
LXX have καί), “The elder shall serve 
the younger ” (this prophecy is distinctly 
connected in Gen. xxv. with the pro- 
phetic description of the children as two 
nations,—Aabs λαοῦ ὑπερέξει, καὶ 6 μείζων 
κιτιλ. But the nations must be con- 
sidered as spoken of in their progenitors, 
and the elder nation = that sprung 
from the elder brother. History records 
several subjugations of Edom by the 
kings of Judah; first by David (2 Sam. 
viii. 14);—under Joram they rebelled 
(2 Kings viii. 20), but were defeated by 
Amaziah (2 Kings xiv. 7), and Elath 
taken from them by Uzziah (2 Kings xiv. 
22); under Ahaz they were again free, 
and troubled Judah (2 Chron. xxviii. 16, 
17, compare 2 Kings xvi. 6, 7),—and con- 
tinued free, as prophesied in Gen. xxvii. 
40, till the time of John Hyrcanus, who 
(Jos. Antt. xili. 9.1) reduced them finally, 
so that thenceforward they were incorpo- 
rated among the Jews): as it is written, 
Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated (there is 
no necessity here to soften the ‘ hated’ 
into ‘loved less :’ the words in Malachi pro- 
ceed on the fullest meaning of ἐμίσησα, see 
ver. 4 there, “ The people against whom the 
LorD hath indignation for ever 7). 

14—29.] This election was made by the 
indubitable right of God, Who is not 
therefore unjust. 14.) What then 
shall we say (anticipation of a difficulty or 
objection, see reff.,—but not put into the 
mouth of an objector)? Is there un- 
righteousness (injustice) with (in) God 
(viz. in that He chooses as He will, with- 
out any reference to previous desert) ὃ Let 


Ps. cxviii. 32, gen., Acts i. 7. 


ΙΧ, 


13 καθὼς γέγραπται " Tov ᾿Ιακὼβ ἠγάπησα, τὸν δὲ Ησαῦ 


μὴ * ἀδικία " παρὰ τῷ θεῷ ; 


13 τῷ Μωσῇ γὰρ λέγει *’EXenow ὃν ἂν ἃ ἐλεῷ, 


9 A 
16 «ἄρα “οὖν ov τοῦ 


4 χρέχοντος, ἀλλὰ τοῦ * ἐλεῶντος θεοῦ. 


b here bis only. 4 Kings xiii. 23. 
Heb. ν. 14. 


: 14. om τω D'F. 
15. rec yap bef uwon, with AKL rel Chr Thdart: txt BDF[P]X® Damase. 
FKLN[P rel]: txt ABD [g].— -σει ΒΓΕ cd g Chr-2-mss [ Damasc] : 


μωυσ. 


-ση AB!IDKLN 


4 Eus, Chr Thdrt Damasc] ; εὐδοκουντὸς L: 


it not be: 15.] for He saith to 
Moses, ‘‘I will have mercy on whormso- 
ever I have mercy, and [1] will have 
compassion on whomsoever I have com- 
passion.” ‘The citation is from the LXX, 
who insert the indefinite av, the Heb. be- 
ing .... jx Weng ὭΣΤ; the meaning 
apparently being, ‘whenever I have merc y 
on any, it shall be pure mercy, no human 
desert contributing τ᾿ which agrees better 
with the next verse than the ordinary ren- 
dering, which lays the stress on the ὃν ἄν; 
and is not inconsistent with ver. 18, ὃν 
θέλει, ἐλεᾷ : because if God’s mercy be 
pure mercy without any desert on man’s 
part, it necessarily follows that he has 
mercy on whom He will, His will being the 
only assignable cause of the selection. 

16.| So then (inference from the 
citation) it is not οὗ (God’s mercy ‘ does 
not belong to,’—-‘is not in the power of,’ 
see reff.) him that willeth (any man 
willing it) nor of him that runneth (any 
man contending for it, see reff. and Phil. 
iii. 14, _ There hardly can be any allusion 
to Abraham’s wish for Ishmael, Gen. xvii. 
18, and Esau’s running to hunt for venison, 
as Stuart, Burton, al.), but of God that 
hath mercy. I must pause again here to 
remind the student, that 1 purposely do not 
enter on the disquisitions so abundant in 
some commentaries on this part of Scrip- 
ture, by which it is endeavoured to recon- 
cile the sovereign election of God with our 
tree will. We shall find that free will 
asserted strongly enough for all edifying 
purposes by this Apostle, when the time 
comes. At present, he is employed wholly 
in asserting the divine Sovereignty, the 
glorious vision of which it ill becomes us to 
distract by continual downward looks on 
this earth. I must also protest against all 
endeavours to make it appear, that no 
inference lies from this passage as to the 
salvation of individuals, It is most true 
(see remarks at the beginning of this 
chapter) that the immediate subject is 


13—18. 


A δι ’ > a) »“" > > 
17 λέγει γὰρ “ ἡ γραφὴ τῷ Φαραὼ ὅτι ‘els 8 αὐτὸ ὅ τοῦτο « sing., Mark 
5 2 - ͵ " \ \ / ΄ 5 
h ἐξήγειρά σε, ὅπως | ἐνδείξωμαι ἐν σοὶ τὴν δύναμίν μου 
\ 6 A \ " ΄ , 7, “ A 
καὶ ὅπως * διαγγελῇ TO ὄνομά μου ἐν πάσῃ τῇ γῆ. 
= 4 a A : uf 7, 
18 ὁ ἄρα “ οὖν ὃν θέλει ** ἐλεεῖ, Ov δὲ θέλει !oKANpUVEL. 


g Acts xxiv. 15 reff. 


ΠΡῸΣ POUMATOT>.. 


ἢ = here (1 Cor. vi. 14) only. Judg. v. 12. 
i and constr., 1 Tim. i. 16. (see ver. 22.) Exon. ix. 16. 


409 


xi. 


22 and 
passim. ch. 
iv. 9.4], 

f Mark i. 38. 
John xviii. 
37. Acts ix. 
21 


Ps. vii. 6 al. Jos. Antt. viii. 11. 
k Luke ix. 60. Acts xxi. 26 only. 1. c. 


1 Acts xix. 9. Heb. iii. 8,13, 18. iv. 7 only. Exod. iv. 21 (737). vii. 3 (TWP), al. 


17. evdetoua F[not G} L[P 17] ¢ 11 Chr-ms. 


γελει L[P] f 0 [-γειλη m]. 


18. In A, from ov δε 0. to ἡ ove exert ver. 21 is in a later hand. 


ins o Geos D. | 
B?). 


the national rejection of the Jews : but we 
must consent to hold our reason in abey- 
ance, if we do not recognize the infer- 
ence, that the sovereign power and free 
election here proved to belong to God 
extend to every exercise of His mercy — 
whether temporal or spiritual—whether in 
Providence or in Grace—whether national 
or individual. It is in parts of Scripture 
like this, that we must be especially careful 
not to fall short of what is written : not to 
allow of any compromise of the plain and 
awful words of God’s Spirit, for the sake of 
a caution which He Himself does not teach 
us. 17.) The same great truth shewn 
on its darker side :—not only as regards 
God’s mercy, but His wrath also. For 
(confirmation of the wazrersal truth of the 
last inference) the Scripture (identified 
with God, its Author : the case, as Thol. re- 
marks, is different when merely something 
contained in Scripture is introduced by 
ἢ γραφὴ λέγει: there 7 yp. is merely per- 
sonified. The justice of Thol.’s remark 
will be apparent, if we reflect that this 
expression could not be used of the mere 
ordinary words of any man in the histo- 
rical Scriptures, Ahab, or Hezekiah,—but 
only where the text itself speaks, or where 
God spoke, or, as here, some man under 
inspiration of God) saith to Pharaoh, For 
this very purpose (ὅτι recitantis; the LXX 
have καὶ ἕνεκεν TovTov) did I raise thee up 
(LXX διετηρήθης, ‘ thou wert preserved to 
this day: Heb. ATO from oy, stetit, 
in Hiph. stare fecit ; hence taken to sig- 
nity (1) ‘ constituit, muneri prefecit,’ as 
1 Kings xii. 32; Isa. xxi. 6 (LXX σεαυτῷ 
στῆσον σκόπον); Esth. iv. 5,—(2) ‘con- 
Jirmavit, as 1 Kings xv. 4 al.,—and (8) 
‘prodire fecit, excitavit, Dan. xi. 11; 
Neh. vi. 7 : the meaning ‘incolumem pre- 
stitit,’ given in the Lexicons, seems to be 
grounded on the following of the LXX in 
this passage, who apparently understood it 
of Pharaoh being kept safe through the 
piagues. This has been done by modern 
interpreters [perhaps] to avoid the strong 


aft [2nd] omws ins αν F. διαγ- 


[aft lst θελει 


* ἐλεᾷ D'F.—aft eA. ims ov δε θελει εἐλεει B'(Tischdf: om 


assertion which the Apostle here gives, 
purposely deviating from the LXX, that 
Pharaoh was ‘ raised up, called into action 
in his office, to be an example of God’s 
dealing with impenitent sinners. The 
word chosen by the Apostle, ἐξεγείρω, in 
its transitive sense, is often used by the 
LXX for ‘ to rouse into action :’ see besides 
reff. Ps. lvi. 8; Ixxix. 2; Cant. iv. 16 al. 
So that the meaning (3) given above for 
the Heb. verb—‘ prodire fecit, excitavit,’ 
was evidently that intended by ἐξήγειραῚ, 
that I may shew in thee (‘in thee as an 
example,’—‘ in thy case,’—‘ by thee’) my 
power (τ. ἰσχύν μου LXX-B: δύν. (which 
is read in A) is perhaps chosen by the 
Apostle as more general, ἰσχύς applying 
rather to those deeds of miraculous power 
of which Egypt was then witness), and 
that my Name may be proclaimed in all 
the earth (compare as a comment, the 
words of the song of triumph, Exod. xv. 
14—16). 18.| Therefore He hath 
mercy on whom He will (ref. to ver. 15, 
where see note), and whom He will, He 
hardeneth. The frequent recurrence 
of the expression σκληρύνειν τὴν καρδίαν 
in the history of Pharaoh should have 
kept Commentators (Carpzov, Ernesti, al., 
and of Lexicographers, Wahl and Bret- 
schneider) from attempting to give to 
σκληρύνω the sense of ‘ treating hardly,’ 
against which the next verse would be 
decisive, if there were no other reason 
for rejecting it. But it is very doubtful 
whether the word can ever bear the mean- 
ing. The only passage which appears to 
justify it (for in 2 Chron. x. 4 it clearly 
has the import of hardening, making 
severe) is Job xxxix. 16, where ἀπεσκλή- 
ρυνε τὰ τέκνα ἑαυτῆς (αὑτῆς AN) the LXX 
version of the Heb. τ ΡΠ, is supposed to 
mean, ‘treats her offspring hardly.’ But 
the LXX by this compound seem to have 
intended, ‘ casts off her offspring in her 
hardness ;’ the Εἰ. V. has,‘ She is hardened 
against her young ones.’ Whatever 
difficulty there lies in this assertion, that 


= 
410 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS IX’ 
oer 9 / = , , ΝΣ , 

τιον, iit. 19. ἐρεῖς μοι οὗν ™ Τί [οὖν] ἔτι ™ μέμφεται ; τῷ γὰρ ° βουλή- 
Gal. ν. 11. ’ to , , , 5) > » a 
Heb. 8 Ρ ς - 20 q 

ἊΣ ΠΟ 2 ματι AVTOV τις ἀνθέστηκεν ; ω ἄνθρωπε, MEVOUVYE 
rec.) only t. ᾿ / τὰ pee x ; A θ γι \ 5) ΜΞ \ 
Sir χ ῖ αἰ OU WS El* O QAVTATTOKPLVOKMEVOS τῷ EW ; My €pEel TO 
7. 2M 
Ve ene o Acts xxvii. 43. 1 Pet. iv. 3only+. 2 Macc. xv. 5 only. p Acts vi. 10 reff: 


q ch. x. 8 (Luke xi. 28 v. r.) only. r Luke xiv. 6 only. “Judg. v.29 A Ald.compl. Job xvi. 9. xxxii. 12 only- 


19. ree Ist ovy bef μοι, with DFKL [rel] latt [copt] Orig,[int,] Chr, Thdrt: om 
ovy 73. 118 arm: txt ABR P 47] m syr goth Orig, [ Dam: 180. rec om 2nd ουν, 
with AKL[P]§& rel vulg [syrr copt seth arm | Orig, Chr, ‘Vhdrt Aug[sepe Ambrst] : 
ins BDF Jer, Sedul. elz om yap, with G- ii: ins ABDFKL[ PN rel [vss] 
Orig,[int,] Ath, Chr, Thdrt Thdor-mops Damase Aug. 

20. rec ee bef w ανθρ. (to suit the arrangement in other places: see reff. Had 
the μενουνγε been transposed in A &c to avoid plucing it first in the sentence (see 
Phryn Lobeck, p. 342), the same various reading would have occurred in the other 
places, which it does not), with D? KK LX’, P 47-marg(sic) | rel syrr copt [goth (arm) ] 


Orig, Chr, Thdrt Thdor mops, e Thi: 
Augsepe | Jer: 


God hardeneth whom He will, lies also in 
the daily course of His Providence, in 
which we see this hardening process going 
on in the case of the prosperous ungodly 
man. The fact is patent, whether declared 
by revelation or read in history: but to 
the solution of it, and its reconciliation 
with the equally certain fact of human 
responsibility, we shall never attain in this 
imperfect state, however we may strive to 
do so by subtle refinements and distinc- 
tions. The following is the admirable 
advice of Augustine (ad Sixtum, Ep. exciv. 
6. 23, vol. ii. p. 882), from whom in this 
case it comes with double weight : “ Satis 
sit interim Christiano ex fide adhuc viventi, 
et nondum cernenti quod perfectum est, 
sed ex parte scienti, nosse vel credere 
quod neminem Deus liberet nisi gratuita 
misericordia per Dominum nostrum Jesum 
Christum, et neminem damnet nisi zquissi- 
ma veritate per eundem Dominum nostrum 
Jesum Christum. Cur autem illum potius 
quam illum liberet aut non liberet, scrute- 
tur qui potest judiciorum ejus tam magnum 
profundum,—verumtamen caveat pre- 
cipitium.” 19.] Thou wilt say then 
to me (there seems no reason to suppose 
the objector a Jew, as Thol. after Grot., 
Calov., Koppe, al.:—the objection is a 
general one, applying to all mankind, and 
likely to arise in the mind of any reader. 
The expression ὦ ἄνθρωπε seems to confirm 
this), Why then doth He yet find fault (ἔτι 
as ch. iii. 7, assuming your premises,—‘ if 
this be so: at the same time it expresses 
a certain irritation on the part of the 
objector: ‘exprimit morosum fremitum,’ 
Bengel. μέμφομαι has a stronger sense 
than mere blame here : Hesych. interprets 
it αἰτιᾶται, ἐξουθενεῖ, καταγινώσκει : see the 
apocryphal reff. Thol.)? For who resists 
(not, ‘hath resisted: ἀνθέστηκεν. like 
ἕστηκεν, is present, see Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 40. 
4. Ὁ, and compare ἐφέστηκεν, 2 Tim. iv. 6) 


om μενουνγε DIF latt eth 
txt A(B)&?! m [47-txt Orig, ] Chr-ms, Damasc.—om γε b. 


((Meth) Orig-int, 


His will (i. e. if it be His will to harden the 
sinner, and the sinner goes on in his sin, 
he does not resist but goes with the will 
of God)? Yea rather (uevodvye, see reff., 

takes the ground from under the previous 
assertion and supersedes it by another: im- 
plying that it has a certain ‘show of tr uth, 
but that the proper view of the matter is 
yet to be stated. It thus conveys, as in 
ref. Luke, an intimation of rebuke; here, 
with severity: ‘that which thou hast said, 
may be correct human reasoning—but as 
against God’s sovereignty, thy reasoning is 
out of place and irrelevant ’), 0 man (per- 
haps without emphasis implying the con- 
trast between man and God.—for this is 
done by the emphatic ov following, and we 
have ἄνθρωπε unemphatic in ch. ii. 1), who 
art THOU that repliest against (the ἀντί 
seems to imply contradiction, not merely 
dialogue: see besides reff., ἀνταπόκρισιν, 
Job xiii. 22, BC) Gop P—implying, ‘ thou 
hast neither right nor power, to call God to 
account in this manner.’ Notice, that 
the answer to the objector’s question does 
not lie in these vv. 20, 21, but in the follow- 
ing (see there) ;—the present verses are a 
rebuke administered to the spirit of the 
objection, which forgets the immeasurable 
distance between us and God, and the re- 
lation of Creator and Disposer in which He 
stands to us. So Chrys.,—kal οὐδὲ τὴν 
λύσιν εὐθέως ἐπάγει, συμφερόντως Kal τοῦτο 
ποιῶν" ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιστομίζει πρῶτον τὸν ζ(η- 
τοῦντα, λέγων οὕτω μενοῦνγε.. . .. θεῷ; 
ποιεῖ δὲ τοῦτο, τὴν ἄκαιρον αὐτοῦ περι- 
εργίαν ἀναστέλλων, κ. τὴν πολλὴν πολυ- 
πραγμοσύνην, K. χαλινὸν περιτιθείς, κ. 
παιδεύων εἰδέναι τί μὲν θεὸς τί δὲ ἄνθρω- 
πος, K. πῶς ἀκατάληπτος αὐτοῦ ἡἣ πρό- 
voila, K. πῶς ὑπερβαίνουσα τὸν ἡμέτερον 
λογισμόν, κ. πῶς ἅπαντα αὐτῷ πείθεσθαι 
δεῖ ἵνα ὅταν τοῦτο κατασκευάσῃ παρὰ 
τῷ ἀκροατῇ, kK. καταστείλῃ κ. λεάνῃ τὴν 
γνώμην, τότε μετὰ πολλῆς εὐκολίας ἐπ- 


AFDP 
ΚΙΓΡῚΝΣ 
abcdt 

gnk} 
mnt? 


[a7 J 


a 


ee 


19—23. ΠΡΟΣ PAMAIOTS 41] 
5 , a t , ’ >] / fa ef i 9] a 1s 
i δὴν ΤῈ Sinead 2 ἽΝ μα ETOLNGAS ουτως: Lif eee 19} 
> nw Qn ’ al SA. i > 
οὐκ ἔχει " ἐξουσίαν ὁ ἡ κεραμεὺς τοῦ “ἡ πηλοῦ, ἐκ TOD yi Tim iis 
> a x / a y ἃ Ν Z ᾽ \ a a only. Gen. 
auTou φυράματος ΤΟιῆσαι O μεν ELS τιμὴν σκεῦος, il. » 8. ‘ 
u and constr., 
ἃ \ ? > / oC ? \ 7 ς ᾽ . 
YO δὲ 5 εἰς ἢ ἀτιμίαν ; 22 « εἰς δὲ θέλων ὁ θεὸς 4 ἐνδείξα- ον. 1χ.12 
θ \ 2 \ \ e , \ f 3 \ 5) a v Matt. xxvii. 
ovat τὴν Οργὴν Kat γνωρισαᾶν TO UVQ@TOV QUTOU_ 7,10 only. 
& ἤνεγκεν ἐν πολλῇ ἢ μακροθυμία ἱ σκεύη ὀργῆς * κατ Isa. aly. 9 
yvey i Pak pocupid 7 opyns dl | alli 8 
, > ἢ ΄, 9 \ “ / \ a : 2 
τισμένα εἰς ἰ ἀπώλειαν, 35 καὶ ™ ἵνα" γνωρίση τον ™ πλοῦτον Ἶ 6. 
a 0 ὃ , Ε ΟΝ ey fs / p δι A q ! &c. (5 times) 
Τῆς ὀξης αὐτου ἐπι σκευὴ €NEOUS, a TT PONT OLUAG EV only. Gen 
xi; 
x ch. xi. 16. 1Cor. ν. 6, 7. Gal. v.9only. Exod. xii. 34. y 1 Cor. xi. 21 reff. z= ch. 
ipl, Ὁ 51 fr. a = 2 Tim. il. 20,21. Heb.ix. 21 al. Exod. iii. 22. Ὁ ch. 1. 26 reff. 
c Acts xxiii. 9. ἃ constr., ch. ii. 15. Eph. ii. 7. Tit. ii. 10. ili.2. Heb. vi. 10, 11. see ver. 
Piece Gene ly 25, 17. e 1 Cor. xii. 3 reff. ee ὍΣ constr., ch. i. 19, 20. viii. 3. 


= Heb. xii. 20 only. (see Heb. xiii. 13.) φέρειν TL πράως, Ken. Gru: ii, 2. 9. 
1566 ver. 21. Jer. xxvii. (l.) 25. constr., Acts ix. 15. 


h ch. ii. 4 reff. 
io — Heb. x. 5 (from Ps. xxxix.6) xi. 


2) Matt. iv. 21. 2 11: Acts viii, 20 reff. Jobn xvii.12. Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) 2 m constr., 

see Winer, edn. 6, $ 63. I. 1. n ch. ii. 4 reff. o Eph. i. "18. iii. 16. (Phil. iv. 

19.) Col. i. 27. p Luke i. 50 ἄς. Eph.ii.4. Exod. xx. 6. q Eph. 11. 10 only. Isa. 
xxviii. 22, Wisd. ix. 8 only. 


for eroinoas, ἐπλασας D[-gr] Syr Thl- -marg. 
22. om ἡνεγκεν F D?-lat Julian). ins εἰς bef σκευὴ F [ D!-lat] Ambrst Julian. 
23. om Ist καὶ Β m 39. 47-marg 672. 80. 116 vulg copt goth arm[Griesb, not Treg ] 
(Orig[-int, ]) Jer Pel Sedul Fulg,. for tov πλουτον, To πλουτους5 F. [for 


δοξης, χρηστυτητος P.]} 


άγων τὴν λύσιν, εὐπαράδεκτον αὐτῷ ποιήσῃ 
τὸ λεγόμενον. Hom. xvi. p. 614. Simi- 
larly Calvin: ‘Hac priori responsione 
uihil aliud quam improbitatem illius blas- 
pheuize retundit, argumento ab hominis 
conditione sumpto. Alteram mox subjiciet, 
qua Dei justitiam ‘ab omni criminatione 
vindicabit.’ Shall the thing formed 
(properly of a production of plastic art, 
moulded of clay or wax) say to him who 
formed it, ‘‘ Why madest thou me thus?”’ 

These words are slightly altered from 
Isa. xxix. 16 LXX,—pv ἐρεῖ τὸ πλάσμα 
τῷ πλάσαντι αὐτό(οιη. αὐτό AR), Οὐ σύ 
με ἔπλασας; ἢ τὸ ποίημα τῷ ποιήσαντι, 
Οὐ συνετῶς με ἐποίησας ; Or (intro- 
duces a new objection, or fresh ground of 
rebuke, see ch. ii. 4; iii. 29; vi. 3; xi. 2) 
hath not the potter power over the clay 
(the similitude from ref. Isa. In Sir. xxxvi. 
(xxxiii.) 13, we have a very similar senti- 
ment: ὡς wnrds κεραμέως ἐν χειρὶ αὐτοῦ 
“νων οὕτως ἄνθρωποι ἐν χειρὶ τοῦ ποιή- 
σαντος αὐτούς. And even more strikingly 
80, Wisd. xv. 7: καὶ yap κεραμεὺς ἁπαλὴν 
γῆν θλίβων ἐπίμοχθον πλάσσει πρὸς ὑπη- 
ρεσίαν ἡμῶν ἕκαστον(ὲν ἕκ. ACR), ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ 
τοῦ αὐτοῦ πηλοῦ ἀνεπλάσατο τά τε τῶν 
καθαρῶν ἔργων δοῦλα σκεύη τά τε ἐναντία 
πάνθ᾽ (πάντα AN) ὁμοίως" τούτων δὲ ἕκα- 
τέρου(ἑτέρου BN, ἑτέρων N1) τίς ἑκάστου 
ἐστὶν ἡ(οιῃ. ἡ &) χρῆσις, κριτὴς ὃ πηλουρ- 
yés. See also Jer. xviii. 6), out of the 
same lump to make one vessel unto ho- 
nour (honourable uses) and another unto 
dishonour (dishonourable uses. See ref. 
2 Tim. The honour and dishonour are not 
here the moral purity or impurity of the 
human vessels, but their w/timate glorifi- 
cation or perdition. The Apostle in asking 


this question, rather aims at striking dumb 
the objector by a statement of God’s un- 
doubted right, against which it does not 
become us men to murmur, than at un- 
folding to us the actual state of the case. 
This he does in the sue verses ; see 
above, from Chrys. and Calv.) ? 22. | 
But what if (by the elliptical εἰ δέ the an- 
swer to the question of the objector, ver. 19, 

seems to be introduced ; ἐὰν οὖν occurs in a 
similar connexion John vi. 62; and ἀλλ᾽ εἰ, 
Soph. (4. Col. 590,---ἀλλ᾽ εἰ θέλοντάς γ᾽ 
οὐδὲ σοὶ φυγεῖν καλόν ; See Hartung, Parti- 
kellehre, ii. 212. 6) (1) God, purposing to 
shew forth His wrath, and to make known 
His power (that which He could do), en- 
dured with much long-suffering vessels 
of wrath fitted [prepared, made complete 
and ready] for destruction; and (what if 
this took place) (2) that He might make 
known the riche: of His glory on (not fo, 
as De Wette, who joins it with γνωρίσῃ.--- 
but ‘toward,’ on, ‘with regard to,’ depen- 
dent on πλοῦτον, as πλουτῶν εἰς. ch. x. 12) 
the vessels of mercy, which He before 
prepared for glory? t I have given the 
whole, that my view of the construction 
might be evident: viz. that (1) and (2) 
are parallel clauses, both dependent on εἰ 
δέ; θέλων giving the purpose of the Ist, 

and ἵνα yv. that of the 2nd. They might 
be cast into one form by writing the 1st 
6 θ., ἵνα ἐνδείξηται. . . . κι yvwplon,—or 
the 2nd, καὶ θέλων γνωρίσαι. Only I do 
not, as Calv., Beza, Grot., Bengel, De 
Wette, Meyer, and Winer, understand the 
same ἤνεγκεν .... ἀπώλ., as belonging to 
both, but only to the 1st, and supply before 
the 2nd, ‘What if this took place,’ viz. 
this ὃν θέλει, ἐλεεῖ, Other constructions 


ΚΙΓΡῚΣΝ 
ἂν. as 


412 ΤΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. TX: 

’ ¢ ἃ \ 3 ΄ ΄ a , ’ 5» 
πα, εἰς τδόξαν; 535 οὺς καὶ ἐκάλεσεν μᾶς ov μόνον ἐξ appr 

eff. / \ . ἢ “ oe ae \ 
«Narki.2, Ἰουδαίων, ἀλλὰ Kal ἐξ ἐθνῶν, 35 ὡς καὶ “ἐν τῷ Ὡσηὲ 
Heb. iv. 7. 
t Hosea ii. 23° ast Καλέσω τὸν οὐ λαὸν μου λαόν μου, καὶ τὴν οὐκ (ἡ 
ῶ \ 

ulesei.to. ἢ ἠγαπημένην ἠγαπημένην. “6. “Kal ἔσται ἐν TH τόπῳ 


οὗ ἐῤῥέθη αὐτοῖς Οὐ λαός μου ὑμεῖς, ἐκεῖ κληθήσον- 


25. om εν B. 


26. for οὗ, ὦ N'(txt N-corr! ?) [Thdrt]. 


rec ἐρρήθη, with B?D°L rel Ge: txt 


AB! D!-gr ΚΓΡῚΝ ἃ ἔν Καὶ 1? evp. 1}}] n 17 (Euthal-ms Damase} Thdrt Thl.—for 


Epp. avt., αν κληθησονται F{- gr] (D?!-lat Aimbrst) : 


eanuhodae Iren-int. 


have been,—to make ἵνα depend on κατηρ- 
Tigneva— prepared to destruction for this 
very purpose, that ἄς. So Fritz. and 
Rickert, ed. 2; but this seems to overlook 
kal, or to regard it as = καὶ τοῦτο :—to 
take ver. 23 as a new sentence, supplying 
ἐκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς, as Tholuck. Stuart 
supplies θέλων before iva yv., and ἠλέησεν 
before οὖς ἐκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς. This in fact 
amounts to nearly the same as my own 
view, but appears objectionable, inasmuch 
as it joins ver. 24 to ver. 23: see below. 
The argument is, ‘ What if God, in the 
case of the vessels of wrath prepared for 
destruction, has, in willing to manifest His 
power and wrath, also exhibited towards 
them long-suffering (to lead them torepent- 
ance, ch. ii. 4,—a mystery which we cannot 
fathom), and in having mercy on the ves- 
sels of mercy prepared for glory, has also 
made manifest the riches of His glory ὃ 
Then in beth these dispensations will ap- 
pear, not the arbitrary power, but the rich 
goodness of God. The theological diffi- 
culties in κατηρτισμένα and προητοίμασεν 
(in both cases God is the agent; not they 
themselves, as Chrys., Theophyl., Olsh. 
Bengel, however, rightly remarks, “ non 
dicit que προκατήρτισε, cum tamen ver. 
seq. dicat ‘que preparavit.’ Cf. Matt. xxv. 
34 cum ver. 41, et Act. xiii. 46 cum ver. 
48”) are but such as have occurred re- 
peatedly before, and, as Stuart has well ob- 
served, are inherent, not in the Apostle’s 
argument, nor even in revelation, but in 
any consistent belief of an omnipotent 
and omniscient God. See remarks on ver. 
18. σκεύη ὀργῆς and σκεύη ἐλέους 
are vessels prepared to subserve, as it 
were to hold, His ὀργή and ἔλεος : hardly, 
as Calvin, instruments to shew forth: 
that is done, over and above their being 
σκεύη, but is not necessary to it. 
The ok. doy. and ox. ἐλ. are not to be, 
with a view to evade the general applica- 
tion, confined to the instances of Pha- 
raoh and the Jews: these instances give 
occasion to the argument, but the argu- 
ment itself is general, extending to all the 


in loco liberata (ἐρρυσθη Ὁ) in quo 


dealings of God. 24.| Of which kind 
(quales, agreeing with 7uas—i.e. σκεύη 
ἐλέους) He also called us, not only from 
among the Jews, but 4150 from among 
the Gentiles. It being entirely in the 
power of God to preordain and have mercy 
on whom He will, He has exercised this 
right by calling not only the remnant of 
His own people, but a people from among 
the Gentiles also. 25, 26.| It is difti- 
cult to ascertain in what sense the Apostle 
cites these two passages from Hosea as 
applicable to the Gentiles being called to 
be the people of God. That he does so, is 
manifest from the words themselves, and 
from the transition to the Jews in ver. 27. 
In the prophet they are spoken of /srael ; 
see ch. i. 6—11, and ch. ii. throughout: 
who after being rejected and put away, was 
to be again received into favour by God. 
Two ways are open, by which their citation 
by the Apostle may be understood. Either 
(1) he brings them forward to shew that it 
is consonant with what we know of God’s 
dealings, to receive as His people, those 
who were formerly not His people—that 
this may now take place with regard to the- 
Gentiles, as it was announced to happen 
with regard to Israel,—and even more,— 
that Israel in this as in so many other 
things was the prophetic mirror in which 
God foreshewed on a small scale His future 
dealings with mankind, —or (2) he adduces 
them from mere applicability to the subject 
in hand, implying, ‘It has been with us 
Gentiles, as with Israel in the prophet 
Hosea.’ I own I much prefer the former 
of these, as more consonant with the dignity 
of the argument, and as apparently justified 
by the xai,—as He saith also in Hosea, 
implying perhaps that the matter in hand 
was not that directly prophesied in the 
citation, but one analogous to it. Chrys. 
takes the same view: εἰ yap. ἐπὶ τῶν 
ἀγνωμονησάντων μετὰ πολλὰς εὐεργεσίας, 
καὶ ἀλλοτριωθέντων, καὶ τὸ λαὸς εἶναι 
ἀπυλωλεκότων, τοσαύτη γέγονεν ἡ μετα- 
βολή, τί ἐκώλυε καὶ τοὺς οὐ μετὰ τὴν 
οἰκείωσιν ἀλλοτριωθέντας, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἀρχῆς 





24—30. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 413 


tat υἱοὶ θεοῦ ζῶντος. 27 “Hoaias δὲ " κράζει " ὑπὲρ 
τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ *’Kav ἢ ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν υἱῶν ᾿Ισραὴλ 


ὡς ἡ γ ἄμμος τῆς " θαλάσσης, τὸ "ὑπόλειμμα σωθήσεται. 


v Jobni. 15 al. 

w = 2 Cor. 1.6 
vii. 4. Phil. 
sit 7 

x Isa. x. 22, 


23. 
28 λό EG τς ς Σ ed : ye ὃ y a ae 
Ὁ > x. 8 only. 
λόγον yap * συντελῶν καὶ “4 συντέμνων [ἐν © δικαιοσύνῃ" 2,8 only. 
4 ΄ ὰ ΄ , ΄ δὲν a a 12. see Heb. 
ὅτι λόγον “ συντετμημένον] ποιήσει κύριος ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. x12. 


i zas above (y). 
29 καὶ καθὼς ' προείρηκεν Ησαΐας § Ei μὴ κύριος σαβαὼθ , Matt. vii. 


a here only. 


h2 , ο΄ κα , « τ' ᾽ὃ Ἀ 2 Θ \ Mic. v.7, 8al. 
ἐγκατελύπεν LY σπέρμα, ως «οοομᾷ ἂν eyeVv?) NMEV KAU ὃ constr. part., 
ὡς Γόμοῤῥα ἂν ' ὡμοιώθ 80 Κ Τί οὖν * ἐροῦμεν ; ὅτι « seis x23 
ως ομορρα αν § μοιωσήμεν. υουν ερουμέν ; OTL nae Tea. 
ii. 17. Jer. vi. 11. Isa. xxviii. 22. ἃ here only. I. c. e Acts xvii. 31 reff. 
= 2 Pet. iii. 2. Jude 17 +. ΕἾΝ . ἃ; Ot h 2 Cor. iv. 9 reff. i = Acts xiv. 
1l. Heb.ii.17. elsw. Mt. Mk. L. only. Ps. xxvii. 1. k ch, iii. 5 reff. 


[aft κληθ. ins ουτοι P: αὐτοι 71-3 arm. } 

27. rec καταλειμμα (corrn to LXX where no MS has υπολ.), with DFKL[P] &-corr} 
rel Thdrt: ἐγκαταλειμμα Chr: υποκαταλειμμα 47: txt ABR! Eus,. 

28. om ev δικαιοσυνη ott λογον συντετμήμενον (by mistake from similarity of συν- 
τεμνων and συντετμήμενον Ὁ) ABN! [471] Syr copt Eus, Damase Aug, (th has the ver 
thus: guia consummatum et precisum verbum enarret Deus in mundo: om συντελ. to 
Aoyoy Thdrt) : ins DFKL[P]&3 rel latt syr goth [arm(omg o7z) Euthal, | Kus, Chr, Gc 


Thl Jer Ambrst Bede. 
29. εγκατελειπεν ΑΒΕ KL P nj. 
AFL[P Euthal-ms]. 


ἀλλοτρίους ὄντας, κληθῆναι, K. ὑπακού- 
σαντας τῶν αὐτῶν ἀξιωθῆναι ; Hom. xvi. p. 
618. The fem. τήν is used because the 
Jewish people was typified by the daughter 
of the prophet, Hos. i. 6, who was called 
Lo-ruhamah, ‘not having obtained mercy.’ 
The sense, not the words of the LXX, is 
quoted. By ἐν τῷ tTémm.... ἐκεῖ must 
not I think be understood, in any particular 
place, as Judea, nor among any peculiar 
people, as the Christian Church: but as a 
general assertion, that in every place where 
they were called ‘not His people,’ there 
they shall be called ‘ His people.’ 

27.| A proof from Scripture of the fact, 
that a part of Israel are excluded. Here 
again the analogy of God’s dealings, in the 
partial deliverance of Israel from captivity, 
and their great final deliverancefrom death 
eternal, is the key to the interpretation of 
the prophecy cited. The words are spoken 
by Isaiah of the return from captivity of 
a remnant of Israel. 28.] The refer- 
ence of this latter part of the citation is not 
very plain. It is almost verbatim from tle 
LXX, the γάρ (which is found in AN but 
not in B) being perhaps adopted by the 
Apostle as continuing the testimony, = 
‘for the prophet proceeds, —and the LXX 
having κατάλειμμα for ὑπόλειμμα (see di- 
gest), and ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ ὅλῃ for ἐπὶ τῆς 
yins. The literal rendering of the Heb. is, 
“ The consummation (or consumption) de- 
cided, overfloweth with righteousness: for 
a decision (or consumption) and a decree 
shall the Lord Jehovah of Sabaoth make 
in the midst of all the land.” As it stands 
in the LXX, the meaning seems to be, 


εγενηθεν B'(Tischdf). ομοιωθημεν 


the Lord will complete and soon fulfil 
His word in righteousness (viz. his denun- 
ciation of consuming the Assyrian and 
liberating the remnant of His people): 
for the Lord will make a rapidly accom- 
plished word in the midst of all the land. 
The E. V., Calv., and others, render λόγον, 
‘ work,’ a signification which it never has. 
If the above interpretation be correct, and 
the view which I have taken of the analogy 
of prophecy, it will follow that this verse is 
adduced by the Apostle as confirming the 
certainty of the salvation of the remnant 
of Israel, seeing that now, as then, He 
with whom a thousand years are as a day, 
will swiftly accomplish His prophetic word 
in righteousness. 29. | Another proof 
of a remnant to be saved, from a preceding 
part of the same prophecy. (Such seenis 
to be the sense of προείρ. here,—and so 
Beza, Calv., Grot.,al.; De W., Thol.,al., pre- 
fer ‘ prophesied ;? but surely there is no ne- 
cessity for affixing an unusual sense to the 
word, where the ordinary one (see all the 
reff.) suits much better.) “ ὁμοιοῦσθαι 
ὡς is a construction in which two ideas, ‘to 
become as,’ and ‘to become like to,’ are 
mingled, as in Heb. 3 5v02, Ps. xlix. 18, 
21; compare Mark iv. 30.” Tholuck. On 
‘Jehovah Sabaoth,’ Bengel remarks, “ Pro 
Hebraico nx2g in libro 1 Sam. et Jesaia 
σαβαώθ ponitur ; in reliquis libris omnibus 
παντοκράτωρ. (This is not strictly the 
case: δυνάμεων is found in several places: 
and σαβαώθ occurs in Zech. xiii. 2 BN.) 

The citation is verbatim from the 
LXX, who have put σπέρμα tor the Heb. 
Ty, ‘residuum,’—implying ἃ renmant 


414 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. ΙΧ. 

1 = ch, xii. 13. ἔθνη τὰ μὴ ™ διώκοντα ™ δικαιοσύνην, " κατέλαβεν δικαιο- 

XIV. iv. "μι. ΄ / \ / \ 

titi σύνην, δικαιοσύνην δὲ τὴν 5 ἐκ πίστεως" 531 Ἰσραὴλ δὲ 
1ess. Κ΄, 

ἰδ. δ 1 διώκων νόμον δικαιοσύνης, Peis νόμον οὐκ P41 ἔφθασεν. 


χχτίϊ. 8. 
m1 Tim. vi. 11. 2 Tim. ti. 22. ; n = 1 Cor. ix. 24. Phil. iii. 12. Exod. xv. 9. Deut. xxviii. 45. 
o=ch.x.6. Gal. ii. 8. Be PS Phil. iii. 16. Dan. xii. 12 Theod. qas above (p). ‘Thess. iv. 
5. ν΄. ἄχρι, 2 Cor. x. 14. w. emt, Matt. xii. 28|jL. 1 Thess. ii. 16 only. Eccl. viii. 14. Dan. iv. 25 (28) Theod. 


(30. for την, της F.] 

81. [δικαιοσ. bef 1st vouoy P: δικαιοσυνὴν omg vou. k 3] rec aft 2nd νόμον ins 
δικαιοσυνὴς (corrn for clearness’ sake? see notes), with F(but with a mark inserted 
hefore it) KL[P]X? rel D3-lat vulg syrr goth [arm Euthal-ms]} Chr, ‘hdor-mops, Thdrt 
(ec Thi Jer, Aug,: om ABDGN! [47] copt Procop, Damase Orig-int, Ambrst-comm 


Sedul.[—om ers vou. also o 17. ] 


for a fresh planting. 30—33.] The 
Apostle takes up again the fact of Israel’s 
failure, and shews how their own pursuit 
of righteousness never attained to right- 
eousness, being hindered by their self- 
vighteousness and rejection of Christ. 
These verses do not contain, as Chrys., 
(Ee., Theophyl., the τοῦ χωρίου παντὸς 
Avois—this λύσις is simply in the creative 
right of God, as declared ver. 18 ;—but 
they are a comment on ver. 16, that it is 
not of him that willeth, nor of him that 
runneth ; the same similitude of running 
being here resumed, and it being shewn 
that, so far from man’s running having 
decided the matter, the Jews who pressed 
forward to the goal attained not, whereas 
the Gentiles, who never ran, have attained. 
If this is lost sight of, the connexion of 
the whole is much impaired, and from 
doctrinal prejudice, a wholly wrong turn 
given to the Apostle’s line of reasoning, — 
who resolves the awful fact of Israel’s ex- 
clusion not into any causes arising from 
man, but into the supreme will of God,— 
which will is here again distinctly asserted 
in the citation from Isaiah (see below). 

What then shall we say? ‘This ques- 
tion, when followed by a question, implies 
of course a rejection of the thought thus 
suggested-—but when, as here, by an asser- 
tion, introduces a further unfolding of the 
argument from what has preceded. I can- 
not agree with Flatt, Olsh., al., that ὅτι 
k.T.A. is to be regarded as a question: for, 
as Riickert has observed, (1) Paul could not 
put interrogatively, as a supposition in 
answer to Ti οὖν ἐροῦμεν, a sentiment not 
intimated in nor following from the fore- 
going; (2) there would be no answer to 
the question thus asked, but the διὰ τί, ver. 
32, would ask another question, proceeding 
on the assumption of that which had been 
before by implication negatived ; and (3) 
the answer, ὅτι K.7.A. ver. 32, would touch 
only the case of the Jews, and not that of 
the Gentiles, also involved, on this suppo- 
sition, in the question. That the Gentiles 
(not, as Meyer and Fritz., ‘some Gentiles’), 


ν 
᾽ 


which pursue not after (see especially reff 


εφθοχεν F(and 6), 


Phil.) righteousness (not justification, 
which is merely ‘the being accounted 
righteous,’ ‘the way in which righteous- 
ness is ascribed :’ not this, but righteous- 
ness itself, is the aim and end of the race) 
attainea to (the whole transaction being 
regarded as a historical fact) righteous- 
ness, even (δέ brings in something new, 
different from the foregoing, but not 
strongly opposed to it, see Winer, edn. 6. 
§ 53. 7. b:—the opposition here, though 
fine and delicate, is remarkable: righteous- 
ness—not however that arising from their 
own works, but the righteousness, &c.) the 
righteousness which is of faith : 31.] 
—but Israel, pursuing after the law of 
righteousness (what is the νάμος δικαιο- 
avvns? Certainly not = δικαιοσύνη νόμου, 
as Chrys., Theodoret, (Xcum., Calv., Beza, 
Bengel, by the so-called, but as Thol. 
observes, unlogical figure of Hypallage :— 
it may mean either (1) as Meyer, Fritz., 
Thol., au zdeal law of righteousness, a 
Justifying law,—or (2) as Chrys., al.,—see 
above,—the law of Moses, thus described : 
or (3) which I believe to be the true account 
of the words, νόμος δικαιοσ'. is put regard- 
ing the Jews, rather than merely δικαιοσ., 
because in their case there was a prescribed 
norm of apparent righteousness, viz. the 
law, in which rule and way they, as matter 
of fact, followed after it. The above, as I 
believe, mistaken interpretations arise from 
supposing νόμον δικαιοσ. to be = δικαιοσ.» 
which it is not. The Jews followed after, 
aimed at the fulfilment of ‘the law of 
righteousness, thinking by the observance 
of that law to acquire righteousness. See 
ch. x. 3, 5, and note; and eompare John’s 
coming ἐν ὁδῷ δικαιοσύνης, Matt. xxi. 32), 
arrived not at [notice the change in the 
verb] the law (fell far short even of 
that law, which was given them. It is 
surprising, with ch. x. 3—5 before them, 
how De Wette and Tholuek can pronounce 
the reading νόμον without δικαιοσύνης 
to be without sense. The Jews followed 
after, thinking to perform it entirely, 
their νόμος δικαιοσύνης : which δικαίοσ. ἐκ 
τοῦ νόμου the Apostle defines, ch. x. 5, to 


ABDFE 
KL[P]x 
abcaf 

ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


91---ὐῦ, 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


415 


327 Oud TL; OTL οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως, ἀλλ᾽ " ws ἐξ ἔργων [νόμου] τ Paul, 1 Cor 
7 (bis 


'προςέκοψαν τῷ λίθῳ τοῦ ἃ προςκόμματος, 


Vi. 
33 καθὼς oe xi. i 
== Philem. 14. 


γέγραπται " Ἰδοῦ Oni ἐν Σιὼν λίθον "προςκόμματος i t Matt. iv. δ 


 L. vii. 27. 


καὶ W πέτραν *X σκανδάλου, καὶ ὁ Y πιστεύων Y ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ οὐ a 


- καταισχυνθήσεται. 


uch. xiv. 13,20. 1 Cor. viii. 9. I Pet. il. 8 only. 
w ] Pet. ii. 8. 


(from 1. c.-A® Ald. pean : 


= Matt. xviii. 7. ch. xiv. 13 al. 
mo — Che Veo. ky bak 


0. ch. xiv. 
21. 1 Pet. ii. 
8 only. Prov. 
iii. 23. 
Isa. xxix. 21. ΟΝ v Isa. (viii. 14) xxviii. 10, 
Ps. xlviii. 14. y ch. x. 11 sleet 6 


Ps, xxiv. 20. 


32. om vouov (see notes) ΑΒ ΕΝ [47-txt] vule copt [Orig- int 4] Jer, AUgsepe Ambrst : 
ins DKL[P 8° rel syrr goth [arm] Chr,(ov« εἶπεν ᾽Εξ ἔργων, ἀλλ᾽ Ὡς ἐξ ἔργων νόμου 
δεικνὺς ὅτι οὐδὲ ταύτην εἶχον τὴν See ae Thdor-mops, Thdrt [Damase] (ec Thi. 


mposexowyev X! |, προεκ. 0. | 


D3KL[P JX? τοὶ vulg [fuld] 


syrr Chr, Thdor-mops, Thdrt Aug, Jer, Sedul : 


rec aft mposexoWay ins yap (see note), with 
om 


AB D'[and lat] FR? al [47-txt | ἐσ h tol) copt goth [ Damase Orig-int, | Ambrst. 
33. rec ins mas bef ο πιστευων (insd to conform this ver to ch x. 11, rather than omd 
to suit the LxxX: not one ms omits it in ch x. 11), with KL[P] rel D3-lat vulg syr [arm 


EKuthal-ms] Chr, Thdor-mops, 
Orig,[int, Cyr-p,] Damasec Aug, Ambrst. 


be ὁ ποιήσας αὐτὰ ἄνθρωπος ζήσεται ἐν 
αὐτοῖς, but they did not attain to—not in 
this case κατέλαβεν, but ἔφθασεν eis—the 
law—they therefore never attained righte- 
ousness. It is surely far more easy to 
imagine how a transcriber should have in- 
serted δικαιοσύνης, than how he should 
have omitted it. It probably was a mar- 
ginal gloss to explain the second νόμον, 
and thence found its way into the text 
(1 may notice, that ch. x. 3 is not a case 
in point, the νόμον here having an inde- 
pendent and exceptional meaning of its 
own, which introduces an element not 
belonging to ἰδίαν there)). Wherefore? 
because (pursuing it) not by faith, but as 
(used subjectively, as ‘if about to obtain 
their object by: see Winer, edn. 6, § 65. 
9, and compare 2 Pet. i. 3) by [the] works 
[of the law (the evidence for and against 
νόμου is about equally balanced. On the 
one side we have the Apostle’s usage, see 
ch. iii. 28 reff..—and the possibility of a 
transcriber omitting νόμου, either as having 
twice occurred already, or for more com- 
plete antithesis—and on the other we 
have the temptation to correct ἔργων to 
ἔργων νόμου to suit that very usage. On 
the whole I incline to omit νόμου, but do 
not regard the evidence as sufficiently 
clear to justify its exclusion from the 
text)], they stumbled at the stone of 
stumbling (the similitude of a race is still 
kept up. The insertion of ydp has arisen 
from a period being placed at νόμου. It 
confuses the sense, making it appear as if 
the stumbling was the cause of, or at all 
events coincident with, their pursuing οὐκ 
ἐκ π. K.T.A , whereas it was this mistaken 
method of pursuing which caused them to 
stumble against the stone of stumbling. 
Thus we have instances in the Greek 


Thdrt Jer, : 


om ABDFR [47] Syr copt “goth eeth 
ov μη καταισχυνθη (see LXX) DF. 


chariot races, of competitors, by an error 
in judgment in driving, striking against 
the στήλη round which the chariots were 
to turn, see Soph. Elect. 730 ἢ, There 
is a close analogy between our text and 
the exhortation in Heb. xii. 1 f. There, 
after the triumphs of faith have been re- 
lated, we are exhorted to run with patience 
the race set before us, looking to Jesus, 
the Author and Finisher of our faith: 
where notice, that the sacred Writer seems 
to have had in his mind the same com- 
parison of Him to the pillar or goal, to 
which the eyes of the runners would be 
exclusively directed). 33.] Appeal 
to the prophecy of Isaiah, as justifying 
this comparison of Christ to a stone of 
stumbling. The citation is gathered from 
two places in Isaiah. The ‘stone of stum- 
bling and rock of offence,’ mentioned ch. 
vili. 14, is substituted for the ‘ corner-stone 
elect, precious,’ of ch. xxviii. 16. The 
solution of this is very simple. Isa. viii. 14 
was evidently interpreted by the Jews 
themselves of the Messiah: for Simeon, 
Luke ii. 34, when speaking of the child 
Jesus as the Messiah, expressly adduces 
the prophecy as about to be fulfilled. 
Similarly Isa. xxvii. 16 was interpreted 
by the Chaldee Targum, the Babylonish 
Talmud (Tract Sanhedrin, fol. xxxviii. 1, 
Stuart), ὅς. What was there then to pre- 
vent the Apostle from giving to this Stone, 
plainly foretold as to be laid in Zion, that 
designation which prophecy also justifies, 
and which bears immediately on the matter 
here in hand? The translation of Isa. viii. 
14 is after the Heb.,—the LXX having 
apparently read differently. See 1 Pet. ii. 
6—8, where the same two si are joined, 
and also Ps. exviii. (exvii.) 2 ov 
καταισχυνθήσεται, LXX (Isa. ae 16), 


410 


a = here only. 
Sir. xviii. 31. 


Jude 21. 

ς Acts xxii. 5. 
Gal. iv. 15. 
Col. iv. 13. 

d = Johnii. 
17, from Ps. 
Ixviil. 9. 

2 Cor. vii. 7, 
11 


f 


» | ’ ᾿ 
ov kat δεπίγνωσιν. 


ΠΡῸΣ .- POMAIOT®S: 


Χ; 


X. ΟΑδελφοί, ἡ μὲν ὃ εὐδοκία τῆς ἐμῆς καρδίας καὶ 
Matt. xi.28 9 δέησις πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ὃ εἰς σωτηρίαν. 
5. μαρτυρῶ γὰρ αὐτοῖς ὅτι 4" ζῆλον " θεοῦ ἔχουσιν, ἀλλ᾽ 
δ.» ἀγνοοῦντες γὰρ τὴν τοῦ | θεοῦ 
ἱ δικαιοσύνην, καὶ τὴν ἰδίαν 


[δικαιοσύνην] * ζητοῦντες 


ἱστῆσαι, τῇ ἰ δικαιοσύνῃ τοῦ ᾿θεοῦ οὐχ ™ ὑπετάγησαν. 


e 2 Cor. xi. 2. see Acts xxii. 3. f Acts iii. 17 reff. g ch. iii. 20 reff. h Acts xiii. 
27 reff. ich. i. 17 reff. k = Acts xili 8 reff. 1= ch. iii. 31. Heb. x.9. Num. 
xxx. 14. m = 1 Cor. xv. 28. 2 Macc. xiii. 23. see ch. viii. 7 reff. 


Cuap. X. 1. ree aft ἢ Senois ins ἡ (corrn: see note), with KL rel Chr Thdrt 


[ Euthal-ms Damasc: μου P]: om ABDFR [47 arm]. 
rec for autwy, Tov ἰσραηλ (explanatory gloss), with KL rel 


an erasure by δὲ], 


προς Tov θν is written over 


Thdrt Ge Thi: txt ABDF[P]8 17 [47-txt] latt syrr copt arm Chr, Cyr[-c] Damase 


[ Orig-int, | Ambrst Augsepe Pel Sedul Bede. 


rec ins ἐστιν bef εἰς σωτηριαν, with 


ΚΙΓΡΊΝ rel syr Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Thl @c]: om ABDFR! [47-txt] Syr goth 


[ (eth) arm] Cyr[-c Damasc] Aug). 
3. for yap, δε A 57 Leo. 


Clem, Cyr{-p,] Bas, Chr, Procop, Damasc [Ambrst | Augszpe : 


om 2nd δικαιοσυνην ABD[P 47-txt] vulg copt arm 


ins FKLN rel [D-lat'] 


syrr goth eth Chr, Thdrt Ge Thi [ Orig-int, | Iren{-int, |-mss Tert, Ambr, Aug,, and 
yrr ¢ 4 g-int, | 1 1 1 AUS. 


att ζητουντες m. 


ov μὴ καταισχυνθῇ, gives a secondary 
meaning of the Heb. wm x%, ‘shall not 
make haste: 1. 6. shall not fly in terror, 
shall not be confounded. 

Cuap. X. 1—138.] The Jews, though 
zealous for God, are yet ignorant of God’s 
righteousness (1—3), as revealed to them 
in their own Seriptures (4—18). 

1.1 Brethren (‘nunc quasi superata pre- 
cedentis tractationis severitate coiiter 
appellat fratres.’ Bengel), the inclination 
of my heart (εὐδοκία is seldom, if ever, used 
to signify the motion of desire, but imports 
the rest of approving satisfaction. Pos- 
sibly there is here a mixture of construc- 
tions: the Apostle’s εὐδοκία would be their 
salvation itself,—his δέησις πρὸς τὸν θ. 
ὑπὲρ αὐτ. was εἰς σωτ. The μέν re- 
quires a corresponding δέ, not expressed, 
but implied in the course of vv. 2, 3, where 
the obstacle to their σωτήρ. is brought 
out), and my supplication to God on their 
behalf (Israel, see cli. ix. 32, mposexopav), 
(is) for (their) salvation (lit. ‘towards 
salvation.’ The insertion of the art. 
after δέησις has apparently been an over- 
careful grammatical correction: it is by 
no means universal in the N. 'T’., even where 
the Greek writers insert it,—and here, 
seeing that there could be no δεήσεις to 
any other than God, the omission would 
be more natural. τοῦ Ἰσραήλ has been 
substituted by the adoption of a gloss: 
ἐστίν to complete the sense). The Apostle’s 
meaning seems to be, to destroy any im- 
pression which his readers may have re- 
ceived unfavourable to his love of his own 
people, from the stern argument of the 
former chapter. 2. For (reason why 
1 thus sympathize with their efforts, though 


misdirected) I bear witness to them that 
they have a zeal for God (for this meaning 
of the gen. see reff., especially 2 Cor. xi. 2, 
and note there), but not according to (in 
accordance with, founded upon, and carried 
on with) Knowledge (accurate apprehen- 
sion of the way of righteousness as revealed 
to them). 8.] For (explanation of 
ov κατ᾽ ἐπίγν.) not recognizing (‘ being 
ignorant of’ is liable to the objection, 
that it may represent to the reader a state 
of excusable ignorance, whereas they had 
it before them, and overlooked it) the 
righteousness of God (not, the way of 
justification appointed by God, as Stuart, 
al.: but that only righteousness which 
avails before God, which becomes ours in 
justification ; see De Wette’s note, quoted 
on ch. i. 17), and seeking to set up their 
own righteousness (again, not justifica- 
tion, but righteousness: that, namely, de- 
scribed ver. 5; not that it was ever theirs, 
but the Apostle speaks subjectively. Not- 
withstanding the Ms. authority against 
δικαι. after ἰδίαν, it would seem as if it 
had been written for emphasis’ sake by the 
Apostle, and omitted on account of the 
word occurring thrice in the sentence), they 
were not subjected (historical: implying, 
but not itself bearing, a perfect sense. 
The passage,—not in a middle sense, as 
De Wette and Thol.,—expresses the result 
only ; it might be themselves, or it might 
be some other, that subjected them,—but 
the historical fact was, that they were not 
subjected) to the righteousness of God 
(the dcx. τ. θ. being considered as a rude or 
method, to which it was necessary to con- 
form, but to which they were never sub- 
jected as they were to the law of Moses), 


ABDF 
KL[P jx 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[11] 


]--ῦ. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


417 


4. π aN \ , x b.? ὃ ΄, ‘ a 
TEAOS yap νομου χρίιστος εις ὑκαιοσυνην TAVTL TW n = 1 Pet. i. 9. 


πιστεύοντι. 


fe) ΄ \ ΄ 
5 Μωυσῆς γὰρ “5 γράφει τὴν Ρ δικαιοσύνην 
\ le “ e ΄ ΄ 
τὴν Ῥέκ Ῥνόμου, “ ὅτι 0 ποιήσας αὐτὰ ἄνθρωπος ζήσεται 
p Phil. iii. (6) 9. see Gal. iii. 21. 


see note and 
2 Cor. iii. 13. 
o constr., John 
1.46. see 
Luke xviii, 


q Lev. xviii. 5. see Neh. ix. 29; Ezek. xx. 21, 


5. rec ins tov bef vouov, with DFKL[P] rel [arm Chr Thdrt Damasc]: om (A)BN. 


—for vouov, πιστεως A. 
Ambrst Cassiod, ]. 


om ανθρωπος F Syr Chr, Hil. 


4—13.] The δικαιοσύνη τ. θ. is now 
explained to be summed up in that Saviour 
who was declared to them in their own 
Scriptures. For (establishing what was 
last said, and at the same time unfolding 
the δικ. τ. θ. in a form which rendered 
them inexcusable for its non-recognition) 
Christ is the end of the Law (i. e. the 
object at which the law aimed: see -the 
similar expression 1 Tim. i. 5, τὸ τέλος 
τῆς παραγγελίας ἐστὶν ἀγάπη. Various 
meanings have been given to τέλος. (1) 
End, tinis, chronological: ‘Christ is the 
termination of the law. So the latt., 
Augustine, Luther, al., Olsh., Mever, Fritz., 
De Wette, al. But this meaning, unless 
understood in its pregnant sense, that 
Christ, who has succeeded to the law, was 
also the object and aim of the law, says too 
little. In this pregnant sense Tholuck 
takes the word ‘end,’ the end in time and 
in aim. It may beso; but I prefer simply 
to take in the idea of Christ being the end, 
i. e. aim of the law, as borne out by the 
following citations, in which nothing is said 
of the transitoriness of the law, but much 
of the notices which it contains of right- 
eousness by faith in Christ. (2) Clem. 
ΑἸοχ., --- πλήρωμα yap v. xp. εἰς δικ. π. τῷ 
mot., De Div. Serv. § 9, p. 940 P. 
Theodoret, Calv., Grot., al., take τέλος for 
“ accomplishment,’ a sense included in the 
general meaning, but not especially treated 
here,—the following quotations not having 
any reference to it. (8) The meaning, end 
in the sense of object or aim, above adopted, 
is that of the Syr., Chrys., Theophy]l., Beza, 
Bengel, al. Chrys. observes: εἰ yap τοῦ 
νόμου τέλος ὃ χριστός, ὃ τὸν χριστὸν οὐκ 
ἔχων, κἂν ἐκείνην (1. 6. δικαιοσύνην) δοκῇ 
ἔχειν, οὐκ ἔχει: ὁ δὲ τὸν χριστὸν ἔχων, 
κἂν μὴ ἢ κατωρθωκὼς τὸν νόμον, τὸ πᾶν 
εἴληφε. καὶ γὰρ τέλος ἰατρικῆς ὑγιεία. 
ὥςπερ οὖν 6 δυνάμενος ὑγιῆ ποιεῖν, κἂν 
μὴ τὴν ἰατρικὴν ἔχῃ, τὸ πᾶν ἔχει. ὁ δὲ μὴ 
εἰδὼς θεραπεύειν, κἂν μετιέναι δοκῇ τὴν 
τέχνην, τοῦ παντὸς ἐξέπεσεν: οὕτω ἐπὶ 
τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῆς πίστεως, ὁ μὲν ταύτην 
ἔχων, καὶ τὸ ἐκείνου τέλος ἔχει" 6 δὲ ταύ- 
τῆς ἔξω ὥν, ἀμφοτέρων ἐστὶν ἀλλότριος. 
Hom. xvii. p. 622. νόμου is here plainly 
the law of Moses: see Middleton in loc.) 

Vou. LI, 


ott bef τ. dix. τ. εκ v. ADIN! 17! vulg Damase [Orig-int, 
om αὑτὰ (as LXX-AB(not Ed-vat [&c])) A D-gr δὲ} vulg 
Damase [Orig-int,]: eam D?-lat copt[-wilk] goth Cassiod, : 


ταυτα 17! m! eth. 


unto righteousness (1. 6. 50 asto bringabout 
righteousness, which the law could not do) 
to (dat. commodi) every one that believeth. 
** Had they only used the law, instead of 
abusing it, it would have been their best 
preparation for the Saviour’s advent. For 
indeed, by reason of man’s natural weak- 
ness, it was always powerless to justify. 
It was never intended to make the sinner 
righteous before God; but rather to impart 
to him a knowledge of his sinfulness, and 
to awaken in his heart earnest longings for 
some powerful deliverer. Thus used, it 
would have ensured the reception of the 
Messiah by those who now reject Him. 
Striving to attain to real holiness, and 
increasingly conscious of the impossibility 
of becoming holy by an imperfect obedience 
tothe law’s requirements, they would gladly 
have recognized the Saviour as the end of 
the law for righteousness.” Ewbank. 

5.] For (proof of the impossibility of legal 
righteousness, as declared even in the law 
itself) Moses describes (reff.) the righte- 
ousness which is of (abstr.—not implying 
that it has ever been attained, but rather 
presupposing the contrary) the law, that 
(ὅτι recitantis, not γράφ. ὅτι, in which case 
we should have αὐτήν. The eam of some 
versions has apparently arisen from mis- 
understanding ὅτι) the man who hath 
done them (the ordinances of the law) 
shall live in (in the strength of, by 
means of, as his status) it (the righteous- 
ness accruing by such doing of them). 

As regards the life here promised, the 
Jewish interpreters themselves included in 


it morethan mereearthly felicity inCanaan, 


and extended their view to a better life 
hereafter: see Wetst.inloc. Earthly feli- 
city it doubtless did impart, compare Deut. 
xxx. 20; but even there, as Thol. observes, 
‘ life’ seems to be a general promise, and 
length of days a particular species of 
felicity. “In the N. T.,” he continues, 
‘this idea (of life) is always exalted into 
that of life blessed and eternal :—see Matt. 
vil. 14; xviii. 8, 9; Luke x. 28.” 

6—8.] The righteousness whieh is of faith 
is described, in the words spoken in Scrip- 
ture by Moses of the commandment given 
by. him,—as not dependent.on a long and 

EE 


4.18 HPO POMAIOT®2. X: 

coh. ἐν αὐτῇ. ὅ ἡ δὲ "ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοσύνη οὕτως λέγει, oo 
Gal. iii. 8. MA εἶ ξ bs 

« Devi. 23%. 5 Μὴ εἴπῃς ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου Tis ἀναβήσεται εἰς τὸν abedt 
πον ἐδ » Ν lal ἕξ 

tacit — οὐρανόν ; " τοῦτ᾽ ἔστιν χριστὸν " καταγαγεῖν" 77 Tis m πον 

Ὁ = ch. 1x. 8. 


y Acts xxiii. 15 reff. 


rec (for avrn) αὐτοῖς (from LxX), with DFL[KP]N§ rel [syrr_arm(Treg) Chr, Thdrt 
Ambrst]: txt ABN! 17 [47] vulg D?-lat copt goth arm[-ed-ven(Sz) Orig-int,] 


Damase Pel Sedul Bede. 


difficult process of search, but near to 
every man, and in every man’s power to 
attain. I believe the account of the follow- 
ing citation will be best found by bearing 
in mind that the Apostle is speaking of 
Christ as the end of the law tor righteous- 
ness to the believer. He takes as a con- 
firmation of this, a passage occurring in 
a prophetic part of Deut., where Moses is 
foretelling to the Jews the consequences 
of rejecting God’s law, and His mercy to 
them even when under chastisement, if they 
would return to Him. He then describes 
the law in nearly the words cited in this 
verse. Now the Apostle, regarding Christ 
as the end of the law, its great central aim 
and object, quotes these words not merely 
as suiting his purpose, but as bearing, 
where originally used, an ἃ fortiori applica- 
tion to faith in Him who is the end of the 
law, and to the commandment to believe in 
Him, which (1 John iii. 23) is now ‘ God’s 
commandment.’ If spoken of the law as a 
manifestation of God in man’s heart and 
mouth, much more were they spoken of 
Him, who is God manifest in the flesh, the 
end of the law and the prophets. This 
view is, it is true, different from that of 
almost all eminent Commentators, ancient 
and modern,—who regard the words as 
merely adapted or parodied by the Apostle 
as suiting his present purpose. Thus, with 
minor shades of difference, Chrys., Beza, 
Grot., Vatabl., Luther, Wolf, Bengel, 
Koppe, Flatt, Riickert, De Wette, Thol., 
Stuart, Hodge,al. But we must remember 
that it is in this passage Paul’s object not 
merely to deseribe the righteousness which 
is of faith in Christ, but to shew it described 
already in the words of the law, The 
Commentators who have taken more or less 
the view that the Apostle cites the words as 
bearing the sense put on them, are Calvin, 
Calovius, Reiche, Meyer, Fritz., Olsh. 

But the righteousness which is of faith 
speaketh on this wise (personified, as Wis- 
dom in the Prov.), Say not in thine heart 
(i-e. ‘think not,’ a Heb. idiom. The LXX 
has merely λέγων, Wx). The Apostle cites 
freely, giving the explanation of λέγων, viz. 
thinking), Who shall go up to heaven 
(LXX, avaB. ἡμῖν( ἡμῶν, A) eis τ. οὐρ., see 
Prov. xxx. 4) !—that is (see note above :— 
that imports in its full and unfolded mean- 


ing), to bring down Christ :—or who shall 
go down into the abyss (LXX, ris διαπε- 
pacer ἡμῖν εἰς τὸ πέραν τῆς θαλάσσης ; The 
Apostle substitutes τίς κατ. εἰς τ. ἄβ. as 
the direct contrast to τίς av. εἰς τ. ovp., as 
in ref. Ps.; see also Amos ix. 2:—and as 
better suiting the interpretation which 
follows) ?—that is, to bring up Christ from 
the dead. There is some difficulty in assign- 
ing the precise view with which the Apostle 
introduces these questions. Tholuck re- 
marks, “ The different interpretations may 
be reduced to this, that the questions are 
regarded either (1) as questions of unbelief, 
or (2) as questions of embarrassment, or 
(3) as questions of anwiety.” The first 
view is represented by De Wette, who says, 
“In what sense these questions, from which 
the righteousness which is of faith dis- 
suades men, are to be taken, is plain from 
ver. 9, where the Resurrection of Christ is 
asserted as the one most weighty point of 
historical Christian belief :—they would be 
arate of unbelief, which regards this 
uct as not accomplished, or as now first 
to be accomplished. Thus also, probably, 
are we to understand the first question, as 
applying to the Incarnation of Christ.” 
This is more or less also the view of Chrys., 
Theodoret, Theophyl., Ec., Erasm., Estius, 
Semler, Koppe, Meyer, al., Riickert (who 
refers the doubt or the unbelief to the full 
accomplishment of redemption by the 
Incarnation and Resurrection of Christ), 
Reiche, and KGllner (who refer catay. to 
the ascended Saviour, thereby destroying 
the symmetry of the whole,—because the 
latter question undoubtedly refers to bring- 
ing Christ not from a present but from a 
past state, from which He has historically 
come). (2) The second view, that they 
are questions of embarrassment, is taken 
by L. Capellus, Wolf, Rosenm., and Stuart, 
which last says, “The whole (of Moses’s 
saying) may be summed up in one word, 
omitting all figurative expression: viz. the 
commandment is plain and accessible. You 
can have, therefore, no excuse for neglect- 
ing it. Soin the case before us. Justi- 
fication by faith in Christ is a plain and 
intelligible doctrine. It is not shut up in 
mysterious language.... It is like what 
Moses says of the statutes which he gave 
to Israel, plain, intelligible,accessible .... 


6—9. 


, > Ά Ua ᾽ Ν Ρ 
Υ καταβήσεται εἰς τὴν ἄβυσσον ; "ἃ τοῦτ᾽ ἔστιν ΡΟΣ — Eph. is. 


ἐκ νεκρῶν γ᾽ ἀναγαγεῖν. 


εὐ can / »" 7 co , 
τὸ ῥῆμά ἐστιν, ἐν τῷ στόματί σου καὶ ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου" 
mF lj \ en wn 
υ τρῦτ᾽ ἔστιν τὸ ὃ ῥῆμα τῆς πίστεως ὃ 


xxix. 3. : 
i. 25. (John vi. 63. xiv. 10, plur.) 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


z Deut. xxx. 14. constr., John iii. 23. vi. 19, 23. 


419 


Ps. 
CXXXVili. 8. 


8 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ; Ξ Ἔνγγύς σοῦ x Luke viii. 31 


only, exc. 
Rev. ix. l, 
y 9 ΡῈ 4 ll pe 

Ἢ en. i. 2. 
κηρύσσομεν OTL τ ΠΡ xiii 


a 


20: . Ps: 
a= Acts x. 37.. 1 Pet. 


* 8. aft λέγει ins ἡ γραφη Ὁ [17] vulg(not demid tol) [arm] Orig,[-int, ] Cyr[-p,(om,)] 
1 


Thdrt Hil, Ambrst Pel Sedul Bede: aft τι, F [copt eth]. 


st ἐστιν bef lst ra 


pnua (see LXX) DF [vulg goth arm Orig-int, Hil, Ambrst]. 


It is brought before the mind and heart of 
every man: and thus he is without excuse 
for unbelief.’ (3) The third view, that 
they are questions of anxiety, is that of 
Calv., Beza, Pisc., Bengel, Knapp, Fritz., 
and Tholuck:—by none perhaps better 
expressed than by Ewbank, Comm. on the 
Ep. to the Rom., Ρ. 74 : “ Personifying the 
great Christian doctrine of free justification 
through faith, he represents it as addressing 
every man who is anxious to obtain salva- 
tion, in the encouraging words of Moses: 
‘Say not in thine heart, (it says to such an 
one) τοῦς |... ? In other words, ‘ Let not 
the man, who sighs for deliverance from 
his own sinfulness, suppose that the accom- 
plishment of some impossible task is re- 
᾿ quired of him, in order to enjoy the bless- 
ings of the Gospel. Let him not think 
that the personal presence of the Messiah 
is necessary to ensure his salvation. Christ 
needs not to be brought down from heaven, 
or up from the abyss, to impart to him 
forgiveness and holiness. No. Our Chris- 
tian message contains no impossibilities. 
We do not mock the sinner by offering him 
happiness on conditions which we know 
that he is powerless to fulfil. We tell him 
that Christ’s word is near to him: so near, 
that he may speak of it with his mouth, 
and meditate on it with his heart..... 
Is there any thing above human power in 
such a confession, and in such a belief? 
Surely not. It is graciously adapted to the 
necessity of the very weakest and most sin- 
ful of God’s creatures.” [I will now 
take up the three views afresh, and state 
the objections.] (1) The objection to this 
view, as alleged by Tholuck, is, that in it, 
the contrast with ver. 5 is lost sight of. 
And this is so far just, that it must be 
confessed we thus lose the ideas which the 
Apostle evidently intended us to grasp, 
those of insuperable difficulty in the ac- 
quisition of righteousness by the law, and 
of facility,—by the gospel. Also,—it puts 
too forward the allegation of the great 
matters of historical belief, which are not 
here the central point of the argument, 
but introduced as the objects which faith, 
itself that central point, apprehends. (2) 


The last objection has some force as against 
this view. The regarding the questions as 
mere questions of difficulty and intellectual 
bewilderment does not adequately repre- 
sent the ζῆλος θεοῦ predicated of the Jews, 
on the assumption of which the whole pas- 
sage proceeds. Here, however, it seems to 
me, we have more truth than in (1): for 
the plainness and simplicity of the truth to 
be believed is unquestionably one most im- 
portant element in the righteousness which 
is of faith. (8) Here we have the im- 
portant element just mentioned, not indeed 
made the prominent point of the questions, 
but, as it appears to me, properly and suffi- 
ciently kept in view. The anxious follower 
after righteousness is not disappointed by 
an impracticable code, nor mocked by an 
unintelligible revelation: the word is near 
him, therefore accessible ; plain and sim- 
ple, and therefore apprehensible; and, 
taking (1) into account, we may fairly add, 
—deals with definite historical fact, and 
therefore certain: so that his salvation is 
not contingent on an amount of perform- 
ance which is beyond him, and therefore 
inaccessible: irrational, and therefore in- 
apprehensible: undefined, and therefore 
involved in uncertainty. Thus, it seems 
to me, we satisfy all the conditions of the 
argument: and thus also it is clearly 
brought out, that the words themselves 
could never have been spoken by Moses of 
the righteousness which is-of the law, but 
of that which is of fazth. — 8.1 But 
what says it? The word 1s near thee, 
in thy mouth (to confess), and in thine 
heart (to believe): that is (see above), the 
word of faith (which forms the substratum 
and object of faith, see Gal. 11. 2; 1 Tim. 
iv. 6) which we (ministers of Christ: or 
perhaps, I Paul) preach. This verse has 
been explained in dealing with vv. 6 and 7. 

9.] Because (explanation of the 
word being near thee: so Thol., De Wette, 
Stuart, al. Others take ὅτε here as in ver. 
5, merely recitantis, making ἐὰν k.7.A. the 
ῥῆμα preached. But as Thol. observes, 
(1) the duty of confessing the Lord Jesus 
can hardly be called part of the contents of 
the preaching of faith, but the prominence 


EE 2 


" 4 
420 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. a 
oN b * ’ c 2 A ¢ , / / ’ a 
b=Johnix, ἐὰν » ὁμολογήσῃς “ἐν τῷ “στόματί σου κύριον Ἰησοῦν, 
22. xii. 42. ὃ ᾿ 3 - ᾿ ἷ Ε 
Acts siti. καὶ ἃ πιστεύσῃς ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ σου “ὅτι ὁ θεὸς αὐτὸν 
εξ ch. χν. 6 e 2 = ΄ = / \ ΄ 
only. ἦς, ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν, σωθήσῃ: 10 καρδίᾳ γὰρ πιστεύεται 
ΧΧχΧΥ . de > , / \ ¢ a 
dactsix.26 Fels δικαιοσύνην, στόματι δὲ " ὁμολογεῖται ἴ εἰς σωτηρίαν. 
rei. 
= ,ὔ \ ς \ “ « / ᾿ 8 A 
oar” 11 reyes yap ἡ γραφὴ Ilds ὁ ἢ πιστεύων ἐπ αὐτῷ ov 
f vv. 1, 4. h , 12 > ΄ ᾿ i \ > 
g sing. ch. ix καταισχυνθήσεται. lov yap ἐστιν ἱ διαστολὴ ᾿Ιου- 
(ren, 
h ch, ix. 33, : ἡ a ae ; are , 4 
fram in daiov τε καὶ “EXAnvoss ὁ yap αὐτὸς κύριος πάντων 
“iii. 16. κα > , \ f , 
vee Sir.ii.10. Κ πλουτῶν εἰς πάντας τοὺς ' ἐπικαλουμένους αὐτόν. 
ich. iii. 22. 
4 ca xiv. 7 only. =: Exod. viii. 23. k = Luke xii. 21. 1 Tim. vi. 18. Exod. xxx. 15. 


1 Acts ii. 21 reff. JOEL ii. 32. 


9. aft ομολογησὴς ins To pnua Β 71 Clem,. 
B Clem, Cyr[-p(sometimes omg o71)]: so, addg ἐστιν, copt Hil Aug. 
πιστευεις P: -cers m, ots 17.] 


αὐτὸν Ab k ὁ [arm Clem, ] Cyr-jer, Cyrsepe[-p]- 


ins xpiorov A Bas[-ed(omg κυρ.). 


(10. for στόματι, στομα P m. | 


for kuptoy inoour, οτι κυριος ιησους 
aft ἤσουν 
nyepev bef 


11. ins μη bef καταισχυνθησεται (see ch ix. 23 v. r.) DF. 


12. ιουδαιω και ελληνι D[-gr]. 


given to that duty shews a reference to the 
words of Moses: (2) the making ὅτι render 
a reason for ἐγγύς σου «.T.A. suits much 
better the context and form of the passage : 
(3) the fact of the confession with the mouth 
standing first, also shews a reference to 
what has gone before: for when the Apostle 
brings his own arrangement in ver. 10, he 
puts, as natural, the belief of the heart first), 
if thou shalt confess with thy mouth (same 
order as ver. 8) the Lord Jesus (not, I 
think, ‘Jesus as the Lord’ (see the readg 
of B al.): this might very weil be,—and 
κύριον might, as Thol., be the predicate 
placed first for emphasis, did not Paul fre- 
quently use κύριος Ἰησοῦς for ‘the Lord 
Jesus,’—-see (ch. xiv. 14 after a prep.) 
1 Cor. i. 3 al.; Phil. (ii. 19) iii. 20; Col. 
iii. 17 (1 Thess. i.1; iv. 1). 1 Cor. xii. 
3 is hardly an example on the other side: 
see note there, but 2 Cor. iv. 5 is, cf. note 
there), and believe in thine heart that 
God raised Him from the dead (here, 
as in 1 Cor. xv. 14, 16, 17, regarded as the 
great central fact of redemption), thou 
shalt be saved (inherit eternal life). 

Here we have the two parts of the above 
question again introduced: the confession 
of the Lord Jesus implying his having 
come down from heaven, and the belief in 
His resurrection implying His having been 
brought up from the dead. 10.] For 
(refers back to ver. 6, where the above 
words were ascribed to ἡ ἐκ πίστεως δικαιο- 
σύνη, and explains how πιστεύσ. ἐν τῇ 
καρδ. refer to the acquiring of righteous- 
ness) with the heart faith is exercised 
(πιστεύεται, men believe) unto (so as to 
be available to the acquisition of) right- 
eousness, but (q. d. ‘not only so: but 
there must be an outward confession, in 


order for justification to be carried forward 


to salvation’) with the mouth confession 
is made unto salvation. Clearly the 


‘words dix. and owr. are not used here, as 


De W.., al., merely as different terms for 
the same thing, for the sake of the paral- 
lelism: but as Thol. quotes from Crell., 
owr. is the ‘terminus ultimus et apex 
justificationis,’ consequent not merely on 
the act of justifying faith as the other, but 
on a good confession before the worl, 
maintained unto the end. 11.] For 
(proof of the former part of ver. 10) the 
Scripture saith, Every ove who believeth 
on Him shall not be ashamed. πᾶς is 
neither in the LXX nor the Heb., but is 
implied in the indefinite participle. The 
Apostle seems to use it here as taking up 
παντὶ τῷ πιστεύοντι, ver. 4. See ch. 1x. 33. 

12.| For (an explanation of the 
strong expression was ὁ πιστεύων, as im- 
plying the wniversal offer of the riches of 
God’s merey in Christ) there is no dis- 
tinction of Jew and Greek (Gentile. See 
ch. iii. 22); for the same Lord of all (viz. 
Christ, who is the subject here: vv. 9, 11, 
13 cannot be separated. So Orig., Chrys., 
(£c., Calov., Wolf, Bengel, Riick., Meyer, 
Fritz., De Wette, Tholuck, al. So πάντων 
κύριος of Christ, Acts x. 36. Most modern 
Commentators make ὁ αὐτός the subject, 
and κύριος the predicate. But I prefer the 
usual rendering, both on account of the 
strangeness of 6 αὐτός thus standing alone, 
and because this Apostle uses the expres- 
sion 6 αὐτὸς κύριος, 1 Cor. xii. 5, and even 
ὁ αὐτὸς θεός, ib. 6, for ‘the same Lord,’ 
and ‘it is the same God.’ Stuart supplies, 
‘(there is) the same Lord: but this is 
harsh,—and unnecessary, if the participle 
πλουτῶν be taken as συντελῶν κ. συντ. in 
ch. ix, 28) is rich towards all (‘by eis 
is signified the direction in which the 


ABDF 
KL[PJx 
abcdf 

ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 





un 
αλω- 
Voce 
:σ ΠῈ 
L(P]x 
rcdf 
hk] 


no 17 


47] 


10—16. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 42] 
13 la} \ ἃ x be? , \ v , 

πᾶς γὰρ ὃς ἂν ἰἐπικαλέσηται τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου monte ἢ. 
σωθήσεται. 1: πῶς οὖν ᾿ἐπικαλέσωνται πὶ εἰς ὃν οὐκ Tea Dies 


n 2 7, A δὲ ΄ ΠῚ κ᾿ ’ o 2 a 
ἐπίστευσαν ; πῶς δὲ πιστεύσωσιν ἃ οὗ οὐκ ° ἤκουσαν; 
tol Ν \ tA A \ , 

πῶς δὲ ἀκούσωσιν χωρὶς κηρύσσοντος ; 15 πῶς δὲ κηρύξ- 


λιξζομένων ἀγαθά. 


ἅ σου κλύω. 
Ἢ 
n w. εἰς, Acts 


x. 43 reff. 
o = w. gen., 
\ ἧς 9) a θὰ , ‘Oo Pre - here only 
wow ἐὰν μὴ ἀποσταλῶσιν ; καθὼς γέγραπται ‘Os P ὡραῖοι Xen. Mem 
e a , ἌΡ A , ili. 5. 9. 
οἱ πόδες τῶν [* εὐωγγελιζομένων * εἰρήνην, τῶν] 4 εὐαγγε- Hom. Od. a 
. see 
΄ ens τ a 
16”’AXN οὐ πάντες ὅ" ὑπήκουσαν τῷ δεῖ» xxi 16. 
« P τ ties 
ren. - 


lii. 7.) 


q = Lukei. 19. ii. 10. 


r Acts x. 36 reff. s Acts vi. 7 reff. 


14, rec επικαλεσονται (see note), with KL[P] rel Clem, [Ath, Euthal-ms] Thdor- 


mops, Chr, Thdrt Damase ΤῊ] Gc: txt ABDFR a. 
rec πιστευσουσιν, with AKL rel Clem, [Ps-]|Ath Chr{-montf 
Euthal-ms}] Thdrt Damasc Th] Ge: txt BD F[-gr(emor.) ΡΊΝ Chr-ms,. 


[Syr arm Ambrst]. 


ins 7 bef Ist πως δε F latt 


rec akov- 


σουσιν, with L rel Clem, [Ath,] Chr-montf, Thdrt ΤῊ] Ge : ἀκουσονται DFKR'| P 47 | 


ἃ Damasc: txt ΑΞ ΒΝ 8 m 17 Chr-2-inss. (A! illegible.) 


[for xwpis, avev P. | 


15. rec κηρυξουσιν, with rel Clem, Chr[-montf,] Thdrt Damase: [εἸκηρυσσουσιν 


F[-gr]: 
B: καθα Chr-ms. 


ακουσωσιν c: txt ΑΒΌΚΠΓΡ δα a 17 Chr-2-mss, { Euthal-ms]. 


καθαπερ 


om ευαγγελιζομενων εἰρηνὴν των (homeotel) ABCR? [47-txt |] 


coptt eth Clem, Orig,[-int, Euthal,] Epiph, (Thdor-mops,) Damasc: ins D(F)KL[P 8s 
rel Jatt syrr goth arm Chr, Thdrt ‘hl Gc Tert; Ambr, Jer, Hil,.—om τῶν F.—evang. 


bona evang. pacem Iren-int Tert, Hil,—om evang. bona Epiph, Hil,. 


rec Ins Ta, 


bef ἀγαθα, with D?3KLN! rel Clem, Chr, [Euthal,(and ms} Thdrt: om [as 1xx] 


ABCD! FR3/P 47-txt Eus,] Orig, Damasc. 


16. aft υπηκουσαν ins εν (but marked for erasure) δὲ]. 


stream of grace rushes forth.’ Olsh.) who 
call upon Him. 13—21.] Proof 


_ from Scripture of this assertion, and ar- 


gument thereon. 13.| For every one, 
whosoever shall call upon the Name of 
the Lord (JEHovAH,—but used here of 
Christ beyond a doubt, as the next verse 
shews. There is hardly a stronger proof, or 
one more irrefragable by those who deny 
the Godhead of our Blessed Lord, of the 
unhesitating application to Him by the 
Apostle of the name and attributes of 
Jehovah) shall be saved. 14, 15.} It 
has been much doubted to whom these 
questions refer,—to Jews or to Gentiles ἢ 
It must, I think, be answered, Zo neither 
exclusiwely. They are generalized by the 
πᾶς ὃς ἄν of the preceding verse, to mean 
all, both Jews and Gentiles. And the 
inference in what follows, though mainly 
concerning the rejection of the unbelieving 
Jews, has regard also to the reception of 
the Gentiles: see below on vv. 19, 20. 

At the same time, as Meyer remarks, 
“the necessity of the Gospel ἀποστολή 
must first be laid down, in order to bring 
out in strong contrast the disobedience of 
some.” How then (i.e. posito, that the 
foregoing is so) can they(men, represented 
by the πᾶς ὃς ἄν of ver. 13) call on (I 
have followed the majority of the chief 
Mss. in reading the aor. subjunctive in- 
stead of the future indic. So also ch. 
vi. 1) Him in whom they have not be- 
lieved (i. e. begun to believe: so ch. xiii. 
11)? But how can they believe (in Him) 


of whom they have not heard (ccnstruction 
see reff.)? But how can they hear without 
a preacher? But how can men preach 
unless they shall have been sent? As it 
is written, How beautiful are the feet of 
those who [publish glad tidings of peace, 
who] publish glad tidings of (ra is ex- 
cluded by the strong manuscript testimony 
against it) good things. The Apostle is 
shewing the necessity and dignity of the 
preachers of the word, which leads on tothe 
uniwersality of their preaching, leaving all 
who disobey it withoutexcuse. He there- 
fore cites this, as shewing that their instru- 
mentality was one recognized in the pro- 
phetic word, where their office is described 
and glorified. The applicability of these 
words to the preachers of the Gospel is 
evident from the passage in Isaiah itself, 
which is spoken indeed of the return froin 
captivity, but in that return has regard to 
amore glorious one under the future Re- 
deemer. We need not therefore say that 
the Apostle uses Scripture words merely as 
expressing his own thoughts in a well- 
known garb ;—he alleges the words as a 
prophetic description of the preachers of 
whom he is writing. 16.} In this 
preaching of the Gospel some have been 
found obedient, others disobedient: and 
this was before announced by Isaiah. The 
persons here meant are as yet kept in- 
definite,—but evidently the Apostle has 
in his mind the unbelieving Jews, about 
whom his main discourse is employed. 

But not all hearkened to (historic: dur- 


4.22 


b oi ὔ 
t=Johnxii, EVAYYVEALO. 
38, from Isa. 

liii. 1. 

1 Thess. ii. 

13. Heb. iv. 2. 
u Gal. iii. 2, 5. 
v here only. 

see John vy. 


Y ῥήματος " χριστοῦ. 


47. Acts xi. 
16. 
Ἢ ch. xi. 1,11. 
x here bis. 
1 Cor. ix. 4, 
5. xi. 22 
only. P. J 
al Cor. xiv. 7 only. Ps. 1. c. 
il. § al. fr. 
iii. 10. xv. 9. xvi. 14 only. 


» nw 
avuTOV. 
Wisd. xix. 18 only. 


Pa Uxx1..0- 


17. [aft apa ins ovy F m sah.] 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


y (Luke xi. 28 v. r.) ch. ix. 20 only t. 


X. 


Ἥσαΐϊ \ x, / K 4 ’ bl / a 
as yap λέγει Κύριε, τίς ἐπίστευσεν τῇ 
taxon ἡμῶν ; Ἰΐ ἄρα ἡ πίστις " ἐξ ἀκοῆς, ἡ δὲ ἀκοὴ διὰ 
18 ἀλλὰ γ᾽ λέγω, * μὴ " οὐκ ἤκουσαν ; 
Υ μενοῦνγε “εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν " ἐξῆλθεν ὁ * φθόγγος 
αὐτῶν, καὶ εἰς τὰ πέρατα τῆς “ οἰκουμένης τὰ ῥήματα 
19 ἀλλὰ * λέγω, * μὴ Ἰσραὴλ * οὐκ ἔγνω; πρῶτος 


z Matt. ix. 26. Mark 1. 28, Psa. xviii. 4. 


Ὁ = Matt. xii. 42. Luke xi. 31 (Heb. vi. 16 only. Ps. 


ce Paul here only. Matt. xxiv. 14. Luke ἰϊ. 1 412, Acts xi. 28al4. Heb.i.6. 11. 6. Rev. 


rec (for xpiorov) θεου, with A D?-3[-gr] KL[P] 


X-corr'3 rel syrr zth-pl Clem, [Ps-]Ath, Thdor-mops, Chr, Thdrt Damase Sedul : 
Dei Christi [Ps-]Bede: [om F Hil,:] txt BCD!X? [47-txt] vulg coptt goth xth-rom 


[arm Orig-int,] Ambrst Aug, Pel. 
18. om μενουνγε F D!-lat [Orig-int, ]. 


aft macay ins yap D}(and lat’). 


19. rec οὐκ eyvw bef iopana (corra for elegance 9), with D*L rel syrr Thdrt Thi: txt 


ing the preaching) the glad tidings (οὐ 
πάντες, because πάντες, see vv. 11—13, 
were the objects of the preaching, and must 
hearken to it if they would be saved) :— 
(and this too was no unlooked-for thing, 
but predetermined in the divine counsel) 
for Esaias saith, Lord (κύριε is not in the 
Heb.), who believed the hearing of us 
[(i.e. as in our Version, | our report) ? 

17.] Faith then (conclusion from ver. 16, 
τίς ἐπίστ. τῇ ἀκοῇ) is from hearing (the 
publication of the Gospel produces belief 
in it), and the hearing (the effect of the 
publication of the Gospel) is by means of 
(not, ‘in obedience to,’ but ‘by,’ as its 
instrument and vehicle) the word of Christ 
(θεοῦ has probably been a rationalizing 
correction, to suit better the sense of the 
prophecy. ῥήματος is used possibly, as 
De Wette suggests, as a preparation for 
τὰ ῥήματα avr. in ver. 18). 18.] But 
(in anticipation of an objection that Israel, 
whom he has especially in view, had not 
sufficiently heard the good tidings) I say, 
Did they not hear (ἤκουσαν partly founded 
on the cognate ἀκοή of the last verse, 
partly recalling the ἤκουσαν of ver. 14) 4 
nay rather (ch. ix. 20, note) into all the 
earth went forth their voice, and to the 
ends of the world their words. It is 
remarkable that so few of the Commen- 
tators have noticed (I have found it only 
in Bengel, and there but faintly hinted : 
Olsh., who defends the applicability of the 
text, does not even allude to it) that 
Psal. xix. is ὦ comparison of the sun, and 
glory of the heavens, with the word of 
’ God. As far as ver. 6 the glories of 
nature are described: then the great 
subject is taken up, and the parallelism 
carried out to the end. So that the 
Apostle has not, as alleged in nearly all 
the Commentators, merely accommodated 
the text allegorically, but taken it in its 


context, and followed up the comparison 
of the Psaim. As to the assertion of 
the preaching of the. Gospel having gone 
out into all the world, when as yet a small 
part of it only had been evangelized,—we 
must remember that it is not the extent, 
so much as the universality in character, 
of this preaching, which the Apostle is 
here asserting; that word of God, hitherto 
confined within the limits of Judza, had 
now broken those bounds, and was preached 
in all parts of the earth. See Col. i.6, 23. 

19. But (in anticipation of another 
objection, that this universal evangelizing 
and admission of all, had at any rate 
taken the Jews by surprise,—that they 
had not been forewarned of any such 
purpose of God) I say, Did Israel (no 
emphasis on Israel—they are not first 
here introduced, nor have the preceding 
verses been said only of the Gentiles; but 
they have been during those verses in the 
Apostle’s mind, and are now named for 
distinctness’ sake, because it is not now a 
question of their having heard, which they 
did in common with all, but of their having 
been aware from their Scriptures of God’s 
intention with regard to themselves and the 
Gentiles) not know (supply, not ‘the Gos- 
pel,’ τὴν ἀκοήν, as Chrys., Estius, Rickert, 
Olsh., al..—but, the fact that such a gene- 
ral proclamation of the Gospel would be 
made as has been mentioned in the last 
verse, raising up the Gentiles into equality 
and rivalry with themselvyes—so Meyer, 
Fritz., Thol., De Wette, Stuart, al.— 
Others supply variously :—Calv. and Beza, 
‘the truth of God,’—so as to have an ad- 
vantage over the Gentiles:—Bengel, ‘jus- 
titiam Dei:—Bretschneider and Reiche 
take Ἰσραήλ for the object of ἔγνω, and 
understand ὁ θεός as its subject: “ Did not 
God know,—acknowledge, regard with love, 
—Israel?’ But surely the context will not 


“λέγω 
K Ὕ 


ABCD 
FL[P]x 
abcd f 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


17—21. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


423 


a ΄ ’ \ ΄ e a ] 
Μωυσῆς λέγει ᾿Εγὼ ὁ παραζηλώσω ὑμᾶς “ ἐπ᾽ ἴ οὐκ ἔθνει, ἃ ch, αἱ. 11,14. 
1 Cor. x. 22 


ἐπὶ ἔθνει & ἀσυνέτῳ ἢ παροργιῶ ὑμᾶς. 
ἱ ἀποτολμᾷ καὶ λέγει * ᾿Πὑρέθην [! ἐν] τοῖς ἐμὲ μὴ ™ ζητοῦ- 
ἐμὲ 
2] Ρπρὸς δὲ τὸν ᾿Ισραὴλ λέγει “Ὅλην 
“ἐξεπέτασα τὰς χεῖράς μου πρὸς λαὸν " ἀπειθοῦντα καὶ 


σιν, ἃ ἐμφανὴς ἐγενόμην τοῖς 


"ἀντιλέγοντα. 


only. Devt. 
xxxii. 21. 

e = Luke i. 29, 
7 al 


20 Ἣσαϊΐας δὲ 


47 al. 

f = 1 Pet. ii, 10. 
Lam. i. 6. 

g ch. i. 21 reff. 

h Eph. vi. 4 
only. 1. c. 
3 Kings xv. 
30 al. 
(-σμός, Eph. 
iv. 26.) 


, “ 
° ἐπερωτωσιν. 
\ ς ΄ 
Τὴν ἡμέραν 


μὴ 


i here only +. 


Jos. Antt. 
xv. 10. 3. k Isa. Ixv. 1. 1 = 1 Tim. i. 16. m = Acts xvii. 27 (reff.) 
only. : n Acts x. 40 only. Exod. ii. 14. Ὁ = here only. Isa.l.c. Ezek. 
xx. 3 (?). Y p — Luke xvili. 9. xx. 19. Heb. i. 7, 8. here only. Isa. lxv. 2» 
τ οἢ. ἰϊ. 8 4]. Deut, xxi, 20. s Luke xx. 27. Acts xiii. 45. L.P., exc. John xix. 12. Hos. iv. 4. 


ABCD!'3F[PJ8 ἃ m [47] latt coptt goth [eth] arm Chr, Damase [Orig-int,] Hil,. 


forlst vuas, avtous (from LXX) CR3 [eth]. 


[ Clem, ]. 


for 2nd vuas, avrous X38, 


20. om αποτολμα και 10] 1.8 and D-lat!(not D2, appy(Tischdf) ]F. 


for em, ex BC?D[ AR] m 


rec om εν 


(corrn to suit Lxx?), with ACD?3L[P]X® rel vulg Clem, Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms 


Damasc] Hil, : 
BD! [ Orig-int, ]. 

21. for 2nd zpos, ex: D Clem,. 
D} [and lat]. 


allow this)?—First (in the order of the 
prophetic roll; q. d. their very earliest pro- 
phet: compare Matt. x. 2, πρῶτος Σίμων 
κιτιλ. Thol., after Riickert, observes, “The 
Apostle has in his mind a whole series of 
prophetic sayings which he might adduce, 
but gives only a few instead of all, and 
would shew by the πρῶτος, that even in the 
earliest period the same complaint (of Is- 
rael’s unbelief) is found”’?) Moses saith, I 
will provoke you (Heb. and LXX, ‘ them’) 
to jealousy against (those who are) no 
nation (the Gentiles, as opposed to the 
people of God), against a nation that hath 
no understanding (532, the spiritual fool 
of Ps. xiv. 1; 1.1; Prov. xvii. 21) will 
I anger you. The original reference of 
these words, as addressed to Israel by 
Moses, is exactly apposite to the Apostle’s 
argument. Moses prophetically assumes 
the departure of Israel -from God, and 
his rejection of them, and denounces from 
God that as they had moved Him to 
jealousy with their ‘no-gods’ (idols) and 
provoked Him to anger by their vanities, 
—so He would, by receiving into his fa- 
vour a ‘no-nation,’ make them jealous, and 
provoke them to anger by adopting instead 
of them a foolish nation. On the interpre- 
tation of De Wette, al., that the meaning 
is, God would deliver the children of Israel, 
as a prey to the idolatrous nations of Ca- 
naan, the parallels will not hold; nor do 
the following verses in Deut. (22—25) jus- 
tify it. 20,1 But (even more than 
this: there is stronger testimony yet) 
Esaias is very bold. and says (i. 6. as we 
say, ‘dares to say,’ ‘ ventures to speak thus 


ins BD!F sah[appy] goth[ appy ] Ambrst. 


aft eyevouny ins ev 


om kat αντιλεγοντα F Hil,: for αντιλεγ.; Acy. 


plainly.’ Thol. compares Aischin. de Falsa 
Leg. ὁ. 45: κἂν ἐθελήσῃ σχετλιάζειν K. 
λέγειν), I was found (so LXX, the Heb. is 
‘Mv17), ‘I was sought :’ but apparently in 
the sense of Ezek. xiv. 3; xx. 3, ‘en- 
quired of :’ which amounts to εὑρέθην. In 
Ezek. xiv. the LXX render it ἀποκρίνεσθαι 
—and so Stier here, Sd) gebe Untwort . . .) 
by (or among) those who sought me not, 
I became manifest to those who asked 
not after me. The clauses are inverted 
in order from the LXX. De Wette 
and other modern Commentators have 
maintained that Isa. ἰχν. 1 is spoken of ~ 
the Jews, and not of the Gentiles; their 
main argument for this view being the 
connexion of ch. lxiv. and Ixv. But even 
granting this connexion, it does not follow 
that God is not speaking in reproach to 
Israel in ch. lxv. 1, and reminding them 
prophetically, that while they, His own re- 
bellious people, provoke Him to anger, the 
Gentiles which never sought Him have 
found Him. The whole passage is tho- 
roughly gone into and its true meaning 
satisfactorily shewn, in Stier’s valuable 
work, “Sefaias, nidt Pfeudo-Sefaias,” 
pp. 797 ff., who remarks that ‘the nation 
which was not called by my Name, in 
Ixv. 1, can only primarily mean the Gen- 
tiles. 21.] But of (not ‘to,’ but ‘ with 
regard to :’ see reff. The words are not an 
address) Israel (evidently emphatic ;—the 
former words having been said of the Gen- 
tiles) he saith (ibid. ver. 2), All the day 
(after μου in LXX) I stretched forth my 
hands (the attitude of gracious invitation) 
to a people disobedient and gainsaying 


434 


t ch. x. 18, 19. 
ver. ll. ᾿ 
u Acts vii. 27, rt hs 
39. xiii. 46. avuTOU ’ 
PsA. xciii. 14. 
Ezek. xliii. 9. 


τ ch. iii. 4 reff. w John i. 48. 


CHap. XI. 1. for τὸν Aaov, τὴν KAnpovouay F Ambr, Ambrst. 
ov mpoeyyw AD!N* [Chr,] ΤᾺ] Ambrst-comm Aug, 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 
XI. 1: Λέγω οὖν, μὴ 


Acts ii. 22. 2 Cor. xi. 22 ΔΙ Jos, Antt. ii. 9. 1. 


ΧΙ, 


υ ἀπώσατο ὁ θεὸς τὸν λαὸν ΑΒοΡ 
Υ μὴ γένοιτο" καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ “ Iopanditns εἰμί, 
* σπέρματος ᾿Αβραάμ, φυλῆς Βενιαμείν. 


x ch. ix. 7 reff. 


aft αὐτου ins 
(βενιαμειν, so A BRI: 


Tischdf ascribes it to his Β’"3[βενιαμ B1(Tischdf N. ὧν Vat) ]) ΟΝ m 17.) 


(rebellious; the same word 170 occurs 
Deut. xxi. 18). Cuapv. XI. 1—10. | 
Yet God has not cast off His people, but 
there is a remnant according to the election 
of grace (1—6),—the rest being hardened 
(7—10). 1.] I say then (a false in- 
ference from ch. x. 19 —21,—made in order 
to be refuted), Did (μή, it cannot surely 
be, that) God cast off His people (as would 
almost appear from the severe words just 
adduced)? Be it not so: forIl alsoaman 
Israelite (ἐκ γένους Ἴσρ., Phil. iii. 5), of 
the seed of Abraham (mentioned probably 
for solemnity’s sake, as bringing to mind 
all the promises made to Abraham), of the 
tribe of Benjamin (so Phil. iii.5), There 
is some question with what intent the 
Apostle here brings forward himself. Three 
ways are open to us: either (1) it is as ὦ 
case in point, as an example of an Israelite 
who has not been rejected but is still one 
of God’s people: so almost all the Com- 
mentators—but this is hardly probable,— 
for in this case (a) he would not surely 
bring one only example to prove his point, 
when thousands might have been alleged — 
(8) it would be hardly consistent with the 
humble mind of Paul to put himself alone 
in such a place,—and (vy) μὴ γένοιτο does 
not go simply to deny a hypothetical fact, 
but applies to some deprecated consequence 
of that which is hypothetically put :—or 
(2) as De Wette, al., he implies, ‘ How can 
I say such a thing, who am myself an 
Israelite, &c.?’ ‘Does not my very na- 
tionality furnish a security against my en- 
tertaining such an idea ?’—or (3) which I 
believe to be the right view, but which I 
have found only in the commentary of 
Mr. Ewbank,—as implying that if such 
a hypothesis were to be conceded, it would 
exclude from God’s kingdom the writer 
himself, as an Israelite. This seems better 
to agree with μὴ γένοιτο, as deprecating 
the consequence of such an assertion. 

But a question even more important arises, 
not unconnected with that just discussed : 
viz. who are ὃ λαὸς αὐτοῦ: ? ΤΩ order for 
the sentence καὶ yap ἐγὼ x.7.A. to bear 
the meaning just assigned to it, it is obvious 
that 6 λαὸς adr. must mean the people of 
God nationally considered. If Paul depre- 
cated such a proposition as the rejection of 


God’s people, because he himself would 
thus be as an Israelite cut off from God’s 
favour, the rejection assumed in the hy- 
pothesis must be a national rejection. It 
is against this that he puts in his strong 
protest. It is this which he disproves by 
a cogent historical parallel from Scripture, 
shewing that there is a remnant kal ἐν 
τῷ νῦν καιρῷ according to the election of 
grace: and not only so, but that that part 
of Israel (considered as having continuity 
of national existence) which is for a time 
hardened, shall ultimately come in, and 
so all Israel (nationally considered again, 
Israel as a nation) shall be saved. Thus 
the covenant of God with Israel, ‘having 
been national, shall ultimately be fulfilled 
to them asa nation: not by the gathering 
in merely of individual Jews, or of all 
the Jews individually, into the Christian 
church,—but by the national restoration 
of the Jews, not in unbelief, but as a 
Christian believing nation, to all that can, 
under the gospel, represent their ancient 
pre-eminence, and to the fulness of those 
promises which have never yet in their 
plain sense been accomplished to them. I 
have entered on this matter here, because 
a clear understanding of it underlies all in- 
telligent appreciation of the argument of 
the chapter. Those who hold xo national 
restoration of the Jews to pre-eminence, 
niust necessarily confound the ἐν τῷ νῦν 
καιρῷ remnant according to the election of 
grace, with the of λοιποί, who nationally 
shall be grafted. in again. See this more 
fully illustrated where that image occurs, 
ver/17 fi. 2.1 God did not cast 
off his people which he foreknew (προ- 
ἔγνω as in reff.: ‘which, in His own 
eternal decree before the world, He se- 
lected as the chosen nation, to be His own, 
the depositary of His law, the vehicle of 
the theocracy, from its first revelation to 
Moses, to its completion in Christ's future 
kingdom.’ It is plain that this must here 
be the sense, and that the words must not 
be limited, with Orig., Aug., Chrys., Calv., 
al., to the elect Christian people of God 
from among the Jews, with Paul as their 
representative: seeon ver.1. On this ex- 
planation, the question of ver. 1 would be 
self-contradistory, and this negation a 


ἐκ abcdf 
ρ 3 u 2 ΄ ghkl 


1—6. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


43 


« \ \ \ > mw y S x > ἡ ΩΣ Pe 
ὁ θεὸς τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ ὃν ἡ προέγνω. ἢ οὐκ. οἴδατε ἐν γ = ch, vill. 39 
reff.). 
> / fr yr ε ,ὕ ε 5) ΄ a A ἣν rey, 
Ηλίᾳ τί λέγει ἡ *ypady ; ὡς *° ἐντυγχάνει τῷ θεῷ ὃ κατὰ "ἐπί, 
ἃ sing., ch. ix. 


al I A 3 K / \ 7 > , . 
Tov Ἰσραὴλ, ὕριε, TOUS TPOdNTasS σου ἀπέκτειναν, TA” 7s 
d , 7 e ΄ Sia NUL ὦ εν / , b here only. 
θυσιαστήριά σου κατέσκαψαν, KAY@ ὑπελείφθην μόνος, 


1 Mace. viii. 
32. 

\ a \ / ? δὴ ΄ ΄ >. A ¢ Act ye 24. 
καὶ 8 ζητοῦσιν τὴν ὃ ψυχὴν μου. 1 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει αὐτῷ © ch, viii. 27, 


« h , i J 3 a e ͵ 34. Heb. vii. 
ὁ ἔχρηματισμος; ἱΝατέλιπον ἐμαυτῷ επτακις γιλίους 25 onlyt. 
acc. lV. . 
” “ oY es ιν | ee Lea ΄ Fie τεῦς ἹΞ 
ἄνδρας, οἵτινες οὐκ * ἔκαμψαν * γόνυ Ἰτῇ Βάαλ. ὅ οὕτως cae 


5 A A A a ΠῚ d _y. 2 : 
OV) καὶ ἐν τη TO νυν m Καιρῷῳ n λείμμα κατ ο ἐκλογὴν d Matt. v. 23 αἱ 


3 KINGS xix. 


Pp ΄ , Gas δὲ , q » ” ᾽ ” oe we 
χάριτος γέγονεν. ὃ εἰ ὃὲ χάριτι, οὐκ ἔτι ἐξ ἔργων, a 


Amos ix. il. 
fhere only. Gen. xxx. 368]. (-λειμμα, ch. ix. 27.) g = Matt. ii. 20 only. Exod. iv. 19. 
h here only. Prov. xxxi. (see xxiv.) 1. 2 Mace. ii. 4. xi. 17 only. i = Luke xx. 3l. Heb. iv. 1 
only. 3 KINGs xix. 18, k ch. xiv.1]. Eph.iii. 14, Phil. ii. 10. 1 Chron. xxix. 20. see 
Acts vii. 60 reff. 1fem. (not 1, c.), Judg. ii. 13 & iii. 7 (A Ald.compl.). Zeph.i. 4. Hos. ii. 8 al. 
m ch. iii. 26 reff, nhere only. Josh. xiii. 12 F(not A)compl. 4 Kings xix.4 only. (ὑπόλ., ch. ix. 
27.) o ch. ix. 11 reff. p gen. subject., Luke iv. 22. q = ch. vii. 17, 20. 


2. rec at end ins λεγων, with LX! rel Syr [wth] Thl Ge: om ABCDF[P]N? 
[47(sic) ] latt [syr] coptt arm Eus, Chr, Thdrt Damase [Orig-int,] Ambr. 

3. rec ins καὶ bef τα θυσιαστηρια, with DLN® rel syrr [eth arm] Just Chr, Thdrt 
[Euthal-ms Damasc]: om ABCF[P JX? 17 [47(sic) ] latt coptt Eus, Chr, [Orig-int,]. 


4. κατελειπον ACFL[P] n. 


truism. It would be inconceivable, that 
God should cast off His elect). Or (see 
ch. ix. 21 al.:—introduces a new objection 
to the matter impugned) know ye not 
what the Scripture saith in (the history 
of) Elias (better thus than ‘with regard 
to, as Luth., Erasm., Calv., Beza, al. 
Tholuck gives examples: from Pausan. 
vill. 37. 8,--ἔστιν ἐν Ἥρας ὅρκῳ τὰ ἔπη, 
—i.e. in that part of the Iliad (ξ. 278) 
where Hera swears by the Titans: from 
Thucyd. i. 9,---καὶ ἐν τοῦ σκήπτρου ἅμα 
τῇ παραδόσει εἴρηκεν αὐτὸν πολλῇσι νήσοισι 
K.”Apyet παντὶ ἀνάσσειν, i.e. in that part 
of the Iliad (8. 108) where the trans- 
mission of the sceptre is related)? how 
(depends on οὐκ οἴδατε) he pleads with 
(see reff.—and note, ch. viii. 26) God 
against Israel, &c. The citation is a free 
one from the LXX. The clauses τοὺς 
mpop., and τὰ θυσιαστ. are inverted, ἐν 
ῥομφαίᾳ is omitted, and κἀγὼ ὑπελείφθ. 
μόνος is put for καὶ ὑπολέλειμμαι ἐγὼ 
μθνώτατοςσ. The altars, as De W. ob- 
serves, were those on the high places, 
dedicated to God. 4.] But what 
saith the divine response to him (χρη- 
ματισμός, see reff. and reff. to the verb, 
Acts x. 22)? I have left to myself (here 
the Apostle corrects a mistake of the LXX, 
who have for κατέλιπον--- καταλείψεις,--- 
in the Complut. ed. κατλείψω. He has 
added to the Heb. *mwwa,—‘ I have left, 
‘kept as a remainder,’ —épavt@, a simple 
and obvious filling up of the sense) seven 
thousand men, who (the sense of the say- 
ing, as far as regards the present purpose, 


for τη, To F: tw G. 
5. λιμμα ABICDIFR: Anupa B?. [17 uncert. | 


κατ᾽ exAoyns D}, 


viz. to shew that all these were faithful 
men; in the original text and LXX, it is 
implied that these were all the faithful 
men,—émTa χιλιάδας ἀνδρῶν, πάντα γό- 
vata ἃ οὐκ ὥκλασαν γόνυ(οτη. γόνυ A) τῷ 
Β. k. πᾶν στόμα ὃ οὐ προξεκύνησεν(προ:- 
κυνήσει Α) αὐτῷ. But this was not neces- 
sary to be brought out here) never bowed 
knee to Baal. “ Here the LXX, accord- 
ing to the present text, have τῷ, not τῇ 
Βάαλ : but elsewhere (see reff.) they write 
the fem.: and probably the Apostle read 
it so in his copy.” Fritz. According to 
this Commentator, they wrote the fem., 
taking Baal for a female deity ; according 
to Beyer, Addit. ad Seld. de diis Syr., 
Wetst., Koppe, Olsh., Meyer,—because Baal 
was an androgynous deity ;—according to 
Gesenius, in Rosenmiiller, Rep. i. 39, to 
designate feebleness, compare the Rabbi- 
nical ninidy, ‘false gods.’ and other ana- 
logous expressions in Tholuck. “The 
regarding τῇ Βάαλ as put for τῇ τοῦ Βάαλ, 
5011. εἰκόνι or στήλῃ, as Erasm., Beza, 
Grot., Estius, al., and Bretschneider, is 
perfectly arbitrary.””’ De Wette. In Tobit 
i. 5 AB, we have, πᾶσαι ai φυλαὶ ai συν- 
αποστᾶσαι ἔθυον τῇ Βάαλ τῇ δαμάλει,--- 
where the golden calves of the ten tribes 
seem to be identified with Baal, and 
where a curious addition in δὲ (in this part 
published by Tischdf. as Codex Friderico- 
Augustanus) refers expressly to their esta- 
blishment by Jeroboam. δ.) Thus 
then (analogical inference from the ex- 
ample just cited) in the present time 
also (or, even in the present time, scil. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


ΧΊ; 


426 
5 Ἢ © , q 3 " ΄ ΒΕ ’ 8 Ν 5" yy 

reh.iii.9. ἐπεὶ ἡ χάρις “ οὐκ ἔτι γινεται χάρις" [εἰ δὲ ἐξ ἔργων, 

vi. 15. , , \ \ y ’ ” > \ » 

Matt. τί. 32. α οὐκ & vy Ἴρυκ ε lv ἔργον. 
se οὐκ. “ἐτου χάρες, STE IER CPR uc ἔτι ἐστιν, ey v. | 

iAimss** 7 τί οὖν; ὃ " ἐπιζητεῖ lopand, ‘ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐπέτυχεν, 
t Acts ix. 20 e \ 9 “ S'a5 e \ \ w2 ͵ 

ff. v ἃ ἐπέτυχεν: οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἐπωρώθησαν 

Ms δὲ γ᾿ ἐκλογὴ & ἐπέτυχ ρωθησαν, 

ἀρ Ἐπ ΑΝ, iv.2only. Gen. xxxix.2. Prov. xii. 27 only. v ch. ix. 11] reff. = here only. 
w Mark vi. 52. viii. 17. John xii. 40. 2 Cor. iii. 14 only. Job xvii. 7 BN &c. only. (-ρωσις, ver. 23.) 


6. for ywera, eor[a]: C2(appy) [F-lat: ἐστι] 54 syrr Chr, Thdrt: est vulg D-lat 


lat-ff. 


om last tlause ACDFR! [ P 47-txt] latt coptt (ath) arm Damase [Orig- 


int,] Ambr Ambrst Aug: [om εἰ δε to xapis 17 :] ins (with some variations) BLN3 rel 
syrr Chr Thdrt (‘both, in text: they do not expl it in comm; but that does not 


prove its omn:’ Tischdf [ed. 7]) Gennad-c, ΤῺ] Gc. 


(See notes.)—(rec ins ἐστι bef 


3rd xapis: omd by B.—for epyov at end, xapis (by mistake 9) B.) 


7. ἐπεζητει F 73 latt syrr { Orig-int, | lat-ff. 


rec Tovtov (grammatical corrn), 


with ἃ gh 15 Chr,-montf Thdor-mops[-c, Cyr-c, Damasc] Thdrt : txt ABCDFL[P |X rel 


Chr, Chr,-2-mss. 


erepwOnoar(sic) C (ἴῃ ? [sic, Tischdf]): ἐπορευθησαν c: exnpw- 


θησαν 667: excecati sunt latt [arm Orig-int, }. 


of Israel’s national rejection) there is a 
remnant (a part has remained faithful, 
which thus has become a λεῖμμα) according 
to (in virtue of,—in pursuance of) the elec- 
tion (selection, choice of a few out of many) 
of grace (made not for their desert, nor 
their foreseen congruity, but of God’s free 
unmerited favour). 6.] ‘ And let us 
remember, when we say an election 
of grace, how much those words imply : 
viz. nothing short of the entire exclusion 
of all human work from the question. Let 
these two terms be regarded as, and kept, 
distinct from one another, and do not let 
us attempt to mix them and so destroy the 
meaning of each.’ So that the meaning 
of the verse is to clear up and remove all 
doubt concerning the meaning of ‘ election 
of grace, —and to profess on the part of 
the Apostle perfect readiness to accept his 
own words in their full sense, and to abide 
by them. This casts some light on the 
question of the genuineness of the brack- 
eted clause (see authorities in var. readd.). 
The object being precision, it is much more 
probable that the Apostle should have 
written both clauses in their present for- 
mal parallelism, and that the second should 
have been early omitted from its seeming 
superfluity, than that it should have been 
inserted from the margin. Besides which, 
as Fritz. has remarked, the words do not 
correspond sufficiently with those of the 
first clause to warrant the supposition of 
their having been constructed to tally 
with it: we have for χάριτι in the first, 
ἐξ ἔργων in the second,—for γίνεται χάρις, 
ἐστὶν €pyov ;—and the plur. ἔργα would 
probably have been retained in the infer- 
ence of clause 2, But (directing attention 
to the consequence of the admission, ἐκλ. 
χάριτος) if by grace (the selection has 
been made), it is no longer (when we have 
conceded that, we have excluded its being) 


of (arising out of, as its source) works: 
for (in that case) grace no longer becomes 
(i.e. becomes no longer—loses its efficacy 
and character as) grace (the freedom and 
‘proprio motu’ character, absolutely neces- 
sary to the idea of grace, are lost, the act 
having been prompted from without) :— 
but if of (arising out of, as the cause and 
source of the selection) works, no longer 
is it (the act of selection) grace; for (in 
that case) work no longer is work (the 
essence of work, in our present argument, 
being ‘ that which earns reward,’ and the 
reward being, as supposed, the election to 
be of the remnant,—if so earned, there can 
be no admixture of divine favour in the 
matter; it must be all earned, or none: 
none conferred by free grace, or all). 
These cautions of the Apostle are decisive 
against all attempts at compromise between 
the two great antagonist hypotheses, of 
salvation by God’s free grace, and salva- 
tion by man’s meritorious works. The two 
cannot be combined without destroying 
the plain meaning of words. If now the 
Apostle’s object in this verse be to guard 
carefully the doctrine of election by free 
grace from any attempt at an admixture 
of man’s work, why is he anxious to do 
this just at this point? I conceive, be- 
cause he is immediately about to enter on 
a course of exposition of the divine deal- 
ings, in which, more than ever before, he 
rests all upon God’s sovereign purpose, 
while at the same time he shews that 
purpose, though apparently severe, to 
be one, on the whole, of grace and love. 

7.) What then (what therefore 
must be our conclusion from what has been 
stated ? We have seen that God hath not 
cast off his own chosen nation, but that 
even now there is a remnant. This being 
so, what aspect do matters present? This 
he asks to bring out an answer which may 


7—10. 


8 θὰ / "BS » A c 
καθὼς γέγραπται WKEV αὐτοῖς ὁ 

΄ \ “ \ f > 
Υ κατανύξεως, 5 ὀφθαλμοὺς ὃ τοῦ μὴ βλέπειν, Kal ἡ ὦτα 
ToD μὴ ἀκούειν, ἕως τῆς “σήμερον “ ἡμέρας. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


427 


θεὸς Χ πνεῦμα x = ch. viii. 1 
bis. 1 Cor. . 
iv. 21. 2 Cor. 
iv. 13. Gal. 
9 \ Eph. 
Ka 


7 , “- 5 
Δαυεὶδ λέγει ἃ Γενηθήτω ἡ “ τράπεζα αὐτῶν 3 εἰς 8 traryida Υ hers omy be. 


2 \ > 
καὶ ἃ εἰς δἰ θήραν καὶ ἃ εἰς ᾿Ἑ 


σκάνδαλον καὶ 4 εἰς 


(5) only. 
(-νύσσειν, 
Acts li. 37. 


le 
αντε 


, an ΄ € 5 \ A - 
απόδομα αὐτοῖς, 10 πιὰ σκοτισθήτωσαν οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ αὐτῶν | Six. xx 31) 


DEvT. xxix. 


a lal \ βλέ \ Ν a > “ ἢ ὃ \ \ 4. 
τοῦ μὴ ἔπειν, καὶ τὸν νῶτον αὐτων χα WAVTOS Scone tear 


b Paul, Acts xxviii. 27 bis (from Isa. vi. 10). 


xx. 26. 2 Cor. iii. 14 only. Josh. v. 9. 
e = 1Cor. x. 21 bis. Ps. Ixxvii. 20. 
Vii. 23. g Ps. xxxiv. 8. 


n Acts ii. 25. x. 2al. Isa. xlix. 16, 


8. καθαπερ BN. 


1 Cor. ii. 9. xii. 16 only. 


f Luke xxi. 35. 
D h Josh. xxiii. 13. Ps. cxl. 9, 
v. 2. k = Matt. xvi. 23. ch. ix. 33 al. 
xxvii. 4. 2 Chron. xxxii.25. (-δοσις, Col. iii. 24.) 


x. 13 reff. 
c Matt. xxviii. 15. Acts 
ἃ constr., Acts v. 36 reff. Psa. lxviii. 22. 
1 Tim. iii. 7. vi. 9. 2 Tim. ii. 26 only. Prov. 
i here only. = Hos, 
1 Luke xiv. 12 only. Ps. 
m = ch. i, 21 (reff.) only. 1. c. 


1 Kings xviii. 21. 


6 is written twice in δὲ. 


[8, 9. nucpas και Saud is supplied at the foot of the page in F-gr(not G).] 


9. ins καθαπερ bef και Saved C. 


set in view the ot Aourot)? ΄“ That which 
Israel is in search of (viz. δικαιοσύνη, see 
ch. ix. 31; x. 1 ff.), this it (as a nation) 
found not (on ἐπιτυγχάνω w. an ace., 
see Matthie, Gr. Gr. § 363 obs.), but the 
election (the abstract, because Israel has 
been spoken of in the abstract, and to keep 
out of view for the present the mere indi- 
vidual cases of converted Jews in the idea 
of an elected remnant) found it: 

8.] but the rest were hardened (not 
‘blinded ;? see note on Eph. iv. 18:— 
σκληροτέῤαν ἡ ἀπιστία τὴν καρδίαν αὐτῶν 
ἀπειργάσατο. Theodoret. It is passive, 
and implies God as the agent. This for 
the sake of the context, ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ὃ 
θεὸς x.7.A., not necessarily for the meaning 
of the word itself, which might indicate 
‘became hard,’ but certainly does not 
here),—as it is written (if we are to 
regard these passages as merely analogous 
instances of the divine dealings, we must 
remember that the perspective of pro- 
phecy, in stating such cases, embraces all 
analogous ones, the divine dealings being 
self-consistent,—and especially that great 
one, in which the words are most pro- 
minently fulfilled), God gave to them 
(LXX and Heb., πεπότικεν ὑμᾶς) a spirit 
(see reff.) of stupor (there is at the end of 
Fritzsche’s commentary on this chapter 
an elaborate excursus on κατάνυξις, in 
which he has thoroughly investigated its 
derivation and meaning. He comes to 
the conclusion that it is derived from 
κατανύσσω, ‘compungo,’ and might sig- 
nify any excitement of mind, pity, sadness, 
&c.,—but in the few places where it occurs, 
it does import stupor or numbness :—so 
ref. Ps. ἐπότισας ἡμᾶς οἶνον κατανύξεως“, --- 
which Hammond explains to mean the 
stupifying wine given to them that were 
to be put to death. Hanim. alsocites from 


Marcus Eremita, vov@eo. ψυχ. p. 948, a 
passage where he describes πόνον tijs 
κατανύξεως as the consequence of oivo- 
ποσίαι. Tholuck compares the similar 
meanings of ‘frappé,’ struck, betrofjen),— 
eyes that they should not see (such eyes 
that they might not see: in the Heb. and 
LXX the negative is joined with the verb, 
καὶ ovk ἔδωκεν κύριος 6 θ. ὑμῶν x.T.A.) and 
ears that they should not hear unto this 
present day. ‘These last words are not, 
as Beza, E. V., Griesb., Knapp, to be sepa- 
rated from the citation, and joined to 
ἐπωρώθησαν : they belong to the words in 
Deut. and are adduced by St. Paul as 
applying to the day then present, as 
they did to the day when Moses spoke 
them: see 2 Cor. iii. 15. 9.1] And 
David saith, Let their table be for a 
snare and for a net (θήρα more usually 
‘a hunt,’ or the act of taking or catching, 
—but here and in ref. a net, the instru- 
ment of capture. It is not in the Heb. 
nor in the LXX, and is perhaps inserted 
by the Apostle to give emphasis by the 
accumulation of synonyimes), and for a 
stumbling-block and for a recompense 
to them (the LXX have eis παγίδα K. εἰς 
ἀνταπόδοσιν κ. εἰς σκάνδαλον. The Heb. 
of εἰς ἀνταπόδοσιν, as at present pointed, 
is Ὁ, ‘to the secure.’ It has been 
supposed that the LXX pointed nw? 
or oie, ‘for retributions.” See Ps. 
xci. 8: but qu. ?): 10.} let their 
eyes be darkened that they may not see, 
and their back bow thou down always. 
«Instead of bending the back, the Heb. 
text speaks of making the loins to 
tremble, 1y27 o2N9. This elsewhere is 
a sign of great terror, Nah. ii. 10; Dan. 
v. 6: and the darkening of the eyes 
betokens in the Psalm, a weakened, 
humbled, servile condition, just as in 


428 


° σύγκαμψον. 


e here only. 
l.c. 4 Kings 
iv. 35 only. 

pver.lal. _ 
(=-) James il. 
10. iii. 2 (bis). 
2 Pet. i. 10 
only. 1 Kings 
iv. 2. 

r = ch. xiv. 4 
reff. 

s ch. iii. 4 reff. 

t ch. iv. 25 reff. uch, iv. 11] reff. 

vi. 7 only. Isa.xxxi.8only. (see 2 Cor. xii. 13 reff.) 
28, ver. 24. Philem. 16. Heb. ix. 14 only. 


12. om ver A. 


Deut. xxviii. 65—67. It is plain from 
διὰ παντός, that we must not suppose 
the infirmities of age to be meant. The 
Apostle might well apply such a description 
to the servile condition of the bondmen of 
the law, see Gal. iv. 24.’* Tholuck. 

11—24.] Yet this exclusion and hardening 
has not been for their destruction, but for 
mercy to the Gentiles, and eventually for 
their own restoration. 11.] I say 
then (see on ver. 1), Did they (who? see 
below) stumble in order that they should 
fall (not ‘sic, ut caderent’—as Vulg.,—so 
Orig., Chrys., Grot., al., denoting the result 
merely : neither the grammar nor the con- 
text will bear this: the Apostle is arguing 
respecting God’s intent in the παράπτωμα 
of the Jewish nation. He here calls it by 
this mild name to set forth that it is not 
final. The subject of ἔπταισαν is the 
αὐτοί of the following verses, i.e. the Jews, 
as a people: not the unbelieving indivi- 
duals, who are characterized as πεσόντες, 
ver. 22. He regards the λοιποί as the re- 
presentatives of the Jewish people, who 
have nationally stumbled, but not in order 
to their final fall, seeing that God has a 
gracious purpose towards the Gentiles even 
in this πταῖσμα of theirs, and intends to 
raise them nationally from it in the end. 
This distinction, between the πταίσαντες, 
the whole nation as a nation, and the 
πεσόντες, the unbelieving branches who 
have been cut off, is most important to the 
right understanding of the chapter, and to 
the keeping in mind the separate ideas, of 
the restoration of individuals here and 
there throughout time, and the restoration 
of Israel at the end. The stress is on 
πέσωσιν. and it is the fall which is denied : 
not on ἵνα πέσωσιν, so that the purpose 
merely should be denied, and the fall ad- 
mitted)? God forbid: but (the truer ac- 
count of the matter is) by their trespass 
(μοῦ fall, as Εἰ. V.) salvation (has come) 
to the Gentiles, for to provoke them 
(Israel) to jealousy. Two gracious pur- 
poses of God are here stated, the latter 
wrought out through the former. By this 
stumble of the Jews out of their national 
place in God’s favour, and the admission 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


v ch. x. 19 reff. 


z as above (y). 


ΧΙ, 


1] Ρ λέγω οὖν, μὴ “ἔπταισαν ἵνα * πέσω- 
σιν; “μὴ γένοιτο ἀλλὰ τῷ αὐτῶν ‘ παραπτώματι ἡ 
σωτηρία τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, “eis τὸ Y παραζηλῶσαι αὐτούς. 
15 εἰ δὲ τὸ ᾿ παράπτωμα αὐτῶν “ πλοῦτος κόσμου καὶ 
τὸ “ἥττημα αὐτῶν “ πλοῦτος ἐθνῶν, 5 πόσῳ Y μᾶλλον 


w = Heb. xi. 26. x 1 Cor. 
y Matt. vii. 11. x. 25. Luke xi. 13, xii. 24, 
Matt. xii. 12. Heb. x. 29 only. 


of the Gentiles into it, the very people thus 
excluded are to be stirred up to set them- 
selves in the end effectually to regain, as a 
nation, that pre-eminence from which they 
are now degraded. 12.] Then the 
Apostle argues on this, as Meyer well says, 
‘a felici effectu cause pejoris ad feliciorem 
effectum cause melioris:’—But (‘posito, 
that ’—as in last verse—taking for granted 
the historical fact, that the stumble of the 
Jews has been coincident with the admis- 
sion of the Gentiles) if their trespass is the 
world’s wealth (the occasion of that wealth, 
—the wealth itself being the participation 
in the unsearchable riches of Christ), and 
(this latter clause parallel to and explana- 
tory of the less plainly expressed one before 
it) their loss, the wealth of the Gentiles, 
how much more (shall) their replenish- 
ment (be all this)? On ἥττημα and 
πλήρωμα much question has been raised. 
I have taken both as answering strictly to 
the comparison here before the Apostle’s 
mind, viz. that of impoverishing and en- 
riching,—and the genitives αὐτῶν [&c.] as 
subjective: q. ἃ. ‘if their impoverishment 
be the wealth of the Gentiles, how much 
more shall their enrichment be!’ But 
several other interpretations are possible. 
(1) #77 nua may mean as in ref. 1 Cor., 
degradation, and πλήρωμα would then be 
Sulness, re-exaltation to the former mea- 
sure of favour,—or perhaps, as where 
Herod. iii. 22 says ὀγδώκοντα ἔτεα Cons 
πλήρωμα, ‘their completion, ‘their highest 
degree of favour.’ (2) If we regard the 
meaning of πλήρωμα in ver. 25, we shall 
be tempted here to render it, ‘full num- 
ber,’ and similarly ἥττημα, ‘small num- 
ber.’ So the majority of Commentators : 
Chrys., Theodoret, Erasmus, Beza, Bucer, 
Grot., Bengel, Reiche, De W. (but only as 
regards πλήρ. :—he renders #77. with Lu- 
ther, Gdjabde) and Olsh. (see below). Thus 
the argument will stand : ‘If their unbelief 
(i.e. of one part of them) is the world’s 
wealth, and their small number (i.e. of 
believers, the other part of them), the 
wealth of the Gentiles, how much more 
their full (restored) number !’ i.e. as Olsh. 
explains it, ‘ If so few Jews can do so much 


ABCD 

ΕΓΓΡῚΝ 
abcd@ 

ghk!1 
mnoi7z 


[47] 


1]—15. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΊΟΥΣ. 429 


lal A »-“ 7 
τὸ "πλήρωμα αὐτῶν; 15 ὑμῖν δὲ λέγω τοῖς ἐθνεσιν. a = here only. 


b 3. 4.5 b 7 \ 5 > a \ 20) A > ΄ \ 
ep "ὅσον μὲν οὖν εἰμι ἐγὼ εθνῶὼν atroaToXos, THY 


see Eph. i. 
23 notes. 
John i. 16. 


΄, , ver. 25. 
ὁ διακονίαν μου ἃ δοξάζω, 13 ὁ εἴ πως Y παραζηλώσω pov > Ἐ Mate, πα, 


\ f ΄ \ g / \ 2 es 
τὴν σάρκα καὶ ὃ σώσω τινὰς ἐξ αὐτῶν. 


reff. d = 2 Cor. iii. 10. 


24 : 
g ΞΞῚ Cor. vii. 16 (bis), ix. 22, 1 Tim. iy. 10, 


Judg. ix. 9. 
James v. 20. 


te ind τ : ) xxv. 40, 
9) 45 (2 Pet. i. 
εὐ yap q) 13) only. 

c = Acts xx. 


ech. i. 10. f Gen. xxxvii. 27. 


18. rec (for δὲ) yap, with DFL rel latt goth Chr, Thdrt{-ed] ΤῊ] ec [Orig-int, 


Ambrst]: ovy C: om eth: txt ABX[P 47 arm] syrr copt Thdrt-ms Damasc. 


rec 


om ovy (see notes), with L rel vulg D3-lat syr (copt(Treg) th] Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] Cc 
[Orig-int, Ambrst] Aug: om μὲν ovy DF goth [arm]: ins ABC[P]® copt{(Tischdf) 


Cyr, Damasc]. 

goth] Cyr, [Orig-int, Ambrst]. 

| Orig-int,.] lat-ff(but not Aug,). 
14. την capa bef μου DF. 


for the Gentile world, what will not the 
whole number do?” But thus we shall 
lose the ‘a minori ad majus’ argument— 
‘if their siz has done so much, how much 
more their conversion?’ unless indeed it 
be said that τὸ ἥττημα implies a national 
παράπτωμα. Besides, it can hardly be 
shewn that ἥττημα will bear this meaning 
of ‘a small number.’ (9) Tholuck, from 
whom mostly this note is taken, notices 
at length the view of Olsh., after Origen, 
that the idea of a definite number of the 
elect is here in the Apostle’s mind,— 
that the falling off of the Jews produces 
a deficiency in the number, which is filled 
up by the elect from the Gentiles, as ver. 
25: understanding by πλήρωμα both there 
and here, if I take his meaning aright, 
the number required to fill up the roll of 
the elect, whether of Jews, as here, or 
Gentiles, as there. Tholuck, while he 
concedes the legitimacy of the idea of a 
πλήρωμα τῶν σωζομένων, maintains, and 
rightly, that in this section no such idea 
is brought forward: and that it would not 
have been intended, without some more 
definite expression of it than we now find. 

I have thought it best as above, consi- 
dering the very various meanings and diffi- 
culty of the word πλήρωμα, to keep here to 
that which seems to be indicated by the 
immediate context, which is, besides, the 
primitive meaning of the word. It must 
be noticed, that the fact, of Israel being the 
chosen people of God, lies at the root of 
all this argument. Israel is the nation, 
the covenant people,—the vehicle of God’s 
gracious purposes to mankind. Israel, 
nationally, is deposed from present favour. 
That very deposition is, however, accom- 
panied by an outpouring of God’s riches of 
mercy on the Gentiles; not as rivals to 
Israel, but still considered as further from 
God, formally and nationally, than Israel. 
if then the disgrace of Israel has had such 
a blessed accompaniment, how much more 


om eyw A n 73. 80. 108-16-8 arm Thdrt-ms, 


: ins bef equ F [vulg 


δοξασω F [17] 46. 109 latt Thdrt{-ed],(txt,) 


blessed a one shall Israel’s honour bring 
with it, when His own people shall once 
more be set as a praise in the midst of the 
earth, and the glory of the nations. 

13. | ‘ Why, in an argument concerning the 
Jews, dwell so much on the reference to the 
Gentiles discernible in the divine economy 
regarding Israel? Why make it appear 
as if the treatment of God’s chosen people 
were regulated not by a consideration of 
them, but of the less favoured Gentiles ?’ 
The present verse gives an answer to this 
question. But (apology for the foregoing 
verse :—if γάρ bé read, the sense will be 
much the same—For (i. e. let it be under- 
stood, that), &c.) I am speaking to you 
the Gentiles. Inasmuch therefore (μὲν 
οὖν is surely not to be rejected as yielding 
no sense,—as De Wette and Tholuck, who 
object to it as proceeding from those who 
hold a new sentence to begin at ἐφ᾽ ὅσον, 
and ὑμῖν... .. ἔθνεσιν to refer to the fore-' 
going :—but the usage of μὲν οὖν in 1 Cor. 
vi. 4 seems strictly analogous to that in our 
text, where no new sentence is begun in 
any sense which may not be true here. 

ἐφ᾽ ὅσον, not ‘as long as,’ as Orig. and 
Vulg.) as I am Apostle of the Gentiles, 
I honour mine office (by striving for their 
conversion and edification at all times,—by 
introducing a reference to them and their 
part in the divine counsels, even when 
speaking of mine own people), if by any 
means I may (regarding it as a real ser- 
vice done on behalf of Israel, thus to 
honour mine office by mentioning the 
Gentiles, if this mention may) provoke to 
jealousy mine own flesh (the Jews) and 
may save some of them. 15. | For 
(a reason for my anxiety for the salva- 
tion of Israel: not merely for the sake 
of mine own kinsmen, but because their 
recovery will bring about the blessed con- 
summation of all believers. Vv. 13, 14 
should not then be in a parenthesis) if the 
rejection of them (not ‘their Joss,’ as Luth: 


450. 


2 Cor. v. 18, 
19 only $. 
(Isa. ix. 5.) 
2 Macc. v. 20 
only. 
m ch. ix, 21 reff. ᾿ 
only in Epp. Ezek. xxxi. 7. 


15. κοσμω F. 
16. for δε, yap A: om C? goth [eth]. 
Chr-ms,. 


and Beng., by which the antithesis to πρός- 
Anus is weakened) be (the occasion of) 
the reconciliation of the world (of the 
Gentiles, viz. to God), what (‘ qualis,’ ‘ of 
what kind,’ in its etfect) (will be) their 
reception, but (the occasion of) life from 
the dead? ζωὴ ἐκ vexp. may be variously 
taken. (1) it may be metaphorical, as in 
ch. vi. 13, and may import, that so general 
a conversion of the world would take place, 
as would be like life from the dead. So, 
more or less, Caly., Calov., Estius, Bengel, 
Stuart, Hodge, al., and Theophyl., Phot., 
who explain it of a joy like that of the 
resurrection. But against this interpreta- 
tion lies the objection, that this is already 
involved in καταλλαγὴ κόσμ., and thus no 
new idea would be brought out by the 
words, which stand in the most emphatic 
position. (2) it may mean that ‘life from 
the dead’ literally should follow on the 
restoration of the Jewish people; i. e. that 
the Resurrection, the great consummation, 
is bound up with it. So Chrys., Orig. 
(tune enim erit assumptio Israel, quando 
jam et mortui vitam recipient, et mundus 
ex corruptibili incorruptibilis fiet, et mor- 
tales immortalitate donabuntur”), Theo- 
doret, Reiche, Meyer, Fritzsche, Riickert 
ed. 2, Tholuck, al. The objection to this 
view seems to be, that the Apostle would 
hardly have used ζωὴ ἐκ νεκρῶν thus pre- 
dicatively, if he had meant by it a fixed 
and predetermined event ;—but that, stand- 
ing as it does, it must be qualitative, im- 
plying some further blessed state of tlie 
reconciled world, over and above the mere 
reconciliation. This might well be de- 
signated ‘life from the dead,’ and in it 
may be implied the glories of the first 
resurrection, and deliverance from the 
bondage of corruption, without supposing 
the words ζωὴ ἐκ νεκρῶν Ξ- ἣ ἀνάστασις τῶν 
vex. Stuart well compares Ezek. xxxvii. 
1—14, which was perhaps before the mind 
of the Apostle:—but he gives a mere 
ethical interpretation to it. 16—24.] 
Such a restoration of Israel was to be 
expected from a consideration of their 
destination and history. This is set forth 
in similitudes, that of the root and branches 
being followed out at some length,—and 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


ΧΙ. 


λημψιῖις, εἰ μὴ ζωὴ ἐκ νεκρῶν ; 16 εἰ δὲ ἡ "ὶ ἀπαρχὴ ἁγία, 
καὶ τὸ ™ φύραμα" καὶ εἰ ἡ " ῥίζα ἁγία, καὶ οἱ 5 κλάδοι. 


jhere only+. (-λαμβάνειν, ch. xiv. 3.) 
ἢ Matt, iii, 10. xiii. 6 al. Job xiv. 8. 


k ch. viii. 23 reff. 1 Num. xv. 21. 
o Matt. xiii. 32 al. here Kc. (5 times) 


for mposA., προλ. CF ΚΙ, 


om 2nd εἰ F{P'] 70-1. 109 lect-13 arm 


their own position, as engrafted Gentiles, 
brought to the mind of the readers. But 
(a further argument for their restoration 
following on ἀλλά, ver. 11) if the first- 
fruit be holy, so also the lump (not here 
the firstfruit of the field, as Grot., Rosenm. 
(nor is φύραμα the cake made by the 
priests out of the firstfruits which fell to 
them, Deut. xviii. 4, as Estius, Koppe, 
KOéllner, Olsh., al.) ;—but the portion of 
the kneaded lump of dough (φύρω), which 
was offered as a heave-offering to the Lord, 
and so sanctified for use the rest: see ref. 
Num. where the same words occur) ;—and 
if the root be holy, so also the branches. 
Who are the ἀπαρχή and the pita? First 
of all, there is no impropriety in the two 
words applying to the same thing. For 
though, as Olsh. remarks, the branches 
being evolved from the root, it rather 
answers to the φύραμα than to the ἀπαρχή, 
and, as Riickert, the firstfruit succeeds 
the lump in time, while the root precedes 
the branches,—yet, as Thol. replies, the 
ἁγιότης is the point of comparison, and in 
ἁγιότης the ἀπαρχή precedes and gives 
existence to the φύραμα. This being so, 
(1) the ἀπαρχή and ῥίζα have generally 
been taken to represent the patriarchs ; 
and I believe rightly (except that perhaps 
it would be more strictly correct to say, 
Abraham himself). The ἀγαπητοὶ διὰ 
τοὺς πατέρας of ver. 28 places this refer- 
ence almost beyond doubt. Origen ex- 
plains the ῥίζα to be owr Lord. But 
He is Himself.a branch, by descent from 
Abraham and David (Isa. xi. 1; Matt. i. 1), 
if genealogically considered ; and if mysti- 
cally, the whole tree (John xv. 1). De 
Wette prefers to take as the firstfruit and 
root, the ideal theocracy founded on the 
patriarchs,—the true, faithful children of 
the patriarchs, and as the branches, those 
united by mere external relationship to 
these others. This he does, because in the 
common acceptation, the κλάδοι who are 
cut offought to be severed from their phy- 
sical connexion with Abraham, &c., which 
they are not. This objection I do not con- 
ceive applicable here: because, as we see 
evidently from ver. 23, the severing and 
re-engrafting are types, not of genealogical 


2 .«-ἰ,..5 κι γι 


10---18, 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 


431 


17 εἰ δέ τινες τῶν ° κλάδων P ἐξεκλάσθησαν, σὺ δὲ 4 ἀγρι-- phere ἃς. Ice 


dr, Xx t b] / 0 5 > a“ ‘ 8 \ 
EAAaLOS ὧν EVEKEVTPLOUHS EV AUTOS Kab TVUYKOLYWVOS 


~ n Ἐπ col t , “ 
THs "ῥίζης tHS "πιότητος τῆς 
xvii. 6. 
7. Rev.i.9only+. (-etv, Eph. v. 11.) 


’ , SUF \ 
α ἐλαίας ἐγένου, 18 μὴ 
r here ἅς. (6 times) only+. Wisd. xvi. 11 only. 


only. Levit. 
i. 17 only. 

q ver. 24 only ¢ 
see Isa. xhiv. 
14 F(not A) 
compl. Jer. 

81 Cor. ix. 23. Phil. i. 

u ver. 24. James 


there only. June. ix. 9. 


iii, 12, Rev. xi. 4 only, exc. (w. ὄρος) in Gospp. Gen. viii. 11. 


17. for evex., εκεντρισθης L. 


om ev C!(appy). 


rec ins καὶ bef trys πιοτῆτο, 


with AL[D?3P]X3 rel [vulg syrr goth «eth arm Chr, Thdrt Antch, Orig-int,]: om 


BC(D!F)N! copt Damasc{[-txt]. 
k (Cyr-jer,) Iren-int,. 


disunion and reunion, but of spiritual. 
Meanwhile, De W.’s view appears less 
simple than the ordinary one, which, as I 
hope to shew, is borne out by the whole 
passage. (2) Then, who are indicated by 
the φύραμα and the κλάδοι ISRAEL, con- 
sidered as the people of God. The lump, 
which has received its ἁγιότης from the 
ἀπαρχή, = Israel, beloved for the fathers’ 
sakes: the assemblage of branches, evolved 
from Abraham, and partaking of his holi- 
ness. But one thing must be especially 
borne in mind. As Abraham himself had 
an outer and an inner life, so have the 
branches. They have an outer life, de- 
rived from Abraham by physical descent. 
Of this, no eutting off can deprive them. It 
may be compared to the very organization 
of the wood itself, which subsists even after 
its separation from the tree. But they 
have, while they remain in the tree,an nner 
life, nourished by the circulating sap, by 
virtue of which they are constituted living 
parts of the tree: see our Lord’s parable 
of the vine and the branches, John xv. 1 ff. 
It is of this life, that their severance from 
the tree deprives them: it is this life, which 
they will re-acquire if grafted in again. 

See a very ingenious but artificial explana- 
tion in Olsh., who agrees in the main with 
De W.:—and the whole question admirably 
discussed in Tholuck. The ἁγιότης then 
here spoken of, consists in their dedication 
to God as a people—in their being physi- 
cally evolved from a holy root. This pecu- 
liar ἁγιότης (see 1 Cor. vii. 14, where the 
children of one Christian parent «are simi- 
larly called ἅγια) renders their restoration 
to their own stock a matter, not of wonder 
and difficulty, but of reasonable hope and 
probability. I may notice in passing, that 
those expositors who do not hold a restora- 
tion of the Jewish people to national pre- 
eminence, find this passage exceedingly in 
their way, if we may judge by their expla- 
nations of this ἁγιότης. K.g. Mr. Ewbank 
remarks: ‘ Holy they are, inasmuch as there 
is no decree against their restoration to 
their place of life and fruitfulness.’ Surely 
this is a new meaning of “ holy:’ the same 
would be true of a Hottentot : in his case, 


eyevou THs πι. THs ελαιας [omg της ριζη5) DF 


too, there is no decree against his reception 
into a place (and im Mr. E.’s view, the 
restoration of the Jew is nothing more) of 
life and fruitfulness in the Chureh of God. 

17.] But (introduces a hypothesis in- 
volving a seeming ineonsistency with the 
ἁγιότης just mentioned) if some of the 
branches (the tives, as ἜΠΟΣ. remarks, de- 
preciates the number, m order to check the 
Gentile pride) were broken out (from the 
tree), and thou (a Gentile believer) being 
a wild olive (aypiéAatos, the tree, spoken 
of a sprout or branch of it. Better so than, 
as Fritz., Meyer, to make ayp. an adj., ‘of 
wild olive,’ which can only be used of that 
which ts made out of the wood, as aypt- 
έλαιος σκυτάλη. Thol.) wast grafted in 
(Clem. Alex. Strom. vi.[15]§ 119, p.799 P., 
enumerates four different kinds of éyxev- 
τρισμός, using it as a general term for 
grafting and budding. The difficulty here 
is, that the Apostle reverses the natural 
process. It is the wilding, in practice, 
which is the stock, and the graft inserted 
is a sprout of the better tree. I believe 
that he does not here regard what is the 
fact in nature: but makes a supposition 
perfectly legitimate,—that a wilding graft 
on being inserted into a good tree, thereby 
becomes partaker of its qualities. No 
allusion can be intended to a practice men- 
tioned by Columella, de Re Rust. v. 9, 
of inserting a wilding graft into a good 
tree to increase the vigour and growth 
of the tree: for this would completely 
stultify the illustration—the point of which 
is, a benefit received by the wilding from 
the tree, not one conferred by the wild- 
ing on it) among them (i.e. among the 
branches,—vo7s κλάδοις : or perhaps αὐτοῖς 
may imply the remnants of the branches 
broken off. The renderings, ‘in their 
stead, ‘in loewm, as De W. after Chrys., 
Theophyl., Beza,—and ‘in their place, 
‘in loco,’ Meyer, Olsh., are surely inad- 
missible), and becamest a feliow-partaker 
(with the branches: or perhaps simply ‘a 
partaker,’ σύν not implying fellows in par- 
ticipation, but merely the participation 
itself) of the root of the fatness (of that 
root, on union with which all the develop- 


4533 


v (—) here bis. 
iii. 14 only. 
Jer. xxvil. 
(1.) 11, 38 
(Zech. x. 12) 
only. 

w ch. xv. Ll. 
Matt. xx. 12. 


John xvi.12. & 
4 Kings xviii. ΕΟ ΤΉΚας. 
14. Sir. vi. 25 
only. Bel ἃ 
Dr. 36 Theod. 
x Matt. xv. 7. 
John iv. 17 al. 2 Kings iii. 13. y = ch. iii. 3. 
vi. 17 only +. see ch. xii. 16 reff. 


below (1). 
d = 1 Cor. viii. 9. ellips., here only. 


18. for κατακαυχασαι, ov καυχασαι D'F Ambrst. 
19. for εξεκλασθησαν, εἰ κλασθησανΐ si fracti sunt] F [ D-lat! Orig-int, 1. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOT®S, 


Heb. iii. 19. dat. of cause, see ver. 30, 
a= chix. 2k 
c Paul (Acts xx. 29. ch. viii. 32. 


XI. 


Vv nw - ΠῚ x [ὃ = 9 δὲ Vv aw > 
κατακαυχῶ τῶν “ κλάδων εἰ δὲ “KaTaKavyaoat, οὐ 
σὺ τὴν " ῥίζαν * βαστάζεις, ἀλλὰ ἡ ῥίζα σέ. 
οὖν Ρ᾽ Βξεκλάσθησαν ° 


19. ἀρεῖς 


κλάδοι ἵνα ἐγὼ * ἐγκεντρισθῶ. 


"0 χ καλῶς. τῇ " ἀπιστίᾳ " ἐξεκλάσθησαν, σὺ δὲ τῇ πίστει 
μὴ ἡ τὑψηλοφρόνει, ἀλλὰ φοβοῦ: 31 εἰ γὰρ ὁ 

Ν “-“ / ΄ ’ ΄ 
θεὸς τῶν ® κατὰ ὃ φύσιν ° κλάδων οὐκ ° ἐφείσατο, [4 μή 


vi z1 Tim, 
. Col. iii, 22. b here &c. (3ce) only t. see 
1 Cor. vii. 28 al.) only, exc. 2 Pet. it. 4,5. Ezek. xxxvi. 21. 


(aAAa, so ΒΝ.) 
rec 


ins ot bef κλαδοι, with D! Ὁ c[e sil] o Thdrt [Antch,] Thl: om A B(Tischdf, expr) 


CD3FL[P |X rel Chr, [Antch, ] Damasc. 


20. for εξεκλασθησαν, ἐκλασθησαν B(Tischdf, expr) D'F: txt ACD3L[P]X& rel Chr, 


Thdrt [Antch, Damasc ]. 


[for ov, συν D'(appy ; but ν erased, as is also one letter 
before and one after moti: απιστια, Wetst). ] 
21. εἰ yap is written over an erasure by δὲ!. 


Ἐὐψηλὰ φρόνει ABN. 


rec ins wn πως, with DFL rel 


(vulg syrr goth arm] Chr,(kal οὐκ εἶπεν Οὐδὲ σοῦ φείσεται, ἀλλὰ Μή πως οὐδὲ σοῦ 


ment of life and its fertility depend: which 
is the source of the fatness. With καί, it 
will mean, of the source of life, and also of 
the development of that life itself in all 
richness of blessing) of the olive-tree, 

18.} do not boast against the 
branches (which were broken off): but if 
thou boastest against them (know that... 
or let this consideration humble thee, that 
... Similarly 1 Cor. xi. 16, εἰ δέ τις δοκεῖ 
φιλόνεικος εἶναι, ἡμεῖς τοιαύτην συνήθειαν 
οὐκ ἔχομεν, κιτιλ. See Winer, edn. 6, 
§ 66. 1a) it is not thou that bearest the 
root, but the root thee. The ground of 
humiliation is—“ Thou partakest of thy 
blessings solely by union with God’s spi- 
ritual church, which church has for its 
root that Father of the faithful, from whom 
they are descended. Regard them not 
therefore with scorn.” This is expanded 
further in ver. 20. 19.1 Thou wilt 
then (posito, that thou boastest, and de- 
fendest it) say, Branches (it would look 
as if the art. had been erased, to square 
this sentence with ver. 17, where τινὲς τ. 
κλάδων only were broken off. Or we 
might think, as Matthaéi has remarked 
(Thol.), that, ‘Gentilis loquitur arrogan- 
tius,’ using of «A. in his pride, to signify 
that the branches, generically, have now 
become subject to excision on his account. 
But the fact, now ascertained by Tischdf., 
that B omits the art., makes nearly the 
whole manuscript authority against it) 
were broken off that I (emphatic) might 
be grafted in. 20. Well (the fact, 
involving even the purpose, assumed in 
wva,is conceded. When Thol. denies this, 
he forgets that the prompting cause of 
their excision, their unbelief, is distinct 
from the divine purpose of their exci- 


sion, the admission of the Gentiles, and 
belongs to a different side of the sub- 
ject ):—through their unbelief (or per- 
haps, ‘through unbelief, abstract. There is 
often a difficulty in distinguishing the pos- 
sessive from the abstract (i. 6. generic) 
article. Thol. observes that the in- 
strumental use of the dat. and that of διά 
with the gen. differ in this, that the latter 
expresses more the zmmediate cause, the 
former the mediate and more remote. 
The explanation of this would be, that 
the dative only acquires its instrumental 
use through another, more proper attri- 
bute of the case, that of reference to, 
form or manner in which: see Bern- 
hardy, Syntax, ch. iii. 14, pp. 100—105) 
they were broken off, but thou by thy 
faith (see above :—‘ through’ indicates bet- 
ter the prompting cause of a definite act,— 
‘by, the sustaining condition of a con- 
tinued state. ‘Thus we should always say 
that we are justified through, not by, faith, 
—but that we stand dy, not through, faith) 
standest (in thy place, in the tree, opposed 
to ἐξεκλάσθησαν. ‘Thol. prefers the sense 
in ch. xiv. 4, and certainly the adoption of 
πεσόντες ver. 22, seems to shea that the 
figurative diction is not strictly preserved). 
—Be not high-minded, but fear: 

21.| for if God did not spare the natural 
branches (the branches which grewaccord- 
ing to natural development, and were not 
engrafted),—(supply ‘I fear,’ or ‘it is 
to be feared,’ or simply ‘fear,’ or ‘ take 
heed,’ as in ref.) lest He shall also not 
spare THEE. The fut. ind. with μή πως, 
the apparent incongruity of which has pro- 
bably caused the variety of reading, im- 
plies, as Herm., Soph, Aj. 272, observes 
with regard to the ind. pres., “μὴ ἐστὲ 





L.-. xen- 
στοτητα 


19---94. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 433 
d δὲ y Ξε 22 7 ᾿ e ᾿ ᾿ 6 ch. ii. 4 reff. 
πως] οὐδὲ σοῦ φείσεται. ἶδε OD XPNOTOTHTG Heat $e etree 
Γἀποτομίαν θεοῦ" ἐπὶ μὲν τοὺς 8 πεσόντας ἴ ἀποτομία, oat a 
Dies \ \ / “ >A h®*? / lal e ἢ = 
ἐπὶ δὲ σὲ “ στότης θεοῦ, ἐὰν "' ἐπιμείνης τ - πραότητι 
ΤΌΝ ΤΠ κω tie pu 128 seein, ἀν ΝΣ 
στότητι" ἐπεὶ καὶ σὺ ἵἱ ἐκκοπήσῃ. 25 κἀκεῖνοι δέ, ἐὰν Flnt-de lib. 
Se hie? t tal y b) / k2 67 le ὃ D. (-μος, 
μὴ ὃ ἐπιμείνωσιν τῇ Y ἀπιστίᾳ, * ἐγκεντρισθήσονται" δυνα- ϑιοὰ ν 50) 
κι ͵΄ ¢ \ ͵΄ ΄ 5 =ch. χῖν. 4 
τὸς γάρ ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς πάλιν * ἐγκεντρίσαι αὐτούς" τεῦ. 
9 ’ \ \ 5 a b a ΄ ΟΥ̓͂Σ , k 2 meee 1 
24 εἰ yap σὺ ἐκ τῆς ὃ᾽ κατὰ ὃ φύσιν ' ἐξεκόπης * ἀγρι- ire vic. 
, \ \ , > , > Matt. iii. 10 
ἐλαίου καὶ ' παρὰ ‘dvow * ἐνεκεντρίσθης εἰς ™KaAN~ | L. +30. 
vu. . 
4 ges n ya “p Ὁ. a; οὖ ΗΝ ἘΣ, iii. 8. 
ἔλαιον, ἢ πόσῳ ™ μᾶλλον οὕτοι ° οι κατὰ φύσιν xvii. i 
7,9. 2 . 
xi. 12 only. Deut. vii. 5. Kever:: 17. 1 ch. i. 26 (reff.) only. xis heve 
only +. Aristot. de Plant. i. 6. n ver. 12, 0 ellips., ch. iv. 14 al. 


φείσηται, ὑποτεμνόμενος τοῦ λόγου Td φορτικὸν TH ἀμφιβολίᾳ) Thdrt [Antch,] ΤῊ] Ge 
Iren-int, Cypr, Ambrst: om (corrn to avoid fut. with μη πως Ὁ) ABCR[P 47-txt] copt 


Damase [Ors, Antch, Orig-int, ] Aug. 


rec φεισήται, with Chr-montf, Chr-c, ΤῊ] 


(ec: txt [A] B(sic) CDFL[P |X rel Chr-2-mss, Thdrt Antch, Damasc. 


22. ins του bef [1st] θεου B. 


rec amoTouiay (see note), with DFL &*(but ν 


erased) rel [vulg] Clem, Eus, Chr, Thdrt Phot, (Cyr, Orig-int, Hil, Ambrst]: txt 


ABC®! (Orig,) Damase. 


rec χρηστότητα, with D*[and lat | FL rel {vulg | Clem 


Chr Cyr[-p,] Thdrt Phot [Orig-int, Hil, Ambrst]: -rn7os(sic) N: txt ABC D![-gr 


arm | (Orig,) Eus, Damasc. 


rec om θεου (see note), with D?-3FL rel demid Syr 


[syr goth ΘΒ} Clem, Orig,[(-int,) (Eus,) Cyr,] Chr, Thdrt [Hil, Ambrst Augszpe]t 


ins ABCD'® vulg copt arm Damase Pel. 


23. rec καὶ εκεινοι, with L rel Chr, Thdrt: txt ABCDFX cd Καὶ [47] Damase. 
o θεος bef ἐστιν Lahk1 17. 


emiuew., emiueywow BD'IN?}, 


(ἔσται) verentis quidem est ne quid nune sit 
(futurum sit), sed indicantis simul, putare, 
se ita esse (futurum esse), ut veretur.’ See 
Winer, edn. 6, § 56. 2. Ὁ. β, and 64. i. 7. a, 
also Col. ii. 8; Heb. iii. 12. 22.) The 
caution of the preceding verse is unfolded 
into a setting before the Gentile of the 
true state of the matter. Behold therefore 
( posito, that thou enterest into the feeling 
prompted by the last verse) the goodness 
and the severity (no allusion to ἀποτέμνω 
in its literal sense) of God :—towards those 
who fell (see on ver. 11. Here the 
πεσόντες are opposed to σύ, the figure being 
for the moment dropped: for πίπτειν can 
hardly be used of the branches, but of men) 
severity; but towards thee, the goodness 
of God (the nominatives here, as involving 
a departure from the construction, are pre- 
ferable: and the repetition of θεοῦ is quite 
in the manner of the Apostle: see 1 Cor. i. 
24, 25. Riickert thinks that because Clem. 
Alex. Padag. i. 8 [70], p. 140 P., under- 
stands χρηστότης, in ἐὰν ἐπιμείνῃς τῇ 
χρηστότητι, of the χρηστότης of men 
(τουτέστι τῇ εἰς χριστὸν πίστει), θεοῦ may 
have been a marginal gloss to guard 
against this mistake, and may have found 
its way into the text, misplaced. But 
this is hardly probable: θεοῦ is much more 
likely to have been erased as unnecessary), 
if thou abide by (retf.) that goodness ; for 
({supply otherwise : | assuming that thou 


Vou. II. 


for επιμειν., επιμενης BD'IN. 
for 


dost not abide by that goodness) thou also 
shalt be cut off (ind. fut. The placing 
only a comma at ἐκκοπήσῃ, as Meyer,— 
not Lachm. (ed. 2) and Tischend. (ed. 7 
[and 8]),—prevents the break evidently 
intended between the treatment of the 
case of the Gentile and that of the Jews). 

23.| And they moreover, if they 
continue not (not exactly the same mean- 
ing as before: the χρηστότης before being 
external and objective, this, as in ch. vi. 1, 
a subjective state) in their (see on ver. 20) 
unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is 
able to graft them in again. Some, e.g. 
Grot., represent this last clause as imply- 
ing, that God’s power to, graft them in 
again has always been the same, but has 
waited for their change of mind, to act: 
‘Nihil est preter incredulitatem quod 
Deum impediat eos rursum pro suis as- 
sumere et paterne tractare :'—but surely 
De W.’s interpretation is far better :— 
‘The Apostle obscurely includes in the 
ἔγκεντρ. the removal of their unbelief and 
the awakening of faith, and this last espe- 
cially he looks for from above :’—for, as he 
observes, the power of God would not be 
put forward, if the other were the mean- 
ing. 24.] For (proof that, besides 
God’s undoubted power to re-engraft them, 
the idea of their being so re-engrafted is 
not an unreasonable one) if THOU wast cut 
off from the olive-tree which is by 

FF 


XI. 
25 PO’ yap θέλω 


434. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 
penis ἐἐγκεντρισθήσονται τῇ ἰδίᾳ ὃ ἐλαίᾳ. 
1 Cor. ἐς ὌΝ ΓΞ Ρ > A ye 2 ¥ , \ q 7 a “ \ 
nil 2Cor. ὑμᾶς Ρ ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, TO “ μυστήριον τοῦτο, ἵνα μὴ 


iv. 13. 

q = see note. 
ch. xvi. 25 al. 
Dan. ii. 18. 

r Matt. xxv. 2, 
&c. 


only+. (-ροῦν, ver. 7.) 


ἦτε ἐν ἑαυτοῖς " φρόνιμοι, OTL ὃ πώρωσις * ἀπὸ ' μέρους τῷ 
if | \ s u " Φ \ Vv ΄ a 26 ~ 
σραὴλ, γέγονεν “aypis ov τὸ “πλήρωμα τῶν ἐεθνων 


Gen. xli. 33. w. ἐν, 1 Cor. iv. 10. w. παρά, ch. xii. 16. Prov. iii. 7. 
tch. xv. 15, 24. 2 Cor. i. 14. ii. 5 only. P. 


s Mark iii. 5. Eph. iv. 18 
Josh. xviii. 20. see 1 Cor. 


xiii. 9, ἄς. xiv. 27. Heb. ix. 5. u constr.,1 Cor. xi. 26. Gal. iii. 19 al. v = here 
only}. (ver. 12.) : 
25. θελω bef yap N: θελω Se (omg yap) m. [μας F-gr(not 6). om μὴ 


A}, 


rec (for ev) map (see ch. xii. 19), with CDLN rel Thdor-mops, Chr, Thdrt 


[Orig-int,]: om F 47. 67? latt copt (Hil, Ambrst Augsepe]: txt AB goth[?] Damase. 


for axpis, axpt ΒΒ}. 


nature wild, and wast grafted contrary 
to nature into a good olive-tree, how 
much more shall these, the natural 
branches, be engrafted in their own 
olive-tree? It is a question, as Tholuck 
remarks, whether κατὰ φύσιν and mapa 
φύσιν denote merely growth in the natural 
manner and growth (by engrafting) 7m an 
unnatural (i.e. artificial) manner,—or 
that the wild is the nature of the Gentile, 
and the good olive that of the Jew, so 
that the sense would be—‘If thou wert 
cut out of the wild olive which is thine 
naturally, and wert engrafted contrary to 
(thy) nature into the good olive, how much 
more shall these, the natural branches,’ &e. 
But then the latter part of the sentence 
does not correspond with the former. We 
either should expect the of to be omitted (as 
is done in some mss.), or must, with Fritz., 
place a comma after οὗτοι, and, taking of 
as the relative, construe, ‘How much more 
these, who shall, agreeably to (their) na- 
ture, be grafted,’ ἄς. Tholuck describes 
the question as being between a compari- 
son of engrafting and not engrafting, and 
one of engrafting the congruovs and the 
incongruous : and, on the above ground, 
decides in favour of the former,— κατὰ 
φύσιν signifying merely natural growth, 
παρὰ φ., unnatural growth, i.e. the growth 
of the grafted scion. But however this 
may fit the former part of the sentence, it 
surely cannot satisfy the requirements of 
the latter, where the κατὰ φύσιν (κλάδοι) 
are described as being engrafted (which 
would be παρὰ φύσιν) into their own olive- 
tree. We must at least assume a mixture 
of the two meanings, the antithesis of κατὰ 
and παρὰ φ. being rather verbal than lo- 
gical,—as is so common in the writings of 
the Apostle. Thus in the former case, that 
of the Gentile, the fact of natural growth 
is set against that of engrafted growth : 
whereas in the latter, the fact of congruity 
of nature (τῇ ἰδίᾳ ἐλαίᾳ) is set against in- 
congruity,—as making the re-engrafting 
more probable. 25—32.]| Prophetic 
announcement that this re-engrafting 
SHALL ACTUALLY TAKE PLACE (25—27), 


and explanatory justification of this 
divine arrangement (28—32). 25. | 
For (I do not rest this on mere hope or 
probability, but have direct revelation of 
the Holy Spirit as to its certainty) I 
would not have you ignorant, brethren 
(see reff..—used by the Apostle to an- 
nounce, either as here some authoritative 
declaration of divine truth, or some facts 
in his own history not previously known 
to his readers), of this mystery (pvor. 
Tholuck in his 4th edition classifies the 
meanings thus: (1) such matters of fact, 
as are inaccessible to reason, and can 
only be known through revelation: (2) 
such matters as are patent facts, but 
the process of which cannot be entirely 
taken in by the reason. He adds a third 
sense,—that, which is no mystery zz étself, 
but by ts figurative import. Of the first, 
he cites chap. xvi. 25; 1 Cor. ii. 7—10; 
Eph. i. 9; iii. 4; vi. 19; Col. 1. 26, al., as 
examples: of the second, 1 Cor. xiv. 2; 
xiii. 2; Eph. v. 32; 1 Tim. iii. 9, 16: of 
the third, Matt. xiii. 11; Rev. i. 20; xvii. 
5; 2 Thess. ii. 7. The first meaning is 
evidently that in our text :—‘a prophetic 
event, unattainable by human kaowledge, 
but revealed from the secrets of God’) that 
ye be not wise in your own conceits (that 
ye do not take to yourselves the credit for 
wisdom superior to that of the Jews, in 
having acknowledged and accepted Jesus 
as the Son of God,—seeing that ye merely 
ἠλεήθητε TH τούτων ἀπειθείᾳ, ver. 30),— 
that hardening (not ‘dlindness:’ see above 
on ver. 7, and Eph. iv. 18 note) has hap- 
pened in part (Calvin explains it ‘qguodam- 
modo... .qua particula voluisse mihi dun- 
taxat videtur temperare verbum alioqui 
per se asperum,’—but there is no trace of 
such a desire above, ver. 7 ;—the tives ver. 
17 establishes the ordinary acceptation, 
that a portion of Israel have been hardened. 
ἀπὸ p. may be joined with πώρωσις, or 
with γέγονεν : from the arrangement of 
the words, best with the former) to Israel, 
until (ἄχρις οὗ has been variously rendered 
by those who wish to escape from the pro- 
phetic assertion of the restoration of Israel. 


ABCD | 
FLRab 
edfgh 
kimn 
017 [47] 


ΠΡΟΣ ῬΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 


4.35 


εἰξέλθῃ, 5 καὶ ἡ οὕτως πᾶς ᾿Ισραὴχ σωθήσεται, καθὼς w=cn.v.1 
rei. 


So Calv.: “donee non infert temporis 
progressum vel ordinem, sed potius valet 
perinde ac si dictum foret, τ plenitudo 
gentium ;”—al., “while.... shall come 
in: but Thol. well observes that ἄχρ. οὗ 
with an ind., if any thing actually happen- 
ing is spoken of, may have the meaning of 
‘while, even with an aor.: but with a 
subj. of the aorist, a possible future event 
is indicated, which when zt enters puts an 
end to the former: see reff.) the comple- 
tion of the Gentiles shall have come in 
(scil. to the Church or Kingdom of God, 
where we, the Apostle and those whom he 
addresses, are already: as we use the word 
‘come in’ absolutely, with reference to 
the place in which we are. Or the word 
may be used absolutely, as it seems to be 
in Luke xi. 52, of entering into the King- 
dom of God. In order to understand 
τὸ πλήρ. τ. ἐθν., we must bear in mind the 
character of the Apostle’s present argu- 
ment. He is dealing with nations: with 
the Gentile nations, and the Jewish nation. 
And thus dealing, he speaks of τὸ πλήρ. τ. 
ἐθν. coming in, and of πᾶς ᾿Ισραήλ being 
saved: having xo regard for the time to 
the zndividual destinies of Gentiles or Jews, 
but regarding nations as each included 
under the common bond of consanguinity 
according to the flesh. The πλήρωμα τῶν 
ἐθνῶν 1 would regard then as signifying 
‘the full number, ‘the totality,’ of the 
nations, i. e. every nation under heaven, the 
prophetic subjects (Matt. xxiv. 14) of the 
preaching of the gospel. Stuart denies that 
πλήρωμα will admit of this meaning. But 
the sense which he allows to it of ““ comple- 
tion, i.q. πλήρωσις ” (?), amounts in this 
case to the same thing: that completion 
not arriving till a// have come in: the 
πλήρωμα τῶν ἐθνῶν importing that which 
πληροῖ τὰ ἔθνη. The idea of an elect num- 
ber, however true in itself (‘ plenitudo 
gentium in his intrat, qui secundum pro- 
positum vocati,’ Aug. cited by Tholuck), 
does not seem to belong to this passage). 

26.] And thus (when this condition 
shall have been fulfilled) all Israel shall 
be saved (Israel as a nation, see above: 
not individuals,—nor is there the slightest 
ground for the notion of the ἀποκατάστα- 
ous). This prophecy has been very vari- 
ously regarded. Origen, understanding by 
the ‘omnis Israel qui salvus fiet,’ the ‘re- 
liquize que electe sunt,’ yet afterwards ap- 
pears to find in the passage his notion of 
the final purification of all men,—of the 
believing, by the word and doctrine : of the 
unbelieving, by purgatorial fire. Chry- 
sostom gives no explanation: but on 


our Lord’s words in Matt. xvii. 11, he 
says, ὅταν εἴπῃ ὅτι ᾿λίας μὲν ἔρχεται 
K. ἀποκαταστήσει πάντα, αὐτὸν λίαν 
φησί, κ. τὴν τότε ἐσομένην τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων 
ertatpoprv,—and shortly after calls him 
Tis δευτέρας παρουσίας πρόδρομος, Simi- 
larly Theodoret and Gregory of Nyssa (in 
Thol.) ; so also Augustine, de Civ. Dei xx. 
29, vol. vii. p. 704,—‘ ultimo tempore 
ante judicium (per Eliam, exposita sibi 
lege) Judzeos in Christum verum esse cre- 
dituros, celeberrimum est in sermonibus 
cordibusve fidelium.’ Similarly most of 
the fathers ( Estius), and schoolmen (Thol.) ; 
—Jerome, however, on Isa. xi. 11, vol. iv. 
p. 162, says, ‘Nequaquam juxta nostros 
Judaizantes, in fine mundi quum intraverit 
plenitudo gentium, tunc omnis Israel salvus 
fiet : sed heee omnia de primo intelligamus 
adventu.’ Grotius and Wetst. believe it to 
have been fulfilled after the destruction of 
Jerusalem, when μυρίοι ἐκ περιτομῆς bes 
came believers in Christ (Eus. H. E. iii. 
35). But Thol. has shewn that neither 
could the number of Gentiles received inte 
the Church before that time have answered 
to the πλήρωμα τ. ἐθνῶν, nor those Jews to 
mas Ἰσραήλ, which expression accordingly 
Grotius endeavours to explain by a Rab- 
binical formula, that “all Israel have a 
part in the Messiah ;” which saying he 
supposes the Apostle to have used in a 
spiritual sense, meaning the Israel of God, 
as Gal. vi. 16. The Reformers for the most 
part, in their zeal to impugn the mille- 
narian superstitions then current, denied 
the future general conversion of the Jews, 
and would not recognize it even in this 
passage :— Luther did so [recognize 10], at 
one time, but towards the end of his life 
spoke most characteristically and strongly 
of what he conceived to be the impossibility 
of such national conversion (see extract in 
Tholuck’s note, p. 616) :—Calvin says: 
‘Multi accipiunt de populo Judaico, ac 
si Paulus diceret instaurandum adhue in 
religionem ut prius : sed ego Israelis nomen 
ad totum Dei populum extendo, hoe sensu, © 
Quum Gentes ingresse fuerint, simul et 
Judzi ex defectione se ad fidei obedientiam 
recipient. Atque ita complebitur salus 
totius Israelis Dei, quem ex utrisque colligi 
oportet : sic tamen ut priorem locum Jude 
obtineant, ceu in familia Dei primogeniti.’ 
Calovius, Bengel, and Olshausen, interpret 
mas Ἴσρ. of the elect believers of Israel: 
—Beza, Estius, Koppe, Reiche, Kéllner, 
Meyer, Tholuck, De Wette, al., hold that 
the words refer, as I have explained them 
above, to a national restoration of Israel to 
God’s favour. I have nct mixed with 


Fr32 


450 


x ch. vii. 24 


1 Thess. iii. 
Sal. 
y Acts iii. 26 


reff. 
τ ch. i. 18 reff. 
al Johny. 2. 
w. ἐάν, 
1 John ii. 3. 
b = Luke i. 72. 
Acts iii. 25. Ps. xxiv. 14. 
9. Sir. xlvii. 11. 
al. Ps. evii. 6. 
16. vi. 23. 


e = Gal. iv. 16. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


k / \ am | a an θ “ 
χαρίσματα καὶ ἡ ᾿ κλῆσις τοῦ θεοῦ. 


c mid., Luke xvi. 3 only. Hos. ii. 9. 


XI. 


“ ’ \ e , ἢ 
γέγραπται “Ἥξει ἐκ Σιὼν ὁ * ῥυόμενος, Y ἀποστρέψει 
Ζ > / ’ \ | »3° ΟἿ \ a “ 3 tal ς » ,’ a 
ἀσεβείας ἀπὸ ᾿Ιακώβ' "51 καὶ δ αὕτη αὐτοῖς ἡ παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ 
, 4 > / \ a 
» διαθήκη, "ὅταν “᾿ ἀφέλωμαι τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν. 38 κατὰ 
\ > / 5 Ἃ id “ 
μὲν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον “ ἐχθροὶ δι᾿ ὑμᾶς, κατὰ δὲ τὴν ἴ ἐκλογὴν 
\ 
Eayarntot διὰ τοὺς » πατέρας. 


29 i ἀμεταμέλητα γὰρ τὰ 
30 ὥςπερ γὰρ ὑμεῖς 


d Heb. χ. 4. Isa. xxvii. 
f ch. ix. 11 reff. g Matt. iii. 17. ch. i. 7 
i 2 Cor. vii. 10 only τ. k ch. v. 15, 


26. rec.ins καὶ bef ἀποστρεψει (as LXX), with 1)5.31, rel [latt syrr copt arm] Orig, 
Chr, Thdrt: om ABC D![-gr] FX [47 eth Euthal-ms, Damase].—aroorpevar F goth. 


30. om ver XN! [ins X-corr? |. 


rec ins καὶ bef υμεις, with D2-°LN? rel vulg syrr 


[arm] Chr(-montf and 2-mss): om ABC D!/and lat] F &-corr! [ἃ 47] copt goth zth 


the consideration of this prophecy the 
question of the restoration of the Jews to 
Palestine, as being clearly irrelevant to it: 
the matter here treated being, their recep- 
tion into the Church of God. καθὼς 
yéyp.| This quotation appears to have for 
its object to shew that the Redeemer was 
to come for the behoof of God’s own chosen 
people. For ἐκ Σιών, the LXX have 
ἕνεκεν Σιών (i385), the E. V. ‘to Zion.’ 
The Apostle frequently varies from the 
LXX, and a sufficient reason can generally 
be assigned for the variation: here, though 
this reason is not apparent, we cannot 
doubt that such existed, for the LXX 
would surely have suited his purpose even 
better than ἐκ, had there been no objection 
to it. It may be that the whole citation 
is intended to express the sense of prophecy 
rather than the wording of any particular 
passage, and that the Apostle has, in ἐκ 
Σιών, summed up the prophecies which 
declare that the Redeemer should spring 
out of Israel. 6 pudp. is in the Heb. ‘a 
deliverer ’"—the Apostle adopts the LXX, 
probably as appropriating the expression 
to Christ. ἀἄποστρ. «.7.A.| Heb. and 
E. V. ‘ and unto them that turn from trans- 
gression in Jacob, ὅταν ἀφέλ. from 
another place in Isa. (ref.),—hardly from 
Jer. xxxi. (LXX, xxxviii.) 34, as Stuart ;— 
and also containing a general reference to 
the character of God’s new covenant with 
them, rather than a strict reproduction of 
the original meaning of any particular 
words of the prephet. ‘ How came the 
Apostle, if he wished only to express the 
general thought, that the Messiah was 
come for Israel, to choose just this cita- 
tion, consisting of two combined passages, 
when the same is expressed more directly 
in other passages of the Old Testament? 1 
believe that the ἥξει gave occasion for the 
quotation : if he did not refer this directly 
to the second coming of the Messiah, yet it 


allowed of being indirectly applied to it.” 
Tholuck. 28.] With regard indeed 
tothe gospel (i.e. ‘ viewed from the gospel 
side,’ looked on as we must look on them 
if we confine our view solely to the prin- 
ciples and character of the Gospel), they 
(the Jewish people considered as a whole) 
are enemies (θεοῦ : not μου, as Theodoret, 
Luther, Grot., al.—scil. in a state of 
exclusion from God’s favour: not active, 
‘enemies to God,’ as Grot., Bengel) for 
your sakes; but with regard to the 
election (viz. of Israel to be God’s people, 
see vv. 1, 2—not that of Christians, as 
Aug. al.:—i.e. ‘looked on as God’s elect 
people’), they are beloved for the fathers’ 
sakes (i.e. not for the merits of the fathers, 
but because of the covenant with Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob, so often referred to by 
God as a cause for His favourable remem- 
brance of Israel). 29.) For (explana- 
tion how God’s favour regards them still, 
though for the present cast off) the gifts 
(generally) and calling (as the most 
excellent of those gifts. That calling seems 
to be intended ‘qua posteros Abrahz in 
foedus adoptavit Deus,’ Calv. A very 
similar sentiment is found ch. iii. 3, where 
the same is called ἡ πίστις τ. θεοῦ. But 
the words are true not only of this calling, 
but of every other. Bengel says, ‘ dona, 
erga Judeos: vocatio, erga gentes :’ simi- 
larly of κλῆσις, De W., ‘die Berufung 
burd) das Ev.” But thus the point of 
the argument seems to be lost, which is, 
that the Jews being once chosen as God’s 
people, will never be entirely cast off) 
[of God cannot be repented of, i. e.] 
are irretractable (do not admit of a 
change of purpose. The E. V., ‘ without 
repentance,’ is likely to mislead. Compare 
Hosea xiii. 14). 30] For (illustra- 
tion of the above position) 88 ye (manu- 
script evidence is too decided against the 
καί to allow of its being retained: but we 


ABCD 
FLRab 
cdtgh 
klmn 
017 [47] 


“νυν 
nev. C. 
ABDF 
LNabec 
dtghk 
Imno 
17 | 47] 


27—33. 


™ πγοτὲ 


» 
P ἀπειθείᾳ, 51 οὕτως καὶ οὗτοι νῦν " ἠπείθησαν, τῷ 3 ὑμετέρῳ 
“ ct ἐ 
Υ̓ 5 / 5 vA \ Ρ] \ ο =r θῶ 
ἔλεει S va καὶ αὐτοὶ ° ἐλεηθῶσιν. 


θεὸς " τοὺς 


ο ἐλεήσῃ. “35 ὦ Κ᾽ βάθος 5" πλούτου καὶ 533 σοφίας καὶ ¥*® γνώ- 


Tose we ets τ. 10. 


r Luke i. 50, &c. ch. ix. 23. 

t Luke v.6. Gal. iii. 22, 23 only. 
ἀμηχανίαν συγκλεισθείς, Diod. Sic. 

V Gor ix. 22. x17. 2 Cor: v.10; 14: 
aly) isa. vil. 11» x ‘ch. ii. 4 reff. 
iii. 10. 41 Cor. xii. 8. 


Eph. ii. 4. 
Josh. vi. 1 al. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS.. 


΄ 5 3 / 
ν πάντας ἃ εἰς Ῥ ἀπείθειαν, ἵνα 


Prov. xxi. 10: Hos. ii. 23 (25) A 
6. Heb. iv. 6, 11 only t. (-θής, ch. i. 30.) constr., ver. 20. 
Ps. exliii. 2. 


ἘΠΕ 1 
Eph. iv. 13. Phil. ii. 


437 


» aretOno-are τῷ θεῷ, νῦν δὲ ο ἠλεήθητε τῇ τούτων m -- John ἴα. 


13. ch. vii. 
9 al. 
n = ch. ii. 8. 
x. 21. Deut. 
xxi. 20. 
o ch. ix. 15, &c, 
Paes Matt. 
ats 1 Cor; 
vii. 25. 
2 Cor. iv. 1. 
1 Tim. i. 13, 
p here bis. Eph. ii. 2. ν. 6. Col. iii. 
q = 1Cor. xv. 31. see ch. xv. 4. 
s inversion of words, 2 Cor. ii. 4 reff. 
u here only. Ps. lxxvii. 50,62. εἰς τοιαύτην 
So Dion. Hal. vill. p. 520. Polyb. iii. 63. 3, and fr. 
21. P. w ch. viii. 39. Eph. iii. 18 
y Rev. v. 12 only. z=1Cor.i.21. Eph. 


32 τὰ συνέκλεισεν γὰρ ὁ 


v | y 
TOUS TAVTaS 


b 1 Cor. xiii. 2. 


Chr-2-mss; ] Damasce ΤῊ] [ Orig-int,] Jer Augsepe.—mote bef vuers A: ποτε και ὑμεις 
1 P κω μ 


b o. vuve B Chr,. 


avro. ins votepov 5. 17. 98: 
BD!(&) {copt] Damase.—om αὐτοι XN}. 


32. for Ist τοὺς mavras, ta παντα D!, παντα F [Tren,: 


[Ambrszpe ]. 


may suspect that it has been struck out 
as superfluous, in ignorance (Thol.) of the 
Greek usage which often doubles καί in 
two parallel clauses) in times past were 
disobedient to God (nationally—as Gen- 
tiles, before the Gospel) but now have (lit. 
‘were compassionated,’ historical) received 
mercy (scil. by admission into the church 
of God) through (as the occasion; the 
breaking off of the natural branches giving 
opportunity for the grafting in of you) the 
disobedience of these (i.e. unbelief, con- 
sidered as an act of resistance to the divine 
will: see 1 John iii. 23), so these also have 
now (under the Gospel) disobeyed (are now 
in a state of unbelieving disobedience), in 
order that through the mercy shewed to 
you (viz. on occasion of the fulness of the 
Gentiles coming in) they also may have 
merey shewn them (‘the objective view 
corresponding to the subjective eis τὸ 
παρα(ζ(ηλῶσαι αὐτούς, ver 11.’ De W.). 

Some place the comma after ἐλέει 
instead of ἠπείθησαν, and construe, either, 
as Erasm., Calv., al., ‘they have disobeyed 
through (upon occasion of) the mercy shewn 
to you,’ or as Vulg., Luth., Estius, al., 
‘they have become disobedient to the mercy 
shewn to you. But thus the parallelism 
is weakened, and the μυστήριον of ver. 25 
lost sight of. Examples of the emphatic 
word being placed before ἵνα are found in 
reff. 82. ] For (foundation of the last 
stated arrangement in the divine purposes) 
God shut up (not shut up together; σύν, 
as in so many cases, implying, not co-par- 
ticipation on the part of the subjects of 
the action, but the character of the action 
itself: so in ‘concludere.’ The sense is 
here as in the examples, which might 
be multiplied by consulting Schweig- 
heuser’s Index to Polyb., ‘to involve in,’ 


cweabnee C (m ?) Thl. 
31. for ουτοι, αυτοι D'F [syr-marg Cyr-p,: istz latt Orig-int, Ambrst]. 
παλιν Cyr[-p, |; 


aft 
vuv (possibly mechanical repetition) 


omnia} latt Iren-int, 


‘to subject to.’ The aor., which should be 
kept in the rendering, refers to the time of 
the act in the divine procedure) all (the 
reading τὰ πάντα has probably been in- 
troduced from Gal. iii. 22) men in (into) 
disobedience (general here,—every form, 
unbelief included), that He may have 
mercy on all. No mere permissive act of 
God must here be understood. The Apostle 
is speaking of the divine arrangement by 
which the guilt of sin and the mercy of 
God were to be made manifest. He treats 
it, as elsewhere (see ch. ix. 18 and note), 
entirely with reference to the act of God, 
taking no account, for the time, of human 
agency ; which however, when treating of 
us and our responsibilities, he brings out 
into as prominent a position: see as the 
most eminent example of this, the closely 
following ch. xii. 1, 2. But there re- 
mains some question, who are the ot πάντες 
of both clauses? Arethey thesame? And 
if so, 7s any support giver to the notion of 
an ἀποκατάστασις of all men? Certainly 
they are identical: and‘signify ali men, 
without limitation. But the ultimate dif- 
ference between the all men who are shut 
up under disobedience, and the all men 
upon whom mercy is shewn is, that by 
all men this mercy is not accepted, and 
so men become self-excluded from the 
salvation of God. Gop’s ACT remains 
the same, equally gracious, equally uni- 
versal, whether men accept His mercy or 
not. This contingency is here not in 
view: but simply God’s act itself. We 
ean hardly understand the οἱ πάντες na- 
tionally. The marked universality of the 
expression recalls the beginning of the 
Epistle, and makes it a solemn conclusion 
to the argumentative portion, after which 
the Apostle, overpowered with the view 


458 


ΠΡΟΣ ῬΡΩΜΔΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 


ΧΙ, 34—36. 


6 a e ο > / \ d / >’ “ \ e ᾽ 
chereonly+. σεως θεοῦ, ὡς “ ἀνεξεραύνητα τὰ ἃ κρίματα αὐτοῦ καὶ © ἀνεξ- 


Proy. xxy. , ς f< \ ; a 
3symm. φγνίαστοι αἱ ἴ ὁδοὶ αὐτοῦ. 
Sa geet + Ε Σ 
et. 1. . 
ἃ ch. ν.16. Ps. μ) τις 
exviii. 75. 
e Eph. ili. 8 
only. Joby. 


f = Acts xiii. 10. 
h here only. 
2 Macc. vii. 37 only.) 


9. ix. 10. xxxiv, 24 only. 
ii. 16, from Isa. xl. 13. 


14 AN Ald. (4 Kings vi. 11. 


35.) Luke xiv. 14 bis. 1 Thess, iii. 9. 2 Thess. i. 6 only. L.P.H. Isa. Ixiii. 7. 


33. ins του bef θεου F 17. 
34. for κυριου, θεου D'(and lat!) Zeno,. 


of the divine Mercy and Wisdom, breaks 
forth into the sublimest apostrophe evist- 
ing even in the pages of Inspiration itself. 

33—36. | Admiration of the good- 
ness and wisdom of God, and humble 
ascription of praise to Him. 33. | 
There is some doubt whether σοφίας and 
γνώσεως are genitives after πλούτου, as in 
E, V., or parallel with it. The former 
view is adopted by Thom. Aquin., Luther, 
Beza, Calvin, Estius, Reiche, and al. The 
grounds on which Reiche supports it are 
thus given and refuted by Tholuck: (1) 
“If these three genitives are co-ordinate, 
καί must stand either before all, or before 
the last only.” But in the case of three 
nouns placed co-ordinately in this manner, 
καί is prefixed to the two latter only, 
see ch. ii. 7; xii. 2; Luke v.17. (2) 
““πλοῦτος is no qualitative idea, but only 
a quantitative idea.” But wherein the 
riches consist, is ordinarily indicated by 
the context; and here there can be but 
littie doubt on the matter, if we compare 
ch. x. 12; in Phil. iv. 19 we also read of 
the πλοῦτος of God. This also answers 
(3) “that πλοῦτος without an adjunct 
expresses no definite attribute of God.” 
(4) “in the following citation, vv. 34, 35, 
two only of these, copia and γνῶσις, are 
mentioned.” But this may be doubted. 
Chrys. says, on ver. 36, αὐτὸς εὗρεν, αὐτὸς 
ἐποίησεν, αὐτὸς συγκροτεῖ. Kal γὰρ καὶ 
πλούσιός ἐστι, καὶ οὐ δεῖται παρ᾽ ἑτέρου 
λαβεῖν: καὶ σοφός ἐστι, καὶ οὐ δεῖται συμ- 
βούλου. τί λέγω συμβούλου ; οὐδὲ εἰδέναι 
τις δύναται τὰ αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ἢ μόνος αὐτὸς 
ὁ πλούσιος Kk. σοφός. Hom. xix. p. 653. 
Perhaps this latter is altogether too fine- 
drawn; but it is favoured by Bengel, 
Olsh., and Tholuck. I prefer therefore 
the view of Chrys,, Theodoret, Grot., 
Bengel, Tholuck, Kéllner, and Olsh.,—to 
take πλούτου, σοφίας, γνώσεως, as three 
co-ordinate genitives: mA. denoting the 
riches of the divine goodness, in the 
whole, and in the result just arrived at, 
ver. 32: σοφ., the divine wisdom of pro- 
ceeding in the apparently intricate vicissi- 
tudes of nations and individuals: γνώσ. (if 


Heb. iii. 10. Rey. xv. 3. Ps. xvii. 21. 
2 Kings xy. 12. 


34. / \ » 8 fal / 
TIS γὰρ ἔγνω ἕνουν κυρίου; 


΄, wn 3 7 ; / 
"σύμβουλος αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο ; 85 ἢ τίς + προέδωκεν 
> a“ \ k ᾽ 7 > A 86 “ ] 5 > a \ 
αὐτῷ καὶ ὃ ἀνταποδοθήσεται αὐτῷ; 59 ὅτι 1 ἐξ αὐτοῦ Kal 


51 Cor. 
Jos xli. 3 Heb. = Isa. xl. 
k ch. xii. 19. (and Heb. x. 30, from Deut, xxxii. 
7 11 Cor. viii. 6. 


i here only. 


(ανεξεραυνητα, so ABIN.) 


a distinction be necessary, which can hardly 
be doubted) the divine knowledge of all 
things from the beginning,—God’s com- 
prehension of the end and means together 
in one unfathomable depth of Omniscience. 
How unsearchable are His judg- 
ments (the determinations of His wisdom, 
regarded as in the divine Mind; answering 
perhaps to γνῶσις. So Thol.: De W. how- 
ever denies this meaning to κρίματα, and 
renders it decrees, referring it to the blind- 
ing of the Jews) and His ways unable to 
be traced out (His methods of proceed- 
ing, answering to σοφία, Thol. But this 
is perhaps too subtle). 34. | For (con- 
firmation of ἀνεξερ. and ἄνεξιχν. by a cita- 
tion from Scripture. It is made from two 
separate places in the LXX, more perhaps 
as a reminiscence than as a direct quota- 
tion) who hath known the mind (γνῶσις, 
but see above) of the Lord ? or who hath 
been His counsellor (σοφία 9) ἢ 
35. | or who hath previously given to Him, 
and it shall be repaid to him *—from Job 
xli. 3 (11 E. V.), where the LXX (xli.2) have 
tis (add ἐστιν ὃς A) ἀντιστήσεταί μοι, κ. 
ὑπομενεῖ; But the Heb. is ὈΞΦΝῚ 22977 Ὁ, 
‘who hath anticipated (i,e. by the con- 
text, conferred a benefit on) me, that 
I may repay him?’ And to this the 
Apostle alludes, using the third person. 
We can hardly doubt that this ques- 
tion refers to the freeness and richness of 
God’s mercy and love, 36.] For 
(ground of vv. 33—35. Well may all this 
be true of Him, for) of Him (in their 
origin :—* quod dicit, “ex ipso,” hoe ip- 
sum, quod sumus indicat: Orig. Chrys. 
somewhat differently: see above on ver. 
33), and through Him (in their subsistence 
and disposal: —** per Ipsum,” quod per ejus 
providentiam dispensamur in vita:” Orig.), 
and unto Him (‘“in Ipso,” (so Vulg, and 
some other vss.) quod perfectio omnium et 
finis in Ipso erit tune, cum erit Deus omnia 
in omnibus:’ Orig.) are all things (not 
only, though chiefly, men,—but the whole 
creation). Origen remarks, ‘ Vides, quo- 
modo in ultimis ostendit, quod in omnibus 
que supra dixit signaverit, mysterium Tri- 


[P ὠω- 


car ...} 


bb 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


459 


lal \ Ψ » , a ΄ 
ἰδι αὐτοῦ καὶ ets αὐτὸν ππτὰ πάντα αὐτῷ ἡ " δόξα « -- σοι. τ6. 


εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ἀμήν. 


XII. 1 Παρακαλῶ οὖν ὑμᾶς. ἀδελφοί, 

4 οἰκτιρμῶν τοῦ θεοῦ, " παραστῆσαι τὰ σώματα ὑμῶν 
ca / S. lal lal 

θυσίαν ζῶσαν, ἁγίαν, " εὐάρεστον τῷ θεῷ, τὴν ' λογικὴν 


iii, 21. 
10. 2Cor. x. 1. 
xiii. 15. 


1 Thess. iv. 2. 


o == and constr., Acts xxiv. 4. xxvii. 34 al. 


r Luke ii. 22. ch. vi. 13, ἄς. 


Rev. iv. 11]. 
Job viii. 3. 
n = Luke ii. 14. 
xvii. 18. 
John ix. 24. 
Acts xii. 23. 
Jude 25 al. 
Ps. xcv. 7. 
ellips., ch. 
xvi. 27. Gal. 
i. 5. Eph. 
p = ch. xv. 30. i Cor. i. 
Col. iii. 12. Heb. x. 28 only. Isa. 
s here bis. ch. xiv. 18. 2 Cor. v. 


Ρ διὰ τῶν 


2 Cor. ΟΣ Phil. ii. 1. 
PSs ΎΛΕΣ 


9. Eph.v.10. Phil. iv.18, Col. iii.20. Tit. ii.9. Heb. xiii.21 only +. Wisd. iv. 10. ix. 10 only. (-τως, 


Heb. xii. 28 only. -Tetv, Heb. xi. 5.) 


t 1 Pet. ii. 2 only +. προςφέρουσιν (οἱ ἄγγελοι) 


κυρίῳ... λογικὴν . . προςφοράν, Test. xii. Patrum, p. 547 Ὁ. 


36. aft awvas ins των awvwy FG? [fuld demid tol spec,(om,) Syr Orig-int, Cypr, 


Hil, ]. 


Cuar. XII. 1. tw θεω bef evaperrov A[P]X! vulg [spec Damasc Orig-int, Ambr, 


Ambrst] Augszpe. 


nitatis. Sicut enim in presenti loco quod 
ait, “quoniam ex Ipso, et per Ipsum, 
et in Ipso sunt omnia:” convenit illis 
dictis, que idem Apostolus in aliis memorat 
locis, cum dicit (1 Cor. viii.6): “‘Unus Deus 
Pater ex quo omnia, et unus Dominus nos- 
ter Jesus Christus, per quem omnia :” et 
item in Spiritu Dei dicit revelari omnia, 
et per heec designat, in omnibus esse pro- 
videntiam Trinitatis: ita et cum dicit ‘‘alti- 
tudo divitiarum,” Patrem, ex quo omnia 
dicit esse, significat: et sapientic altitu- 
dinem, Christum, qui est sapientia ejus, 
ostendit: et scientiz altitudinem, Spiritum 
Sanctum, qui etiam alta Dei novit, decla- 
rat.’ And, if this be rightly understood,— 
not of a formal allusion tothe Three Per- 
sons in the Holy Trinity, but of an wmplicit 
reference (as 'Thol.) to the three attributes 
of Jehovah respectively manifested to us by 
the three coequal and coeternal Persons, — 
there can hardly be a doubt of its correct- 
ness. The objection of De Wette, that not 
eis, but ἐν, would be the designation of the 
Holy Spirit-and His relation to the Uni- 
verse, applies to that part of Origen’s Com- 
mentary which rests on the Vulg. a ipso 
and to the idea of a formal recognition : 
but not to Tholuck’s remark, illustrated 
from ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων κ. διὰ πάντων K. ἐν πᾶσιν 
ἡμῖν, Eph. iv. 6, as referring to εἷς θεός, εἷς 
κύριος, ἕν πνεῦμα. Only those who are 
dogmatically prejudiced can miss seeing 
that, though St. Paul has never definitively 


expressed the doctrine of the Holy Trinity ᾿ 


in a definite formula, yet he was conscious 
of it as a living reality. 

XII. 1—XV. 18.] PracticaL EXHOR- 
TATIONS FOUNDED ON THE DOCTRINES 
BEFORE STATED. And first, ch. xii. gene- 
ral exhortations to a Christian life. 

1.] οὖν may apply to the whole doctrinal 
portion of the Epistle which has preceded, 
which, see Eph. iv. 1; 1 Thess. iv. 1, seems 


the most natural connexion,—or to ch. xi. 
35, 36 (so Olsh., Meyer), or to the whole 
close of ch. xi. (so Tholuck.) Theodoret 
remarks: ὅπερ ἔστιν ὀφθαλμὸς ἐν σώματι, 
τοῦτο τῇ ψυχῇ πίστις, καὶ τῶν θείων ἢ 
γνῶσις. δεῖται δὲ ὅμως αὕτη τῆς πρακτι- 
κῆς ἀρετῆς, καθάπερ ὃ ὀφθαλμὸς χειρῶν 
καὶ ποδῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων μορίων τοῦ 
σώματος. τούτου δὲ χάριν ὃ θεῖος ἀπό- 
στολος τοῖς δογματικοῖς λόγοις καὶ τὴν 
ἠθικὴν διδασκαλίαν προΞςτέθεικε. 

διά] introduces, as in reff., an idea which 
is to give force to the exhortation. 
οἰκτιρμῶν | viz. those detailed and proved 
throuyhout the former part of the Epistle. 
δ αὐτῶν οὖν τούτων, φησί, παρακαλῶ. 
δι’ ὧν ἐσώθητε' ὥςπερ ἂν εἴ τις τὸν μεγάλα 
εὐεργετηθέντα ἐντρέψαι βουλόμενος, αὐτὸν 
τὸν εὐεργετήσαντα ἱκέτην ἀγάγοι. Chrys. 
Hom. xx. p. 606. παραστῆσαι] the 
regular word for bringing to offer in 
sacrifice (reff.). τ. σώματα Up. | 
Most Commentators say, merely for ὑμᾶς 
avtovs,—to suit the metaphor of a sacri- 
fice, which consisted of a body: some 
(Thol., al.), because the body is the ergan 
of practical activity, which practical ac- 
tivity is to be dedicated to God: better 
with Olsh.and De Wette,—as an indication 
that the sanctification of Christian life is ta 
extend to that part of man’s nature which 
is most completely under the bondage of 
sin. θυσίαν] Chrys. strikingly says, 
πῶς ἂν γένοιτο τὸ σῶμα, φησί, θυσία; 
μηδὲν ὀφθαλμὸς πονηρὸν βλεπέτω, καὶ 
γέγονε θυσία: μηδὲν ἣ γλῶσσα λαλείτω 
αἰσχρόν, καὶ γέγονε mpospopa μηδὲν ἣ 
χεὶρ πραττέτω παράνομον, καὶ γέγονεν 
ὁλοκαύτωμα. μᾶλλον δὲ οὐκ ἀρκεῖ ταῦτα, 
ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἡμῖν ἐργασίας 
δεῖ, ἵνα ἡ μὲν χεὶρ ἐλεημοσύνην ποιῇ, τὸ 
δὲ στόμα εὐλογῇ τοὺς ἐπηρεάζοντας, ἡ δὲ 
ἀκοὴ θείαις σχολάζῃ διηνεκῶς ἀκροάσεσιν. 
ἡ γὰρ θυσία οὐδὲν ἔχει ἀκάθαρτον, ἡ θυσία 


440 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. GRE 
, co oa 9 \ \ , ὶ a 
nch.ix.dret, ἢ λατρείαν ὑμῶν, 3 Kal μὴ Y συνσχηματίζεσθαι τῷ Κ᾽ αἰῶνι 
v 1 Pet. i. 14 ͵7 > \ r nan Ἴ / nw 
ly +. La Σ y 
oulyt. τουτῷ,, ee, μεταμορφοῦσθαι τῇ ἀνα ei τοῦ 
< Σ a Ν a a 
Gorio. 2 νοός, ὃ εἰς TO ἢ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τί τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ 
ii. 6 (bis) 416, Yo 4 θὸ Neg Se \ ghey 3 , Ἂν a \ 
L.P.only, τὸ ὥγαθον καὶ δ εὐάρεστον Kat “ τέλειον. λέγω γὰρ ἃ διὰ 
exc. τς ces an / a / “Ὁ al 
BES χὰ, τῆς ὁ χάριτος τῆς " δοθείσης μοι παντὶ τῷ ὄντι ἐν ὑμῖν, 


Ε Matt. xvii. 2 


(| Mk. 2Cor.iii. 1S only +. Ps. xxxiii. 1 Symm. y Tit. iii. 5 only +. 2 =eh.d. cog Goh sls, 
a ch. iv. 11 reff. ,.. D Luke xiv. 19. 1 Cor, ili. 18. Eph.v.10, Phil. i. 10. Prov. xvii. 3. c = Matt. 
νυ. 48. χὶχ. 21. Phil. iii. 15 al. Gen. vi. 9. d = Gal. i. 15. iii. 18, iv. 23. Philem. 22. e 1 Cor. 

i. 4 reff. 


2. (cvvexnu., So BIDFRN.) rec -σχηματιζεσθε and μεταμορῴφουσθε, with BIL[P] 
rel latt syrr copt goth [(ath) arm] Clem, Chr, Thdrt Damase [ Phot-e, Orig-int, 
Cypr, Ambrst]|: -a: and -e [ D?-3-gr] ἢ 17; -e and -αι δὲ ὁ οἱ : txt AB? D![-gr] Fg k ΤῊ]. 

awvio B. rec aft voos ins vuwr, with D§L[ PIX rel [latt syrr goth (ath) arm 
Cyr,] Thdrt [Damase Orig-int, Ambrst] Augsepe: om AB D!/-gr] F [47] copt Clem, 


Orig, ] Cypro. om 2nd του F. 


ἀπαρχὴ τῶν ἄλλων ἐστί. καὶ ἡμεῖς Tol- 
νυν καὶ χειρῶν καὶ ποδῶν καὶ στόματος 
καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ἀπαρχώμεθα τῷ 
θεῷ. Hom. xx. p. 656 f. ζῶσαν] In 
opposition to the Levitical θυσίαι, which 
were slain animals, Our great sacrifice, 
the Lord Jesus, having been slain for us, 
and by the shedding of His Blood perfect 
remission having been obtained διὰ τῶν 
οἰκτιρμῶν Tov θεοῦ, we are now enabled to 
be offered to God no longer by the shedding 
of blood, but as living sacrifices. This 
application of the figure of a sacrifice occurs 
in Philo, who (‘quod omnis probus liber,’ 
§ 12, vol. ii., p. 457) describes the Essenes 
as οὐ ζῶα καταθύοντες, ἀλλ᾽ ἱεροπρεπεῖς τὰς 
ἑαυτῶν διανοίας κατασκευάζειν ἀξιοῦντες. 
See also Jos. Antt. xviii. 1. 5. τῷ θεῷ 
belongs to εὐάρεστον, not to παραστῆσαι, 

τὴν λογικὴν λατρ. ὑμ.} “This 
may certainly be in apposition with θυσίαν 
(Reiche, Meyer), the acc. denoting the 
result and intention ;—@voia however 
alone can hardly be called a λατρεία, but 
παραστῆσαι θυσίαν may: therefore it is 
preferable to take the acc. as in apposition 
with the whole sentence, and supply some 
verb of exhorting: see 1 Tim. ii. 6; 
2 Thess. i. 5.” Tholuck. λογικήν 
(reff.) is opposed to σαρκικήν, see Heb. vii. 
16. So Chrys.,—ovdev ἔχουσαν σωματικόν, 
οὐδὲν παχύ, οὐδὲν αἰσθητόν. Theodoret, 
Grot., al., take it as ‘ having reason, ‘ra- 
tional,’ opposed to sacrifices of animals 
which have no reason: Photius, Basil, and 
Calvin, ‘rational,’ as opposed to super- 
stitious. But the former meaning is far 
the best, and answers to the πνευματικὰς 
θυσίας of 1 Pet. ii. 5. 2.) συνσχη- 
ματίζεσθαι is not imperative in sense, but 
dependent on παρακαλῷ. (Of course, in 
all such questions betwen ε and a, the 
confusing element of itacism comes in: 
but in no ease where both forms are equally 


adinissible in the text, can the mere sus- 
picion of itacism be allowed to decide the 
question.) 6 αἰὼν οὗτος, here, the 
whole world of the ungodly, as contrasted 
with the spiritual kingdom of Christ. 

The dat. ἀνακαινώσει is not the instrament 
by which, but the manner in which the 
metamorphosis takes place: that wherein it 
consists: compare περιετμήθητε περιτομῇ 
ἀχειροποιήτῳ, Col. ii. 11. εἰς TO δο- 
κιμάζειν, that ye may prove, viz. in this 
process and the active Christian life accom- 
panying it, compare reff. Eph., Phil. : not 
‘that ye may be able to prove,’ ‘acquire 
the faculty of proving,’ as Bucer, Olsh., 
Rickert: the Apostle is not speaking of ac- 
quiring wisdom here, but of practical proof 
by experience. τὸ ἀγαθ. κ. evap. K. 
τέλ. are not epithets of τὸ θέλημα τ. θεοῦ 
as in E. V., for in that case they would be 
superfluous, and in part (τέλειον) inappli- 
cable: but abstract neuters, see ver. 9, 
that ye may prove what 18 the will of 
God (viz. that which is) good and accept- 
able (to Him) and perfect. The non- 
repetition of the art. shews that the adjec- 
tives all apply to the same thing. 
3—21.| Particular exhortations grounded 
on and expanding the foregoing general 
ones. ‘This is expressed by the γάρ, which 
resumes, and binds to what has preceded. 
And first, an exhortation to humility in 
respect of spiritual gifts, vv. 3—8. 

8.) λέγω, a mild expression for ‘I com- 
mand: enforced as a command by διὰ τ. 
x...» ‘by means of my apostolic office,’ 
‘of the grace conferred on me to guide and 
exhort the Church τ᾿ reff. παντὶ τῷ 
ὄντι ἐν ὑμ..,---ἃ strong bringing out of the 
individual application of the precept. οὐχὶ 
τῷ δεῖνι καὶ τῷ δεῖνι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ 
ἄρχοντι κ. ἀρχομένῳ, Kk. δούλῳ κ. ἐλευ- 
θέρῳ, κ. ἰδιώτῃ κ. σοφῷ, kK. γυναικὶ κ. ἀνδρί, 
kK. νέῳ κ΄ γέροντι. Chrys. Hom. xx. p. 603. 


ABDF 
LEP |x 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


— Ὁ συυὰς 


2—Bh, ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS 


μὴ f Urepppovetv ὃ παρ᾽ ὃ δεῖ " φρονεῖν, ἀλλὰ ὃ φρονεῖν * εἰς 


441 


f here only +. 


Job xxxi. 
iy os A ς if rd - \ B , 7 πα σαν τα 
τὸ 'σωφρονεῖν, "ἑκάστῳ ὡς ὁ θεὸς * ἐμέρισεν τ μέτρον ULE aH 
ἢ ΄ \ > \ ΄ \ ire 
πίστεως. * πκαθάπερ yap ἐν ἑνὶ σώματι πολλὰ ° μέλη ἐμαί δ 
f \ Ν 7) 7 \ fal ΄ 
ἔχομεν, τὰ δὲ “μέλη πάντα οὐ τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχει Ῥ πρᾶξιν, τον r00, 


5 οὕτως 4 οἱ « πολλοὶ ἕν σῶμά ἐσμεν ἐν χριστῷ, τὸ δὲ ἴ καθ᾽ 
εἷς ἀλλήλων 5 μέλη. 
"χάριν τὴν ᾿ δοθεῖσαν ἡμῖν ἃ διάφορα, " 


6 ἔχοντες δὲ 


xxviii. 22 al. 2 Macc. xiv. 26. 
iy. 7 only t+. k and constr., 1 Cor. vii. 17. (111. 5.) 
13. 2Cor. χ. 15: Heb. vii. 2. Proy. xxix, 24. 


n ch. iv. 6 reff. o ch. vi. 13 reff. 


(See 2 Macc. 
ix. 12.) 
constr. inf., 


5 ᾿ δ * Matt. v. 39. 

χάρισματα, κατα τὴν ἔμεν 

= chy ἘΠῚ 

εἴτε ἡ προφητείαν, © τοῦ 
ἢ Acts 

i Mark v.15. Luke viii. 35. 2 Cor. v. 13. Tit. j i. 6.” Leen 
= Mark vi. 4. Luke xii, 
m 2 Cor. x.13. Eph. iv. 7, 13,16. = Paul only. 

p = here only. (Acts xix. 15 reff.) Sir. xi.10. Xen. 


{John viii. 9. 1 Rey. 


Mem. ii. 1. 6. gq = ch. y. Ip ΒΗ: r Mark xiv. 19. 
iv. 8. 3 Macc. v. 34. sch. v. 15. Vie cok ΩΝ οἰ ΩΣ, ΧΙ alee only, exc. 1 Pet. iv. 10 +. 
t ver. 3. u = Heb. ix. 10 (i. 4. viii. 6) only. Deut. xxii. 9. y so 1 Cor. iii. 


w = 1Cor. xii. 10. xiii. 2 41. (Rev,i. 3.) see Sir. xxiv. 33. 


22. Col. i. 16, 


8. aft xapiros ins του θεου Ld f m 5, 48. 67. 73. 113-4-5-20-4 fuld guelph [syr 


goth] eth arm Thi Augszpe. for 6, a B?: om παρ o Se dpovew F 70. 
bef o θεος (see 1 Cor vii. 17) A guelph ‘fam tol] Syr [Orig-int, Ambrst]. 
4. for καθαπερ, wstep D'F. 


εμερισεν 


rec μελη bef πολλα, with AL[P] rel Chr, [ Bas, 


Antch, } Damase (ic : xt BDFN Jatt Thdrt ΤῊ] [Orig-int, Ambrst Augsepe ]- 


παντα bef weAn F(not G), so also vulg Syr [ Ambrst Augsepe |- 
5. om εσμεν FB, rec (for τοὶ 


o (alteration to suit cis), with D2-3[L] rel vulg 


(and F-lat) Syr:Eus, Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] (Ee: txt ABD! F-gr ΝΡ 47-txt] Antch, Damase. 


[6. for δε, ουν P: enim Orig-int,. Sapepav D}, | 


μὴ ὕπερφρ. x.7.A.] There isa play on 
the words φρονεῖν, ὑπερφρονεῖν, and σωφρο- 
vety, which can only be clumsily conveyed 
- in another language: ‘not to be high- 
minded, above that which he ought to be 
minded, but to be so minded, as to be sober- 
minded.’ Wetst. quotes from Charondas in 
Stobeeus, Sentent. xlii., προσποιείσθω δὲ 


ἕκαστος τῶν πολιτῶν σωφρονεῖν μᾶλλον ἢ 


φρονεῖν,--- πὰ from Thucyd. il. 62, ---ἰέναι 
δὲ τοῖς ἐχθροῖς ὁμόσε, μὴ φρονήματι μόνον, 
ἀλλὰ καὶ καταφρονήματι. But φρονεῖν 
must ποῦ be taken, with Calvin, ‘admonet ut 
eatantum cogitemus et meditemur, que nos 
sobrios et modestos reddere potuerunt :’— 
the thoughts implied in it being, thoughts 
of one’s self. ἑκάστῳ ὡς ΞΞ as 
ἑκάστῳ (reff.), not (λέγω) ἑκάστῳ, ὡς. ...- 
μέτρον πίστεως is the receptivity of 
χαρίσματα, itself no inherent congruity, 
but the gift and apportionment of God. 
It is in fact the subjective designation of 
ἢ χάρις ἣ δοθεῖσα ἡμῖν, ver. 6. But we 
must not say, that (Ewb.) ‘faith, in this 
passage, means those gifts or graces which 
the Christian can only receive through 
faith: this is to confound the receptive 
faculty with the thing received by it, and 
to pass by the great lesson of our verse, 
that this faculty is nothing to be proud of, 
but God’s gift. 4.| γάρ, elucidating 
the fact, that God apportions variously to 
various persons: because the Christian 
community is like a body with many mem- 
bers having various duties. See the same 
idea further worked out, 1 Cor. xii. 12 ff. 
5. τὸ δὲ καθ᾽ εἷς] But (severally, 


1. 6.7 as regards individuals. A solecism 
for τὸ δὲ εἷς καθ᾽ ἕνα, as ἕν καθ᾽ ἕν in ref. 
Rev. Wetst., on ref. Mark, gives many 
examples of it. Members of one an- 
other =- fellow-members with one another, 
—members of the body of which we one 
with another are members. 6.| The 
δέ = ‘and not only so, but’. . . . χάρις, 
see above, ver. 3, on μέτρ. πίστ. These 
χαρίσματα are called, 1 Cor. xii. 7, 7 
φανέρωσις τοῦ πνεύματος. “These χαρίσ- 
ματα δάφορα are next specified. The two 
first accusatives are grammatically de- 
pendent on ἔχοντες : by degrees the Apos- 
tle loses sight of the construction, and 
continues with the concrete 6 διδάσκων, 
which still he binds on to the foregoing by 
efre,—but at 6 μεταδιδούς, omits this also, 
and, at ver. 9, introduces the abstract 7 
oem Thol. εἴτε προφητείαν] 
There is some dispute about the construc- 
tion of these clauses. The ordinary ren- 
dering regards them as elliptical, and sup- 
plies before κατὰ and ἐν, χρηρδέδα αὐτῇ 
or ὥςτε εἶναι αὐτήν or the like. But 
Reiche, Meyer, De Wette, suppose 20 
ellipsis, joing κατὰ τὴν avar., Ke, to 
the foregoing substantives, as κατὰ τὴν 
χάριν to χαρίσματα. This construction 
must however be dropped at ἐν ἁπλότητι, 
which is manifestly to be rendered with 
a verb supplied: and (2) it reduces the 
four first mentioned gifts to a bare cata- 
logue, and deprives the passage of its 
aim, which is to keep each member of 
the body in its true place and work 
without any member boasting against 


442 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


XII. 


\ ‘ x 2 > U A ‘ Ps 7 Vv » Υ ὃ / ες 
xhereonly+. ΚαΤα THV aVaANOYLAVY TNS “πίστεως ELTE taKOVLAV, ἐν 


(~yws, Wisd. 
xii. 5.) 
y Acts xx. 24 


τῇ Y διακονίᾳ" " εἴτε ὁ διδάσκων, ἐν TH διδασκαλίᾳ" 8 Y εἴτε 


a A / / > 
2 Tuxe itis, ὁ “παρακαλῶν, ἐν τῇ *mapakhyjoe ὁ ὃ μεταδιδούς, ἐν 


Acts ii. 40 al. 
a= Acts ix. 3]. 


” a « a 
°amdoTnte ὁ ἃ προϊστάμενος, ἐν “σπουδῇ ὁ fédewv, ἐν 


2 Cor. viii. 4. 

1 Tim. iv. 13. Heb. xii.5. xiii. 22. L.P.H. beh.i. 11, Luke iii. 11. Eph. iv. 28. 1 Thess. ii. 8 
only. LP. Job xxxi. 17. Wisd. vii. 13. ο 2 Cor. viii. 2. ix. 11, 13. xi. 3. Eph. vi. 5. Col. iii. 22 
only. P. 1 Chron, xxix. 17. d1 Thess. v.12. 1 Tim. iii.4,5,12. v.17. Tit. iii. 8, l4only. P. Prov. 


xxvi. 17. e = 2 Cor. vii. 11, 12. 


7. εἰτί ε (ειτ &3,] appy) ο diaxovwy N3 m [Bas,(txt,) Thdrt-ms(omg o) ]. 


διδασκων, διδασκαλειαν A. 


8. om εἰτε D!F latt [Β85, Orig-int,] Pel. 


another. Tholuck quotes a passage of very 
similar construction from Epictet. Dissert. 
iii. 23.5. He is speaking of reading and 
philosophizing from ostentation, and says 
that every thing which we do, must have 
its aim, its ἀναφορά ;---λοιπόν, ἣ μὲν τίς 
ἐστι κοινὴ ἀναφορά, ἣ δ᾽ ἰδία. πρῶτον, 
ἵν’ ὡς ἄνθρωπος. ἐν τούτῳ τί περιέχεται ; 
. ἢ δ᾽ ἰδία πρὸς τὸ ἐπιτήδευμα ἑκάστου 
καὶ τὴν προαίρεσιν' 6 κιθαρῳδός, ὡς κι- 
θαρῳδός" 6 τέκτων, ὡς τέκτων᾽ ὃ φιλόσοφος, 
ὡς φιλόσοφος" ὃ ῥήτωρ, ὧς ῥήτωρ. Seealso 
the same construction in 1 Pet. iv. 10,11. 
On προφητεία, the gift of the προφῆται, 
see note, Acts xi. 27. κατ. τ. ἀναλ. 
τ. πίστ. | (let us prophesy) according to 
the proportion (compare Justin Mart. 
Apol. i. 17, p. 54: “each will be punished 
πρὸς ἄναλογίαν ὧν ἔλαβε δυνάμεων παρὰ 
θεοῦ of faith. But what faith? Ob- 
jective (‘fides gue creditur’), or subjective 
(‘fides gua creditur’)? the faith, or our 
faith ? The comparison of μέτρον πιστεως 
above, and the whole context, determine it 
to be the latter; the measure of ovr faith: 
‘quisque se intra sortis sue metas con- 
tineat, et revelationis sue modum teneat, 
ne unus sibi omnia scire videatur.’ To 
understand ἀναλογία τ. π. objectively, as 
‘the rule of faith, as many R.-Cath. ex- 
positors, and some Protestant, e. g. Calvin, 
‘fidei nomine significat prima religionis 
axiomata,—seems to do violence to the 
context, which aims at shewing that the 
measure of faith, itself the gift of God, is 
the receptive faculty for all spiritual gifts, 
which are therefore not to be boasted of, 
nor pushed beyond their provinces, but 
humbly exercised within their own limits. 
7. διακονίαν] any subordinate 
ministration in the Church. In Acts vi. 
1 and 4, we have the word applied both to 
the lower ministration, that of alms and 
food, and to the higher, the διακ. τοῦ λόγου, 
which belonged to the Apostles. But here 
it seems to be used in a more restricted 
sense, from its position as distinct from 
prophecy, teaching, exhortation, &c. 
ἐν τῇ Stax.) Let us confine ourselves 
humbly and orderly to that kind of minis- 
tration to which God’s providence has ap- 


2 Pet.i.5. Jude3. Exod. xii. 11. 


f ch. xi. 31 reff. 
for o 
προιστανομενος ὃξ. 


pointed us, as profitable members of the 
body. 6 διδάσκων] The prophet 
spoke under immediate inspiration; the 
διδάσκαλος under inspiration working by 
the secondary instruments of his will and 
reason and rhetorical powers. Paul him- 
self seems ordinarily, in his personal minis- 
trations, to have used διδασκαλία, He is 
nowhere called a prophet, but appears as 
distinguished from them in several places : 
e.g. Acts xi. 27; xxi. 10, and apparently 
xiii. 1. Of course this does not affect the 
appearance of pruphecies, commonly so 
called, in his writings. The inspired διδά- 
σκαλος would speak, though not technically 
προφητείας, yet the mind of the Spirit in 
all things: not to mention that the apos- 
tolic office was one in dignity and fulness of 
inspiration far surpassing any of the subor- 
dinate ones, and in fact including them all. 

ἐν τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ as before: he is 
to teach in the sphere, within the bounds, 
of the teaching allotted to him by God,—or 
for which God has given him the faculty. 

8.1 The παρακαλῶν was not neces- 
sarily distinct from the προφητεύων, τττϑθ6 
1 Cor. xiv. 31. ὃ μεταδιδούς appears 
to be the giver of the alms to the poor,— 
either the deacon himself, or some dis- 
tributor subordinate to the deacon. This 
however has been doubted, and not with- 
out reason : fora transition certainly seems 
to be made, by the omission of the εἴτε, 
from public to private gifts. We eannot 
find any ecclesiastical meaning for ἐλεῶν 
(though indeed Calvin, al., understand by 
it “viduas et alios ministros qui curandis 
zgrotis, secundum veterem Ecclesize mo- 
rem, preeficiebantur ”),—and the very fact 
of the three preceding being all limited to 
their respective official spheres, whereas 
these three are connected with qualitative 
descriptions, speaks strongly for their 
being private acts, to be always performed 
in the spirit described. Add to all, that, 
as Vitringa remarks, διαδιδόναι is more 
properly to distribute (Acts iv. 35), pera- 
διδόναι to impart of one’s own to another. 
I would therefore render it: He that be- 
stoweth. ἐν ἁπλότητι] ordinarily, 
‘with simplicity.’ But seeing that ἅπλά- 


ABDF 

L[P]s 
abcdf 

ghkl 
mnol?7 


[47] 


1--11. 


8 ἱλαρότητι. 


πονηρόν, " κολλώμενοι | TH! ἀγαθῷ" 10 τῇ ™ φιλαδελφίᾳ εἰς 


ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. 


448 


ἘΠ. > 4 ῇ 5 a x 
9 ἡ ἀγάπη © ἀνυπόκριτος. ‘ ἀποστυγοῦντες TO Ε here only. 


Prov. xviii. 
22 only. 
(-ρός, 2 Cor. 


ἀλλήλους " φιλόστοργοι' τῇ 5 τιμῇ ἀλλήλους P TpoNyoU- n2 Cor νἱ. 5. 


1 Tim. i. 5. 
lal a \ » / an / / 
EVOL’ 11 Tn © Ὁ ὃ 4 OK .ἴ IS 8 Σ. ἌΝ δ: 
μ b 7) σπου Hf] μὴ O VN POL TO πνευματιυ ζέον Ἔτι δὰ ἀν 12: 
; “; ᾿ 1 Pet. i. 22 
only+. Wisd. v. 18. xviii. 16 only. constr., Heb. xiii. 5. i here only +. k = Luke 
xv. 15. Acts vill. 29. 2 Kings xx. 2. 1 ch, ii. 10 reff. m 1 Thess. iv. 9. Heb. 
xiii. 1. 1 Pet.i.22. 2 Pet.i.7 (bis) only+. (-os, 1 Pet. iii. 8.) n here only +. (-yws, 


2 Macc. ix. 21. -γία, 2 Mace. vi. 20.) 
xlviii. 12, 20. p here only, 
iii. 1) only. Proy. vi. 6, 9, 


9. for αποστυγ.; μεισουντες Ε', 


Ts, referred to alms-giving, bears another 
and an objective meaning, this hardly 
satisfies me, because σπουδή and ἱλαρότης 
designate not so much the inward frame 
of mind, as the outward character of the 
superintendence and the compassion: as 
might be expected, when gifts to be exer- 
cised for mutual benefit are spoken of. In 
2 Cor. vill. 2; ix. 11, 13, Jos. Antt. vii. 13. 
4. (where David admires Araunah, τῆς 
ἁπλότητος Kal τῆς μεγαλοψυχία5), the word 
signifies ‘ liberality : so perhaps ἁπλῶς 
also, James i. 5, but see note there. This 
meaning is not recognized by Wahl, Lex., 
but defended by Tholuck, who connects it 
with the phrase found in Stobzeus, Eclog. 
Phys. i. p. 123, ἁπλοῦν τὰς χεῖρας, ‘to 
open the hands wide :’-—and I would thus 
render it here. ὃ προϊστάμενος] 
He that presides—but over what? If 
over the Church exclusively, we come back 
to offices again: and it is hardly likely that 
the rulers of the Church, as such, would be 
introduced so low down in the list, or by so 
very general a term, as this. In 1 Tim. 
iii. 4, 5, 12, we have the verb used of pre- 
siding over a man’s own household : and in 
its absolute usage here, I do not see why 
that also should not be included. Meyer 
would understand it of ‘patronage of 
strangers’ (ch. xvi. 2). Stuart in his Ex- 
cursus on this place, appended to his Com- 
mentary, takes up and defends the same 
view. But, not insisting on the general 
usage of the word being preferable where it 
occurs absolutely, will ἐν σπουδῇ apply to 
this meaning? Of course so far as σπουδή 
is applicable to every employment, it might, 
but more than this is required, where words 
are connected in so marked a manner as 
here. Giving προϊστάμενος the ordinary 
meaning, these words fit admirably: imply- 
ing that he who is by God set over others, 
be they members of the Church or of his 
own household, must not allow himself to 
forget his responsibility, and take his duty 
indolently and easily, but must προΐστασθαι 
σπουδαίως, making it a serious matter of 
continual diligence. ὁ ἐλεῶν] See 
above: He that sheweth mercy, is the 
very best rendering: and I cannot conceive 


Prov. xvii. 14 al. 
r = Acts xvii. 16 reff. 


o = John iv. 44. Acts xxviii. 10. ch. 11. 7 al. Ps- 
2 Mace. iy. 40. q = Matt. xxv. 26 (Phil. 
s Acts xviii. 25 (reff.) only. 


that any officer of the Church is intended, 
but every private Christian who exercises 
compassion. It is in exhibiting compas- 
sion, which is often the compulsory work 
of one obeying his conscience rather than 
the spontaneous effusion of love, that cheer- 
Sulness is so peculiarly required, and so 
frequently wanting. And yet in such an 
act it is even of more consequence towards 
the effect,—consoling the compassionated, 
than the act itself. κρείσσων λόγος ἢ 
δόσις, Sir. xviii. 16. 9—21.]| Ex- 
hortations to various Christian principles 
and habits. 9.1 Olsh., De Wette, 
al., would understand éotiv,—not ἔστω, 
—the ellipsis of the imperative being un- 
usual. But I cannot see how this can be 
here. Clearly the three preceding clauses 
are hortative; as clearly, those which fol- 
low are so likewise. Why then depart from 
the prevalent character of the context, and 
make this descriptive ? ἀποστυγ.] 
This very general exhortation is probably, 
as Bengel says, an explanation of ἀνυπό- 
Kpitos:—our love should arise from a 
genuine cleaving to that which is good, and 
aversion from evil: not from any by-ends. 

10.] in brotherly love (dat. of 
the respect or regard in which), affec- 
tionate. φιλόστ.] properly of love 
of near relations ; agreeing therefore ex- 
actly with φιλαδελφία. a pon you- 
μενοι] “invicem preevenientes,” latt. μὴ 
μένε φιλεῖσθαι παρ᾽ ἑτέρου, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸς 
ἐπιπήδα τούτῳ καὶ κατάρχου, Chrys.: 
similarly Syr., Theophyl., Erasm., Luther : 
—or, = ἀλλήλους ἡγούμενοι ὑπερέχοντας 
ἑαυτῶν, Phil. ii. 8; so Origen, Theodoret, 
Grot.: or, as in ref. 2 Mace. ‘ setting 
an example to,’ ‘going before, which 
however does not seem to apply here, 
unless we render τῇ τιμῇ, ‘in yielding 
honour :? ‘in giving honour, anticipat- 
ing one another’ (so Stuart). 11.] 
in zeal (not ‘business, as E. V. which 
seems to refer it to the affairs of this life, 
whereas it relates, as all these in vv. 11, 12, 
13, to. Christian duties as such: as ‘fer- 
vency of spirit,’ ‘acting as God’s servants,” 
‘rejoicing in hope,’ ἄς.) not slothful. ζέων 
τῷ mv. is used of Apollos, in ref. The 


444. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOYS. XIE 


“- , ~ / a 
t—Actsxx. Tes’ τῷ κυρίῳ * δουλεύοντες. 19 τῇ ἐλπίδι χαίροντες" TH 


19 reff. see θ nlp oe , r ie ans es 
«ποῖος xan, σλίψρεν “ ὑπομένοντες τῇ Y προςευχῇ “ προςκαρτεροῦντες 
iv. 13 |}. a , Le REG rh a . ‘ 
2timii. 19 ταῖς * χρείαις τῶν *ayiwv Y κοινωνοῦντες" τὴν * φιλο- 
James y. il. ͵ Bs , 14 be 2? a 4 d , eth ins 
iPet.ii20. ξενίαν ὃ διώκοντες. εὐλογεῖτε τοὺς ἃ διώκοντας ὑμᾶς" 
Job xiv. 14. y fi Ἶ Ν 5 ᾿ ‘ 
vice °° εὐλογεῖτε, Kal μὴ Katapacbe. 15 χαίρειν μετὰ χαιρόν- 
w Acts xx. 34 , \ / or fs 5) > Ἢ 
ee yg Τῶν, κλαιεῖν μετὰ KNALOVTOV. To ‘auto εἰς ἀλλήλους 
Acts 
ff. s 
y th. xv. 27. Gal. vi.6. Phil. iv.15. 1 Tim. v.22. Heb. ii. 14. 1 Pet. iv. 13. 2John ll only. Wisd. vi. 25. Polyb. 
ii. 32.8 al. 2 Heb. xiii. 2 only +. (-vos, 1 Pet. iv. 9.) a=ch. ix. 30, 31 reff. b= 1 Cor. 
iv. 12. 1 Pet. iii. 9 al. e LUKE vi. 28. James iii. 9. Gen. xii. ὃ. d = Matt. νυ. 44. Acts 


vii. 52 reff. 
iii. 10.) 


2 Kings xxi. 5. 


eas above (c). Matt. xxv.41. Mark xi. 2l only. Gen. v.29. (-pa, Gal. 
f ch. xv. 5. 


2 Cor. xiii. 11. Phil. ii. 2. iv. 2. 


11. Steph (for kvpiw) ka:pw, with D' F[-gr] 5 G-lat lat-mss-mentd-by-[ Orig-int ]-Jer 
Cypr Ambrstexpr: txt ABD? 51 ΡΊΝ rel gr-mss-mentd-by-[Orig-int ]-Jer-Ambrst 
[vule F-lat syrr copt goth «th arm] Clem, Ath, Bas, Chr, Thdrt Euthal[(Wetst: not 
in Zacagn. Euthal-ms om τ. «. δ.) Antch, Damasc] ΤῊ] Ce [Orig-int,] Jer Pel Aug 
Primas Sedul Bede. ὑπομενονντες τὲ [-wevos ΑἸ]. 

18. for χρείαις, μνειαις DIF mss-mentd-by-Thdor-mops(éa τῶν ἀντιγράφων) am 
Hil, Ambrst Aug,: txt ABD°(LP 8 rel [vulg-clem(with fuld demid harl tol) syrr(and 
syr-mg-gr) copt goth eth arm] Clem, Chr, Thdrt Thdor-mops, Damase ΤῺ] @e Aug, 
Bede: [Orig-int, ] Sedul Pel speak of both readings. 

14. om vuas (homeotel 7) B 47. 672 am Clem: tous ex@pouvs nuwy Orig, : om eva. τ. 
diwk. vu. (passing from 1st evdoyerte to 2nd) F [spec Orig-int ]-ms: these words are aft 
καταρασθε in D'3[and lat]: txt ΑἸ [ΞΡ δὲ rel [vulg & Clem] Chr Bas Thdrt. 


[evroyeroBar (2nd) D}(appy). | 


15. ree ins. καὶ bef κλαίειν, with AD8L[P 47(sic)] rel Syr copt [eth] (Orig,) Chr, 
Thdrt [Damase Tert, Ambr,]: om BD!FX latt syr goth arm [Orig-int, |] Ambrst Pel 


Aug, Sedul Bede. 


Holy Spirit lights this fire within: see 
Luke xii. 49; Matt. 111. 11. τ. κυρίῳ 
Sova. | The external authorities, as will be 
seen in the var. read., are strongly in favour 
of this reading. The balance of internal 
probability, though not easy at once to 
settle, is 1 am persuaded on the same side. 
The main objection to κυρίῳ has ever been, 
that thus the Apostle would be inserting 
here, among particular precepts, one of the 
most general and comprehensive character. 
So Hilary (in Wetst.) and al. But this will 
be removed, if we remember, of what he is 
speaking: and if I mistake not, the other 
reading has been defended partly owing to 
forgetfulness of this. The present sub- 
ject is, the character of our zeal for God. 
In it we are not to be ὀκνηροί, but fervent 
in spirit,—and that, as servants of God. 
A very similar reminiscence of this relation 
to God occurs Col. iii. 22—24: of δοῦλοι, 
. . . ὃ ἐὰν ποιῆτε, ἐκ ψυχῆς ἐργάζεσθε ὡς 
τῷ κυρίῳ καὶ οὐκ ἀνθρώποις, εἰδότες ὅτι 
ἀπὸ κυρίου ἀπολήμψεσθε τὴν ἀνταπόδοσιν 
τῆς κληρονομίας. τῷ κυρίῳ χριστῷ δου- 
λεύετε. ‘The command, τῷ καιρῷ δουλεύειν, 
would surely come in very inopportunely 
in the midst of exhortations to tiie zealous 
service of God. At the same time, it is 
not easy to give an account of the origin of 
the reading. The ἐξαγοραζόμενο: τὸν και- 
pov of Epb. v. 16 may have led to the 
filling up of the contracted κυρίῳ (Kw) with 
ibis word: and the notion that σπουδῇ 


referred to worldly business, may have fa- 
voured the sense thus given. For examples 
of the phrase τῷ καιρῷ δουλεύειν and ‘tem- 
pori inservire,’ see Wetst. As to its appli- 
cability at all to Christians, De Wette well 
remarks, “ The Christian may and should 
certainly employ (Eph. v. 16) τὸν καιρόν 
(time and opportunity), but not serve it.” 
Athauas, (in Wetst.) ad Dracont. says, οὐ 
πρέπει TH καιρῷ δουλεύειν, ἀλλὰ κυρίῳ. 
12.) The datives here are not parallel. 
τῇ eArtdsis the ground of the joy in χαίρον- 
Tes,—but τῇ θλίψει the state in which the 
ὑπομονή is found. 13.] The reading 
μνείαις 15. curious, as being a corruption 
introduced, hardly accidentally, in favour of 
the honour of martyrs by commemoration. 
τ. φιλοξ διώκ.! οὐκ εἶπεν Epya- 
Copevor, ἀλλὰ διώκοντες, παιδεύων ἡμᾶς 
μὴ ἀναμένειν τοὺς δεομένους, πότε πρὸς 
ἡμᾶς ἔλθωσιν, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοὺς ἐπιτρέχειν «. 
καταδιώκειν. Chrys. Hom. xxi, p. 676. 
14.} “The Sermon on the Mount must 
have been particularly well known ; for 
among the few references in the N. T. 
Epistles to the direct words of Christ there 
occur several to it: e.g. 1 Cor. vii. 10. 
James iv. 9; v. 12 (we may add iv. 3; i. 2, 
22; ii. 5, 18; v. 2, 3, 10)..-1 Pet. iii. 9, 
14; iv. 14. Tholuck. 15. | Inf. for 
imperative: see Phil. iii. 16: and Winer, 
edn. 6, § 43. 5. d. 16.] Having 
(the participial construction is resumed, 
as in ver. 9) the same spirit towards ons 


i ᾿ῳ.... 


12—20. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


445 


lal « μ Ν hi δ \ Η ἴω 3 \ lal 
“= φρονοῦντες" μὴ τὰ “ὑψηλὰ © φρονοῦντες, ἀλλὰ τοῖς « -- eh. το 
A \ / f . 
= ἱ συναπαγόμενοι. μὴ γίνεσθε ™ φρόνιμοι παρ᾽ " apni tee 
\ \ 5 \ A 3 , ii 
17 μηδενὶ 5 κακὸν ὃ avTlL κακοῦ "Ὁ ἀποδιδόντες". ἀν ὅς oy. x 
> k = Lukei. 52. 
2 Cor. (vii. 
6 reff.) x. 1. 
James i. 9. 
Isa. xi. 4. 
1 Gal. ii. 13. 
2 Pet. iii. 17 
only. Exod. 
xiv. 6 only. 
m Ww. παρά, 
here only (see 
ch, xi. 25 
το). Prov. 
ΟἹ Thess. v.15. 1 Pet. 111. 9. (Prov. xvii. 13.) 
q 2 Cor. viii. 21, 1Tim.y.8 only. Prov. iii. 4. (-vova, 


TATFELVOLS 
" ἑαυτοῖς. 
q ΄ λὰ r2 ΄ ΄ > 6 / Ξ 18 ς 
προνοούμενοι καλὰ " ἐνώπιον πάντων ἀνθρώπων 5 εἰ 
\ ς lal \ / » / 
δυνατόν, ‘to ἐξ ὑμῶν μετὰ πάντων ἀνθρώπων ἃ εἰρηνεύον- 
\ lal , 
tes’ 19 μὴ " ἑαυτοὺς " ἐκδικοῦντες, ἡ ἀγαπητοί, ἀλλὰ * δότε 
Χ le a 5 a, / \ y Ἢ \ za2 / π᾿ 
τύπον τῇ ὀργῇ γέγραπται γὰρ μοὶ 2 ἐκδίκησις, ἐγὼ 
/ ΄ ζ A 
2> ἀνταποδώσω, λέγει κύριος. 59 ἀλλὰ ἐὰν “ πεινᾷ ὁ ἐχθρός 


111. 7. n 2nd pers., 2 Cor. vii. 11 reff. 
p = Matt. vi. 4,6. Luke x. 36 al. 


ch. xiii. 14.) ,t = Acts iv. 19 reff. Mal. ii. 17. 5 Matt. xxiv. 24. Gal. iv. 15, 

ὁ = here only. Hom. Il. a. 525, ἐξ ἐμέθεν. see ch. i, 15. u Mark ix. 50. 2 Cor. xiii.11. 1 Thess. 
v.l3only. 3 Kings xxii. 43. Sir. vi. 6. v Luke xviii. 3,5. 2 Cor. x.6. Rey. vi. 10. xix. 2 
only. 4 Kingsix.7. (-«os, ch. xiii. 4.) w 2 Cor. vii. 1 reff. x Luke 
xiv.9. Eph.iv.27. Sir. iv. 5. xxxviii. 12. see Heb. xii. 17. y DevT. xxxii. 35. z Heb. 
x. 30. (JER. xxviii. [1.1 6.) a as above (2). Luke xviii. 7,8. xxi. 22. Acts vii. 24. 2. Cor. 
vii. 11. 2 Thess.i.8. 1 Pet. ii. l4donly. Judg. xi. 36. Ὁ ch. xi. 35 reff. c Matt. 
iy.2.v.6al. Prov. xxy. 21, 22. 


[16. for μη τα vb. ppov., ayarnra P}. συναπαγαάμενοι B},] 

17. aft cada ins ἐνώπιον Tov θεου καὶ (see 2 Cor viii. 21; Prov iii. 4) A? (Polyc,) ; 
ov μονον ενωπ. τ. 8. aAAa και F vulg goth arm[-use spec Ambrst] Lucif,: om Al(appy) 
BDL[P]X& rel Syr [5.7 copt eth arm-zoh Chr, Thdrt Damase Orig-int, ]. for 
παντων, των ΑΞ D}/and lat] F guelph harl tol [spec] Lucif, : txt (A'?)BD3L[P]® τοὶ 
[ vulg-clem(with am fuld demid) syrr copt goth arm Bas,] Chr, (Thdrt) Damase ΤῊ] 
(Ec Ambrst Sedul Bede. 

19. [εκδικησεις A F-gr Orig, (txt,-int,). | ανταποδω F, 

20. rec (for αλλα eav) εαν ovy, with D3-gr L rel Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] Ce: eay (alone) 
D!-gr F guelph D3-lat [spec] goth: εαν yap Syr Did, : [οὐδὲ syr, etsi quoque wth: ] txt 
AB[P]X m vulg D!-lat [copt arm] Bas, Damasc [ Orig-int,. 


another, 1.e. actuated by a common and 
well-understood feeling of mutual allow- 
ance and kindness. μὴ τὰ ὑψ.] It 
is a question, whether τοῖς ταπεινοῖς is 
neuter or masc. Certainly not necessarily 
neuter, as De W.: the Apostile’s antitheses 
do not require such minute correspondence 
as tunis. The sense then must decide. In 
τὰ ὑψηλὰ φρονοῦντες, the ὑψηλά are 
necessarily subjective, the lofty thoughts 
of the man. But in tots ταπεινοῖς συν- 
απαγόμενοι the adj. is necessarily objec- 
tive; some outward objects with which 
the persons exhorted are συναπάγεσθαι. 
And those outward objects are defined, if 
I mistake not, by the τὸ αὐτὸ εἰς ἀλλήλους 
φρονοῦντες. This spirit towards one an- 
other is not to be a spirit of haughtiness, 
but one of community and sympathy, con- 
descending to men of low estate, as E. V. 
admirably rendersit. For ovvar.., see reff. 
and compare Zosimus, Hist. v. 6, cited by 
Tholuck, καὶ αὐτὴ ἢ Σπάρτη συναπήγετο 
τῇ κοινῇ τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἁλώσει. The in- 
sertion of the seemingly incongruous μὴ 
γίνεσθε. . ἑαυτοῖς is sufficiently accounted 
for by reference to ch. xi. 25, where he had 
stated this frame of mind as one to be 
avoided by those whose very place in God’s 
church was owing to His free mercy. Being 
uplifted one against another would be a 
sign of this fault being present and opera- 
tive. 11.) The construction is resumed. 


The Apostle now proceeds to exhort respect- 
ing conduct to those without. mpovoovp. 
καλὰ... .7 from ref. Prov., which has 
ἐνώπιον κυρίου καὶ ἀνθρώπων. 

18.] The εἰ δυνατόν, as well remarked by 
Thol. and De Wette, is objective only— 
not ‘if you can,’ but if it be possible—if 
others will allow it. And this is further 
defined by τὸ ἐξ ὑμῶν : all YouR part is to 
be peace: whether you actually live peace- 
ably or not, will depend then solely on how 
others behave towards you. 19.1 So 
Matt. v. 39, 40. ἀγαπητοί) ‘The 
more difficult this duty, the more affection- 
ately does the Apostle address his readers, 
with this word.’ Thol. δότε τόπον] 
allow space, i.e. ‘interpose delay,’ to 
anger. So Livy viii. 32, “Legati cireum- 
stantes sellam orabant, ut rem in posterum 
diem differret, et ire sue spatium, et con- 
silio tempus, daret.” So that we must 
not understand τῇ ὀργῇ, ‘your anger,’ nor 
[ exactly, though it comes to that, | “ God’s 
anger,’ but ‘anger,’ generally ;—‘ give 
wrath room: ‘proceed not to execute it 
hastily, but leave it for its legitimate time, 
when He whose it is to avenge, will execute 
it: make not the wrath your own, but 
leave it for God.’ So in the main, but 
mostly understanding [exclusively] τ. dp. 
τοῦ θεοῦ, Chrys., Aug., Theodoret, and the 
great body of Commentators. Some 
Fathers interpret it, ‘yield to the anger. 


446 


d 1 Cor. xiii. 3 
only. Num, 
xi. 4, 18 al, 

e Matt. xxv. 
35, 37, 42. 

Job xxii. 7. 

f Matt. x. 42. 

1 Cor. iii. 2, 
ἄς. xii. 13. 

Rev. xiv. 8. 
Judg. iv. 19. 

g here only.1l.c. 
Ps. xvii. 8, 12. 
(-κία, John 
xviii. 18.) 

h2 Tim. iii. 6 
only. l.c. 
Judith. xv. 11 only. 

ii. 43 reff. 


αὐτοῦ. 
‘CR Te ον 
i ἀγαθῷ ἱ ro} κακόν. 


ich. ii. 9, 10 (reff.). 


xiii. 48. xv. q Acts xviii. 6 reff. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


5» lA Ὁ 
σου, “youve αὐτόν" ἐὰν " διψᾷ, “ πότιζε αὐτόν. 
\ a 8 v a \ h / ΟΕ \ \ 
yap ποιῶν ὃ ἄνθρακας πυρὸς ἢ σωρεύσεις ἐπὶ THY κεφαλὴν 
\ a : A 3: A . a 
“1 μὴ νικῶ ὑπὸ ' τοῦ ! κακοῦ, ἀλλὰ νίκα * ἐν ἱ τῷ 


m=1Cor. xv. 24. Eph. iii. 10. vi. 12, Tit. ili. 1. 
ii. 3. iii. 8. iv. 7) only. Gen. xli. 40. (-ox7, 1 Cor. ii. 1.) 


XII. 21. 


“Ὁ 
TOUTO 


XIII. 1 Πᾶσα ἱψυχὴ ™ ἐξουσίαις " ὑπερεχούσαις ° ὗπο- 

’ θ » [ 5 m 5" / ’ \ Ἐν > εν θ lal e 
τασσέσθω. ov yap ἐστιν ™ ἐξουσία εἰ μὴ * ἀπὸ θεοῦ, αἱ 
δὲ οὖσαι ὑπὸ θεοῦ Ῥ τεταγμέναι εἰσίν. 


2 ὥςτε ὁ VavTI- 


1 Acts 
n— 1 Pet. ii. 13 (Phil. 
p Luke vii. 8. Acts 


k = Matt. xii. 27,28. Mark xiv. 1 al. 


o ch, viii. 7 reff. 


ins καὶ bef eav διψα D}(and lat, Tischdf; D3, Treg): eav δε Supa D?*3(Tischdf) goth 


arm |. τῆς Kepadns B. 
21. μη vixov A. for vio, aro F. 
Cuap. XIII. 1. for πασα ψυχη . 
[fuld spec] Iren-int, Ambrst. 
απο D1F Orig, Thdrt Damase. 


. υποτασσεσθω, Tagas .. . ὑυποτασσεσθε DF harl 
* ὑχτὸ ABD3L[P]N rel Bas, Isid, Chr, Thdrt-ms: 
rec aft ovoa ins εξουσιαι, with D3L{ P] rel syrr 


[Orig,] Chr, Thdrt Thl @c: om ABD'FR latt copt goth eth arm Iren-int, Ind- 


int,[appy | Ambrst Aug. 


[for ὑπο, απο F. | 


rec ins tov bef θεου, with L?* 


rel Orig, Thdrt Chr-ms, : om ADF[P]X! 1m Chr Damasc. 


(of your adversary); but this meaning for 
δότε τόπον is hardly borne out. The 
citation varies from the LXX, which has 
ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ἐκδικήσεως ἀνταποδώσω ;—and is 
nearer the Heb.,—n>w) 072 Ὁ, “ mine is re- 
venge and requital.” It is very remark- 
able, that in Heb. x. 30 the citation is 
made in the same words. 20.] The 
οὖν would mean ‘quod cum ita sit ;’— 
carrying on the sentence with the as- 
sumption of the last thing stated. This 
perhaps may not have been understood, 
and hence may have arisen the alteration 
or omission of οὖν inthe Mss. But the 
evidence is very strong for its omission. 

What is meant by ἄνθρακας πυρὸς 
owpevoets? The expression ἄνθρ. πυρ. 
occurs more than once in Ps. xviii., of the 
divine punitive judgments. Can those 
be meant here? Clearly not, in their 
bare literal sense. For however true it 
may be, that ingratitude will add to the 
enemy’s list of crimes, and so subject him 
more to God’s punitive judgment, it is 
impossible that to bring this about should 
be set as a precept, or a desirable thing 
among Christians. Again, can the expres- 
sion be meant of the glow and burn of 
shame which would accompany, even in the 
case of a profane person, the receiving of 
benefits from an enemy? ‘This may be 
meant; but is not probable, as not sufficing 
for the majesty of the subject. Merely to 
make an enemy ashamed of himself, can 
hardly be upheld as a motive for action. 
I understand the words, ‘ For in this doing, 
you will be taking the most effectual ven- 
geance ;’ as effectual as if you heaped coals 
of fire on his head. 21.] If you suf- 
fered yourselves to be provoked to revenge, 


you would be yielding to the enemy,— 
overcome by that which is evil: do not 
thus,—but in this, and in all things, over- 
come the evil (in others) by your good. 
CuaP. XIII. 1—7.] The duty of cheer- 
ful obedience to the powers of the state. 
It has been well observed (Calv., Thol., De 
Wette. See Neander, Pflanzung u. Leitung, 
ἄς. 4th ed. p. 460 ff.) that some special 
veason must have given occasion to these 
exhortations. We can hardly attribute it 
to the seditious spirit of the Jews at Rome, 
as their influence in the Christian Church 
there would not be great; indeed, from 
Acts xxviii. the two seem to have been 
remarkably distinct. But disobedience to 
the civil authorities may have arisen from 
mistaken views among the Christians them- 
selves as to the nature of Christ’s kingdom 
and its relation to existing powers of this 
world. And such mistakes would naturally 
be rifest there, where the fountain of 
earthly power was situated: and there also 
best and most effectually met by these 
precepts coming from apostolic authority. 
The way for them is prepared by vv. 17 ff. 
of the foregoing chapter. 1 Pet. ii. 18 ff. 
is parallel : compare notes there. 
1. ὑποτασσέσθω, see 1 Cor. xvi. 16, is 
reflective, subject himself, i. e. ‘ be subject 
of his own free will and accord.’ For 
there is no authority (in heaven or earth 
—no power at all) except from God: and 
(so δέ, 2 Cor. vi. 15, 16. It introduces a 
second clause as if μέν had stood in the 
first) those that are (the existing powers 
which we see about us), have been ordained 
by God. We may observe that the Apostle 
here pays no regard to the question of the 
duty of Christians in revolutionary move- 


ABDF 
L[P]x 
abcd f 
ghkl 
mnol7z 


[47] 


XIII. 1—6. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


4 > / A a a a 
τασσόμενος τῇ " ἐξουσίᾳ τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ * διαταγῆ * ἀνθ- 
΄ e ἈΝ > , lal lal 
ἐστηκεν" οἱ δὲ " ἀνθεστηκότες ἑαυτοῖς * κρῖμα λήμψονται. 


447 


r Acts vii. 53 
only. Ezra 
iv. 11 only. 


see Gal. ili. 
ς \ ” ? AN / fal > a 5) 19. 
3 οἱ yap ἃ ἄρχοντες οὐκ εἰσὶν " φόβος τῷ W ἀγαθῷ * ἔργῳ, 5 Acts vi. 10 
> \ A / \ A ͵ ren. | 
ἀλλὰ τῷ κακῷ. θέλεις δὲ μὴ φοβεῖσθαι τὴν ™ ἐξουσίαν ; t= chit? 
‘ > \ , \ ov ” oon fal ee Me 
τὸ ἀγαθὸν ποίει, καὶ * ἕξεις 5) ἔπαινον ἐξ αὐτῆς. 4 θεοῦ “is xe '3s* 
\ / / \ ͵ al. fr. 
yap διάκονός ἐστιν σοὶ ὅ εἰς * τὸ “ayabov. ἐὰν δὲ ὃ τὸ v=here only. 
en. ΧΥΧΙ, 
\ a a, > \ b WT a) \ / al ᾿ 
Ὁ κακὸν ποιῇς, φοβοῦ" οὐ γὰρ " εἰκῆ τὴν ἃ μάχαιραν © φορεῖ £3 3! 
a 4 / , ’ 7 > > \ A \ w sing., ch. il. 
θεοῦ γὰρ διάκονός ἐστιν, ἶ ἔκδικος 8 εἰς 8 ὀργὴν τῷ ὃ TO” κα- “τ ive. 
\ ἢ \ Seonl e ͵ ἢ τις -- 
κὸν πράσσοντι. ὅ διὸ " ἀνάγκη ° ὑποτάσσεσθαι οὐ μόνον διὰ τοῦ. ιν. 
\ b) / ᾽ \ % 5 \ \ : / \ a y ch. ii. 29 reff. 
τὴν ὀργήν, ἀλλὰ καὶ 'dia τὴν Ἶ συνείδησιν. ὃ. διὰ τοῦτο zen viii. 28. 
ἡ, 2. XVI 
19 orly. 5661 Cor. xi. 17. ἃ ch. ii. 10 reff. b ch. ii. 9 reff. τ c (Matt. 
v. 22.; 1Cor. xv.2. Gal. iii. 4 (bis). iv. 11. Col. 11. 18 only. Prov. xxviii. 25 only. d Acts 
xii. 2 reff. e Matt. xi. 8. John xix.5. 1 Cor. xv.49 (bis). James 11. 3 only. Prov. xvi. 23, 
27. Sir. xi. 5. xl. 4 only. f1 Thess. iv.6 only +. Wisd. xii. 12. Sir. xxx.6only. (-κεῖν, 
-KN OLS, ch. xii. 19.) 51 Thess. v. 9. h = Heb. ix. 16, 23. i1 Cor. 
x. 25,27, 1 Pet. ii. 19. k 2 Cor. i. 12 reff. 
3. rec τῶν ayabwv epywv a. των κακων, with D3[-gr] L rel syrr [arm] Chr, Thdrt 


[Ambrst-ed]: txt ABD! F[P]& latt copt goth (Clem,) Damase [(Orig-int,)] Iren-int, 


Cypr (Tert,) Aug Pacian Sedul Bede. 
4. om σοι F b' ο 116. om Ist το B. 
εκδικος D3(and lat?) 8! be fk no 17 Chr, Thdrt. 


om eis opynv DIF: es opynv bef 


5. om αναγκὴ (making υποτασσεσθαι = -σθε) DF [guelph spec] goth Iren-int, Sedul,. 


om και F (but F-lat has ef). 


ments. His precepts regard an established 
power, be it what it may. J¢, in all matters 
lawful, we are bound to obey. But even 
- the parental power does not extend to 
things unlawful. If the civil power com- 
mands us to violate the law of God, we 
must obey God before man. If it com- 
mands us to disobey the common laws 
of humanity, or the sacred institutions 
of our country, our obedience is due to 
the higher and more general law, rather 
than to the lower and particular. These 
distinctions must be drawn by the wisdom 
granted to Christians in the varying cir- 
cumstances of human affairs: they are all 
only subordinate portions of the great 
duty of obedience to Law. To obtain, 
by lawful means, the removal or alteration 
of an unjust or unreasonable law, is another 
part of this duty : for all authorities among 
men must be in accord with the highest 
authority, the moral sense. But even 
where law is hard and unreasonable, not 
disobedience, but legitimate protest, is the 
duty of the Christian. 2.| ἄντιτασσ., 
see above on brotacc. ἑαυτοῖς κρῖμα 
A.] shall receive for themselves (the dat. 
incommodi) condemnation, viz. punish- 
ment from God, through His minister, the 
civil power. 3.] And the tendency of 
these powers is salutary: to encourage 
good works, and discourage evil. It is not 
necessary to set a note of interrogation 
after ἐξουσίαν : the clause may be treated 
as hypothetical,—see 1 Cor. vii. 18. Tho- 
luck observes, that this verse is a token 
that the Apostle wrote the Epistle before 


the commencement of the Neronian per- 
secution. Had this been otherwise, the 
principle stated by him would have been 
the same; but he could hardly have 
passed so apparent an exception to it 
without remark. 4.] τὴν μάχαιραν, 
perhaps in allusion to the dagger worn 
by the Cesars, which was regarded as 
a symbol of the power of life and death : 
so Tacitus, Hist. iii. 68, of Vitellius, 
“adsistenti Consuli exsolutum a latere 
pugionem, velut jus necis viteeque civium, 
reddebat.”? Dio Cassius also, xlii. 27, men- 
tions the wearing of τὸ ξίφος on all occa- 
sions by Antony, as a sign that he τὴν 
μοναρχίαν ἐνεδείκνυτο. In ancient and 
modern times, the sword has been carried 
before sovereigns. It betokens the power 
of capital punishment: and the reference 
to it here is among the many testimonies 
borne by Scripture against the attempt to 
abolish the infliction of the penalty of death 
for crime in Christian states. εἰς ὀργήν 
seems to be inserted for the sake of paral- 
lelism with eis ἀγαθόν above: it betokens 
the character of the éxdixnois,—that it 
issues in wrath. The ὀργή is referred to 
in τὴν ὀργήν, ver. 5. 5.] διό, because 
of the divine appointment, and mission of 
the civil officer. avaykn—ye must 
needs submit yourselves—there is a moral 
necessity for subjection :—one not only of 
terror, but of conscience : compare διὰ τὸν 
κύριον, 1 Pet. ii. 13. 6.| διὰ τοῦτο 
.. καί is parallel with διό, ver. 5,—giving 
another result of the divine appointment 
of the civil power ;—not dependent on 


448 ΠΡΟΣ ῬΩΜΑΊΟΥΣ. ΧΙ. 
‘ ‘ l ͵ m . . Π \ ‘ nm " > 
Lhere dee. ον yap Kat‘ φορους  τελεῖτε" " λειτουργοὶ yap θεοῦ εἰσιν εἰς ia 
suke XX. 22. \ Qn an ͵ ral 
xxii. 2 only. ὁ αὐτὸ ° τοῦτο P προςκαρτεροῦντες. ἴ 4 ἀπόδοτε πᾶσιν τὰς adcdt 
be g. 1.2 alas , A Ν , \ A \ ghkl 
my Unt T Obevtas, τῷ " τὸν | φόρον τὸν ἱ φόρον, τῷ τὸ * τέλος TO πὶ ἢ ο17 
ΤΈΣΣ al.) ἜΚ, a x \ η \ ly A ᾿ \ \ \ [47] 
nch.av.16. τέλος, Τῷ τὸν φόβον τὸν φόβον, τῷ τὴν τιμὴν τὴν 
lil. 11, £0. 
Heb. i. 7 if 8 } : shel ; ὸ δ ὦ / 
(fom Ps cin, THLNV- Mydevt μηδὲν ὀφείλετε, εἰ μὴ TO ἀλλήλους 
. Vili. 2 ᾽ a ς \ > a \ “ , ͵ 
only. Josh, GYATAV. O yap ἀγαπῶν ἃ τὸν ἕτερον νόμον ἣ πεπλήρωκεν᾽" 
i (A Ald.) Ύ τ Y p 56 
AAC ae ee ee ee ͵ ἘΠῚ ; 
kings? 9 TO yap “ou μοιχεύσεις, οὐ φονεύσεις, οὐ κλέψεις, οὐκ 


reff. 


Ἢ θ \ x yy x e / 5 / > lal , 
pActsitsren, ἐπιθυμήσεις, καὶ “ εἰ τις *ETEpa ἐντολή, EV τῷ λόγῳ 
qch. xii. 17 reff. p ey ce ἧς ΟΞ Ξ 9 ’ ty petra 

τούτῳ Y ἀνακεφαλαιοῦται, [ἐν * τῷ] * ἀγαπήσεις ὃ τὸν" πλη- 


r Matt. xviii. 


32. 1 Cor. 

“= / e Ψ i}, ue > U a / δ 
ἔμ σίον cov ὡς σεαυτὸν. 19 ἡ ἀγάπη " τῷ " πλησίον κακὸν 
iv. 4. s ellips., 2 Cor. viii. 16. Phil. iii, 14, Winer, edn. 6, ᾧ 64. i. 4. t=here bis. Matt. 


xvii. 25 only. 
w Exon. xx. 13, &c. 
z Gal. ν. 14. see ch. viii. 26 reff. 
al. fr. Exod. ii. 13. 


7. rec aft ἀποδοτε ins ουν, with D3{and lat] FL[P]N? rel [47(sic) vulg-clem(with fuld 
harl) goth arm] syrr Chr, Thl Ge Ambrst: om AB D!/-gr] 8! am(with demid tol) 
coptt (Orig,[-int, ]) Damase Cypr,) Augsepe Cassiod,. 

8. οφιλοντες δὲ ο [Orig,]: -Ante δὲδ : -Aecte B!(Tischdf). rec ayaray bef 
adAndous (corrn of order to agree with next clause 7), with L rel syr coptt [eth] Thi 
(Cc: txt ABDF[P]& τὰ latt Syr [goth] arm Orig,[-int,] Chr, Thdrt Damase Cypr,. 

9. for τὸ yap, γεγραπται yap F Ambr,. [morxevons, κλεψης ἄς Ρ.] rec 
aft κλέψεις ins ov ψευδομαρτυρησεις (corrn to the decalogue), with { P|& rel [vulg-clem 
(with demid harl) syr eth arm] copt Chr, Gc {Orig-int, ]: var transp al: txt ABDFL 
e g117 [47] am(with fuld tol al) Syr sah [goth] Clem, Orig, [Thdrt Damase Ambr, 


uch. i. 1 reff. 
y Eph. i. 10 only 1. Ps. lxxi. 20 Theod. [and Quinta Ed. } 
a LEvVIT. xix. 18. bch, xv, 2. Matt. v.43. xix. 19 


Num. xxxi. 28, &c. 1 Macc. x. 8]. 
x 1 Tim. i. 10. 


Augsepe Ambrst ]- 
F-lat Damase Orig-int, 1. 


Thdrt { Damasc ]. 


aft erepa ins εστιν [A ἰδὲ (8% disapproving) [17 vulg D-lat 

rec τουτω bef tw Aoyw, with AL[P] rel Clem, Dial, 
Cyr[-p, Chr, Thdrt Damasc]: txt BDFN ἃ τὰ Orig,. 
[Orig-int, Ambrst]: om ev Clem, Orig, : 


ν om 2nd εν τω BF latt 
ins ADL[P]N€ rel vss Clem, Orig, Chr 


rec (for oeav.) eavtov, with ΕἾ LP] rel Chr Cyr{-p,} Thi 


(ec: mss of Clem Dial vary: cavtoy g!: txt ABDX Ὁ ὁ ἃ ho Orig, Thdrt Damase. 


ver. 5. τέλεῖτε is indicative, not im- 
perative : the command follows ver. 7. 
For they (the ἄρχοντες) are ministers 
of God, attending upon this very duty, 
viz. Aectoupyetv,—hardly (as Koppe, Olsh., 
Meyer) φόρους τελεῖν, for in ver. 7 the 
Apostle has evidently in view the whole 
official character of these λειτουργοί. 
Reiche, al., construe, “ For those who wait 
upon this very thing are ministers of 
God,” which would require of εἰς αὖτ. τ. 
mposx. :—Koppe, ‘ For λειτουργοί are of 
God :’—but this again would require οἱ 
γὰρ Acct.—Tertullian remarks, Apolog. xlii. 
vol. i. p. 494, that what the Romans lost 
by the Christians refusing to bestow gifts 
on their temples, they gained by their 
conscientious payment of taxes. 7} 
Before the accusatives supply αἰτοῦντι, as 
the correlative of ἀπόδοτε. φόρος is 
tax, or tribute,—direct payment for state 
purposes: τέλος, custom, toll, vectigal. 
Φόβος, to those set over us and 
having power : τιμή, to those, but likewise 
to all on whom the state has conferred 
distinction. 8—10.] Exhortation to 
universal love of others. 8.7 ὀφείλετε 
is not indice. (as Koppe, Reiche, al.), which 
Would require οὐδενὶ oddév,—and would be 


inconsistent with the ὀφειλαί just men- 
tioned,—but imperative: ‘ Pay all other 
debts: be indebted in the matter of love 
alone.’ This debt increases the more, the 
more it is paid: because the practice of 
love makes the principle of love deeper 
and more active. Aug., Ep. excii. (Ixii.), 
ad Ceelest. vol. ii. p. 868, says : “ Redditur 
enim (caritas), cum impenditur, debetur 
autem etiam si reddita fuerit ; quia nullam 
est tempus quando impendenda jam non 
sit. Nec cum redditur amittitur, sed 
potius reddendo multiplicatur.” 

πεπλήρωκεν, hath (in the act) fulfilled: 
compare the perfects, John iii. 18; ch. 
xiv. 23. νόμον is not the Christian law, 
but the Mosaie law of the decalogue. 
“This recommendation of Love has, as 
also the similar one, Gal. v. 23, κατὰ τῶν 
τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν vduos,—an apologetic 
reference to the upholders of the law, and 
depends on this evident axiom,—‘ He who 
practises Love, the higher duty, has, even 
before he does this, fulfilled the law, the 
lower.” De Wette. 9.1 ἀνακεφαλ., 
brought under one head,—‘ united in the 
one principle from which all flow.’ 10. ] 
All the commandments of the law above 
cited are negative: the formal fulfilment 





7—12. 
οὐκ ° 

" ἐγερθῆναι: 
κὰ 


" ἀποθώμεθα οὖν τὰ 5 ἔργα τοῦ 


xiv. 15. and constr., Gen. xxix. 7. 


i= ars xxiv. 32 al. Ezek, xxx. 3. comp., here only. 
. 13. 


1 Luke ii. 52. 

petal [ὃ Symm. ] (- enh Phil. i. 12.) 

n Acts vil. 58 reff. = Col. i 
19. 1 Thess. i. 3. 


10. om ἡ ay. to epya¢. A [Cyr,(appy) ]- 


ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 


ἐργάζεται 4 πλήρωμα oe νόμου ἡ ἀγάπη. 
ABCD “ τοῦτο εἰδότες τὸν καιρόν, ὅτι ὥρα ἐ ἤδη ὑμᾶς ἐξ ὕπνου τ τ ἘΣ 
νῦν γὰρ i ἐγγύτερον ἡμῶν ἡ ἐγώ he ἢ ὅτε ὁ 1 Gor, rv δ, 
ἐπιστεύσαμεν. 15 ἡ ees dings od ἡ δὲ ἡ ἡμέρα Ph 


449 


1] 6 καὶ c=ch. ii. 10 
το 
ΧΙ. 12 


ii. 


. Ἢ Phil. i. 
ἤγγικεν 28. 3John 


Ρ ἐνὸ Oa 2 
° σκότους, ἐν υσώμε a ‘oo πὰς 
h = Eph. v. “me Pee vi. 9. 
1 Cor. iii. 5. xv. 2. Eph. 


g = ch. i. 10. 
= Acts xix. 2. 


Gal. i. 14: 2 Tim. ii. 16. fi. te 13 only. L.P.+ Ps. xliv. 5, Incert. in 


m = Matt. ili. 2._xxi. 34. Lam. iv. 18. 


o Eph. v. ll only. see John vi. 28, 29. viii. 39,41. Gal. v. 


p = 1 Cor. xy. 53, 54 reff. 


for οὐκ epy., ov katepy. D! Ὁ f 17. 


for ovr, δε D}[and lat | 'F spec Augsepe(txt,) : yap 115 [Ambrst]: quia Syr: 


om [P] 98 lect-12. 
11. ἰδοντες A! F[-gr] G2[-gr]. 
rel goth Clem, Chr, Thdrt ΤῺ] Gc: 


rec nuas bef nin (corrn for euphony 7), with ΕἾ, 
[ndn bef wpa P: om δὴ Syr eth arm :] txt 


ABCDRX m vulg Damase Jer, Ambrst.—ree μας, with DFLN? rel [vulg Syr coptt goth 


arm Chr Thdrt Damasc]: om syr [eth Orig-int,]: txt A B(sic: 


d m [Clem,. 
12. nyyioev A. 
Cypr, Ambrst]. 


πυημων Pk. | 


see table) C[P]X! 


for ἀποθωμ., αποβαλωμεθα D'3F [abjiciamus latt Orig-int, 
rec for ενδυσ. δε, kat ἐενδυσ. (corrn, no contrast seeming to Ἔ 


implied), with C’D?3FLN3 rel [vulg xth arm] Chr, Cyr,[txt-p,] Thdrt Cypr, 


of them is therefore attained, by working 
no ill to one’s neighbour. What greater 
things Love works, he does not now say : 
it fulfils the law, by abstaining from that 
which the law forbids. 11—14. | 
Enforcement of the foregoing, and oc- 
casion taken for fresh exhortations, by 
the consideration that THE DAY OF THE 
LorD IS AT HAND. 11.] καὶ τοῦτο, 
and this, i.e. ‘and let us do this,’ viz., 
live in no debt but that of love (see reff.), 
for other reasons, and especially for this 
following one. ὥρα ἤδη ἐγερθῆναι] 
“The Inf. Aor. here, as after verbs of 
willing, ordering, &c., betokens the com- 
pletion of the act in question. See Winer, 
§ 45. 8 (edn. 6, § 44. 7).” De Wette. 
ὕπνος here = the state of worldly 
carelessness and indifference to sin, which 
allows and practises the ἔργα τοῦ σκότους. 
The imagery seems to be taken originally 
from our Lord’s discourse concerning His 
coming: see Matt. xxiv.42: Mark xiii. 33, 
and Luke xxi. 28—36, where several points 
of similarity to our vv. 11—14 occur. 
ἐγγύτ. ἥμ. ἡ σωτ. ἢ ὅτε émor. | σωτηρία, 
as ἀπολύτρωσις Luke xxi. 28, and ch. viii. 
23, of the accomplishment of salvation. 
ἡμῶν [is best ] taken with ἐγγύτερον, 
‘nearer to us,’ see ch. x. 8, [though] 
ἐγγίζει 7 ἀπολύτρωσις ὑμῶν, Luke xxi. 28, 
seems [at first sight ] to favour the usual 
connexion with σωτηρία. ἐπιστ.] 
we first believed;—see reff. Without 
denying the legitimacy of an individual 
application of this truth, and the impor- 
tance of its consideration for all Christians 
of all ages, a fair exegesis of this pas- 
sage can hardly fail to recognize the fact, 
that the Apostle here as well as elsewhere 
Von. IT. 


(1 Thess. iv. 17; 1 Cor. xv. 51), speaks of 
the coming of the Lord as rapidly ap- 
proaching. Prof. Stuart, Comm. p. 521, 
is shocked at the idea, as being inconsistent 
with the inspiration of his writings. How 
this can be, I am at a loss to imagine. 
“ΟΕ THAT DAY AND HOUR KNOWETH NO 
MAN, NO NOT THE ANGELS IN HEAVEN, 
NOR [EVEN] THE SON: BUT THE FATHER 
ONLY.” Mark xiii. 32. And to reason, 
as Stuart does, that because Paul corrects 
in 2 Thess. ii. the mistake of imagining it 
to be wmmediately at hand (or even 
actually come, see note on ἐνέστηκεν there), 
therefore he did not himself expect it 
soon, is surely quite beside the purpose. 
The fact, that the nearness or distance of 
that day was unknown to the Apostles, 
in no way affects the prophetic announce. 
ments of God’s Spirit by them, concerning 
its preceding and accompanying circum- 
stances. The ‘day and hour’ formed no 
part of their inspiration :—the details of 
the event, did. And this distinction has 
singularly and providentially turned out 
to the edification of all subsequent ages. 
While the prophetic declarations of the 
events of that time remain to instruct us, 
the eager expectation of the time, which 
they expressed in their day, has also re- 
mained, a token of the true frame of mind 
in which each succeeding age (and each 
succeeding age ὦ fortiori) should contem- 
plate the ever-approaching coming of the 
Lord. On the certainty of the event, our 
faith is grounded: by the uncertainty of 
the time our hope is stimulated, and our 
watchfulness aroused. See Prolegg. to 
Vol. III. ch. v. § iv. 5—10. 12.] ἢ 

νύξ, the lifetime of the world,—the power 


ᾳ α 


4δ0 


\ \ 
q ch. vi. 13 reff. δὲ Ta 
r = 1 Thess. ν᾿ 
5,8. 2 Pet. 
i. 19. 
s 1 Thess. iv. 
12. 


t as above (s). 


ΤΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


ω a , 
4 ὅσγλα τοῦ φωτός. 


XIII. 18,14: 


13 “ξ γι ἀντ ἀρ Ὁ» εἰ .2 , 
ως εν μερᾳ ευσχημονως 


\ , \ 
ὁ περιπατήσωμεν, μὴ "δ" κώμοις Kat “** μέθαις, μὴ *Y κοί- 
ταις καὶ “* ἀσελγείαις, μὴ δ) ἔριδι καὶ “°° ζήλῳ' 13 ἀλλὰ 


1 Cor. xiv. Pe , Σ ‘ Ἂ a ΄ \ n Ν 
40 only +. ἐνδύσασθε ees i oh Ἰησοῦν vee? και Τῆς σαρκὸς 
ἔν d πρόνοιαν BK” ποιεῖσθε £ εις f ἐπιθυμίας. 

=| id Ν \ > lal a / , 
ee XIV. 1 Tov δὲ ὃ ἀσθενοῦντα τῇ 8 πίστει ὃ προςλαμβά- 
Gal. ν. 21. 

Vai hey (u). 1 Pet.iv. 8 only +. Wisd. xiv. 23. 2 Macc. vi. 4 only. w dat., ch. iv. 12. x as 
above (ἃ). Luke xxi. 34only. Isa. xxviii.7. Hag.i.6. Judith xiii. 15. y ch. ix. 10 reff. plur., 
here only z Mark vii. 22. 2Cor. xii. 21. 1 Pet.iv.3al.+ Wisd. xiv.-26 only. a1 Cor. 
i. 11 reff. Ὁ 1 Cor. iii. 3. 2 Cor. xii. 20. Gal. v.20. Sir. xl. δ. c = Acts xiii. 45 reff. 


ἃ Acts xxiv. 2 only (reff.). e = ver. 4 al. 


h = Acts xxviii. 2 reff. 


{ Ambrst] : 
Damase [ Orig-int, 1. 


f ch. i. 24 reff. g ch. iv. 19 (reff.). 


evduo. (only) δὲ [sah- ee txt ABC!D![P sah-woide] copt goth Clem, 
for οπλα, epya A D{and lat? ]. 


13. ερισι κ. ζηλδις B [sah (Cypr,)] Ambr,. 


14. (αλλα, so ABD3.) 
mo. B goth: om yp. ὁ Κα die 


comm Damase: ev επιθυμια Ambr, : 


Cyr-p, | Thdrt ΤῊ] Cc. 


of darkness, see Eph. vi. 12: 4 ἡμέρα, the 
day of the resurrection, 1 Thess. v. 4; 
Rev. xxi. 25; of which resurrection we 
ure already partakers and are to walk as 
such, Col. iti. 1—4; 1 Thess. v. 5—8. 
Therefore,—let us lay aside (as it were a 
clothing) the works of darkness (see Eph. 
v. 1l—14, where a similar strain of ex- 
hortation occurs), and put on (δέ corre- 
sponding to an understood μέν) the armour 
of light (described Eph. vi. 11 ff.—the 
arms belonging to a soldier of light—one 
who is of the viol φωτός and υἱοὶ ἡμέρας, 
1 Thess. ν. 5,—not, as Grot. ‘arma splen- 
dentia ᾽). 13.] κοίταις, in a bad 
sense: the act itself being a defilement, 
when unsanctified by God’s ordinance of 
marriage. See reff. ἀσελγείαις, plural 
of various kinds of wantonness: so ὑπο- 
κρίσεις, φθόνους, καταλαλιάς, 1 Pet. ii. 1. 

14.) Chrys. says, on Eph. iv. 24, 
οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ φίλων λέγομεν, 6 δεῖνα τὸν 
δεῖνα ἐνεδύσατο, τὴν πολλὴν ἀγάπην λέ- 
γοντες, kK. τὴν ἀδιάλειπτον συνουσίαν. See 
examples in Wetst. The last clause is 
to be read, τῆς σαρκὸς πρόνοιαν μὴ ποι- 
εἶσθε | εἰς ἐπιθυμίας-,---ποῦ τῆς σαρκὸς πρό- 
votay | μὴ ποιεῖσθε εἰς emiOvuias,—and 
rendered, Take not (any) forethought for 
the flesh, to fulfil its lusts, not ‘ Zake 
not your forethought for the flesh, so, 
as to fulfil its lusts’ (Wartet des Leibes, 
doch alfo, δαβ er nidjt geil werde, Luth.). 
This latter would be τὴν πρόνοιαν τ. σαρκ. 
μὴ π. εἰς ἐπιθ..,---οΥ τῆς o. mpdv. ποιεῖσθε 
μὴ εἰς ἐπιθ. : see construction of the next 
verse. Cuap. XIV. 1—XV. 18.] On 
THE CONDUCT T@BE PURSUED TOWARDS 
WEAK AND SCRUPULOUS BRETHREN. 
There is some doubt who the ἀσθενοῦντες 
τῇ πίστει were, of’ whom the Apostle here 
treats; whether they were ascetics. or 


om κυριον B [Clem,]: add nuwr sah. 
om καὶ D!F, 

ev επιθυμιαυς F latt [Orig-int,(txt,) Ambrst Aug, |: 

txt BDLLP]X rel Ps-Ign, Clem, ‘Chr, [ Bas, 


xp- bef 
aft σαρκ. ins nuwy sah. 
εις επιθυμιαν AC Ath, Thdrt-ms- 


Judaizers. Some habits mentioned, as 
e.g. the abstinence from all meats, and 
from wine, seem to indicate the former: 
whereas the observation of days, and the 
use of such expressions as κοινόν [ver. 14], 
and again the argument of ch. xv. 7—13, 
as plainly point to the latter. The diffi- 
culty may be solved by a proper combina- 
tion of the two views. The over-scrupulous 
Jew became an uscetic by compulsion. 
He was afraid of pollution by eating meats 
sacrificed or wine poured to idols: or even 
by being brought into contact, in foreign 
countries, with casual and undiscoverable 
uncleanness, which in his own land he 
knew the articles offered for food would be 
sure not to have incurred. He therefore 


abstained from all prepared food, and 


confined himself to that which he could 
trace from natural growth to his own use. 
We have examples of this in Daniel (Dan. 
i.), Tobit (Tob. i. 10, 11), [and in] some 
Jewish priests mentioned by Josephus, 
Life, § 3, who having been sent prisoners 
to Rome, οὐκ ἐξελάθοντο τῆς eis Td θεῖον 
εὐσεβείας, διετρέφοντο δὲ σύκοις καὶ Kapvots. 
And Tholuck refers to the Mishna as con- 
taining precepts to this effect. All difficulty 
then is removed, by supposing that of these 
over-scrupulous Jews some had become 
converts to the gospel, and with neither 
the obstinacy of legal Judaizers, nor 
the pride of ascetics (for these are not 
hinted at here), but in weakness of faith, 
and the scruples of an over-tender con- 
science, retained their habits of abstinence 
and observation of days. On this account 
the Apostle characterizes and treats them 
mildly: not with the severity which he 
employs towards the Colossian Judaizing 
ascetics and those mentioned in 1 Tim. 
Weick “i The question treated in 


ABCD 
FL[P]x 
abcdf 

ghkl 
mnol7 


[17] 





X\VE. 1--4. 


νεσθε μὴ εἰς 


ΠΡῸΣ ῬΩΜΑΊΟΥΣ, 


ἱ διακρίσεις * διαλογισμῶν. 
7 A 4 a 
™ πιστεύει φαγεῖν Tavta,'o δὲ & ἀσθενῶν ἃ λάχανα ἐσθίει. 


451 


21 ὃς ep i1c xii. 10 
11 Cor, xii. 10, 
lee Heb. ν. 14 
only. Job 
xxxvii. 16 


ς \ \ / ly. 
30 ἐσθίων τὸν μὴ ἐσθίοντα μὴ ὃ ἐξουθενείτω, ὁ δὲ μὴ καὶ ta. 


3 / \ 2 \ , εἶ \ \ teed 
ἐσθίων τὸν ἐσθίοντα μὴ ?Kpivéto’ ὁ θεὸς yap αὐτὸν 


1 Cor. iii. 20 
(from Ps. 
xciii, 11). 
James ii. 4 al. 


\ / 4 e 
" προςελάβετο. 3 σὺ τίς εἶ ὁ Υ κρίνων ἀλλότριον "οἰκέτην ; Heer ἐν 


8. ch. ix. 21 al. 
ix. 3. 
= Μ51}. τὴν Τ᾿ ἢ. ii.) ὅτ, 


Col. ii. 16. James iy. 11. 
vii. 6. ch. xv. 20. 2 Cor. x. 15,16. Ps. cviii. 11. 
18 only. Gen. ix. 25. 
Cuap. XIV. 2. os δε acd. F. 
[ Aug:epe}- 


3. for εξουθεν., κρινετω A 68 lect-5 [Orig-int, ]. 


m = Acts xv. 1] reff. 
o = Luke xviii. 9. Acts iv. 11. ver. 10. 


Matt. xiii. 
Luke xi. 42 only. Gen. 
1 Cor. i. 28. vi. 4 al. Prov. i. 7: 
q Luke xvi. 12. John x.5. Acts 
t Luke xvi. 18. Acts x.7. 1 Pet. ii. 


n Matt. xiii. 32 |). 


εσθιετω D'F latt[ (not D!-lat) arm] Ambrst 


rec (for o δὲ un) καὶ o μη, with 


DL[ PX? rel vulg [syrr sah eth Bas, | Epiph, Thdrt Thi (Ec [Orig-int, Aug, Ambrst] : 


ovde o μὴ (omg μη aft) F: txt ABCD!X? goth Clem, Damasc. 


1 Cor. viii. was somewhat different: 
there it was, concerning meat actually 
offered to an idol. In 1 Cor. x. 25— 
27, he touches the same question as here, 
and decides against the stricter view. 
See the whole matter discussed in Tho- 
luck’s Comm. in loc., De Wette’s Hand- 
buch, and Stuart’s Introd. to this chap. 
in his commentary. 1- 12.) Ee- 
hortation to mutual forbearances, en- 
forced by the axiom, that every man 
must serve God according to. his own 
sincere persuasion. 1.1 The gene- 
ral duty of a reconciling and uncontro- 
versial spirit towards the weak in faith. 
The δέ binds this on to the general ex. 
hortations to mutual charity in ch. xiii. : 
4. ἃ. ‘in the particular case of the weak 
in faith,’ &c.: but also implies a contrast, 
which seems to be, in allusion to the 
Christian perfection enjoined in the pre- 
ceding verses,—‘ but do not let your own 
realization of your state as children of 
light make you intolerant of short-coming 
and infirmity in others.’ ἄσθ., see 
reff.: the particular weakness consisted in 
a want of broad and independent principle, 
and a consequent bondage to prejudices. 

πίστις therefore is used in a general 
sense, to indicate the moral soundness con- 
ferred by faith,—the whole character of 
the Christian’s conscience and practice, 
resting on faith. ty, better the faith, 
than ‘his faith: ‘weak in his (subj.) 
faith ? would be opposed to ‘ strong in his 
(subj.) faith, ‘Azs faith,’ remaining in sub- 
stance the same: whereas here the (subj.) 
faith itself is weak, and ‘weak in the 
faith’ = holding THE FAITH imperfectly, 
i.e. not being able to receive the faith in 
its strength, so as to be above such preju- 
dices. awposhapB. | ‘give him your 
hand,’ as Syr. (Thol.): ‘count him one of 
you τ᾿ opposed to rejecting or discouraging 
him. μὴ eis] but not with a view 
to : do not adopt him asa brother, in order 
then to begin’... διακρίσ. Sian. | 


GG 


yap bef θεὸς L 77. 


discernments of thoughts, lit.: i.e. dis. 
putes in order to settle the points on 
which he has scruples.’ In both the reff., 
διάκρισις has the meaning of ‘ discernment 
of,’ ‘the power of distinguishing between.’ 
And διαλογισμοί in the N. T. implies 
(ordinarily in a bad sense), ‘thoughts -᾿ 
what kind of thoughts, the context must 
determine. Here, evidently, those scruples 
in him, in which his weakness consists,— 
and those more enlightened views in you, 
by which you would fain remove his scru- 
ples. Do not let your association of him 
among you be with a view to settle these 
disputes. The above ordinary meanings 
of the words seem to satisfy the sense, and 
to agree better with εἰς than ‘ad alterca- 
tiones disputationum,’ as Beza, or ‘ad cer- 
tamina cogitationum,’ as Estius :—and are 
adopted by most of the ancient and modern 
Commentators. 2.1 The ὃς μέν, the 
strong in faith, so indicated by what follows, 
is opposed to 6 δὲ ἀσθενῶν (not to be taken 
ὃ δὲ, ἀσθενῶν, k.T.A.), by which τὸν ἂσθε- 
νοῦντα of ver. 1 is resumed. πισ- 
τεύει φαγεῖν, either believes that he may 
(ἐξεῖναι) eat,—or ventures to eat. The 
latter is favoured by ref. Acts, πιστεύομεν 
σωθῆναι, ‘we trust to be saved ;? though 
that also may be expanded into ‘we be- 
lieve that we shall be saved,’ as E, V. 

Ady. ἐσθ.1 See remarks introductory to 
this chapter. 3.] There is no need 
to supply πάντα after ἐσθ. and μὴ ἐσθ. I 
would rather take 6 ἐσθ. as the eater, and 
6 μὴ ἐσθ. the abstainer. éfov9., for 
his weakness of faith,—xptvétw, for his 
laxity of practice. For God has ac- 
cepted (adopted into his family) him (i. 6, 
the eater, who was judged,—his place in 
God’s family doubted: not the abstainer, 
who was only despised, set at nought,—and 
to whom the words cannot, by the con- 
struction, apply. 4.) Who art thou 
(see ch. ix. 20) that judgest the servant of 
another (viz. as De W., of Christ,—for a 
κύριος in this passage is marked, vv, 8, 9, 


2 


XIV. 


ἃ σταθήσεται δέ, " du- 
5 x ἃ Ν y / 
Os μὲν ¥ κρίνει 


452 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 
-“" 8 / ͵ ς 4, aA t ͵ 
s Paul (1 Cor. T@ l L@ κυριῳ στΉΚΕι, 7) TUTTE. 
xvi. 13. Gal. Ἔ κ᾿ e , A 
v.1. Phil. patel yap o κύριος “ στῆσαι αὐτόν. 
1. Δ. ΩΣ. 
1 Thess. lii. δ τυ Ζ 3 ἘΉ 4 x 4 δὲ y / A rae hy 
8. 2Thes. MEPAY “Trap NMEpay, 0S ε ὕκρινει πᾶσαν NnMEpav. 
sew Eckl ἐν τῷ ἰδίῳ νοὶ * πληροφορείσθω 
exc. Mar ᾿ 
iii. 51: Xie Ὁ. sated dat έ ω Tp " 


Exod. xiv. 13 A compl. 
2 Cor. ix. 8. xiii. 3 only t. 
21 reff. see ver. 2. 


ch, viii. 5 reff. 


t= eh. xi, 11,22.. 1 Cor. πες Τὰ: 
w = here only? see ch. iii. 31. 
y = Acts xiii. 46 reff. 


a =ch. iv. 21 (Col. iv. 12, 2 Tim. iv. ὃ, 17. Lukei.1) only. Eccles. viii. 11 only. (-ρία, Col. ii. 2.) 


e ~ 
6 o © φρονῶν 
Proy. xi. 28. u 2 Cor. xiii. 1. 
Ps, exviii. 38. 
z=ch.i. 25. Luke xiii..2. Ps. cxxxiv. 5. 


b see 


4. rec Suvatos yap εστιν (more usual expression), with L rel Thdrt [Damase: δυνατι 
yap eotw D3(appy) |: δυνατος yap, omg ἐστιν, D?[ P] syr(adding ἐστιν with ob) Bas, 


Chr,: txt ABCDIER. 


rec for kupios, Geos (corrn to suit ver 3? θεὸς there does 


not vary), with DFL [rel] latt syr Chr, Thdrt { Bas-ed Damase Cypr, Augalie Ambrst ]: 
txt ABC[P]& Syr(addg αὐτου) coptt goth arm | Bas-mss, Orsies, | Aug, Opt. 
5. aft os wey ins yap ΑΟΓΡΊΝΙ latt goth [Bas, Damasc] Ambrst: om ΒΗ ΕῚ,Ν 3 


rel [syrr copt eth arm Chr, Orig-int,] Dial Aug, Jerg. 


Thadrt. 


as being Christ,—and the Master is the 
same throughout. ὁ θεός before is uncon- 
nected with this verse) ? to his own Mas- 
ter (dat. commodi or incommodi according 
as στ. or mint. befalls: ‘it is his own 
master’s matter, and his alone, that’) he 
stands (‘ remains in the place and estima- 
tion of a Christian, from which thou would- 
est eject him;’ not, as Calv., Grot., Estius, 
Wolf, al., ‘stands hereafter in the judg- 
ment,’ which is not in question here: sce 
1 Cor. x. 12) or falls (from his place, see 
above): but he shall be made to stand 
(notwithstanding thy doubts of the cor- 
rectness of his practice): for the Lord (or, 
his Lord, in allusion to τῷ ἰδίῳ κυρίῳ 
above) is able to make him stand (in faith 
and practice. ‘These last words are inap- 
plicable, if standing and falling at the 
great day are meant). Notice, this argu- 
ment is entirely directed ¢o the weak, 
who uncharitably judges the strong,—not 
vice versa. The weak imagines that the 
strong cannot be a true servant of God, 
nor retain his steadfastness amidst such 
temptation. ‘To this the Apostle answers, 
(1) that such judgment belongs only to 
Christ, whose servant he is: (2) that 
the Lord’s Almighty Power is able to keep 
him up, and will do so. 8.1 One man 
(the weak) esteems (selects for honour,— 
κρίνει ἀξίαν τιμιἢ5) (one) day above (reff.) 
(another) day; another (the strong) es- 
teems (ἀξίαν τιμῆ5) every day. Let each 
be fully satisfied in hisown mind. It is 
an interesting question, what indication is 
here found of the observance or non-obser- 
vance of a day of obligation in the apostolic 
times. The Apostle decides nothing ; leav- 
ing every man’s own mind to guide him in 
the point. He classes the observance or 
non-observance of particular days, with the 
eating or abstaining from particular meats. 
In both cases, he is concerned with things 
which he evidently treats as of absolute in- 
difference in themselves. Now the question 


om ev A 38. 54 fuld Chr, 


is, supposing the divine obligation of one 
day in seven to have been recognized by him 
in any form, could he have thus spoken ? 
The obvious inference from his strain of 
arguing is, that he Anew of no such obliga- 
tion, but believed all times and days to be, 
to the Christian strong in faith, ALIKE. I 
do not see how the passage can be other- 
wise understood. If any one day in the 
week were invested with the sacred cha- 
racter of the Sabbath, it would have been 
wholly impossible for the Apostle to com- 
mend or uphold the man who judged all 
days worthy of equal honour,—who as in 
ver. 6 paid xo regard to the (any) day. He 
must have visited him with his strongest 
disapprobation, as violating a command of 
God. I therefore infer, that sabbatical ob- 
ligation to keep any day, whether seventh 
or first, was not recognized in apostolie 
times. 1t must be carefully remembered, 
that this inference does not concern the 
question of the observance of the Lord’s 
Day as an institution of the Christian 
Church, analogous to the ancient Sabbath, 
binding on us from considerations of hw- 
manity and religious expediency, and by 
the rules of that branch of the Church in 
which Providence has placed us, but not 
in any way inheriting the divinely-ap- 
pointed obligation of the other, or the strict 
prohibitions by which its sanctity was de- 
fended. The reply commonly furnished to 
these considerations, viz. that the Apostle 
was speaking here only of Jewish festivals, 
and therefore cannot refer to Christian 
ones, is a quibble of the poorest kind: its 
assertors themselves distinctly maintaining 
the obligation of one such Jewish festival 
on Christians. What I maintain is, that 
had the Apostle believed as they do, he 
could not by any possibility have written 
thus. Besides, in the face of πᾶσαν ἡμέ- 
ραν, the assertion is altogether unfounded. 

6.| The words in brackets were 
probably omitted from the similar ending 


x ὦ ΟΣ. xi. ὁ 






ABCD 
FL[P]N 
abcdf 

ghkl 
mnol7Z 


[47] 


5—10. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTY. 4.53 


\ ς 4 c / b a \ e ἡ a ι 
τὴν ἡμέραν "“ κυρίῳ “ φρονεῖ, καὶ ὁ μὴ ὃ φρονῶν τὴν «Δαι, οἱ. ν.5, 
(yee δἰ c ’ > ἢ A Wee 5 7 τ , “ ᾿ 10 al. Winer. 
ἡμέραν, “ κυρίῳ ov " φρονεῖ]. καὶ ὁ ἐσθίων “ κυρίῳ ἐσθίει, 
al \ a a " 
“εὐχαριστεῖ γὰρ τῷ θεῷ: καὶ ὁ μὴ ἐσθίων “ κυρίῳ οὐκ τῷ πατρὶ 


5 7 \ d 2) A A A > \ \ ς A e ~ D ὃ Hal 
ἐσθίει καὶ ἃ εὐχαριστεῖ τῷ θεῷ. 7 ovdels yap ἡμῶν © ἑαυτῷ τ}. 153 
a \ BS Nis igh ie ra ae θ ΄ ΞΖ \ A θεοῖς 
ζῇ, καὶ οὐδεὶς “ ἑαυτῷ ἀποθνήσκει: ἐάν TE γὰρ ζῶμεν, τέθνηκεν 
aA , a 5. > ΄ a ὗ 
“τῷ κυρίῳ ζῶμεν, ἐάν τε ἀποθνήσκωμεν, “ τῷ κυρίῳ Soph ’Aj. 990. 
, +7 > a A d ch. i. 8 reff. 
ἀποθνήσκομεν. ἐάν τε οὖν ζῶμεν ἐάν τε ἀποθνήσκωμεν, e = gen.,1 Cor. 
11. 23 reff. 
a f 5 ’ > lal \ Ν Eis 
“τοῦ κυρίου ἐσμέν. 5 felis τοῦτο yap χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν MEK.) 
Ware Ἐν £”, \ - \ ΄ ἢ ͵ , 97. Acts ix. 
καὶ ὅ ἔζησεν, ' wa καὶ νεκρῶν καὶ ζώντων ® κυριεύσῃ. 10 σὺ 21. 1 John 
ε lll. al. 


g = Rev. ii. 8. xx. 4, 4 Kings xiii. 21. 


h Luke xxii. 25. ch. vi. 99 14. vii. 1. .1. 24. 2 Ti 
vi. 15 only. L.P. Gen. iii. 16. BEE ie ae 


6. om Kat o μὴ Op. THY NM. K. ov φρ. (homeotel) ABC!DFR vulg copt eth [Orig-int, ] 
Ambrst Aug,; om from yuepay to ἡμεραν 661, from εσθιει to eo bier 71-3 lect-19: from 
Tw θεω to τω θεω Li: ins C3L[P] rel syrr [arm] Bas, Chr-txt, Thdrt-txt Damase Phot, 
ΤῊ] Ce. rec om καὶ (bef o ἐσθ.) [with 47]: ins ABCDFL[P]X rel [vulg syrr 
copt 2th arm] Bas Chr Thdrt Damase ΤῊ] (Ke [Orig-int,] Ambrst Pel. [for evy. 
yap, και evx. P ¢ Syr arm(Tischdf) Clem, Isid, Damasc. ] for lst θεω, kupiw A 52: 
Creatori Ambrst. 

8. for lst αποθνησκωμεν, αποθνησκομεν ADE[P 47] al Ephr, Damase: ἀποθανωμεν 
CL 1017: (both appear to be corrns: the former for uniformity, imagining that ζωμεν, 
ζωμεν were both indic ; the latter for the sense, as representing the state after death :) 
αποθανομεν n: txt BN rel Chr, Cyr[-p] Thdrt. om 2nd τω F. for αποθνησ- 
Kouev, αποθνησκωμεν [CL JX d! Καὶ [Chr-ms]. aft last εαν τε ins ovy Ε΄. for 
2nd αποθνησκωμεν, ἀποθνήσκομεν Α ΕἾ ΡῚ f m1 n [47 Ephr,] Thl: ἀποθανωμεν 108-35. 
219: txt BCLN 17 rel Chr, Cyr[-p Damasc] Thdrt. 

9. rec ins καὶ bef απεθανεν, with C*D?LN% rel am [Syr] syr Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] (ἔς 
[Iren-int, Orig-int, Fulg,]: om A[appy] BC'D'-3F[P]X! ac ¢ 17 vulg copt [eth arm] 
Orig,[-int, ] Cyr-jer, Chr, Cyr[-p] Anast, Damase [Ambrst] Sedul. rec ins καὶ 
ανεστη bef x. εζησεν (see notes), with L[D?P]X3 rel [syr Ephr, Chr,] Thl c: aft, 
Syr: ins καὶ aveory, putting εζησ. bef xk. awed. kK. aveotn D!3 Iren-int, Gaud,: om 
ABCEN! fuld-vict syr copt [wth] arm Dion Cyr-jer, Chr, Cyrsepe Anast, Damase 


{ Orig-int, ].—rec ave(noer, with Thdrt : aveorn F vulg Orig, Pel Fulg: txt ABCDL[P] 


δὲ rel. 


φρονεῖ of both clauses having misled some 
early copyists; but perhaps it may have 
been intentionally done, after the observa- 
tion of the Lord’s Day came to be regarded 
as binding. φρονῶν, taking account 
of, ‘regarding’ εὐχαριστεῖ, adduced as 
a practice of both parties, shews the uni- 
versality among the early Christians of 
thanking God at meals: see 1 Tim. iv. 
3,4. The εὐχαριστία of the μὴ ἐσθίων 
was over his ‘ dinner of herbs.’ κυρίῳ 
is CHRIST. 7.j This verse illustrates 
the κυρίῳ of the former, and at the same 
time sets ina still plainer light than before, 
that both parties, the eater and the ab- 
stainer, are servants of another, even 
Christ. ἑαυτῷ and κυρίῳ are datives 
commodi: ζῇν and ἀποθνήσκειν represent 
the whole sum of our course on earth. 

8.1 The inference,—that we are, 
under all circumstances, living or dying 
(and a fortiori eating or abstaining, ob- 
serving days or not observing them), 
CuRist’s: His property. 9.1 And 
this lordship over all was the great end 
of the Death and Resurrection of Christ. 


By that Death and Resurrection, the 
crowning events of his work of Redemp- 
tion, He was manifested as the righteous 
Head over the race of man, which now, 
and in consequence man’s world also, 
belongs by right to Him alone. The 
rec. text here, ἀπέθ. κ. ἀνέστη κ. ἀνέζησεν, 
may have arisen by the’insertion (1) of 
avé(noeyv as clearer than ἔζησεν, and (2) 
of ἀνέστη from the margin, where it was 
a gloss (1 Thess. iv. 14) explaining ἀνέ- 
(noev or ἔζησεν. Or, on the other hand, 
supposing it to have been the original, 
ἀνέζησεν may have been altered to ἔζησεν 
and κ. ἀνέστη left out, to conform it to 
vv. 7 and 8. In sucha case of doubt, the 
weight of early authority must decide. 
ἔζησεν, lived, viz. after His death; = 
ave(noev. The historical aorist points to 
a stated event as the commencement of 
the reviviscence, viz. the Resurrection. 

κι vexp. K. ζώντων) here, for uni- 
formity with what has gone before: in 
sense comprehending all created beings. 
10.] He returns to the duty of 
abstaining,— the weak, from judging his 


454 ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. XIV. 


8 / x » , \ ὔ ᾽ Lal 

τνν. 8, 4 τοῦ. δὲ TLi κρίνεις τὸν * ἀδελφόν σου ; ἢ καὶ σὺ τί | ἐξουθενεῖς 

k = Matt. vii. φᾧ 9 r Σ ᾿ 7 x 
3 al. . m 

ben ane ee ἀδελφόν σου; πάντες yap παραστησόμεθα τῳ 


m = Acts xxvii. 


, aA -“ lal > ΄ ’ 
a4. Dan τι "βήματι τοῦ θεοῦ. 11 γέγραπται γὰρ “ Ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει 
10. / a > \ , n ΄ \ a a 
i. Ρ q q 
Ὁ Acts xii. 21 κύριος τὲ ἐμοὺ 9 κάμψει 7 img gps πᾶσα tase 
— iv lal lal ¢ δ lal 
“δ T ἐξομολογήσεται τῷ θεῷ. 128 ἄρα [οὖν] ἕκαστος ἡμῶν περὶ 
Jer, Χπ.2 8. “© κι ͵ t 2 , A Ξ 13 7 = > ΄ 
Ἐπεὶ. ν ἢ. ἑαυτοῦ " λόγον [᾿ ἀπο] δώσει τῷ θεῷ. μηκέτι οὖν ἀλλη- 
ΒΕ ΑΙ τ ὶ ᾿ 3 \ a ε \ \ 
P constr of λους ἱκρίνωμεν, ἀλλὰ " τοῦτο * κρίνατε μᾶλλον, “TO μὴ 
th, 2 Cor. , U A a 3 
1.18” Judith Υ τιθέναι ἡ πρόςκομμα TO ἀδελφῷ ἢ Y* σκάνδαλον. 13 οἶδα 
ἜΣΕΙ ἢ P \ qi = , ᾽ ee 2O\ Ζ \ δι᾽ 
« «ἢ. αἱ. ἀτεθ. καὶ ἡ πέπεισμαι ἐν κυρίῳ ᾿Ιησοῦ ὅτι οὐδὲν 5 κοινὸν * δὲ 
Matt. xi. 25 ς a ? \ A , \ 3 2 / 
Philii il. ἑαυτοῦ, εἰ μὴ TO ὃ λογιζομένῳ τι ὅ κοινὸν εἶναι, ° ἐκείνῳ 
2 Kings xxi. 
50. 1. c. AN3D, s ch. y. 18 reff. t Acts xix. 40 reff. u2Cor. ii. 1. see 
1 Pet. ii. 19. v = Acts xvi. 4. xx. 16. 1 Cor. vii. 37. 2 Cor. ii. 1. w ch. ix. 
33 (reff.). x = Matt. xvi, 23. 1Cor.i.23. Rev. ii. 14. Ps. xlix. 21. y constr., ch. viii. 
38 reff. z= Acts x. 14 reff. a see ch. ii. 27. ver. 20. 2 Cor. ii. 4. v. 7. Ὁ = ch, 
vi. 11, Phil. iii. 13. Wisd. xv. 15, c dat., = 1 Cor. iv. 3. 


10. aft tov adeAg. σου (Ist) add ev τω un εσθιειν D'F am? Ambrst: also [F-lat] am? 
Ambrst aft adeAd. cov (2nd) add ev Tw εσθ. rec for θεου, χριστου (see note), with 
C2(appy) ΠΓΡΊΝϑ. rel [vulg-clem demid] syrr goth [eth arm-ed Did,] Orig, Chr, 
Thdor-mops, Thdrt Gennad, [Tert,]: txt ABC!DFX! [47-marg] am(with fuld harl 
mar tol) copt [arm-mss] Damasc [Orig-int,|(quod vero in presenti quidem loco 
tribunal Dei, ad Cor. vero tribunal Christi posuit, ego quidem nullam puto [esse | 
differentiam) Aug, { Fulg Sedul.—47! omits the last clause. 

11. for ort, εἰ μη D}[-gr(appy, Tischdf)] F[-gr] (G-lat has both). εξομολογησεται 
bef πασα γλωσσα (so Lxx-A) Β D!*3(and lat] F goth [(Syr eth) Orig-int,] Ambrst 
Sedul: txt ACD?L[P]X rel vulg syr copt [arm Did,] Chr, Thdrt Damase ΤῊ] He 
Augse e+ 

12. om ovy BD'F(P! Syr]: ins ACD3L[P?]& rel [syr copt goth arm] Chr, Thdrt 
[Antch, Damasc]. υμων C 116. for eav., αυὐτου C, αποδωσει BDIF 


Chr, ; δωσει ACD3L [P(bef Aoyor)] δὲ rel Polyc, Chr-ms, Thdrt [Antch, Damasc] ΤῺ] 
(Ec. 


om Tw θεω B [ D2(appy, Treg) ] F (Polyc) Cypr, Aug,: ins ACDL[P JX rel 


[vss] Chr, Thdrt [Antch, Damase Orig-int,] Ambrst, 


13. κρινετε D'F [-vowev P(so Ρ m! for -vwuev above) ], 


om 7poskoupa and ἤ 


B Syr [arm ].—for 7, εἰς b! m n o [472] Chr-ms, Cyr, Antch). 


14. for κυρ., χριστω L[P] bk mno. 


Thdrtexpr He: txt BCR ἃ m Chr, Damase ΤῊ], 


stronger brother; the strong, from de- 
spising the weaker. It seems probable 
that χριστοῦ has been substituted for 
θεοῦ in the later Mss. from 2 Cor. v. 10. 
The fact of Origen once citing it, decides 
nothing, in the presence of the expression 
βήματος Tov χριστοῦ in 2 Cor. 11.) 
The citation is according to the present 
Alexandrine text, except that our ζῶ ἐγώ 
= κατ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ ὀμνύω. ἐξομ..] shall 
praise, see reff. ΤΧΧ-ΒΝΙ 34. following 
the Heb, has ὀμεϊται(ὀμνῖται δὲ1) πᾶσα 
γλῶσσα τὸν θεόν(κύριον &). 19.) The 
stress ison περὶ ἑαυτοῦ : and the next 
verse refers back to it, laying the emphasis 
on ἀλλήλους. “ Seeing that our account to 
God will be of each man’s own self, let us 
take heed lest by judging one another 
(κρίνομεν here in the general sense of ‘ pass 
judgment on,’ including both the ἐξουθενεῖν 
of the strong and the xpivew of the weak) 
we ineur the guilt of ἀπολλύειν one ano- 
ther.’ 18—23.] Exhortation to the 


for eavtov, αὐτου ADFL[P] rel Chr, 


strong to have regard to the conscientious 
scruples of the weak, and follow peace, 
not having respect merely to his own con- 
science, but to that of the other, which is 
his rule, and being violated leads to 
his condemnation. 13.] See above. 
The second κρίνατε is used as 
corresponding to the first, and is in fact 
a play on it: ‘pulchra mimesis ad id 
quod preecedit,’ Bengel: see James ii. 4 
for another instance:—but determine 
this rather. πρόςκομμα (see ver. 
21), an occasion of stumbling, in act: 
σκάνδαλον (ib.), an occasion of offence, in 
thought. 14,1] The general principle 
laid down, that nothing is by its own 
means,—i. 6. for any thing in itself (φύσει, 
Chrys.),—unclean, but only in reference 
to him who reckons it to be so. 
πέπεισμ.. ἐν Kup. Ino. | These words give 
to the persuasion the weight, not merely 
of Paul’s own λογίζομαι, but of apostolic 
authority. He is persuaded, in his capacity 


ABCD 
FL[P]& 
abcdf 

ghkl 
mnol/7 


[47] 


11—18. 


Zz [4 
KOLVOV. 


σου ἐκεῖνον ἢ 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


Ε f/ , 
ἀπόλλυε, ὑπὲρ οὗ χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν. 
9S e al ΄ 
ἱ βλασφημείσθω οὖν ὑμῶν * τὸ ἀγαθόν. 
“ “ A \ 
τ βασιλεία τοῦ ™ Geod" βρῶσις καὶ 5 πόσις, ἀλλὰ ” δικαιο- 


455 


> \ lal fe A“ 
15 εἰ γὰρ ἃ διὰ °Spadua ὁ ἀδελφός σου ' λυπεῖ- a= Jom αν. 5. 
\ > / a 
ται, οὐκ ETL KATA ἀγάπην © περιπατεῖς. 


h. xv. 15. 
\ Ae ΄ 4 VCorivats 5. 
MY Tw βρώματί e Matt. xiv. 
] \ 15 li. Luke 
6 μὴ iti, 11. 1 Cor. 
3 Pee ae > x. dal. Hag. 
1 ου yap ἐστιν | { Matt. xix. 
22 |. 2Cor. 
ii. 2, &c., al. 
Sir. xxvi. 28. 


σύνη καὶ εἰρήνη καὶ I χαρὰ ἐν «πνεύματι ἁγίῳ" 18 ὁ yap 5 -, «Ὁ αἰῆ. 12, 
i 2p 


1 Thess. iv. 
12 al. fr. 


> / , Lal A ΜΝ al n . 
ἐν τούτῳ " δουλεύων τῷ χριστῷ " εὐάρεστος τῷ θεῷ. Kat n= 1 Cor. viii. 


18. Jamesiv.12. 2 Pet. iii. 9. 
1 = John xvii. 3. m = 1 Cor. iv. 20. see Rev. i. 9. 
wii. 4. 2 Cor.ix.10. Col. it. 16. 


vi. ὅδ. Col. ii. 16 only. Dan. i 10 only. 
r = Acts xx. 19 reff. 


i= ch. iii. 8 reff. 
Heb. xii. 16 (Matt. vi. 19, 20) only. Gen. ii. 9 al. 


s ch. xii. 1, 2 reff. 


11: xv. 
k = here only. (ch. ii. 10 reff.) 
n = John iy. 32. vi. 27 (bis), 55. 1 Cor. 
i o John 


p absol., Acts xvii. 31 reff. q 1 Thess. i. 6. 


15. rec for yap, δε (see note), with [L(sic, Treg)] 17 rel [syrr] goth Chr, Thdrt : txt 
ABCDF[P]X ἃ τὰ vulg syr-mg copt [arm Antch,] Damasce, [Orig-int,] Ambrst Jer. 


om ὁ F. 
καταλύειν in ver 20) F (as latt). 
16. om ουν F goth arm. 


amoAve D?L a h! Καὶ m n-marg [0]: καταλυε τ} : aroAAvew (and 


nuwy DF vulg [spec] Syr copt[has both] goth φῦ [Ὁ] 


Clem, Damase [ Orig-int,] Ath-int, Ambrst Aug). 


[17. Bpwoes AC F-gr. 


πόσεις A F-or. 


18. rec τουτοις (see note), with D%LN% rel syrr goth [arm] Chr, Thdrt [ΤῊ] Cc] 
Tert,: txt ABC D}![and lat] ΕἸ ΡΊΝΙ vulg [spec] coptt Orig Chr Damase, [Orig- 


int Jexpr Ambrst Aug, Pel Bede. 
Chr 'Thdrt Damase. 


as connected with Christ Jesus,—as having 
the mind of Christ. 15.| The reading 
γάρ, besides the overwhelming authority in 
its favour, is the more difficult and charac- 
teristic. It can hardly (as Meyer and Tho- 
luck) depend on the εἰ μὴ «.7.A., for thus 
an awkwardness would be introduced into 
the connexion of the clauses: but I believe 
it to be elliptical, depending on the sup- 
pressed restatement of the precept of ver. 
13: α. ἃ. ‘ But this knowledge is not to be 
yourrule in practice, but rather, &c., as in 
ver.13: <forif, ἄς. βρῶμα, barely put, 
to make the contrast greater between the 
slight occasion, and the great mischief 
done. ‘The mere λυπεῖν your brother, is 
an offence against Jove: how much greater 
an offence then, if this λυπεῖν end in ἀπολ- 
Avey—in ruining (causing to act against 
his conscience, and so to commit sin and 
be in danger of quenching God’s Spirit 
within him) by a MEAL of thine, a brother, 
for whom Christ died! “Ne pluris feceris 
tuum cibum, quam Christus vitam suam.” 
Bengel. See an exact parallel in 1 Cor. viii. 
TO) 4: 16.] Your strength of faith 
(Orig., Calv., Beza, Grot., Estius, Bengel, 
Olsh., al., interpret τὸ @y. ‘your freedom, 
as in 1 Cor. x. 29; but here the contrast is 
between the weak and the strong :—so De 
W. Chrys. leaves it doubtful: 4 τὴν 
πίστιν φησίν, ἢ τὴν μέλλουσαν ἐλπίδα 
τῶν ἐπάθλων, ἢ τὴν ἄπηρτισμένην εὐσέ- 
βειανὴ is a good thing ; let it not pass into 
bad repute: use it so that it may be 
honoured, and encourage others, (73 


om Tw (bef χριστ.) AD'F: ins BCD3L!{ PX rel 
for xp., θεω B!(Tischdf [N. T. Vat.]) 30. 115 [κυριω 47]. 


For it is not worth while to let it be dis- 
graced and become useless for such a trifle; 
for no part of the advance of Christ’s gospel 
can be bound up in, or consist in, meat and 
drink: but in righteousness (ὁ ἐνάρετος 
Bios, Chrys., but of course to be taken in 
union with the doctrine of the former part 
of the Epistle—righteousness by justifica- 
tion,—bringing forth the fruits of faith, 
which would be hindered by faith itself 
being disturbed), and peace (7 πρὸς τὸν 
ἀδελφὸν εἰρήνη, ἣ ἐναντιοῦται αὕτη ἣ φιλο- 
νεικία, id.) and joy (ἡ ἐκ τῆς ὁμονοίας 
χαρά, ἣν ἀναιρεῖ αὕτη ἡἣ ἐπίπληξις, id.) 
in the Holy Ghost: in connexion with, 
under the indwelling and influence of, as 
χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ (Phil. iv. 4) and the ex- 
pressions ἐν kup., ev χριστῷ, generally :— 
not, as De W., ‘joy which has its ground 
in the Holy Ghost, though this is true. 
So, on the other hand, a man under the 
influence of, possessed by an evil spirit, is 
called ἄνθρωπος ἐν πνεύματι ἀκαθάρτῳ, 
Mark i. 28. 18.] The reading τούτῳ 
is too strongly supported to be rejected for 
the rec. τούτοις, as is done by Thol. and 
De Wette, because the latter is the easter 
reading, and might refer to dix. eip. and 
xap. Lhave therefore adopted it. But 1 
do not understand it (as Orig., al.) of πνεύ- 
ματι ἁγίῳ. It would be unnatural that a 
subordinate member of the former sen- 
tence, belonging only to χαρά, should be ati 
once raised to be the emphatic one in this, 
and the three graces just emphatically men-- 
tioned, lost sight of. I believe τούτῳ to 


456 


t (=) ch. xvi. 
10. 1Cor. 
xi. 19. 2 Cor. 
x. 18. xiii. 7. 
2 Tim. ii. 15. 
James i, 12 
only. 

{1 Chron. 
XxViil. 18.) 
uch. v. 18 reff. 
vch. ii. 14 reff. 

see Luke xiv. 


32. 
w ch. ix. 30, 31 
reff. 
x = Paul only, 
ch. xv. 2. 
1 Cor. (iii. 5) xiv. 3, &e. : 
y ver. 15. z = Matt. xxiv. 2. xxvi. 61]. 
it. b = ch. ii. 27 reff. 
ii. 3. Gen. ii. 18. 
g ch. ix. 32 reff. 
ivy. 1, 2. ch. iv. 19 reff. 


h = Matt. xv. 12. 
k Acts xiv. 9 reff. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


t Soxuuos τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. 
ν διώκωμεν καὶ “τὰ τῆς " οἰκοδομῆς τῆς εἰς ἀλλήλους. 
20 μὴ ἕνεκεν ἡ βρώματος 2 κατάλυε τὸ *épyov τοῦ θεοῦ. 
πάντα μὲν καθαρά, ἀλλὰ κακὸν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ τῷ ὃ διὰ 
© προςκόμματος ἐσθέίοντι. 
μηδὲ πιεῖν οἶνον μηδὲ "ἐν ᾧ ὁ ἀδελφός σου ὃ προςκόπτει 
A” σκανδαλίζεται ἢ Ἰ ἀσθενεῖ. 33 σὺ " πίστιν [ἣν] * ἔχεις [;]} 


2 Cor. (v.1) x. 8. xii. 19. xiii. 10. 
Acts v. 38. 
ο ver. 13. 
e 1 Cor. viii. 13 only. 
1 Cor. viii. 13 (bis) al. fr. 


XIV. 19—23. 


19° ἄρα " οὖν ’ τὰ τῆς εἰρήνης 


214 καλὸν τὸ μὴ φαγεῖν “ κρέα 


Eph. iv. 29. 


(Matt. xxiv. 1 al. Ezek. xvii. 17.) 
Gal. ji. 18. 1G 


Ezra v. 12. a= Phi 

1 Cor. vii. 1, &e. 1 Tim. 
fch. ii. 1. 1 Pet. ii. 12. 

Sir. ix. 5. xxiii. 8. xxxv. (xxxii.) 15 only. 


2 Cor. v. 1. 
= Matt. xviii. 8. 
Gen. ix. 4 al. fr. 


και δοκιμοις τοις avOpwros B Gl-gr: καὶ τοις avOpwrois δοκιμοις 77. 
19. διώκομεν ΑΒΕῚΓΡ δαὶ a oChr-ms, : txt CD rel vss [Chr-edd Thdrt Damase Orig- 


int, Ambrst]. 
(not Aug). 
20. απολλυε NR}. 
21. xpeas D? m. 
λυπειται [P] N!(txt N-corr!). 


at end add φυλαξωμεν D} {and lat] F vulg(not demid) [spec Ambrst ] 


aft καθαρα ins τοις Kabapas XS. 
mvew F Clem,[txt,]: πεῖν B'D!. 
om 7 σκανδαλιζ. ἡ ασθενει ACN! Syr copt xth 


for mposko7Tel, 


Damase [Orig-int,] Aug,: ins BDFL[P]X® rel vulg syr [sah (arm) spec] Bas, Chr, 


Thdrt Thl Ambrst Pel. 


22. ree om nv, with DFL[P] rel vulg syrr [sah eth arm Damasc] Chr, Thdrt 
Ambrst Aug,: ins ABCX tol [copt Orig-int,] Aug, Pel. 


express the aggregate of the three, and ἐν 
τούτῳ to be equivalent to οὕτως, ἃ5 Baumg.- 
Crusius. δόκ. τ. ἄνθρ., as a man of 
peace and uprightness: ov yap οὕτω σε 
θαυμάσονται τῆς τελειότητος, WS τῆς“ εἰρή- 
νῆς kK. τῆς ὁμονοίας πάντες᾽ τούτου μὲν 
yap τοῦ καλοῦ πάντες ἀπολαύσονται, 
ἐκείνου δὲ οὐδὲ εἷς. Chrys. Hom. xxvi. p. 
713. 19.] Inference from the fore- 
going two verses—oikod. τ. eis aAd., edifi- 
cation towards one another, i.e. the 
work of edification, finding its exercise in 
our mutual intercourse and allowances. So 
τῇ ἀγάπῃ cis GAX., 1 Thess. il, 12. 

20.] τὸ ἔργον τ. θεοῦ has been variously 
understood: by Fritz. and Baumg.-Crusius, 
as = δικαιοσ. ciphin, x. χαρά: by Meyer 
and Krehl, as = the Christian status of 
the offended brother, so as to be parallel 
to ver. 15: by Theodoret and Reiche, as = 
the faith of thy fellow- Christian : by Mo- 
rus, Rosenm., al., as = ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θ., 
‘the spread of the Gospel.’ But I believe 
the expression oixodoun having just pre- 
ceded is the clue to the right meaning: 
and that τὸ ἔργον = τὴν οἰκοδομήν in the 
Apostle’s mind, He calls Christians in 
1 Cor. iii. 9, θεοῦ γεώργιον, θεοῦ οἰκοδομή. 
Thus it will mean, thy fellow- Christian, 
as a plant of God’s planting, a building 
of God’s raising. So, nearly, De Wette 
and Tholuck. All things indeed are 
pure, but (it is) evil to the man (‘there 
is criminality in the man ;’ Meyer supplies 
τὸ καθαρόν, Grot. τὸ βρῶμα, Fritz. τὸ 
πάντα φαγεῖν : but nothing need be sup- 


plied, any more than to καλόν) who eats 
with offence (i.e. giving offence to his 
weak brother, as Theodoret, Calv., Beza, 
Grot., Estius, Bengel, Thol., De Wette, al. 
That this is the right interpretation is 
shewn by the sentence standing between 
two others both addressed to the strong 
who is in danger of offending the weak. 
But Chrys., Theophyl., Gic., Meyer, al., 
take the sense of ‘receiving offence,’ and 
understand it of the weak). 21.) It 
is good not to eat meats nor to drink 
wine, nor (to do any thing: the ellipsis is 
a harsh one. Fritzsche says, “ aut supple 
φαγεῖν ἢ πιεῖν τοῦτο, ἐν ᾧ K.T.A., as Thi., 
Beng., Flatt, al..—or ποιεῖν (or πράσσειν) 
τοῦτο ἐν @ x.T.A., as Grot. Meyer, &c. 
Preefero illud, quoniam per totum hune 
locum de cibo potuque agitur.”. But why 
should not the Apostle, as so often, be de- 
ducing a general duty from the particular 
subject ?) in (by) which thy brother stum- 
bles, or is offended (see on ver. 13), or is 
weak (Thol. remarks that the three verbs 
form a climax ad infra). 22.1 The 
faith which thou hast (this reading, which 
is the more probable on critical grounds, 
was perhaps changed into the σὺ πίστιν 
ἔχεις of the rec. on account of the position 
of the ov. But this is quite in St. Paul’s 
manner: cf. ver. 4; 1 Cor. xv. 36; 2 Cor. 
ii. 10. However, the other reading is 
very ancient, and it is impossible to de- 
cide positively between them. If it is 
taken, the interrogative rendering, “ Hast 
thou faith?” better suits the lively cha- 


ABCD 
FL[P}x 


abcdf 


ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


a ee here ee 


AVES et ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 457 


μακάριος ὁ μὴ 1 Heliodor. vii. 


] \ A »ὕ m , 7 lal lal 
KATA OE€AUTOV EXE ἐνώπιον του θεοῦ. 
16. (De W.) 


" κρίνων ἑαυτὸν fev ᾧ ° δοκιμάζει. 38 ὁ δὲ ? διακρινόμενος ἐχεμύθει κ. 
\ , = " ὃ κατά σαυτὸν 
ἐὰν φάγῃ “ κατακέκριται, ὅτι οὐκ ἴ ἐκ πίστεως" πᾶν δὲ ὃ ἔχεκ. μηδενὶ 
ye τὲ f 1 ‘a ἐστί XV. 15 6ded δὲ pease, sie 
οὐκ 'é€K πίστεως, ἁμαρτία ἐστίν. : ὀφείλομεν OE ἀμί 11.1. 
A ς \ Ἁ A s iii. 16 reff. 
ἡμεῖς οἱ ‘Ouvatol τὰ ἃ ἀσθενήματα τῶν Y ἀδυνάτων men vii, 
Ww ΄ \ \ xy aby δι" “ἢ 9 “ eA Acts iv. 19 
βαστάζειν καὶ μὴ *éavtois ἡ ἀρέσκειν. 3 ἕκαστος ἡμῶν tf 
reff. 


p = Matt. xxi. 21. Acts x. 

q ch. ii. 1 reff. (perf.,ch. xiii. 8. John 

s = Luke xvii. 10. John xiii. 14. xix.7. Acts xvii. 

Ὁ here only +. v Acts xiv. 8 reff. 
x Ist pers., 2 Cor. iii. 1 reff. 


o =1Cor. xvi. 3. 2 Cor. viii. 8. 1 Thess. ii. 4. Jos. Antt. iii. 4. 1. 


29 al. t= ΟΣ, xii. 3. 
xi. 18 reff. Matt. viii. 17. Gal. vi. 2. 


rec (for geav.) σαυτον, with rel [Chr,]: σεαυτω F: txt ABCDL[P]N c g k 1 [m(Treg) ] 
no 17 [47]. om evwmiov του θεου N-(ins X-corr!) [ Chr, ]. 

23. αν B. [κατακρινεται P. | for 6, το D'[P] m 71.—om παν to πιστεως 
(Aomeotel) &}(ins X-corr?). aft ἀμαρτια ἐστιν ins ch xvi. 25—27 AL[P] rel and 
most other mss(nearly 200 in number) syr goth[{appy] arm-zoh [Chr Cyr-p, Thdrt 
Damasc mss-mentd-by-Orig-int], of these A[P]} 5. 17.109 have it in both places: om 
in both places [ D%(appy, Tischdf) ] F(but in G there is a space left here and in F a space 
at xvi. 24) [Mcion-in-Orig-int mss-mentd-by-Jer] : txt BCD'& 16. 80. 137-76 vulg Syr 
copt zth | Orig-int, |] Ambrst Pel Bede. 


Cuap. XV. 1. [om de P! b! o.] αρεσκον FT -gr |. 

2. rec aft exaoros ins yap: om ABCDFL|P]X rel vulg syr copt [sth] Bas, Chr, 
Thdrt Damase [Orig-int, ] Ambrst. vuwy ὨΞΕῚ ΡῚ rel vulg [spec] Bas[-ed] Chr, 
Thdrt Damase ΤῺ] [Orig-int,] Pel Jer Leo: txt ABCD!3LX& ἃ ἢ k n 17 [47(sic) ] syrr 
copt [ Bas-2-mss, Chr-c, Gc Aug Sing-cler ]. 


w ch. 
y ch. viii. 8 reff. 


racter of the address than the affirmative, 
“Thou hast faith”) have (it) to thy- 
self (reff.) before God. Chrys., who does 
not read the last words (ἐν. τ. @.), says, 
πίστιν ἐνταῦθα ov τὴν περὶ δογμάτων, 
ἀλλὰ τὴν περὶ τῆς προκειμένης ὑποθέσεως 
λέγει...» ἐκείνη μὲν γὰρ μὴ ὁμολογου- 
μένη καταστρέφει, αὕτη δὲ ὁμολογουμένη 
ἀκαίρως. Hom. xxvi. p. 714. ‘ Before 
God,’ —because He is the object of faith : 
hardly, as Erasm., “comprimens inanem 
gloriam que solet esse comes scientiz,’’— 
for there is no trace of a depreciation of 
the strong in faith in the chapter,—only a 
caution as to their conduct in regard of 
their weaker brethren. With μακάριος 
begins the closing and general sentence of 
the Apostle with regard to both: it is a 
blessed thing to have no scruples (the 
strong in faith iz in a situation to be. 
envied) about things in which we allow 
ourselves (Olsh. refers to the addition in 
the Codex Bezz at Luke vi. 4,—where our 
Lord is related to have seen a man tilling 
his land on the Sabbath, and to have said to 
him, ef μὲν οἶδας τί ποιεῖς, μακάριος εἶ, εἰ δὲ 
μὴ οἶδας, ἐπικατάρατος, καὶ παραβάτης εἶ 
τοῦ νόμου): 23.] but he that doubteth 
(the situation just described xot being 
his), incurs condemnation if he eat (the 
case in point particularized), because (he 
eats) not from faith (i.e. as before,—see 
Chrys. above,—from a persuasion of recti- 
tude grounded on and consonant with his 
life of faith. That ‘faith in the Son of 


God’ by which the Apostle describes his 
own life in the flesh as being lived (Gal ii. 
20), informing and penetrating the motives 
and the conscience, will not include, will 
not sanction, an act done against the testi- 
mony of the conscience): but (introducing 
an axiom, as Heb viii. 13) all that is not 
from (grounded in, and therefore consonant 
with) faith (the great element in which the 
Christian lives and moves and desires and 
hopes), is sin. Augustine, Thomas Aqui- 
nas, al., have taken this text as shewing 
that ‘ omnis infidelium vita peccatum est.’ 
Whether that be the case or not, cannot be 
determined from this passage, any more 
than from Heb. xi. 6, because neither here 
nor there is the ‘infidelis’ in question. 
Here the Apostle has in view two Chris- 
tians, both living by. faith, and by faith 
doing acts pleasing to God: and he re- 
minds them that whatever they do out of 
harmony with this great principle of their 
spiritual lives, belongs to the category of 
sin. In Heb. xi. the Writer is speaking of 
one who had the testimony of having (emi- 
nently) pleased God: this, he says, he did. 
by faith ; for without faith it is impossible 
to please Him. The question touching the 
‘ infidelis,’ must be settled by another en- 
quiry: Can he whom we thus name have 
faith,—such a faith as may enable him to 
do acts which are not sinful ? a question 
impossible for ws to solve. 

Cuap. XV. 1—13.] Further exhorta- 
tions to forbearance towards the weak, 


458 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS, 


XV. 


“ U > f > Ν >’ Ν Ἁ ’ ΄ 
rch. xiii.9,10 7 Τῷ ὅ πλησίον " ἀρεσκέτω “ELS TO δ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς ᾿οἰκοδομήν. 


reff, 
ach. xiii.4 reff. 3 
Ὁ -Ξ ch. xiv. 19 


e ~ 
καὶ yap ὁ χριστὸς οὐχ ἑαυτῷ Y ἤρεσεν, “ ἀλλὰ καθὼς 


7 ἢ , \ ial , f 
δαῖτα, τ Cor. γέγραπται Οἱ 4 ὀνειδισμοὶὲ τῶν “ ὀνειδιζόντων σε fér- 
i. 


31. see 


/ ee | > / 
ἔπεσαν ἐπ᾿ ἐμε. 


x1. 26. xiii. 
13 only. 
Isa. xliii. 28. 
e Psa. Ixviii. 9. 
Matt. v. 1] 
al. Prov. 
xxv. 10. 
fActs xx. 37 
reff. met., 
Acts viil. 16 reff. Exod. xv. 16. 
Ald. 1 Mace. x. 36 only. 
ἃ = 2 Cor. i. 3, οι, al. Ps. xciii. 19. 
n ch. vii. 27. 2 Cor. vii. 9—11. 


διὰ τῆς * 


om εἰς To αἀγαθον RN} (ins X-corr!). 
3. om 6 DIF. 


4 “ Ν 8 Φ΄ > \ h id 
σα yap ὃ προεγραφὴ εἰς THY  ημε- 
, ὃ / > / “ Ν ‘ol i ς fol \ 

τέραν διδασκαλίαν ἐγράφη, ἵνα διὰ τῆς ᾿ ὑπομονῆς καὶ 

παρακλήσεως τῶν | γραφῶν τὴν ἐλπίδα ἔχωμεν. 

ὅ ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῆς ἰ ὑπομονῆς καὶ 

δῴη ὑμῖν ™ τὸ αὐτὸ ' φρονεῖν ἐν ἀλλήλοις " κατὰ χριστὸν 


τῆς "παρακλήσεως 


g 681. 1.1. Eph. iii. 3. Τά 4 only+. Esdr. vi, 31 [32] Ἐ(προςγρ. A) 
h objective, here only. ii 
1 plur., Acts xvii. 2 reff. 


1 Cor, xv. 91. ich. ii. 7 retf. 


m ch. xii. 16 refi 


see ch. xi. 31. 


rec ἐπέπεσον (as LXX-Ed-vat), with L rel: txt (as zxx-BN: A 


def) ABCDF/ P]& (g! ?) 1 mn 17 [47] Damase. 
4. προςεγραφη DF: εγραφη B latt eth [arm Orig-int, Ambrst]}: txt ACD*L[P]& 


rel [-φει LP]. 


add παντα B[ P] m 17 [47]. 


rec (for eypapn) προεγραφη, 


with AL[P |X? rel syr Chr, Thdrt Damasc: txt BCDFX! vulg Syr copt goth eth 


[arm spec] Clem, [Orig-int] Ambrst Aug, [-¢er LP]. 


rec om 2nd δια, with 


[ C-corr(appy) P]DF vulg syr copt goth [spec Clem, |] Chr Thdrt, [ Orig-int,] Ambrst 


Aug Oros: ins ABCLX bdfgn Thdrt,. 


ins της παρακλήσεως B. 


[εχομεν Pafn17.]| aft exwuev 


5. ino. bef xp. AC! F(not G-lat) [P]€ m vulg syrr [eth arm-ed] Did, Thdrt [Orig- 


int, | Ambrst. 


from the example of Christ (1—3),—and 
unanimity (4—7) as between Jew and 
Gentile, seeing that Christ was pro- 
phetically announced as the common 
Saviour of both (8—13). 1.] By 
ἡμεῖς of Suv. the Apostle includes himself 
among the strong, as indeed he before 
indicated, ch, xiv. 14. τὰ aod. are 
general, not merely referring to the 
scruples before treated. ἀρέσκειν 
(reff.) to please or satisfy as a habit or 
motive of action. Tholuck quotes from 
the Schol. on Asch. Prom. 156, παρ᾽ 
ἑαυτῷ δίκαιον ἔχων Ζεύς,---πάντα δικαίως 
οἰόμενος ποιεῖν, αὐτὸς ἑαυτῷ ἀρέσκων καὶ 
δίκαιον νομίζων εἶναι ὅπερ ἂν βούληται 
πράττειν. 2.1 The qualification, εἰς 
τὸ ay. πρὸς oix., excludes all mere pleasing 
of men from the Christian’s motives of 
action. The Apostle repudiates it in his 
own case, Gal. i. 10. Bengel remarks, 
‘bonum, genus, edificatio, species ’:—to a 
good end, and that good end his edification. 

3.] ἐξῆν αὐτῷ μὴ ὀνειδισθῆναι, ἐξῆν μὴ 
παθεῖν ἅπερ ἔπαθεν, εἴγε ἤθελε τὸ ἑαυτοῦ 
σκοπεῖν" ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως οὐκ ἠθέλησεν, ἀλλὰ τὸ 
ἡμέτερον σκοπήσας τὸ ἑαυτοῦ παρεῖδε, 
Chrys. Hom. xxvii. p. 721 The cita- 
tion is made directly, without any thing 
to introduce the formula citandi, as in ch. 
ix. 7, where even the formula itself is want- 
ing:—there is no ellipsis. The words 
in the Messianic Psalm are addressed to 
the Father, not to those for whom Christ 
suffered: but they prove all that is here 


required, that He did not please Himself ; 
His sufferings were undertaken on account 
of the Father’s good purpose—mere work 
which He gave Him ito do. 4. The 
Apostle both justifies the above citation, 
and prepares the way for the subject to be 
next introduced, viz. the duty of unanimity, 
grounded on the testimony of these Scrip- 
tures to Christ. The ὅσα mpoeyp. applies 
to the whole ancient Scriptures, not to 
the prophetic parts only. ‘per. viz. of 
us Christians,—mpoeyp. implying πρὸ ἡμῶν. 

ἵνα διὰ τ. tr. κιτ.λ. τουτέστιν, 
ἵνα μὴ ἐκπέσωμεν' ποικίλοι γὰρ οἱ ἀγῶνες 
ἔσωθεν, ἔξωθεν. ἵνα νευρούμενοι κ. παρα- 
καλούμενοι παρὰ τῶν γραφῶν ὑπομονὴν 
ἐπιδειξώμεθα: ἵνα ἐν ὑπομονῇ ζῶντες μέ- 
νωμεν ἐπὶ τῆς ἐλπίδος. ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλων 
ἐστὶ κατασκευαστικά, ἣ ὑπομονὴ τῆς ἐλπί- 


Sos, ἣ ἐλπὶς τῆς ὑπομονῆς" ἅπερ ἀμφότερα 


ἀπὸ τῶν γραφῶν γίνεται, Chrys. ubi 
supra. As in this comment, ὑπομονῇ, 
as well as παρακλήσεως, is to be joined 
with τῶν ypapéy,—otherwise it stands 
unconnected with the subject of the 
sentence. The genitives then mean, the 
patience and the comfort arising from 
the Scriptures,—produced by their study. 

5, 6.] Further introduction of the 
subject, by a prayer that God, who has 
given the Scriptures for these ends, might 
grant them unanimity, that they might 
with one accord shew forth His glory. 
In the title given to God, the ὑπομονή 
and παράκλησις just mentioned are taken 


Pn as ee 


nel gto 


9--9. IPOS POMAIOTS 459 


Ἰησοῦν, 6 iva ° ὁμοθυμαδὸν Ρ ἐν ἑνὶ P στόματι 9 δοξάξζητε 0 Acts i. Ἡ ref 


ch, x. 9 only. 


τὸν ᾿θεὸν καὶ "πατέρα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ. = a 
4. 
ΡΟΝ. ree ewrcore ἀλλήλους, καθὼς καὶ ὁ χριστὸς "20 a 
rrau or. 
8 3. xi. 31. 
ὃ προςελάβετο ὑμᾶς, ‘eis δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ. λέγω γὰρ ae 
\ u 5 , A θ nA Vv ς * > θ if Col. i. 3) 
χριστὸν " διάκονον γεγενῆσθαι περιτομῆς " ὑπὲρ ἀληθείας only, exc. 
1 Pet. i. 3. 
a Ww > \ Χ n ἊΝ y 9 / la) Z ͵ R 6. 
θεοῦ εἰς πὸ βεβαιῶσαι τὰς ἐπαγγελίας τῶν ᾿ πατέρων, Rev. i. 6. " 
\ b] \ 3 ΄ s 3 
9 τὰ δὲ ἔθνη ὑπὲρ *édéovs «“ δοξάσαι τὸν θεόν, καθὼς. scorrii. 
: Διὰ τοῦτο » ἐξομολογήσομαί σοι ἐν ἔθνεσιν, τ. χῖν. 1,3 
ch. xiy. 1, 3. 
γέγραπται μολογῆσομ ee 
u see Gal. ii. 17. v= Pinian.ls; w ch. iy. 11 reff. x Mark xvi. 
20. 1Cor.i.6,8. 2Cor.i.21. Col. ii. 7. Heb. ii. 3. xiii. 9. Ps. xl. 12. cxviii. 28 only. ch. ix. 


4. (iv. 13.) Gal. iii, 16. 


z absol., Acts vii. 19 reff. 
Ὁ ch. xiv. 11 reff. Psa. xvii. 49. 


ach. xi. 31 reff. 


ἡ. [om o F(not G).] rec μας, with BD![P] rel Thdrt [Damasc]: txt 
ACD?3FLN be g 1? mno17[vulg spec] syrr copt goth arm [eth Orig-int,] Chr, 
Ambrst. rec om tov, with L rel Chr, Thdrt [| Damase]: ins ABCDF{ ΡῚΝ m. 

8. rec (for yap) δε (see note), with L rel syrr [arm] Chr, Thdrt [ΤῈ] Ec]: txt 
ABCDE[P]& vulg copt goth Cyr[-p, Damase Orig-int, ] Ambrst. rec ins τἡσουν 
bef χριστον, with DF [Ὁ ο] harl syrr; aft xp. L rel vulg goth [Ath,] Thdrt, Thl 
Cc [Ambrst]: om ABCN copt [eth arm Did,] Epiph, Chr- -comm, Cyr{-p,] Damase 
[ Orig-int, ]. γεένεσθαι (corrn 2) BC DIE’ ς [arm] Ath,: txt AC?D3L[ P]® rel 
[ Did, ] Epiph, Chr, Cyr[-p,] Thdrt Damasc. 


9. for τουτο, του προφητου N'(txt N-corr!). 
clem(and harl tel guelph, not am fuld demid) syr copt Chr, Pel Sedul: cas(? = 


up again: q. ἃ. “ The God who alone can 
give this patience and comfort.” The 
later form of the opt., δῴη, 1 is also found 
2 Tim. 1. 16,18; Eph. i. 17 al., in LXX 
Gen. xxvii. 28; xxviii. 4al. See Winer, 
edn. 6, § 14. 1. g. κατὰ xp. Ἰησοῦν, 
according to (the spirit and precepts of) 
Christ Jesus,—see reff. 6. τὸν 
θεὸν x. πατ.] De Wette regards τὸν θεὸν 
as independent of Ἰησοῦ xp.,—‘ God, and 
the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ? 
The usage of the article will not decide 
the matter, because on either rendering, 
the accusatives both refer to the same 
Person: but the ordinary one, the God 
and Father... . is preferable on account 
of its simplicity. 7.) Wherefore 
(on which account, viz. that the wish of 
the last verse may be accomplished) re- 
ceive (see ch. xiv. 1) one another, as Christ 
also received you,—with a view to 
God’s glory (that this is the meaning of 
εἰς δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ, appears by ver. 9, τὰ δὲ 
ἔθνη ὑπὲρ ἐλέους δοξάσαι τὸν θεόν). 

The Apostle does uot expressly name Jewish 
and Gentile converts as those to whom he 
addresses this exhortation, but it is evident 
from the next verse that it is so. 8. | 
For (reason for the above exhortation. 
This not having been seen, it has been 
altered to δέ) I say, that Christ hath been 
made (has come as: the effects still en- 
during. It can hardly be that the usual 
historical aorist γενέσθαι (see var. readd.) 
was altered to the unusual perfect -yeye- 
γνῆσθαι. The tendency of correction was 


[aft εθνεσιν ins κυριε c ἢ 17 vulg- 


κε) &3,] 


entirely the other way) a minister (He 
came διακονῆσαι, Matt. xx. 28) of the cir- 
cumcision (an expression no where else 
found, and doubtless here used by Paul to 
humble the pride of the strong, the Gen- 
tile Christians, by exalting God’s covenant 
people to their true dignity) on account of 
the truth of God (i.e. for the fulfilment of 
the Divine pledges given under the cove- 
nant of circumcision) to confirm the pro- 
mises of (made to, gen. obj.; ef. ἢ εὐλογία 
Tov “ABpadu, Gal. 111. 14) the fathers 
(i.e. Christ came to the Jews in virtue of a 
long-sealed compact, to the fulfilment of 
which God’s truth was pledged): but (L 
say) that the Gentiles glorified God (or 
‘should glorify God : Winer, in his former 
editions, § 45. 8, took it.as a perfect, and 
co-ordinate with γεγενῆσθαι : I would re- 
gard it (and so, apparently, Winer now, 
edn. 6, ὃ 44. 7. ¢) as the historic aorist, 
and understand ‘each man at his con- 
version. Least of all can it be sub- 
ordinated to εἰς τό, as is done in Εἰ. V.) on 
account of.(His) mercy (the emphasis is 
on ὑπὲρ ἐλέους : the Gentiles have no cove- 
nant promise to claim,—they have nothing 
but the pure mercy of God in grafting 
them in to allege—therefore the Jew has 
an advantage), ὅσ. The citations are 
from the Law, the Prophets, and the 
Psalms. The first, originally spoken by 
David of his joy after his deliverances and 
triumphs, is prophetically said of Christ 
in His own Person. It is adduced to 
shew that among the Gentiles Christ’s 


400 


‘ “ > , / An 
clCor.xiv.15 Καὶ τῷ ονοματὶ gov “ Ψαλῶ. 


(bis). Eph. 
ν. 19. James 
v. 13 only. 

1 Kings xvi. 


16. 

ἃ = Gal. iii. 16 
see 1 Cor. vi. 
16. 

e Acts vii. 41 
reff. Devt. 
xxxii. 43. 

f here only. 
Psa. exvi. 1. 
(elsw., θεόν, 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


/ » Ἄν, a n 4 ~ 
φράνθητε ἔθνη μετὰ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτοῦ. 


νεσάτωσαν αὐτὸν πάντες οἱ ™ λαοί. 
λέγει "ἔσται ἡ ἱῥίζα τοῦ ᾿Ἰεσσαί, καὶ ὁ * 
lapyew ἐθνῶν, τὰ ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ ἔθνη ™ ἐλπιοῦσιν. 
θεὸς τῆς ἐλπίδος "πληρώσαι ὑμᾶς “πάσης χαρᾶς καὶ 


XV: 
10 καὶ πάλιν ἃ λέγει " Εὐ- 


11 καὶ πάλιν 


» a / \ ” . , 
ἀκ έγει7 Αἰνεῖτε πάντα ta ἔθνη τὸν ἴ κύριον. Kal © ἐπαι- 
βίον, 


12 καὶ πάλιν Ἡσαΐας 
ἀνιστάμενος 
13.9 δὲ 


veil) Ὑ ean Ρ 2 = , ᾳ > ee ᾽ὔ ς an ᾽ ef 
cree 6. ΕἸΡΏΨΡΗΣ “ Εν τῷ πιστεύειν, ἃ εἰς τὸ "περισσεύειν ὑμᾶς ἐν τῇ 

1 Cor. xi. 2, > ͵ 4 j : bea 

17, 22 only. 8 

17, 2only. ἐλπίδι " ἐν δυνάμει πνεύματος ἁγίου. 


12 (1). 
h plur., Acts 
iv. 25 (from 


Ps. ii. 1), 27. Rev. vii. 9. x. 11. xi. 9. xvii. 15. 


vii. 11, 15 and, but act., Acts iii. 22 (from Deut. xviii. 15), 26. 


i Isa. xi. 1,10. see Rev. v. 5. xxii. 16. 


/ 
14t ]]έπεισμαι δέ, ἀδελφοί pov, καὶ αὐτὸς ἐγὼ περὶ 


k = Heb. 


1 = Mark x. 42 only. Gen. i. 26, 28 al. 


m constr., 1 Tim. iv. 10. vi. 17. Ps. xxi. δ. dat. only, Matt. xii. 21. νυ. ἐπί and acc.,1 Tim. νυ. 5. 1 Pet. i. 13 (iii. 


5rec.). ν΄. εἰς, John v.45. 2Cor.i.10. 1 Pet. iii. δ. 
p = Acts iv. 30 reff. q ch. iv. 11 reff. 
t constr., ch. viii. 38 reff. 


ψαλω bef τω ov. σ. DG [copt]. 


o= Acts xx. 19 reff. 
sch.i 4 reff. 


Ἢ Acts xili. 52 reff. 
rch. iii. 7 reff. Sir. xix. 24. 


11. ins Aeye: BDF syrr copt goth eth[-rom arm-mss]: om ACL[ PX rel vulg [eth-pl 


arm-ed] (Chr,) Thdrt Damase ΤῺ] (ἔς [Orig-int,] Ambrst. 


rec Tov kup. bef 7. τα 


εθνη (corrn to LXX, where none read as in txt), with CFL rel Syr [eth arm-mss]} Thl 
(Ee [Orig-int,]: txt ABDN[P 47] vulg syr goth arm[-ed] Chr, Thdrt [Damase 


Ambrst ]. 


rec emawecate (so LXX-Kd-vat(B def) 884 &c), with FL[P] rel Chr, 


Thdrt [ΤῺ] Gc}: txt (so zxx-AN!) ABC[D]X® Chr-ms, Damase. 


12. λεγει bef noaas δὲ [copt]. 


ανιστανομενος N (see digest ch xii. 8). 


13. πληροφορησαι vuas (add ev B) παση xapa κ. εἰρηνη BF: txt ACDL[ PX rel. 


[om ev tw mor. DF spec arm Vig). ] 
om ev (bef τη ελπιδι) ΠῚ] F[-gr] Chr-ms. 


57. 


om εἰς To περισσευειν (homeotel) B 


14. κ. a. €. 7. um. bef αδελφοι μου DF Syr Thdrt.—om μου D!F Thdrt Ambrst. 


for περι, υπερ B. 


triumphs were to take place, as well as 
among the Jews. 10.1 καὶ πάλ. λέγει, 
viz. ἣ γραφή, or 6 θεός, which is in sub- 
stance the same: not impersonal: see 
ref. 1 Cor., note. The present Heb. 
text of Deut. xxxii. 43 will not bear this, 
which is the LXX rendering. But Tho- 
luck remarks, ‘‘ According to the present 
text the difficulty arises, that we must 
either take oa of the Jewish tribes, or 
construe P2171 with an accus., instead of 
with 5 (Gesen.): the reading of the LXX 
may therefore be right.” There is how- 
ever a reading toy-nx found in one and 
perhaps another of Kennicott’s Mss. 
which will bear the rendering of our text. 
In several passages where the Gentiles are 
spoken of prophetically, the Hebrew text 
has apparently been tampered with by the 
Jews. See Kitto’s Journal of Sacred Lite- 
rature for January, 1852, pp. 275 ff. 

11, 12.] The universality of the praise to 
be given to God for His merciful kindness 
in sending His Son is prophetically indi- 
cated by the'first citation. In the latter a 
more direct announcement is given of the 
share which the Gentiles were to have in 
the root of Jesse. The version is that of 
the LXX, which here differs considerably 


fromthe Heb. The latter is nearly literally 
rendered in E.V.: “ And in that day there 
shall be a root (Heb. ‘andit shall happen in 
that day, a branch’) of Jesse, which shall 
stand for an ensign of the people: to it 
shall the Gentiles seek.” 18.1 The 
hortatory part of the Epistle, as well as the 
preceding section of it (ver. 5), concludes 
with a solemn wish for the spiritual wel- 
fare of the Roman church. The words 
τῆς ἐλπίδος connect with ἐλπιοῦσι of the 
foregoing verse, as was the case with τῆς 
ὑπομονῆς Kk. τῆς παρακλήσεως in ver. d. 
χαρᾶς κ. εἰρήνης, as the happy result of 
faith in God, and unanimity with one 
another ; see ch. xiv. 17. 

XV. 14—XVI. 27.] CONCLUSION 
OF THE EPISTLE. Persona No- 
TICES, RESPECTING THE APOSTLE HIM- 
SELF (xv. 14—33),—RESPECTING THOSE 
GREETED (xvi. 1—16), AND GREETING: 
TOGETHER WITH WARNINGS AGAINST 
THOSE WHO MADE DIVISIONS AMONG 
THEM (xvi. 16—23) ;—AND CONCLUDING 
DOXOLOGY (xvi. 24—27). 1433. } 
He first (14—16) excuses the boldness of 
his writing, by the allegation of his office 
as Apostle of the Gentiles. 14.) αὐτὸς 
éyw, I myself, = ‘idem,’ Lat.,—‘ notwith- 


ABCD 
FL[P]x 
abcdf 

ghkl 
mnol7 


(47] 


10—17. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 
ὑμῶν ὅτι Kal αὐτοὶ ἃ μεστοί ἐστε 


[τῆς] 


πληρωμένοι ° πάσης 
ἀλλήλους 5 νουθετεῖν' 


Ὁ r ‘ = e 5 7 id “ 
ὑμῖν[, ἀδελφοί, 5 ἀπὸ * μέρους, ὡς " ἐπαναμιμνήσκων ὑμᾶς 


1 Υ τολμηρότερον δὲ 


401 


᾿ ἀγαθωσύνης Ὦ ἡγξ. ἃ οἱ. i. 29 reff. 
᾽ v Gal. v. 22. 


, 4 δ h. v. 9. 
ἡ γνώσεως, δυνάμενοι καὶ Zhe i. 11 
Z ava ae fe Neh. 
YP woe 1 Cor. i. 5 
4]. ἔτ. 
x Acts xx. 31 


reff. 


7 a id ἈΝ lal an > 
> διὰ τὴν “ χάριν τὴν " δοθεῖσάν μοι ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ 16 4 εἰς y here only. 


x \ lal ’ “ ᾽ \ 7 
τὸ εἶναί με ἃ λειτουργὸν χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ “ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, 


᾿ ἱερουργοῦντα τὸ 8 εὐαγγέλιον 
\ κ᾿ 

ἡ ὃἣ προςφορὰ τῶν 
k b] ΄ e / 

ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ. 


ἐθνῶν 


“ 8 θ “ / f 
τοῦ &Geov, ἵνα γένηται 
ἱεὐπρόςδεκτος, 


Polyb. i.17.7, 
τολμηρό- 
τερον ἐγχει- 
ρειν τοις 
πράγμασι. 
(-ρός, Sir. 
xix. 2, 3.) 


K ἡγιασμένη 


5 7 “72: 
171 ἔχω οὖν τὴν lm καύχησιν ἐν 2 ch. xi. 25 reff. 


a here only +. 


= Ch. xiv. 15 
reff. ΟἹ Cor.i.4 reff. d ch. xiii. 6 reff. e = Col. i. 25. f here 
only +. see notes. g Mark i. 14. (Acts xx. 24.) ch.i.1. 2Cor. xi.7. 1 Thess. ii. 2, 
85 9. (1 Tim. 1. 11.) 1 Pet. iv. 17 only. h Acts xxi. 26. xxiv. 17. Eph. νυ. 2. Heb. x. 5 (from 
Ps. xxxix. 6}, &c., nly iver. 31. 2 Cor. vi. 2. viii. 12. 1 Pet. ii. 5 only +. k (and 
constr. ) John xvii. 17. Xo. MGor: 3.2, Heb)x.10; 295) Isa, x, 17. 11 Cor. xv. 31. 


m ch. iii. 27 reff. 


om ka avtot DF Chr-comm[not 1-ms]. 
Pel: 
om ACDFL rel. 


ins καὶ bef πεπληρωμενοι DE Syr. 
αλληλους bef δυναμενοι and om καὶ D}*4[ -gr | F, 


for αγαθωσυνης, αγαπης F vulg Ambrst 
ins της BLP |& k ἢ Clem, [ Damasc] : 
for aAAnA., 


αλλους L rel vulg syrr Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] (Ες [Orig-int,]: txt ABCDFN[P 47] (f ?) 


15. roAunpotepws AB: txt CDFL[P |X rel. 


Cyr[-p, Orig-int,] Aug, 
for emavap., ἐπι ΤΕ ΕΣ B: 
ACDL[P]&? rel. 
16. for εἰναι, γενεσθαι D'[-gr] F[-gr]. 
[eth arm] Chr, Thdrt: 


Ambrst | Aug,. om evs ta εθνη B. 


txt ABCE[P|N m vulg syr Cyr[-p, 


om αδελφοι ABCN! copt seth Chr, 


: ins DFL[P]€? rel vulg Syr [syr arm Damasc] Thdrt Ambrst. 


υπαναμ. O. 


for υπο, απο BFX! Damasc: txt 
rec ino. bef xp., with DL rel Syr copt 
Damasc] Orig{-int, 


evn om evzposdextos F Fulg, 


“ 
17. rec om τὴν (the art not being understood), with AL[P]®& rel [arm] Chr, [Cyr- Ῥ, 


Damasc] Thdrt: ins B C[appy] DF m. 


standing what I have written :’ see ch. vii. 
25, note. Meyer understands it, ‘ without 
information from others: Bengel and 
Olsh., ‘ I myself, as well as others ? Riick- 
ert, ΕἾ not only wish it (ver. 13), but an 
persuaded for myself that it is so? 

καὶ αὐτοί, ye also yourselves, i i.e. with- 

out exhortation of mine. 15.] ἀπὸ 
μέρους restricts the τολμηρότερον. to cer- 
tain parts of the Epistle, 6. g. ch. xi. 17, ff. 
25; chaps. xiii. and xiv. ἔγραψα, the 
dabam or scribebam of the Latins in episto- 
lary writing. ὡς ἐπαν. ὑμ., aS Put- 
ting you anew in remembrance. 

διὰ τ. χάριν. , because of the grace, 
&6.5) 1 θυ κἢ my “apostolic office was the 
ground and reason of my boldness :’—not 
= διὰ τῆς χάριτος ch. xii. 8. 16.] That 
I might be (εἰς τό gives the purpose of the 
grace being given, not of the ἔγραψα) a 
ministering priest of Christ Jesus for 
(in reference to) the Gentiles, ministering 
in the Gospel of God (ἱερουργοῦντα, mpos- 
φέροντα θυσίαν, Hesych.: but the εὐαγγέλ. 
τ. θεοῦ is not the θυσία, but signifies that 
wherein, in behoof of which, the ἱερουργεῖν 
took place: so Josephus, de Mace. § 7, 
speaking of the martyrs for the law, says, 
τοιούτους δεῖ εἶναι τοὺς ἱερουργοῦντας τὸν 
νόμον ἰδίῳ αἵματι, καὶ γενναίῳ ἱδρῶτι 
τοῖς μέχρι θανάτου πάθεσιν ὑπερασπί- 


(ovras), that the offering [up] of the Gen- 


tiles (gen. of apposition: the Gentiles 
themselves are the offering ; so Theophyl. 
αὕτη μοι ἱερωσύνη, τὸ καταγγέλλειν εὐαγ- 
γέλιον. μάχαιραν ἔχω τὸν λόγον" θυσία 
ἐστὲ ὑμεῖς) may be acceptable, sanctified 
by the Holy Ghost. The language is evi- 
dently figurative, and can by no possibility 
be taken as a sanction for any view of the 
Christian minister as a sacrificing priest, 
otherwise than according to that figure— 
viz. that he offers to God the acceptable 
sacrifice of those who by his means believe 
on Christ. ““ Facit se antistitem vel sacer- 
dotem in Evangelii ministerio, qui populum, 
quem Deo acquirit, in sacrificium offerat, 
atque hoc modo sacris Evangelii mysteriis 
operetur. Et sane hoc est Christiani pas- 
toris sacerdotium, homines in Evangelii 
obedientiam subigendo veluti Deo im- 
molare: non, quod superciliose hactenus 
Papiste jactarunt, oblatione homines re- 
conciliare Deo. Neque tamen ecclesias- 
ticos pastores simpliciter hic vocat Sacer- 
dotes, tanquam perpetuo titulo: sed quum 
dignitatem efficaciamque ministerii vellet 
commendare Paulus, hac metaphora per 
occasionem est usus. Hie ergo finis sit 
Evangelii preeconibus in suo munere, ani- 
mas fide purificatas Deo offerre.” Calvin. 

17—22.] The Apostle boasts of the 
extent and result of his apostolic mission 
among the Gentiles, and that in places 


EM, 


ες a A Δ \ fi“ > 4 , 
nuke xiv.32. χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ "τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεόν" 18 ov yap 5 τολμήσω 
Acts xxvul. ” e 9 , \ sos τ 9 

: ‘i. ra) q r 
10. Heb.ii, TE © λαλεῖν P ὧν οὐ “ κατειργάσατο χρίστος δι᾿ ἐμοῦ τ εἰς 
o Phil. i. 14. 
see 2 Macc. 


462 ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. 


δ ἔργῳ, 19 " ἐν δυνάμει 
iv. 2. ͵ Ἢ 7 ε 5 ὃ ΄ , Φὸ ΡῈ 
patir, Acts σημείων καὶ " τεράτων, “ἐν δυνάμει πνεύματος [ἁγίου], 
oo re € x \ / , a ? 

1 Cor. vii 1 ὥςτε μὲ ἀπὸ ᾿ἱερουσαλὴμ καὶ " κύκλῳ “ μέχρι TOU lh- 
Heb. v. 8. a x = ’ 
Winer,edn.6, λυρίκου “ TrETTANPWKEVAL 
ἢ 24. 2, end. 

qch. ii. 9 reff. Q0 

rch. i. 5 (reff.). 


s 2 Cor. x. ll. 
Col. iii. 17. 


lal , \ 
τ ὑπακοὴν ἐθνῶν, ὅ λόγῳ καὶ 


τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ χριστοῦ. 


οὕτω δὲ ¥ φιλοτιμούμενον 7 εὐαγγελίζεσθαι, οὐχ ὅπου 
ἃ ὠνομάσθ ιστός, ἵνα μὴ ἐπ᾽ ὃ" ἀλλότριον ° θεμέλιον 
1 John iii. 18. és ΠΝ “ ΓΕ ρ μ 


(see 1 Cor. iv. 19,20. 1 Thess. i. δ.) t ver. 13. u Acts vii. 36 reff. 
vy absol., Mark iii. 34. vi. 6, 36. Luke ix. 12 only. 2 Chron. xxxiv. 6. w.gen., Rev. iv. 6. v. 11. vii. ll only. Gen. xxxv. 
5 al. w of place, here only. (ch. v. 14 reff.) Job xxxviii. 11. x = Col. i. 25. see Acts xii. 25. 
2 Cor. v.9. 1 Thess. iv. 11 only t. z absol., Luke ix. 6. xx. 1. 
16 bis, 18 only. Nah. i. 15. a= 2 Tim. ii. 19 only. 
c=1 Cor. iii. 10, 11,12. Heb. vi. 1. 


Ti@orvi Li. ix. 
Ὁ ch. xiv. 4 reff. 


Acts xiv. 7. 
Isa. xxvi. 13. 


rec om τον, with b: ins ABCDFL[P]® rel Did, Chr Cyr, Damase Thdrt (ec. 


18. for roAunow, ToAuw BN latt Did, Dial-trin, Cyr[-p, Orig-int, Archel Ambrst]. 


rec λαλεῖν bef τι, with L rel copt [syrr eth arm] Me: txt ABCDF[P]X m 
[vulg] Bas, Ath, Did, Archel Chr, Cyr[-p] Thdrt [Damase Orig-int, Ambrst |—for 


λαλειν, εἰπειν DF: Aeyew and AaAnoa gr-ff. κατηργασατο DEL. ins o bef 
pioros F. aft δὲ euov add λογων B. for uv7ak., ἀκοὴν B. 
19. aft Ist δυναμ. ins αὐτου DIF. (G! also ins αὐτου aft 2nd dur.) ree aft 


πνευματος ins θεου, with D?L[P]X€ rel Syr [syr-txt Euthal-ms] Chr-txt, Cyr[-p, 
Damasc] Thdrt ΤῊ] Ee; ayov AC D!-3/and lat] F ¢ m 17 [47] vulg copt syr[-marg | 
arm Ath, Bas, Chr-comm Cyr[-p, Did,] Dial,: om B Pel-comm Vig). wSTE 
πεπληρωσθαι απο Lep. μεχρι TOU LAA. και KUKAwW TO DF. 

20. φιλοτιμουμαι (corrn of constr) B D'{-gr] F[P]: -μουμενος 116-[295] : om valg 
D-lat [Orig-int,]: txt ACD?3L® rel Orig. [ευαγγελισασθαι P πὶ Chr-mss,. | 


for ovx οπου, orov οὐκ D![-gr] F Chr,. 
απολλοτριὼ θεμελιω F. 


where none had preached before him. 
I have therefore (consequent on the grace 
and ministry just mentioned) my boasting 
(i.e. 1 venture to boast:’ not = ἔχω 
καύχημα, ‘ Ihave whereof I may glory,’ as 
E. V., but, as De W., = ἔχω καυχᾶσθαι, 
“1 can, or dare, boast’) in Christ Jesus 
(there is no stress on ἐν xp. *Ino.,—it 
merely qualifies τὴν καύχησιν as no vain 
glorying, but grounded in, consistent with, 
springing from, his relation and subser- 
viency to Christ) of (concerning) matters 
relating to God (my above-named sacer- 
dotaloffice and ministry). 18. | The con- 
nexion is: ‘I have real ground for glorying 
(in a legitimate and Christian manner) ;’ 
for I will not (as some false apostles do, see 
2 Cor. x. 12—18) allow myself to speak of 
any of those things which (ὧν for ἐκείνων, 
ἅ, attr.) Christ did not work by me (but 
by some other) in order to the obedience 
(subjection to the Gospel) of the Gentiles 
(then, as if the sentence were in the affirma- 
tive form, ‘I will only boast of what Christ 
has veritably done by me towards the obe- 
dience of the Gentiles,’ he proceeds) by word 
and deed, 19.] in the power of signs 
and wonders, in the power of the [ Holy | 
Spirit (the signs and wonders (reff.) are not 
spiritual, but external miraculous acts, — 
see 2 Cor. xii. 12), so that (result of the 


ins o bef χριστος D'F Chr,. er 


κατειργάσατο) from Jerusalem (the eastern 
boundary of his preaching) and the neigh- 
bourhood (κύκλῳ is not to be joined with 
μέχρι τ. “IAA. as Calov., al., but refers 
(reff.) to Jerusalem, meaning perhaps its 
immediate neighbourhood, perhaps Ara- 
bia (Ὁ), Gal. i. 17,—but hardly Damascus 
and Cilicia, as De W. suggests, seeing that 
they would come into the route afterwards 
specified, from Jerusalem to Illyricum), as 
far as Illyricum (Illyricum bordered on 
Macedonia to the S. It is possible that 
Paul may literally have advanced to its 
frontiers during his preaching in Mace- 
donia ; but I think it more probable, that 
he uses it broadly as the ‘terminus ad 
quem,’ the next province to that in which 
he had preached), I have fulfilled (ref. :-— 
‘executed my office of preaching,’ so that 
εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ xp. = τὸ εὐαγγελίζεσθαι 
τὸν xp.) the Gospel of Christ. 

20.] But (limits the foregoing assertion) 
thus (after the following rule) being 
careful (reff.: the word in the Apostle’s 
usage seems to lose its primary meaning of 
‘making a point of honour? The par- 
ticip. agrees with με, ver. 19) to preach the 
Gospel, not where Christ was (previously) 
named, that I might not build on the 
foundation of another, but according asit 
is written (i.e. according to the following 


ABCD 
FL[ PJ] 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


18—25. . 


ἃ οἰκοδομῶ, 


, \ > An v \ «Ὁ b] 5 / 
γέλη περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὄψονται, καὶ ol οὐκ ἀκηκόασιν ® συν- 
ξ Ν \ , 4 ἡ “ lal 
ἤσουσιν. 2 διὸ καὶ » ἐνεκοπτόμην ‘ta i πολλὰ * τοῦ ἐλθεῖν 


\ con 93 \ δὲ s 
T pos ULas “Ὁ VUVL E μήκετιυ 


πὶ κλίμασιν τούτοις, " ἐπιποθίαν δὲ ἔχων 5 τοῦ ἐλθεῖν 
\ 6 “Ὁ p > Ν qr « “ r > »“ 94, ΕἸ ς Ἃ / 
πρὸς ὑμᾶς Ὁ ἀπὸ © ἱκανῶν * ἐτῶν, ὡς ἂν πορεύωμαι 
εἰ \ Ss / 3, sf \ t§ , y θ 7, 
ς τὴν Σπανίαν, (ἐλπίζω yap " διαπορευόμενος θεάσασ- 
-“ \ > lal A “ lal 
θαι ὑμᾶς καὶ ad ὑμῶν ἃ προπεμφθῆναι " ἐκεῖ, ἐὰν ὑμῶν 
A Ww > \ Ww , x ΡῚ δ θῶ 
πρῶτον “amo ἣ μέρους * ἐμπλησθῶ. 


iv. 5. 
only t. (-θεῖν, ch. i. 11.) 
q = Acts ix. 23 reff. Luke xxiii. 8 al. 
1 absol., Luke xviii. 36 (vi. 1. xiii. 22. 
xv. 3 reff, 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


m 2 Cor. xi. 10. Gal. i. 21 only. 


r 2 Mace. i. 20. 
Acts xvi. 4) only. 
v= Matt. ii. 22. John xi. 8. xviii. 3. 


463 


3 \ 
91 ε ἀλλὰ καθὼς γέγραπται Οἷς οὐκ ἴ ἀνηγ- 4 = Gatiiis. 


(ἐποικ., 

1 Cor. iil. 12.) 
e ver. 3. 
f Acts xiv. 27 


reff. Isa. lil 
] , ” > a 15. * 
τόπον ἔχων ἐν τοῖς gch. iii. 11, 
Matt. xiii. 
13, &c. Ephe 
vi L7e sts: 
ii. 10. Prov. 
11: δὲ 
h Acts xxiv. 
reff. 
i here only. 
Xen. Hell. vi. 
2. 30 


k constr., Acts 


OF \ \ ΄ : 
25 νυνὶ δὲ πορεύ- | xiv. 18 ref. 
1 -= Acts xxv. 
16 reff. Sir. 
(Judg. xx. 2 A Ald. compl. ?) n Here 
o constr., Acts xiv. 9 reff. p Luke vili. 43, 


s = 1 Cor. xi. 34. Phil. ii. 23 
Zech. ix. 8. Xen. Anab. ii. 2.11. 
w ver. 15, x = here 


(Luke i. 53. vi. 25. Johnvi.12) only. Eccl. vi.3. Polyb. i. 17.3. see Acts xiv. 17. 


21. amnyyedn C (238 ?): avnyyeAAn(sic) δὲ ὁ ἢ k? o. 


av. Β m [copt]. 
22. for ενεκοπτομην, ενεκοπὴν DF. 
rel Chr, Thdrt [Damasc]. 
23. [for μηκ., ουκετι P. | 
om του A. 
Thdrt: txt BC[ P| m Damase. 


οψονται bef os any. π. 


for Ta πολλα, moAAaKis BDF: txt ACL[ P|& 


for 2nd εχων, exw (corrn of constr) D'F m o. 
rec (for ikavwv) πολλων (more usual exprn), with ADFLX rel Chr, 


24. rec (for av) cay, with L rel Chr, Thdrt: txt AB C(appy) DF[P]& Chr, Damase. 


add ovy DF. 
1222 ; txt ABCN rel Chr, Thl. 


πορευομαι DE[P] a! bi cf m! n [47 Euthal-ms]: -σομαι L 
rec aft σπανιαν ins ελευσομαι προς vuas (fo fill up 


the aposiopesis: see note), with LX? rel syr [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Thl (ἔς : om 
ABCDF[P]X! latt Syr copt ath arm Chr, Damase [Orig-int,] Ambrst Pel Sedul. 

om yap F latt Syr copt eth [arm Orig-int, | (videbo vos et a vobis deducar 
Ambrst) : ins ABCDL[P]& syr [copt Euthal-ms] (‘Fhdrt,) Damase Thl Gc: δὲ a? 3. 


5. 108!-20 Chr-ms Thdrt,. 


πορευθηναι P. | 


rule of Scripture: I determined to act in 
the spirit of these words, forming part of a 
general prophecy of the dispersion of that 
Gospef which I was preaching), &. The 
citation is from the LXX, περὶ αὐτοῦ refer- 
ring to 6 mats μου, ver. 13, but being un- 
represented in the Heb. Our E. V. ren- 
ders: “That which had not been told 
them, shall they see: and that which they 
had not heard, shall they consider.” 
22. 86, not, because a foundation had 
been already laid at Rome by another: 
this would refer to merely a secondary 
part of the foregoing assertion : διό refers 
to the primary, viz. his having been so 
earnestly engaged in preaching elsewhere. 
τὰ πολλά, these many times: 
not [‘ for the most part,’ or], as Meyer, 
Fritz., ‘the greater number of times,’ — 
which would suggest the idea that there 
had been other ocvasions on which this 
hindrance had not been operative. 
23.] py. tow. ἔχων, I have no more 
occasion, viz. of apostolic work. The 
participial construction prevails through- 
out, the participles standing as ‘direct 


πορευόμενος A 62 Damasc,. 
with ACL[P]§8 rel Chr, [Thdrt Damasc]: txt Βίαπο) DF (47. 


rec (for ap) ud, 
for προπεμφθ., 


verbs. This not having been seen, the 
words ἐλεύσομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς have been in- 
serted to fill up what seemed an aposio- 
pesis. Now, however, I have no longer 
any business in these parts, but have had 
for many years past a desire to see you, 
whenever (as soonas) I journey into Spain. 
Respecting the question whether this jour- 
ney into Spain was ever taken, the views 
of Commentators have differed, according 
to their conclusion respecting the libera- 
tion of the Apostle from his imprison- 
ment at Rome. I have discussed this 
in the Prolegg. to the Pastoral Epistles, 
§ ii. The reader may see, on the side of 
the completion of the journey, Neander, 
Pf. u. Leit., ed. 4, pp. 527—552,—and 
on the other side, Dr. Davidson, Introd. 
to N. T. vol. ii. pp. 96—132, and Wie- 
seler, Chron. der Apost. Zvitalt., Ex- 
cursus I., where a copious list of books 
on both sides is given. 24.] ἀπὸ 
μέρους is an affectionate limitation of 
ἐμπλησθῶ, implying that he would wish 
to remain much longer than he anti- 
cipated being able to do,—and also, as 


AG 


22) Tim, 1.08: 
Philem. 13. 
Heb. vi. 10. 
pres. part., 
Winer, edn. 
6, $45.1.2.a, 
Acts vi. 11. 
- OF 


xV. « 
z= Acts ix. 13 


σαλήμ. 


ΠΡΟΣ ῬΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ: 


XV. 26—33. 


A -“ e Ψ τὰν, 
ομαι εἰς “Ιερουσαλὴμ δ διακονῶν τοῖς * ἁγίοις. 598 8 εὖ- 
δόκ up Μακεδονί L ᾿Αχαΐα » , ὰ 

noav γὰρ Μακεδονία καὶ ᾿Αχαΐα ὃ κοινωνίαν τινὰ 
\ a ς a ᾿ 
ποιήσασθαι " εἰς τοὺς πτωχοὺς τῶν ὅ ἁγίων τῶν ἐν ᾿Ιερου- 
ς , ΄, , ee , A 
27 ἃ εὐδόκησαν yap, καὶ “oderdéTat εἰσὶν αὐτῶν. 
a al a , / Ἅ ” 
εἰ yap τοῖς “ πνευματικοῖς αὐτῶν ' ἐκοινώνησαν τὰ ἔθνη, 
\ a lal ; a > lal 
£ ὀφείλουσιν καὶ ἐν τοῖς ™ σαρκικοῖς | λειτουργῆσαι αὐτοῖς. 


98 a ee) es , Ara ΄ > a \ 
16. 58 χρῦτο οὗν * ἐπιτελέσας καὶ ' σφραγισάμενος αὑτοῖς τὸν 
Ῥ-ΞΞ 2 ΟΣ. ix. 


13. Heb. xiii. 
16 only. 
(-vetv, ver. 
27. ch. xii. 

e — 1 Cor. xvi. 
I reff. 

ἃ ch. i. 14 reff. 

e Paul (ci. i. 
11. vii. 14. 
1 Cor. ix. 11 
al.) only, exc. 
1 Pet. ii. 5, bis τ΄. 

ix. 11 (iii. 3 reff.). 


f-ch. xii. 13 reff. 


- la > / 
Ὦ καρπὸν τοῦτον " ἀπελεύσομαι δι’ ὑμῶν "eis Σ-πανίαν' 
τ᾿ ἋΣ 4 A , > 
29 οἶδα δὲ ὅτι ἐρχόμενος πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐν 9 πληρώματι ὃ ev- 
λογίας χριστοῦ ἐλεύσομαι. 


30 4 παρακαλῶ δὲ ὑμᾶς, 


[ἀδελφοί,] 4 διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿ησοῦ χριστοῦ καὶ 4 διὰ 
τῆς "ἀγάπης τοῦ "πνεύματος, " συναγωνίσασθαί μοι ἐν 


g ver. 1 reff. h‘=1 Cor. 


i=here only. (Acts xiii. 2 reff.) 3 Kingsi.4. (-yla, 2 Cor. ix. 12. -γός, 


ver. 16.) k 2 Cor. vii. 1. viii. 6, 11 bis. 1 Kings ili. 12. of sacred rites, Heb. ix. 6. lsee 
John iii. 33. m = Gal. ν. 22. Eph. v.9. Heb. xii. 11. James iii. 18. n= Matt. 
viii. 19. x. 5 al. fr. Josh. vi. 11. o = Eph. iii. 19. p ch. xvi. 18. 1 Cor. x. 
16. 2Cor.ix.5al. Ezek. xxxiv. 26, q ch. xii. 1 reff. r here only. see Col. i. 8. 


s here onty t. (ἀγων- Col. iv. 12.) 


25. διακονησαι DF latt [Orig-int, Ambrst]: διακονησων δὲ! : txt ABCL[ PN? rel. 
26. evdoxnoev B 62. 120 Thdrt,{(and ms,) Chr-c,]: G-lat has both (ηυδ. B'X m 


[Chr-com]: so [Α Ἰδὲ τὴ Chr-ms in next ver). 
των ev tep. αγιων D ΕἾ -gr]. 
27. for evdoK. yap και οφειλεται, oped. yap DF Ambrst. 


also has makatdoves. 


μακαιδονε5 Kat αχαιακοι F, D!-lat 


rec αὐτων bef εἰσι», 


with FL rel: txt ABCD[P|& vulg(with am &c agst fuld &c) spec Syr copt [arm 


Damasce Orig-int, | Ambrst. 
28. aft τουτο ovy ins apa F. 
δι vuas F. 
rel: om ABDIF[P]X! m Chr, [Damasc]. 
29. for oda δε, γινώσκω yap F. 


om ἐρχόμενος F. 


om 2nd auvtwy L. 
oppayicapevors(sic) N. 
rec ins τὴν bef σπανιαν (none om τὴν in ver 24), with CLR3 


om avros B 76. 108. 


mAnpodopta D!F. 


rec ins Tov ευαγγελιου Tov bef χριστου (prob a gloss), with LX? rel vulg[-clem 
arm-mss] syrr Chr, Thdrt: om ABCDF[ ΡΊΝ am(with demid harl [fuld tol]) copt 
eth arm[-ed](om xp. also) Clem, [Orig-int, Ambrst]. 
30. om αδελῴοι B 76 eth Chr, : ins bef παρακ. vu. a(in red) lectt (and C3-marg); bef 
vu., demid: add μου syrr copt (the variations in posn are suspicious : but may not the 
word, characteristic as it is here, have been first rejected as unnecessary, and then 


noted in the margin, and variously inserted ? 


του bef κυριου L ἃ 74. 120 lectt. 


Chrys. οὐδεὶς γάρ με χρόνος ἐμπλῆσαι 
δύναται, οὐδὲ ἐμποιῆσαί μοι κόρον τῆς 
συνουσίας ὑμῶν. 25.] See Acts xix. 
21; xxiv. 17; 2 Cor. viii. 19. διακονῶν, 
not the future, because he treats the whole 
action as already begun ; see reff. 
26.] See 2 Cor. ix. 1, ff. KoLvov. | 
See reff. Olsh. remarks, on τοὺς πτω- 
χοὺς τ. ἁγίων, that this shews the com- 
munity of goods in the church at Jerusa- 
Jem not to have lasted long: ef. Gal. ii. 10. 
27.) The fact is re-stated, with a 
view to an inference from it, viz. that the 
εὐδόκησαν was not merely a matter of 
benevolence, but of repayment: the Gen- 
tiles being debtors to the Jews for spiritual 
blessings. This general principle is very 
similarly enounced in 1 Cor. ix. 11. It is 
suggested by Grot., al., that by this Paul 
wished to hint to the Romans the duty of 


Lachm retains it). ins ovouaros 


a similar contribution. 28.] καρπόν, 
hardly, as Calv., al., “ proventum quem ex 
Evangelii satione ad Judzos redire nuper 
dixit :’ more probably said generally,— 
Sruit of the faith and bs of the Gentiles. 

σφραγισ.., ὡς εἰς βασιλικὰ ταμιεῖα 
ἐναποθέμενος ὡς ἐν ἀσύλῳ κ. ἀσφαλεῖ χωρίῳ, 
Chrys. Hom. xxx. p. 739. U ὑμῶν, 
through yourcity. 29.] The fulness of 
the blessing of Christ imports that rich- 
ness of apostolic grace which he was per- 
suaded he should impart to them. So he 
calls his presence in the churches a χάρις, 
2 Cor. i. 15. See also ch, i. 11. 
32.) τ. ἀγάπ. τ. πνεύμ.., the love shed abroad 
in the heart by the Holy Ghost ;—a love 


ABCD 
FL[P JX 
abcdf 
ghkl 
mnol7 


[47] 


which teaches us to look not only on our - 


own things, but on the things of others. 
συναγων.] “ Ipse oret oportet, qui 
alios vult orare secum. Orare, agon est, 


ΧΎΞΙΣ 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


405 


-“ A e \ a Ν / 
ταῖς ‘mposevyais ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ ' πρὸς τὸν θεόν, 3) ἵνα tactaxii.s ren 


u = οἢ. vii. 2ὲ 


¢ a ’ \ a > ΄ a 
ἃ ῥδυσθῶ ἀπὸ τῶν " ἀπειθούντων ἐν τῇ ‘lovdaia, καὶ ἡ τῇ 


v= Acts xiv. 2 
reff. 


/ 3 ᾽ 6 ΄ - 
“ διακονία μου *7 εἰς ἱΙερουσαλὴμ, Y εὐπρόςδεκτος τοῖς w= Acts νι 


reff. 


e 2 ὦ “3ἅμ 2 a 
2 ἁγίοις γένηται, 35 wa *év χαρᾷ ἔλθω πρὸς ὑμᾶς ὃ διὰ ~ellips., ch. ii 


> θελήματος ὃ θεοῦ, καὶ ° συναναπαύσωμαι ὑμῖν]. 
ἃ θεὸς τῆς ἃ εἰρήνης μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν. 
ὑμῖν Φοίβην τὴν ἀδελφὴν ἡμῶν, 


XVI. 1 f Συνίστημι δὲ 


33 ¢ 5 8 al. fr. a 
y ver. 16 reff. 

ὁ δὲ z = vv. 25, 26. 
> “ἢ a= 1 Corsi: 
αμην. 3 al. 

ea ] b 1 Cor. i. 1. 

2 Cor. 1.15 

viii. 5. Eph. 

i. los Coby 


3 ἴω / an n ζ Ἢ 
οὖσαν & διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας τῆς ἐν Κεγχρεαῖς, 2 ἵνα τ Ὑ 11. 


1 only. 


Ἀ προςδέξησθε αὐτὴν “év κυρίῳ ὃ ἀξίως τῶν 'daylwv καὶ © ber only. 
ἑ 


xvi. 18. 2Cor. vii. 13.) Isa. xi. 6 only. 
9. 1 Thess. v. 23. Heb. xiii. 20. 


(2 Thess, iii. 16.) 


(see 1 Cor. 
1 Cor, xiv. 33. 2 Cor. xiii.11. Phil. iv. 
e ellips., Matt. i. 23. ch. xvi. 


d ch. xvi. 20. 


20 [24]. 1 Cor. xvi. 23, 24 al. f — 2 Cor. iii. 1. v. 12. (ch. ili. 5 reff.) 1 Macc. xii. 43. 
g — Phil.i.1. 1 Tim. iii. 8, 12. fem., here only. hy — Phil. 1529: 1 vv. 8,12. 1 Cor. 
xvi. 19 al. k Eph. iv. 1. Phil. i. 27. Col. i. 10. 1 Thess. ii. 12. 3John6only+. Wisd. 


vii. 15. xvi. 1. Sir. xiv. 11 only. 


1.= Acts ix. 13 reff. 


aft mposevxais ins ὑμων DF [n?] vulg-ed(not am demid fuld harl? [mar]) [copt zth] 


Pel. 


om ὑπερ εμου F [ D!-lat Orig-int, }. 


31. rec aft καὶ ins wa, with D?3[-gr] LX? rel syr Chr, Thdrt [ΤῊ] @c]: om AB 


C[appy] DI F[P]N! latt Syr copt arm Damasc [Orig-int, ] Ambrst Pel. 


tor διακονια, 


dwpopopia (corra to avoid harshness of διακον. εἰς rep.: see below) BD'F, remuneratio 
D'-lat, munerum meorum ministratio Ambrst: txt AC D?3-gr LN vss(administratio 
G-lat, obsequii oblatio vulg, ministerium D?-lat [Orig-int]) Chr, Thdrt Damase Th! 


(Ke. 


Orig-int,]: txt ΑΒΟΓΡῚΝ m. 


om 2nd ἡ L[P] b! ἢ m 73. 93. 122 Thdrt[-ms,] Chr-ms. 
ΒΕ: txt ACD3L[P]& rel Chr-ms Thdrt, [Damasc] Thl. 
F.] rec yernta bef τοις aytors, with 


for εἰς, ev 
[for evrpos., mposdexros 


DFL rel [(vulg) syr copt arm Chr, Thdrt 


32. ελθων AC δὲ! 17 [copt arm Orig-int, (of these] &! [copt Orig-int have it] bef 


Xapa). 
σου D'F [fuld ] 
Thdrt Damasc ΤῊ] (ec [{ Orig-int, |. 


for θεου, Kupiov τιησου B [domini wxth(“ ut sepe pro Geos,” Tischdf | : χριστου 
: moov χριστου δὲϊ : txt ACD3L[ PX rel [vulg syrr copt arm | Chr, 
om καὶ συναναπαυσῶμαι υμιν B: ins (ACDF)L(8) 


rel vss Chr, Euthal, Thdrt Damase ΤῊ] ec [(Orig-int) Ambrst]: om καὶ δὲ 1 ΑὉ ath 
arm Damasce Orig-int ].—avayviw D: ἀναψυχω Ἐ'.---μεθ υμων DF latt. 


33. ins ntw bef wera DIF latt Syr [eth arm Orig-int, ]. 


om ἀμὴν AF: ins 


BCDL[P]k rel [vulg syrr copt 2th arm] Chr, Thdrt Damase ΤᾺ] (Ἐς [Orig-int, ]. 


Cuap. XVI. 1. om de D!F eth arm Sedul. 


ovoay ins και BCLS 47. 


vuwy A F{-gr] P [k] ΤῊ]. aft 


2. rec avtny bef προΞδεξησθε, with ALPN rel vulg Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damase 


Orig-int, |] Ambrst: txt BCDF ἃ harl copt. 


preesertim ubi homines resistunt.” Bengel. 
31.] Compare Acts xx. 22; xxi. 
10—14. The exaeeding hatred in which 
the Apostle was held by the Jews, and 
their want of fellow-feeling with the Gen- 
tile churches, made him fear lest even the 
ministration with which he was charged 
might not prove acceptable to them. 
82.] διὰ θελ. θεοῦ = ἐὰν ὁ κύριος θελήσῃ, 
1 Cor. iv. 19: otherwise in reff. 
[k. συναν. tp., and may refresh myself 
together with you;—i. 6. ‘that we may 
mutually refresh ourselves, I after my dan- 
gers and deliverance, you after your anxie- 
ties for me.’ But the text is in’ some 
confusion. } Cuap. XVI. 1—16.] Re- 
COMMENDATION OF PHBE: GREETINGS. 
1, 3.1 In all probability Phoebe was 
the bearer of the Epistle, as stated in the 
(rec.) subscription. διάκονον] Dea- 
coness. See] Tim. iii. 11, note. Pliny in 


Vor. ΤΊ. 


his celebrated letter to Trajan says, ‘‘ne- 
cessarium credidi, ex duabus ancillis que 
ministre dicebantur, quid esset veri et per 
tormenta querere.” A minute discussion 
of their office, &c., in later times may be 
found in Suicer, Thesaurus, sub vore; and 
in Bingham, book ii. chap. 22, ὃ 8. Ne- 
ander, PA. u. Leit., ed. 4, pp. 265—267, 
shews that the deaconesses must not be 
confounded with the χῆραι of 1 Tim. v. 
3—16, as has sometimes been done. 

KeEencHrem®, the port of Corinth (τῶν 
Κορινθίων ἐπίνειον, Philo in Flace. ὃ 19, 
vol. ii, p. 589: κώμη τις τῆς Κορίνθου 
μεγίστη, Theodoret, h. 1.) on the Saronic 
eulf of the Agean, for commerce with the 
east (Acts xviii. 18): seventy stadia from 
Corinth, Strabo viii. 380. Pausan. ii. 2, 3. 
Livy xxxii. 17. Plin. iv. 4. The Apos- 
tolical Constitutions (vii. 46, p, 1055. 
Migne) make the first bishop of the Cen- 


Ha 


406 ΠΡῸΣ POMAIOTS. XVI. 

m A 2 oA 5 > eK e a n ' ΄ a \ 

m—2Tim.iv, "WAPATTHTE AUT EV ὦ AV υὑμῶὼν yentn πράγματι καὶ 
11 only. Jer. \ Ni ͵΄ ΧΩ > θ Ὁ ΝΣ ra) 5) a 
xv. il. Yap αὐτὴ ° προστάτις TOAAWY ἐγενηθη, καὶ ἐμοῦ αὑτοῦ. 

n: ΕΥ̓ ΣῊΝ = < \ , , \ , 
sing δῆς, 3’Acracacbe IIpicxav καὶ ᾿Ακύλαν τοὺς P cuvepyous 
2 Cor. iii. 1 , a“ Ἶ a 4, q [2 ὑ EL Th r A ov 
only, duds. OU EV χρίστῳ ἰησοῦ, οίτινες ὑπερ τῆς υχῆς μ 
xi. al. ‘ με δεν 2 ᾽ 5, νος f 

attics TOP ἑαυτῶν * τράχηλον δὰ ὑχγέθηκαν, οἷς οὐκ ἐγὼ μόνος 
. “ \ f t » 9 / »“ 3 lal 
i δον εὐχαριστῶ ἀλλὰ Kal πᾶσαι al “ ἐκκλησίαι τῶν ἐθνῶν, 
xxvii. 31. 8606 εν Ν \ x , 5 δον ες x2 , > ΄, 

geet EES) Pee TYP, Υ κατ᾽ οἶκον αὐτῶν * ἐκκλησίαν. ἀσπάσασθε 

og ΣΝ 7, \ > , “ » > \ a 
ἐπ, Εμταίνετον τὸν *ayamntov pov, ὃς ἐστιν * ἀπαρχὴ τῆς 
only, exc. 


3 John 8+. 2 Mace. viii. 7. xiv.5 only. (-yetv, ch. viii. 28.) 
xv. 26 reff. s here only. Sir. li, 26 (but not —). 
Ὁ 1 Tim. iy. 6 only. vy to man, here only. (ch. 1. 8 reff.) 
x 1 Cor. xvi. 19. Col. iv. 15. y Acts ii. 46 reff. 
a ch. viii. 23 reff. 


q = Acts x. 41 reff. r= Acts 


t Acts xv. 10 reff. 
w ver. 16 reff. 


Philem. 2. z Acts xv. 25 reff, 


for προστατις to εμου, Kat Euov Kat aAAwY προστατις eyeveTo D; k. €. K.a. παραστατεις 
[ey.] F. rec αὐτου bef εμου, with rel [arm] Chr-c,-montf, (ἔς : kat avtov καὶ 
euov XN: txt ABC L(Treg, expr) Pd m vulg [Syr] syr copt [wth] Chr-2-mss, Thdrt 
Damasce ΤῊ] [ Orig-int,], ἐμου τε αὐτου A. 

3. [ασπασθε F (so often below). | rec πρισκιλλαν (corrn to Acts xviii. 2, Fe), 
with rel syrr eth Chr, Thdrt(riy yap Πρίσκιλλαν ἢ Πρίσκαν, ἀμφότερα γάρ ἐστιν 
εὑρεῖν ἐν τοῖς βιβλίοις) Ambrst: txt ABCDFLPR ἃ gh τὰ [n] 17. 47 [vulg copt arm 


Euthal-ms Damasce Orig-int, ]. 
εκκλ. DIF, 
[4. eavrov Pc. 
δ. [om lst clause P; see D!F, ver 3. ] 


ured. bef tpax. P. | 


at end, instead of in ver 5, ins και τ. κατ. οι. aut. 


for amapxn, aw apxns D!-gr, in principio 


D!-lat: @ principio G-lat: om ἀπαρχὴ της ΡΒ". 


chrean church to have been Lucius, con- 
secrated by Paul himself (Winer, Realw.). 
The western port, on the Sinus Corinthia- 
cus, was Leche (Paus.), Lechee (Plin.), 
or Lecheum (Strab., Ptol.). 2.) ἐν 
κυρίῳ, in a Christian manner,—as mindful 
of your common Lord: ἀξίως τ. ἁγίων, 
‘in a manner worthy of saints ;’ i.e. ‘as 
saints ought to do,’ —refers to mposdéinode, 
and therefore to their conduct to her ;— 
not, ‘as saints ought to be received.’ 

παραστῆτε] Her business at Rome may 
have been such as to require the help of 
those resident there. προστάτις 
πολλῶν] This may refer to a part of the 
deaconess’s office, the attending on the poor 
and sick of her own sex. K. ἐμοῦ 
αὐτοῦ] when and where, we know not. 
It is not improbable that she may have 
been, like Lydia, one whose heart the Lord 
opened at the first preaching of Paul, and 
whose house was his lodging. 3, 4. ] 
The form Prisca is also found 2 Tim. iv. 19. 
On Prisca and Aquila see note, Acts xviii. 2. 
They must have returned to Rome from 
Epbesus since the sending of 1 Cor. :—see 
1 Cor, xvi. 19: and we find them again at 
Ephesus (?), 2 Tim. iv. 19. Their en- 
dangering of their lives for Paul may have 
taken place at Corinth (Acts xviii. 6 ff.) or 
at Ephesus (Acts xix.). See Neander, Pfl. 
u. Leit., p. 441. “ὑποτιθέναι est prgnori 
opponere. Demosth.in Aphobum: ἀπέτισα 
τὴν λειτουργίαν, ὑποθεὶς τὴν οἰκίαν καὶ 
τἀμαυτοῦ πάντας Aschines: ὑπέθησαν 


αὐτῷ τοῦ ταλάντου τὰς δημοσίας mpos- 
ὀδους. Wetst. The ‘churches of the 
Gentiles’ had reason to be thankful to 
them, for having rescued the Apostle of 
the Gentiles from danger. It seems to 
have been the practice of Aquila and 
Priscilla (ref. 1 Cor.) and some other Chris- 
tians (reff. Col., Philem.) to hold assem- 
blies for worship in their houses, which 
were saluted, and sent salutations as one 
body in the Lord. Some light is thrown 
on the expression by the following passage 
from the Acta Martyrii S. Justini, in 
Ruinart, cited by Neander, Church Hist. i. 
330, Rose’s trans. ‘ The answer of Justin 
Martyr to the question of the prefect ( Rus- 
ticus) ‘ Where do you assemble?’ exactly 
corresponds to the genuine Christian spirit 
on this point. The answer was; ‘ Where 
each one can and will. You believe, no 
doubt, that we all meet together in one 
place; but it is not so, for the God of the 
Christians is not shut up in a room, but, 
being invisible, He fills both heaven and 
earth, and is honoured every where by the 
faithful” Justin adds, that when he came 
to Rome, he was accustomed to dwell in 
one particular spot, and that those Chris-. 
tians who were instructed by him, and 
wished to hear his discourse, assembled at 
his house. (This assembly would accord- 
ingly be 7 κατ᾽ οἶκον τοῦ ᾿Ιουστίνου ἐκ- 
κλησία.) He had not visited any other con- 
gregations of the Church.” 5.] Ερω- 
uetus is not elsewhere named. ἀπαρχή, 


ABCDF 
LU vjxa 
bedfg 
hkim 
nol7 


[47] 


9--.ς-9. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


407 


6 ἀσπάσασθε Μαριάν, © ἥτις πολλὰ db see ch. αν. 16. 


΄ ; ο Acts x. 41 
7 ἀσπάσασθε ᾿Ανδρόνικον καὶ 


3 r 
Ασίας ὃ εἰς χριστόν. 
reff. 
d Matt. vi. 28. 


ς “Ὁ 
ἃ ἐκοπίασεν εἰς ὑμᾶς. 
Ὁ a i ΄ A . 35 
Ιουνιᾶν τοὺς “ συγγενεῖς μου καὶ ᾿συναιχμαλώτους mov, a. Ps. 


ce δὲ ΄ » Seo! 3 La ee ἢ τὴ \ , exxvi. 1. 
οἵτινές εἰσιν ὃ ἐπίσημοι EV τοῖς " ἀποστολοίῖς, OL καὶ προ och hae 


ως, A >’ ᾽ / 
ἐμοῦ γέγοναν iév χριστῷ: 8 ἀσπάσασθε᾿ Αμπλίατον τὸν Fos” 
φ , = ἤ ΟΞ ΄ ’ \ \ Levit. xxy. 
ἀγαπητόν μου ἐν κυρίῳ. 3 ἀσπάσασθε Οὐρβανὸν τὸν 45. 
\ A ἢ " \ > x αἴ f ‘ol. iv. 10. 
Κ συνεργὸν ἡμῶν ἐν χριστῷ, καὶ Στάχυν τὸν 5 ἀγαπητόν Philem.23 
g Matt. xxvii. 


16 only. Esth. ν. 4. 3 Mace. vi. 1. 
4 note. 11 Cor. i. 30. Eph. ii. 13. 


rec for acias, axaias, with D?-3LP rel syrr Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] Gc: txt ABCD! FR latt(not 
harl!) copt eth arm Damase Orig-intyexpr Ambrst. (The rec has prob been an error of 
the scribe, who had amapxn της axatas,1 Cor xvi. 15, in his mind. To suppose, with De 
Wette, that he altered ax. here to ac. to avoid the inconsistency of two persons being 
the first fruits of Achaia, is surely too far-fetched.) for εἰς χριστον, ev χριστω 
DF latt syrr Orig-int). 
6. rec μαριαμ,, with DFLN rel Chr, Thdrt [Damasc] ΤῊ] : txt ABCP copt arm. 
rec εἰς μας, with ΟΣ, rel syr Chr-comm, Thdrt Damase ΤῊ] Gic: εν υὑμιν Ὁ ΕἾ -gr] 
latt[(in domino F-lat) Orig-int-mss vary between nobis and vodis| Ambrst: txt 
ABC'PR Syr copt eth [arm]. 
7. ins tous bef συναιχμαλωτους B. om οἱ δὲ! [ Damasc]. for οἱ Κ. πρὸ eu. 
yey-, τοις πρὸ εμου DF. rec γεγονασιν, with CLP rel: txt A B(sic: see table) &. 
aft χριστω add τησου DF Ambrst Pel Jer. . 
8. rec ἀμπλιαν, with B2 C(appy) D[-gr] LP rel syrr [arm] Chr, Thdrt Chron 
Damase ΤῊ] Gc: txt A B}(Tischdf) FX latt copt eth [Orig-int, Ambrst].—om τὸν b}. 
om μου B F[-gr |(not G). 
9. [vuwy Ρ.] for χριστω, κυριω CDF ὁ marm Chr-3-mss: txt ABLPR rel [am 
fuld &c] syrr 2th [copt Chr-montf Thdrt Damase] Orig-int, [Ambrst, in Christo Jesu 


Polyb. xviii. 38.1. Jos. Antt. v. 7. 1. 
1 Pet. v. 14. 


h see Acts xiv. 
k ver. 3 reff. 


vulg-clem ]. 


the same metaphor being in the Apostle’s 
mind as in ch. xv. 16,—the first believer. 
On ᾿Ασίας see var. readd. eis xp., 
elliptical: the full construction would be 
τῆς Mpospopas eis xp. 6.] None of 
the names occurring from ver. 5—15 are 
mentioned elsewhere (except possibly Ru- 
fus: see below). De Wette remarks, 
that, notwithstanding the manuscript an- 
thority, éis ἡμᾶς is perhaps the more likely 
reading, (1) because the Apostle would 
hardly mention a service done to themselves 
as a ground of salutation from him, and (2) 
because kom Gy without being expressly fol- 
lowed by λόγῳ (1 Tim. v. 17: see Phil. ii. 
16; Col. i. 29), said of women, most likely 
implies acts of kindness peculiar to the sex. 
7.7 ἸἸουνιᾶν may be fem. (louviar), 

from *lovvia (Junia), in which case she is 
probably the wife of Andronicus,—or masc., 
from ἸἸουνιᾶς (Junianus, contr. Junias). 
It is uncertain also whether συγγενεῖς 
means fellow-countrymen, or relations. 
Aquila and Priscilla were Jews : so would 
Maria be, and probably Epznetus, being 
an early believer. If so, the word may 
have its strict meaning of ‘ relations.’ But 
it seems to occur vv. 11, 21 in a wider 
sense. συναιχμ.} When and where, 
uncertain. ἐπίσημοι ἐν τ. ἀποστ.] 
Two renderings are given: (1) ‘of note 
among the Apostles,’ so that they them- 


selves are counted among the Apostles: 
thus the Greek ff. (τὸ ἀποστόλους εἶναι, 
μέγα: τὸ δὲ καὶ ἐν τούτοις ἐπισήμους 
εἶναι, ἐννόησον ἡλίκον ἐγκώμιον, Chrys.), 
Calv., Est., Wolf, Thol., Καὶ ὅ]]1η., Olsh., al. : 
or (2) ‘noted among the Apustiles, i.e. 
well known and spoken of by the Apostles. 
Thus Beza, Grot., Koppe, Reiche, Meyer, 
Fritz., De W. But, as Thol. remarks, 
had this latter been the meaning, we 
should have expected some expression like 
διὰ πασῶν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν (2 Cor. viii. 18). 
I may besides remark, that for Paul to 
speak of any persons as celebrated among 
the Apostles in sense (2), would imply that 
he had more frequent intercourse with the 
other Apostles, than we know that he had ; 
and would besides be improbable on any 
supposition. The whole question seems to 
have sprung up in modern times from the 
idea that of ἀπόστολοι must. mean the 
Twelve only. If the wider sense found in 
Acts xiv. 4, 14; 2 Cor. viii. 28; 1 Thess. 
ii. 6 (compare i. 1) be taken, there need be 
no doubt concerning the meaning. 

ot kat... .] refers to Andr. and Jun., 
not to the Apostles. In the use of yéyo- 
vav, there is a mixed construction—* who 
have been longer than me,” and “‘ who were 
before me.” 8 ft.] Ampliatus = Am- 
plias: see v. r. ay. ἐν κυρ. beloved 
in the bonds of Christian fellowship. 


H # ἃ 


408 


μου. 


Ich. xiv. 18 
att 


. , \ , “-“ ’ 4 
mseelCor.i. ἀσπάσασθε τοὺς ἐκ ™ τῶν ᾿Αριστοβούλου. 


ll. 


Ἡρωδίωνα tov * συγγενῆ pov. 
” 5 ay 

Ναρκίσσου τοὺς ὄντας ἐν κυρίῳ. 
- 4, 7 ͵ 

ναν καὶ Γρυφῶσαν τὰς * κοπιώσας ἐν κυρίῳ. 


n ch. viii. 33 
reff. 
o = Acts ix. 13 


reff. ΄ » an Vue An 
p | Cor. xvi. 20. μήτερα QUTOU και ELLOUV. 
2 Cor. xiii. 
12. 1 Thess. 
νυν. 26. see 
1 Pet. v. 14. 
q as above (p). 
Luke vii. 45. 
xxii. 48 only. 
Prov. xxvil. 
6. Cant. i. 2 
only. 
r plur., Acts 


ἀδελφούς. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 


- ’ Le / 
αὐτοῖς πάντας 5 ἁγίους. 


AVE 


/ “ ‘ ’ ae a 
10 ἀσπάσασθε ᾿Απελλῆν τὸν δόκιμον έν χριστῷ. 


ll ἀσπάσασθε 
ἀσπάσασθε τοὺ; ἐκ ™ τῶν 
19 ἀσπάσασθε Τρύφα:- 
ἀσπάσασθε 


“ 


/ \ Ζ ᾽ » \ d ’ / 3 Ps 
Περσίδα τὴν 2 ayarntiy, ἥτις πολλὰ “ ἐκοπίασε" ἐν κυρίω. 
lal ’ ‘ 5 \ \ 
13 ἀσπάσασθε “Poddov tov " ἐκλεκτὸν ἐν κυρίῳ, καὶ THD 


lt ἀσπάσασθε ᾿Ασύγκριτον, Φλέ- 


a f ¢ “ Ν \ a 
yovta, Ἑρμῆν, llatpoBav, “Ἑρμᾶν, καὶ τοὺς σὺν αὐτοῖς 
- , , ‘ / / 
15 ἀσπάσασθε Φιλόλογον καὶ ᾿Ιουλίαν, Νηρέα 

vad \ >’ “-“ \ 
καὶ τὴν ἀδελφὴν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ᾿Ολυμπᾶν, καὶ τοὺς σὺν 


16 ἀσπάσασθε ἀλλήλους P ἐν 


αν. di. χτὶ. 5. PY φιλήματι ἢ ἁγίῳ. ἀσπάζονται ὑμᾶς αἱ" ἐκκλησίαι πᾶσαι 


ver.4. 1 Cor 

vii. 17, xi. 16 

al. 
10. 
11. 
12. 
14. 


TOU χριστοῦ. 


συγγενην A B'(Tischdf) D!. 


κοπιασας C. 


αριστοβολου (for -Bovaov) BIF vulg [ D!-lat]. 


om from ev κυριω to ev κυριῳ AF (and G). 
rec epuay π. epuny, with D3L rel [vulg-clem demid] Syr syr(txt and mg-gr) arm 


Chr, ‘Thdrt Chron, Ambrst : txt ABC D![and lat] FP& τὰ am(with fuld harl flor mar 


[tol]) copt eth Orig-int,. 
15. covviay CIF. yvnpeav AF, 


fom 3rd καὶ Ῥ ὁ Ambrst. ] 


ολυμπειδα 


F, Olympiadem latt Orig-int Ambrst : ολυμπιαν D? arm. 


16. om ασπαζονται.. 
πασαι TOV Xp. 


. χριστου DF, but aft συγγ. μου ver 21 read καὶ at εκκλ. 
rec om πασαι (see note), with rel Chr, [Damase} Thl (Ge: ins 


ABC(DF)LPX m [vulg syrr copt eth arm] (Chr-comm ?) Cyr[-p,] Thdrt Orig int, 


Ainbrst Pel Bede. 


συνεργ. ἐν xp., fellow-workman 

in (the work of) Christ. Origen and 
others have confounded Apelles with the 
well-known Apollos, but apparently with- 
out reason. Cf. Hor. Sat. i. 5. 100. 
δόκιμ. ἐν xp., approved (by trial) in (the 
work of) Christ. It does not follow that 
either Aristobulus or Narcissus were them- 
selves Christians. Only those of their 
familie (τοὺς ἐκ τῶν) are here saluted 
who were ἐν κυρίῳ: for we must under- 
stand this also after ᾿Αριστοβούλου. 
avyy., see above. Grot., Neander, al., 
liave taken Narcissus for the well-known 
freedman of Claudius. But this can hardly 
be, for he was executed (Tac. Ann. xiii. 1) 
in the very beginning of Nero’s reign, i. 6. 
cir. 55 A.D., whereas (see Prolegg. ὃ iv. 4, 
and Chronol. Table) this Epistle cannot 
have well been written before 58 A.D. 
Perhaps, as Winer (Realw.) suggests, the 
family of this Narcissus may have con- 
tinued to be thus known after his death (?). 

18.] Rufus may have been the son 
of Simon of Cyrene, mentioned Mark xv. 
21: but the name was very common. 
éxXextov—not to be softened, as De W., 
al., to merely ‘eximium,’ a sense unknown 
to our Apostle ;—elect. i.e. one of the 
elect of the Lord. καὶ ἐμοῦ the Apostle 


adds from affectionate regard towards the 
mother of Rufus: ‘my mother,’ in my 
reverence and affection for her. Jowett 
compares our Lord’s words to St. John, 
John xix. 27. 14.] These Christians 
of whom we have only the names, seem to 
be persons of less repute than the former. 
Hermas (= Hermodorus, Grot.) is thought 
by Origen (in loc. “ Puto, quod Hermas 
iste sit scriptor libelli istius qui Pastor ap- 
pellatur”’), Eus. H. Εἰ. iii. 3, and Jerome, 
Catal. script. eccl., 6. x., vol. il, p. 846, 
to be the author of the ‘Shepherd. But 
this latter is generally supposed to have 
been the brother of Pius, bishop of Rome, 
about 150 Α.Ὁ. The σὺν αὐτοῖς ἀδελφοί 
of ver. 14, and σὺν αὐτοῖς πάντες ἅγιοι 
of ver. 15, have been taken by De W. and 
Reiche to point to some separate asso- 
ciations of Christians, perhaps (De W.) «s- 
semblies as in ver. 5: or ( Reiche) unions for 
missionary purposes. 16.] The mean- 
ing of this injunction seems to be, that the 
Roman Christians should take occasion, ou 
the receipt of the Apostle’s greetings to 
them, to testify their mutual love, in this, 
the ordinary method of salutation, but 
having among Christians a Christian and 
holy meaning, see retf. It became soon a 
custom in the churches at the celebration 


ABCTDF 
ΚΓΡῚΝ 4 
bed fg 
hkim 
nol7 


[47 J 


δ παν Kat 
τους... 
ΑΒΟΒΕ 
L[P]x a 
bedef 
ghkl 
mnol? 


[417] 





“δ. ἃ.» «Ὡς a a «ὦ, 


10—20. ΤΕΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 469 
wn »» fn \ A 
17s Παρακαλῶ δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, ‘oxomsivy τοὺς Tas “ -- οἱ. χῇ, ἢ 
ren. 
err. pate 
υ διχοστασίας Kal τὰ " σκάνδαλα ἡ παρὰ τὴν * διδαχὴν ἣν yee ta, 
¢ a 3 ΄ rn \ ᾽ ͵ ΓΝ, ρον ἢ 18 e Gal. vi. 1: 
ὑμεῖς ἐμάθετε ποιοῦντας, Kat ¥ ἐκκλίνατε Y aT αὐτῶν. οἱ Pili d. 
\ a A ͵ va A iii. 17 only Τ. 
yap TOLOUTOL TO) KUPL® ἡμῶν χριστῳ οὐ 2 δουλεύουσιν, 2 sei ee 
ἡλλ Ν lal id lal a δ, ff \ ὃ Ν ΄“- b Ἂν UJ \ 
ἀλλὰ τῇ ἑαυτῶν ὃ κοιλίᾳ, Kal διὰ τῆς > χρηστολογίας καὶ 
c ’ / d > aA \ / nm e > s 19 e 29 i 
εὐλογίας ἃ ἐξαπατῶσιν Tas καρδίας τῶν “ ἀκάκων. Bondy. ον 
κ᾿ δι λα f < \ ᾽ ΄ g 3 ΄ Fs Sup? cA 5 reff. 
yap ὑμῶν fuTaKon εἰς πάντας ὃ ἀφίκετο ἐφ ὑμῖν οὖν w= ἐν. 1.26 
͵ , δὲ c lal \ 3 h » \ h , 7 i ᾽ reff. > 
χαίρω, θέλω δὲ ὑμᾶς σοφοὺς εἶναι " εἰς TO ἀγαθόν, Ἷ ἀκε- x= Acts ii. 42 


u Gal. v. 20 
only t. 
1 Macc. iii. 


7 Ν ᾿ \ » , ¢ « Ἶ \ Lal 7 5 ; 
paious δὲ εἰς τὸ *xaxov. 530 ὁ δὲ ᾿ θεὸς τῆς l εἰρήνης * ten tii 12) 
only. Ps. 


Xxxvi. 27. z = Acts xx. 19 reff. 
b here only τ. c = here only. see note. (ch. xv. 29 reff.) 
e =. here (Heb. vii. 26) only. Prov. i. 4. viii. ὃ al. f ch, i. ὃ reff. 
i. 27. = Sir. xlvii. 16. h ch. xiii. 4 reff. 
k ch. ii. 9 reff. l ch. xv. 33 reff. 


a = Phil. iii. 19. Prov. xxiv. 15. 


d ch. vii. 11 reff 
g here only. Prov. 
i Matt. x. 16. Phil. ii. 15 only t. 


17. for παρακαλω, epwrw D! 3, rogo latt. 

Sing-cler. for mapa, περι D}[-gr]. 
εκκλινετε BCR! m Thdrt Damase. 

18. om τω F. rec ins iqgou bef χριστω, with L rel Syr copt zth-pl arm-mss 
Chr, [Damasc]: om ABCDFPR e m vuilg syr eth-rom arm-ed Orig-int,.—xp. bef 
ἡμῶν DF. δουλευσουσιν ΕἾ -gr]. om και ευλογιας (homeotel) D!F 17 Chr-ms. 

19. ὑπακοὴ bef υμων D-gr F. rec xaipw ουν To ed υμιν, with (DF)? rel vulg 
syrr copt (arm) Chr, Thdrt: τὸ eg’ υμιν συνχαιρω, omg ovy, m(m! Treg): txt ABCLPR! 


for σκοπειν, ασφαλως σκοπειτε DEF 
ins λέγοντας ἡ bef ποιουντ. DF Sing-cler. 


Damasc Orig-int,.—om τὸ D!F d (arin). 


for 6. δε, και θελω D}(and-lat] F Syr eth. 


rec aft σοφους adds μεν (on account of δε follg ?), with ACPR rel syr [Chr- 
montf,] Thl Gc Aug,;: om BDFL [0] copt [zth arm] Clem, Czs,(but om also δὲ 


follg) Chr[-mss,] Thdrt Orig-int,. 


of the Lord’s Supper. See Suicer under 
ἀσπασμός and φίλημα, and Bingham, xv. 
3.3. ἀσπάΐξ. tp. at ἐκκλ. a. | ‘This as- 
surance is stated evidently on the Apostle’s 
authority, speaking for the churches; not 
implying as Bengel, “ quibuscum fui, c. xv. 
26. His significarat, se Romam scribere,” 
but vouching for the brotherly regard in 
which the Roman church was held by all 
ehurches of Christ. The above misunder- 
standing has led to the exclusion of πᾶται. 

17—20.] WARNING AGAINST 
THOSE WHO MADE DIVISIONS AMONG 
THEM. ‘To what persons the Apostle re- 
fers, is not plain. Some (Thol., al.) think 
the Judaizers to be meant, not absolutely 
within the Christian pale, but endeavour- 
ing to sow dissension in it: and so, nearly, 
Neander, Pfl. u. Leit., p. 452. De ὃν. 
thinks that Paul merely gives this warn- 
ing im case such persons came to Rome, 
Judging by the text itself, we infer that 
these teachers were similar to those pointed 
out in Phil. iii, 2,18; 1 Tim. vi. 3 ff; 
2 Cor. xi. 13, 20: unprincipled and selfish 
persons, seducing others for their own 
gain: whether Judaizers or not, does not 
appear: but considering that the great op- 
ponents of the Apostle were of this party, 
we may perhaps infer that they also be- 
longed to it. 17.] σκοπεῖν = βλέ- 
mew, Phil. iii. 2. The διδαχή here spoken 
of is probably rather ethical than doctri- 
bal; compare Eph. iv. 20—24. 18. | 


χρηστολογία, κολακεία, Theophyl. Wet- 
stein cites trom Julius Capitolinus, in Per- 
tinace, 13, “omnes, qui libere conferebant, 
male Pertinacem loquebantur, chrestolo- 
gum eum appellantes, qui bene loqueretur 
et male faceret.” εὐλογίας, fairness 
of speech: so Plato, Rep. iii. 400 D, evAo- 
via ἄρα κ. εὐαρμοστία Kk. εὐσχημοσύνη κ. 
εὐρυθμία εὐηθείᾳ ἀκολουθεῖ---ΟΥ perhaps 
‘ eulogies’ (flatteries), as Pind. Nem. iv. 8, 
οὐδὲ θερμὸν ὕδωρ τόσον | ye μαλθακὰ 
τεύχει | γυῖα, τόσσον εὐλογία φόρ | μιγγι 
συνάορος. 19.] See οἷ. 1. 8. Their 
obedience being matter of universal noto- 
riety, is the ground of his confidence that 
they will comply with his entreaty, ver. 
Ve Some slight reproof is conveyed 
in χαίρω, θέλω δὲ κιτ.λ. They were well 
known for obedience, but had not been 
perhaps cautious enough with regard to 
these designing persons and their pre- 
tended wisdom. See Matt. x. 16, οἵ 
which words of our Lord there seems 
to be here a reminiscence. 20. } 
ἐπειδὴ γὰρ εἶπε τιὺς τὰς διχοστασίας 
κ. τὰ σκάνδαλα ποιοῦντας, εἶπεν εἰρήνη5 
θεόν, ἵνα θαρσήσωσι περὶ τῆς τούτων 
ἀπαλλαγῆς. Chrys. Hom. xxxii. p. 755: 
and so most Commentators, De W. 
prefers taking ὁ θ. τῆς εἰρ. more gene- 
rally as ‘the God of salvation; and 
the usage of the expression (see reff.) 
seems to favour this. συντρ. τ. 
oat. is ἃ similitude from Gen. il, 18, 


470 


m Matt. xii. 20. 
Mark v. 4. 
3, vise 


‘Gee: Ss) , Cagis 
21 ᾿Ασπάζεται ὑμᾶς 
Gen. xix. 9. 
Luke xviii. 8. 
Acts xil. 7. 


5 


xxii. 18. xxv. 
4. Rev.i.l. 
xxii. 6 only. ᾽ ᾿ 
Deut. xxviii. ΕΨ κυρίῳ. 
20. é 

o ellips.,ch. xv. t 
33 reff. 

p ver. 3 reff. 

q vv. 7, 11 reff. 

r see ] Cor. v. 
9 reff. 

s = here only. 
Diod. Sic. « A > , 
αν. ὑμῶν. any. | 
Xen. rare 
Ni. 1. t Acts v. 11: xv. 22. 

2.) “μὴν: viii. 9. Jos. Antt. xi. 6. 12. 


ὅλης τῆς " ἐκκλησίας. 


1 Cor. xiv. 23. 


ΠΡΟΣ POMATOTS: 


νόμος τῆς πόλεως, καὶ Kovaptos ὁ ἀδελφός. 
χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ 


AVE 


m , \ ΄σ Ὁ Ν Ἁ ὃ ς ~ n , ΠῚ / 
συντρίψει τὸν σατανᾶν ὑπὸ τοὺς πόδας ὑμῶν " Ev" τάχει. 
΄ a / ε A ,’ lal a7 » Maes - 
Ἢ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ [χριστοῦ] ° μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν. 
, ἃ / 
Τιμόθεος ὁ Pourepyos μου, Kat 
£ » / \ -- ΄ an 
Λούκιος καὶ ᾿Ιάσων καὶ Σωσίπατρος οἱ I συγγενεῖς μου. 
o) 9 / ἐν a) 5 \ Te e , Τ \ ᾽ \ 
2 ἀσπάζομαι ὑμᾶς ἐγὼ Teptios ὁ γράψας ' τὴν ἐπιστολὴν 
23 ἀσπάζεται ὑμᾶς Laios ὁ ὃ ξένος μου καὶ 
- ἢ Ul 3 cal v . ΠῚ > I 
ἀσπάζεται ὑμᾶς "ἔραστος ὁ ἃ οἰκο- 


[Ὁ Ἢ 
\ ͵ 

° META TAVTWV 

(Luke xvi. 1, ἄς. 


u = here only. 1 Cor. iv. 1, 


20. συντριψαι A 67? vulg(am demid harl F-lat agst fuld tol) G-lat spec Orig,{-int,] 


Thdrt-comm Ambry. 
D{not D-lat?} F Sedul. 
m?*(Treg): om ABCLPNX rel vss gr-lat-ff. 


ev τάχει bef υπο τ. π. nuwy A [ (Syr) | 
om χριστου BR. 


. om last clause 
elz at end adds αμην, with [a(e sil) ] 


21. rec ασπαζονται, with DL rel Syr Thdrt Ee: txt ABCD!FPX m latt syr copt 


[wth(salutate = ἀσπαζετε) arm Chr, Thl Orig-int, Ambrst. 


om 2nd ka B fom και tac. 47]. 
Tov xv (see ver 16). 


23. rec τ. ἐεκκλησιας bef oAns, with Lrel Chr, Thdrt : 
-clem(with demid) } copt(eced. omnis) : txt ABCDPR m am [fuld tol] 


ἡ εκκλησια Vuly 
syrr. 


[24. om ver ABCN am(with fuld harl! &) copt zeth-rom [Orig-int, ] : 


om Ist μου Β 67?. 
at end D!F add και at εκκλησιαι πασαι 


oAa at exkAnoia F eth: oAn 


ins DFL rel 


[vulg-ed demid tol harl? syr| Chr, Thdrt [Kuthal-ms Damasec] ΤῊ] Ge Sedul Bede ; 
and (but aft ver 27) P 17. 80 Syr eth-pl [arm] Ambrst.—for ἡμῶν, υὑμων L: om P 


[m].—om ino. xp. F.] 


συντρίψει, not as Stuart, ‘for 
optative,’ nor does it express any wish, 
but a prophetic assurance and encourage- 
ment in bearing up against all adver- 
saries, that it would not be long before 
the great Adversary himself would be 
bruised under their feet. ἡ χάρις 
κιτ.λ. It appears as if the Epistle was 
intended to conclude with this usual bene- 
diction, but the Apostle found occasion to 
add more. ‘This he does also in other 
Epistles: see 1 Cor. xvi. 23, 24; similarly 
Phil. iv. 20, and vv. 21—28 after the dox- 
ology,—2 Thess. iii. 16, 17, 18:—1 Tim. vi. 
16, 17 ff. :— 2 Tim. iv. 18, 19 ff. 21— 
24. | GREETINGS FROM VARIOUS PERSONS. 
21.] Lucius must not be mistaken 

for Lucas (= Lucanus),—but was proba- 
bly Lucius of Cyrene, Acts xiii. 1, see note 
there. Jason may be the same who is 
mentioned Acts xvii. 5, 7, as the host of 
Paul and Silas at Thessalonica. A 
*Sopater (son) of Pyrrhus of Berea’ 
occurs Acts xx. 4, but it is quite uncertain 
whether this Sosipater is the same person. 
οἱ συγγενεῖς, see above, ver. 7. These 
persons way have been Jews ; but we can- 
not tell whether the expression may not be 
used in a wider sense. 22.) There is 
vothing strange (as Olsh. supposes) in this 
. salutation being inserted in the first person. 


It would be natural enough that Tertius 
the amanuensis, inserting ἄσπάζεται du. 
Τέρτ. 6 yp. τ. ἐπ. ἐν κυρ., Should change 
the form into the first person, and after- 
wards proceed from the dictation of the 
Apostle as before. Beza and Grot. sup- 
pose him to have done this on transcribing 
the Epistle. ‘Thol. notices this irregularity 
as a corroboration of the genuineness of 
the chapter. On the supposed identity of 
Tertius with Silas see note on Acts xv. 22. 

28.] Gaius is mentioned 1 Cor. i. 
14, as having been baptized by Paul. The 
host of the whole church probably implies 
that the assemblies of the church were held 
in his house :—or perhaps, that his hospi- 
tality to Christians was universal. Eras- 
tus, holding this office (οἰκονόμος, the pub- 
lic treasurer, ὁ ἐπὶ τῆς δημοσίας τραπέζης, 
arcarius, Wetst., who quotes from inscrip- 
tions, Νείλῳ οἰκονόμῳ ”Acias,—Secundus, 
arkarius Reip. Armerinorum), can hardly 
have been the same who was with the 
Apostle in Ephesus, Acts xix. 22. It is 
more probable that the Erastus of 2 Tim. 
iv. 20 is identical with this than with that 
other. ὁ ἀδελφός, our brother [see 
1 Cor. i. 1], —the generic singular 5 one 
among οἱ ἀδελφοί, ‘the brethren’ The 
rest have been specified by their services 
or offices. (24.] The benediction 


ARCDE 
L[P]x a 
bedef 
ghk1l 
mnol? 


[47] 








21—26. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 471 


95 A Vv \ , ς A Ww 7 QA A x ’ , , : 3 4 
To δὲ δυναμένῳ ὑμᾶς ᾿' στηρίξαι κατὰ TO “εὐαγγέλιον ° 1 Tim, i. 17. 
Χ } ΝΟΥ ή Ἴ +r ΓΖ Ne ΖΗ Ὁ few ich ll. 
μου καὶ τὸ ἡ κήρυγμα ‘Inoov χριστοῦ *KaTa ™ ἀποκά- 


Luke xxii. 


b / c / c ᾽ / d t 96 e seialy ἘΠῚ i 
AU Wu μυστήριου XPovoals AL@WVLOLS OEOLYNLEVOVU φα- 12 (14). 
x ch. ii. 
16. 2 Tim. ii. 8 only. see 2 Cor. iv. 3. 1 Thess. i. 5. 2 Thess. ii. 14. y (--) Matt. xii 
41\|\L. 1 Cor. 1. 21. ii, 4. xv. 14. 2 Tim. iv. 17. Tit. i. 3 only. (2 Chron. xxx. 5. Prov. ix. 3.) 
z Gal. ii. 2. Eph. iii. 3 only. a ch. viii. 19 reff. b ch. xi. 25, c 2 Tim. i. 
9. Tit. i. 2 only. see Gen. ix. 12. dat. of duration, Luke viii. 29. ch. viii. 11. d = here 


only (Acts xii. 17 reff.). L.P. Ps. xxxi. ὃ, e ch. i. 19 reff. 


25, 26,27. These verses are variously placed: (1) m BCDN 16. 80. 137-76 latt 
Syr copt eth [Orig-int,] Ambrst Pel Bede they stand here and bere only : (11) they 
stand aft ch xiv 23 in L rel and about 192 others syr goth(appy) Chr Thdrt Damasce 
ΤῊ] (ΕΣ Theodul: (III) they are omd altogether in (D*?) F[-gr](a space is left aft 
xvi. 24) G(a space is left aft xiv. 23) Mcion( penitus abstulit aceg to Orig(seé Orig in 
Rom. lib. x. 48, vol. iv. p. 687) as also chaps xv. xvi.) some mss in Jer(appy): (IV) 


they occur in both places in AP 5. 17. 109-lat arm-zoh. 


Paul. 


(Sz reckons 246 mss of St. 


Here 16 are defective (see Sz, addg 126), 21 are unexamined (see Sz, addg 


216. 239 to 246), 7 are not distinct mss (viz. 8. 10. 56. 60-1-6. 117), and 5 are included 


under “ rel.”’) 
25. [μας m (and P in ch xiv.). ] 
χρίστου bef inoov B. 


repeated ; see above on ver. 20. The 
omission (see var. read.) has perhaps been 
by the caprice of the copyists.] 
25—27.| CONCLUDING DOXOLOGY. 
The genuineness of this doxology, and its 
position in the Epistle have been much 
questioned. The external evidence will 
be found in the var. readings ;—from 
which it is plain, that its genuineness as a 
part of the Epistle is pluced beyond αἰ 
reasonable doubt. Nor does the variety 
of position militate here, as in some 
cases, against this conclusion. For the 
transference of it to the end of ch. xiv. 
may be explained, partly from the supposed 
reference of στηρίξαι to the question treated 
in ch. xiv. (so Chrys., πάλιν yap ἐκείνων 
ἔχεται τῶν ἀσθενῶν, kK. πρὸς αὐτοὺς τρέπει 
τὸν λόγον), partly from the supposed in- 
appropriateness of it here after the bene- 
diction of ver. 24, in consequence of 
which that verse is omitted by mss. which 
have the doxology here,—partly from 
the unusual character of the position and 
diction of the doxology itself. This 
latter has been used as an internal argu- 
ment against the genuineness of the por- 
tion. Paul never elsewhere ends with 
such ἃ doxology. His doxologies, when he 
does use such, are simple, and perspicuous 
in construction, whereas this is involved, 
and rhetorical. This objection however is 
completely answered by the supposition 
(Fritz.) that the doxology was the effusion 
of the fervent mind of the Apostle on 
taking a general survey of the Epistle. 
We find in its diction striking similarities 
to that of the pastoral Epistles :—a phe- 
nomenon occurring in several places where 
Paul writes in a fervid and impassioned 
manner,—also where he writes with his 
own hand ;—the inferences from which I 
have treated in the Prolegg. to those 


for To κηρνγμα, κυριου &}(txt X-corr?), 


Epistles (vol. iii. Prolegg. ch. vii. § 1. 
30—33). That the doxology is made up 
of unusual expressions taken from Paul’s 
other writings, that it is diffieult and in- 
volved, are facts, which if rightly argued 
from, would substantiate, not its interpo- 
lation, but its genuineness: seeing that an 
interpolator would have taken care to con- 
form it to the character of the Epistle in 
which it stands, and to have left in it no 
irregularity which would bring it into 
question. The construction is exveed- 
ingly difficult. Viewed superficially, it 
presents only another instance added to 
many in which the Apostle begins a 
sentence with one construction, pro- 
ceeds onward through various dependent 
clauses till he loses sight of the original 
form, and ends with a construction pre- 
supposing another kind of beginning. 
And such no doubt it is: but itis not easy 
to say what he had in his mind when com- 
mencing the sentence. Certainly, ᾧ 7 δόξα 
εἰς τ. αἰῶνας forbids us from supposing 
that δόξα was intended to follow the da- 
tives,—for thus this latter clause would be 
merely a repetition. We might imagine 
that he had ended the sentence as if it had 
begun 6 δὲ δυνάμενος, κιτ.λ. and expressed 
a wish that He who was able to confirm 
them, might confirm them: but this is 
prevented by its being evident, from the 
μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ, that the datives are still 
in his mind. This latter fact will guide us 
to the solution. The dative form is still in 
his mind, but not the reference in which 
he had used it. Hence, when the sentence 
would naturally have concluded (as it ac- 
tually does in B: see digest) μόνῳ σοφῷ 
θεῷ, διὰ Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ, ἣ δόξα εἰς τ. 
ai@vas,—a break is made, as if the sense 
were complete at χριστοῦ, and the relative 
@ refers. back to the subject of the sen- 


472 ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥ͂Σ. XVIiI-2G 
’ ‘\ - »" ~ ’ . 
Facts xvii2, Ψερωθέντος δὲ νῦν διά τε ‘ γραφῶν ὃ προφητικῶν Kat ὃ ἐπι- 
ch. 1. 2 reff. Ἢ “ : / Ἢ “- ν ΄ ᾽ 
ΕἾ Pet νι 19. χαγὴν τοῦ ' αἰωνίου ᾿ θεοῦ * εἰς * ὑπακοὴν " πίστεως εἰς 
onlv τ. . Z > A 
bors 6, πάντα ta ἔθνη Ἰγνωρισθέντος, 27 ™ μόνῳ ™ σοφῷ ™ θεῷ, 
vili.8. i Tum. A a , \ JA 
mitt. πδιὰ Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ, ᾧ ἡ “ο δόξα Peis τοὺς αἰῶνας. 
3. u. 15 “ 
only τ. P. edie 
Wisd. xiv. 16, 27). 
there only. ΠΡΟΣ POMAIOTS. 
IY Gor. xii 3 reff πὶ here only. (1 Tim. i.17. Jude 25.) n see ch. ii. 16. och. xi. 
36 reff. p ch. i. 25 reff. Ϊ 


26. om τε D vulg (syrr [eth]) arm Chr, Orig-int, Hil, [Ambrst]. aft mpognt. add 
και τῆς emipaveras(adventum) Tov Kupiov nuwy ino. χριστου Orig,| not int, | mss-in-Jer. 
27. θεω bef codw D. χριστ. bef ino. B, [for w, avrw P(here) arm (here) 
Chr-2-mss:] om B [F-lat] Syr Orig-int,. ve aft awyvas add των awywy ADPR vulg 
[and F-lat] Syr copt ath arm Damasc [Orig-int. Hil, Ambrst | (but not AP arm xiv. 23), 
om αμην 49. 63 am [Orig-int,.—add ver 24(see above) P 17. 80 Syr zth-pl arm 
Ambrst. | 
SUBSCRIPTION : rec mp. p. eypady απὸ κορινθου, with B? D-corr P(prefixing παυλου 
ἐπιστολη) rel syrr[prefg ἐτελεσθη] copt [Euthal-ms(aft ρωμ. ins emor.)], adding δια 
Φοιβης τῆς διακονου THS εν κεγχρεαις εκκλήσιας, With rel copt (but ἃ k [Kuthal-ms] 
pref; abdefk m ἢ 47 [syrr Euthal-ms} om της ev keyxp. exkA.; m Om Tp. ρω.): 
Tov ay. K. πανευφημου αποστολου παυλοὺ επισ. TP. p. Eypapn amo κορινθου δια φοιβης της 
διακονου L: om Fe g 117: εγραφὴ απο κορινθου Ο: eyp. δια φοιβης απὸ κορ. h: txt 


AB'CD! G(adding ἐτελέσθη) &. 


tence preceding, thus imagined complete, 
—viz. to 6 δυνάμενος---μόνος σοφὸς θεός. 
The analogy of the similar passage Acts 
xx. 32 would tempt us to supply with the 
datives παρατίθεμαι ὑμᾶς, or the like, as 
suggested by Olsh. ;—but as De W. re- 
marks, the form of a doxology is too evi- 
dent to allow of this. After all, perhaps, 
the datives may be understood as convey- 
ing a general ascription of praise for the 
mercies of Redemption detailed in the 
Epistle, and then ᾧ ἡ δ. as superadded, 
4. d., To Him who is able &..... be all 
the praise: to whom be glory for ever. 
26. κατά, in reference to, i.e. ‘in 
subordination to,’ and according to the 
requirements of. κήρυγμα ᾿Ιησοῦ xp. 
ean hardly mean, as De W. and Meyer, 
‘the preaching which Jesus Christ hath 
accomplished by me’ (ch. xv. 18),—nor 
again as Chrys., ὃ αὐτὸς ἐκήρυξεν,---Ὀπῖ 
the preaching of Christ, i.e. making 
known of Christ, as the verb is used 1 Cor. 
i. 23; xv. 12 al. fr. So Calv., and most 
Commentators. κατὰ ἀποκ.} This 
second κατά is best taken, not as co-ordi- 
nate to the former one, and following στη- 
ρίξαι, nor as belonging to δυναμένῳ, which 
would be an unusual limitation of the 
divine Power,—but as subordinate to «7- 
puyua,—the preaching of Jesus Christ ac- 
cording to, &c. The omission of τό before 
κατὰ amok. is no objection to this. 
pvot.| The mystery (see ch. xi. 25, note) 
of the gospel is often said to have been 
thus hidden from eternity in the counsels 
of God—see Eph. iii. 9; Col. i. 26; 2 Tim. 
i. 9; Tit. i, 2;.1 Pet. i. 20; Rev. xii. 8. 


26.] See ch. i. 2. The prophetic 
writings were the storehouse out of which 
the preachers of the gospel took their 
demonstrations that Jesus was the Christ: 
see Acts xviil. 28;—more especially, it is 
true, to the Jews, who however are here 
included among πάντα τὰ ἔθνη. 
κατ᾽ ἐπιταγ. may refer either to the pro- 
phetic writings being drawn up by the 
command of God,—or to the manifestation 
of the mystery by the preachers of the 
gospel thus taking place. The latter seems 
best to suit the sense. αἰωνίου refers back 
to xp. αἰωνίοις [the word should have been 
kept scrupulously the same in English, 


ABCDF 
ΓΡΊΝ ἃ 
bedet 
ghbkt 
mnotl7 


[47] 


not as here and in Matt. xxii. 46 rendered . 


by two different English terms]. The 
first εἰς indicates the aim—in’ order to 
their becoming obedient to the faith :— 
the second, the local extent of the mani- 
festation. 21.) διὰ "Ino. xp. must 
by the requirements of the construction 
be applied to μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ, and not (as 
Aug. [and Εἰ. V.]) to δόξα, from which it 
is separated by the relative ¢. The quan- 
tity of intervening matter, especially the 
datives μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ, prevent it from 
being referred (as (ἔς, Theophyl.) to 
στηρίξαι. It must then be rendered to the 
only wise God through Jesus Christ, 1. 6. 
Him who is revealed to us by Christ as 
such. On the construction of ᾧ see 
above. It cannot without” great harsh- 
ness be referred to Christ, seeing that the 
words μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ resume the chief 
subject of the sentence, and to them the 
relative must apply. : 





ABCDF 
LPN ab 
edefg 
hkim 
no 17, 
47 





ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOYS A. 


1 a a \ > , a 9 ah \ ae 
I. 1 Παῦλος [" κλητὸς] ἀπόστολος χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ ὃ διὰ « Βοιυ.11,6. 


΄ A \ 7, - ᾽ , 9, A ¢ 3 / 2 Ki τ. 
θελήματος θεοῦ, καὶ Σωσθένης ὁ ἀδελφός, 3 τῇ " ἐκκλησίᾳ δεν 


κι ¢ θ ~a ae , d 2 a? A A ” > b Rom. xy. 32 
TOU εου, “ ἡγιασμένοις “εν χρίστῳ Ἰησοῦ, TH οὔσῃ ἐν τοῦς 
: c Acts xx. 


28. ch. x. 32. xi. 16, 22. xv.9. 2Cor.i.1. Gal. i. 13. 1 Thess. ii. 14. 2 Thess. i. 4. 1 Tim. iii. 5, 15. 
Kits ls d Rom, xv. 16 reff. 


TITLE. Steph ἡ προς τους κορινθιους ἐπιστολὴ πρωτη : elZ mavAov του αποστυλου ἢ 
προς κορινθιου em. mp., With rel: mp. kop. αρχεται a F(but G om a): του αγιου και 
πανευφημου αποστολου παυλου επιστολὴ Tp. Kup. πρωτη Li: mpos ko. a er. hn: mp. ko. 
ex. tp. k: παυ. ew. mp. kop. ἃ P: mp. kop. m: om D: txt A(appy: the title is nearly 
gone) BCX (10) 17. 47 [and D at top of pages}. 


Cuap. I. 1. om κλητος AD Cyr,[-p] (perhaps because it does not occur elsw in the 
openings of epp exc Romi. 1: but it may have been insd from there, so I have left it 
doub/ful): ins BCFLPR® rel [vulg fri syrr copt eth arm] Chr, Thdrtyexpr Thlexpr 
(Ecexpr Orig-int, Ambrst Aug Bede. rec ino. bef xp., with ALP rel [vulg-clem 
syrr copt eth arm Cyr, Euthal-ms] Thdrt ΤῊ] @e Orig-int, : txt BDF [m 17} am(with 
demid fuld tol [fri]) Chr, Hil[(Wetst) Ambrst Aug,(ed Bened) ].—av corrd to w &}, 

(C is defective in this and follg ver.) 
2. rec tn ovon ev Kop. bef ἡγιασμ. ev x. τ... with AD?LPN rel [vulg am ἄς syrr copt 


zth arm]: txt B D!-3[and lat] F [fuld-corr]. 


Cuap. I. 1—8.] ADDRESS AND GREET- 
ING. 1.] It is doubtful whether 
κλητός is not spurious: see var. readd. 
The words διὰ θελ. θεοῦ point probably to 
the depreciation of Paul’s apostolic au- 
thority at Corinth. In Gal. i. 1 we have 
this much more strongly asserted. But 
they have a reference to Paul himself also: 
“ratio auctoritatis ad ecclesias: humilis 
et prompti animi, penes ipsum Paulum.” 
Bengel. Chrys., referring it to κλητός, 
says, ἐπειδὴ αὐτῷ ἔδοξεν, ἐκλήθημεν, οὐκ 
ἐπειδὴ ἄξιοι ἦμεν. Hom.i.p. 4. Σωσ- 
θένης can hardly be assumed to be identical 
with the ruler of the synagogue in Acts 
xviii. 17: see note there. He must have 
been some Christian well known to the 
church at Corinth. Thus Paul associates 


with bimself Silvanus and Timotheus in the 


Epistles to the Thessalonians; and Timo- 
theus in 2 Cor. Chrysostom attributes it 
to modesty : espe συντάττων ἑαυτῷ 
τὸν ἐλάττονα πολλῷ. Some have sup- 
posed Sosthenes to be the writer of the 
Epistle, sce Rom. xvi. 22. Possilly he 


“- "ἐν 


may have been one τῶν Χλόης (ver. 11) 
by whom the intelligence had been re- 
ceived, and the Apostle may have associa- 
ted him with himself as approving the ap- 
peal to apostolic authority. Perhaps some 
slight may have been put upon him by-the 
parties at Corinth, and for that reason 
Paul puts him forward. ὁ ἀδελφός, as 
2 Cor. i. 1, of Timothy, our brother,—one 
of of ἀδελφοί. 2.1 The remarks of 
Calvin on τῇ ἐκκλ. τ. θεοῦ, «.7.A. are ad- 
mirable: ‘ Mirum forsan videri queat, cur 
eam hominum multitudinem vocet Eccle- 
siam Dei, in qua tot morbi invaluerant, ut 
Satan illic potius regnum occuparet quam 
Deus. Certum est autem, eum noluisse 
blandiri Corinthiis: loquitur enim ex Dei 
Spiritu, qui adulari non solet. Atqui inter 
tot inquinamenta qualis amplius eminet 
Ecclesiz facies ὃ Respondeo, . .. utcun- 
que multa vitia obrepissent, et variz corrup- | 
tele tam doctrine quam morum, extitisse 
tamen adhuc quedam vere Ecclesiz signa. 
Locus diligenter observandus, ne requira- 
mus in hoc mundo Ecclesiam omni ruga et 


474 


e Acts ix. 13 
reff. 

f Acts xxiii. 15. 
2 Cor. 1. 1. 
Phil. i. 1. 

g = Acts ii. 21 
reff. 

h see Rom. xvi. 
13 and ch. 


τόπῳ ἢ 


1 = Phil. i. 3 al. 


om Ist nuwy A 77 109 fuld Orig,{not int,] Pel. 


αὐτῶν [τε] καὶ ἃ 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOTS A. I. 


Yr , »“" ς , \ cr a 

Κορίνθῳ, * κλητοῖς © ἁγίοις, ἴ σὺν πᾶσιν τοῖς © ἐπικαλουμέ- 
Ν ᾽ lal / ς΄ a ’ cr -“ 

νοις τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ ἐν παντὶ 


ἡμῶν. ὃ. Ἰχάρις ὑμῖν Kat‘ εἰρήνη 


\ “-“ \ ¥ cal ‘ ,’ al a 

ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν Kal κυρίον ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ. 
4 Κ ὐγαριστῶ τῷ * θεῷ * μου πάντοτε περὶ ὑμῶν; ἐπὶ TH 
χαρ ι YP ρι υμῶν Τῇ 


om χριστου A. om Te 


(A? ?)BDIFR! .7 [vulg Syr copt Euthal-ms Damase]: ins [A?]D?L PN rel [syr eth 


arm Chr, Thdrt Cyr-c, Phot-c, }. 


4. om μου BN! wth: ins ACDFLP N-corr! rel [vulg syrr copt arm Orig-e,] 


macula carentem: aut protinus abdicemus 
hoe titulo quemvis ccetuin in quo non omnia 
votis nostris respondeant. Est enim hee 
periculosa tentatio, nullam Ecclesiain pu- 
tare ubi non appareat perfecta puritas. 
Nam quicunque hac occupatus fuerit, ne- 
cesse tandem erit, ut discessione ab omnibus 
aliis facta, solus sibi sanctus videatur in 
mundo, aut peculiarem sectam cum paucis 
hypocritis instituat. Quid ergo cause 
habuit Paulus, cur Ecclesiam Corinthi 
agnosceret ? nempe quia Evangelii doctri- 
nam, Baptismum, Ceenam Domini, quibus 
symbolis censeri debet Ecclesia, apud eos 
cernebat.” On τοῦ θεοῦ, Chrys. remarks, 
ov τοῦδε Kal τοῦδε, ἀλλὰ τοῦ Beov,—and 
similarly Theopbyl., taking the expression 
as addressed to the Corinthians to remind 
them of their position as a congregation 
belonging to Gop, and not to any head of 
a party. Perhaps this is too refined, the 
words ἡ ἐκκλ. τ. θεοῦ being so usual with 
St. Paul,—see reff. The harshuess of 
the position of ἡγιασμένοις ἐν xp. “Ino. is in 
favour of its being the original one :—hal- 
lowed (i.e. dedicated) to God in (in union 
with and by means of) Jesus Christ. 
ἢ cvayn—‘ which exists,’ ‘is found, 
at Corinth. ‘So ἐν ’Avriox. κατὰ τὴν 
οὖσαν ἐκκλησίαν, Acts xiii. 1. κλη- 
τοῖς ἁγίοις | See Rom. i. 7, note. 
σὺν πᾶσιν ;:.τ.λ.1 These words do not 
belong to the designations just preceding, 
= ‘as are all,’ &., but form part of the 
address of the Epistle, so that these πάντες 
of ἐπικαλ. are partakers with the Corin- 
thians in it. They form a weighty and 
precious addition,—made here doubtless to 
shew the Corinthians, that membership of 
God’s Holy Catholic Church consisted not 
in being planted, or presided over by Paul, 
Apollos, or Cephas (or their successors), 
but in calling on the name of our Lord 
Jesus Christ. The Church of England has 
adopted from this verse her solemn ex- 
planation of the term, in the ‘prayer for 
all sorts and conditions of men: “ More 
especially, we pray for the good estate of 
the Catholic Church; that it may be so 
guided and governed by thy good Spirit, 
that all who profess and call themselves 


Christians may be led into the way of 
truth, and hold the faith in unity of spirit, 
in the bond of peace, and in righteousness 
of life.” ἔπικαλ.] not ‘culling them- 
selves by’ (though in sense equivalent to 
this, for they who call upon Christ, call 
themselves by His Name): the phrase 
ἐπικαλεῖσθαι τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου was 
one adopted from the LXX, as in reff. ; 
the adjunct ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ xp. defines that 
Lord (Jehovah) on whom the Christians 
called, to be Jesus Christ,—and is a direct 
testimony to the divine worship ot Jesus 
Christ, as universal in the church. The 
ὄνομα ἐπικληθὲν ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς (James ii. 7) is 
not to the point, the construction being 
different. ἐν παντὶ τόπ. avr. [τε] κ. 
Hp] In every place, both theirs (in 
their country, wherever that may be) and 
ours. This connexion is far better than 
to join aut. [re] «x. u. with κυρίῳ, thereby 
making the tirst ἡμῶν superfluous. 

αὐτῶν refers to the πάντες of ἐπικαλ., 
ἡμῶν to Paul, and Sosthenes, and those 
whom he is addressing. Eichhorn fancied 
τόπος to mean ‘a place of assembly: 
Hug, ‘a party’ or ‘ division: Beza, al., 
would limit the persons spoken of to 
Achaia: others, tc Corinth and Ephesus :— 
but the simple meaning and universal 
reference are far more agreeable to the 
spirit of the passage. I may as well once 
for all premise, that many of the German 
expositors have been constantly misled 
in their interpretations by what I believe 
to be a mistaken view of ver. 12, and the 
supposed Corinthian parties. See note 
there. 3.] See introductory note to 
the Epistle to the Romans. Olsh. re- 
marks, that εἰρήνη has peculiar weight here 
on account of the dissensions in the Corin- 
thian Church. 

4. 9.) THANKSGIVING, AND EXPRES- 
SION OF HOPE, ON ACCOUNT OF THE 
SPIRITUAL STAIE OF THE CORINTHIAN 
cHcrRcH. There was much in the Co- 
rinthian believers for which to be thank- 
ful, and on account of which to hope. 
These things he puts in the foreground, 
not only to encourage them, but (as 
Olsh.) to appeal to their better selves, 





ὁ---9, 


mn “ la) Lal An U e “ 3 aS a at 
χάριτι τοῦ θεοῦ τῇ " δοθείσῃ ὑμῖν ἐν χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ m~ 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


475 


Acts 
xi. 23 reff. 


\ / 3 Ta \ Ἔ 
5 ὅτι ἐν παντὶ ° ἐπλουτίσθητε ἐν αὐτῷ, ἐν Ῥ παντὶ λόγῳ καὶ " §OR ἴδ Ὁ 


» 

Ρ πάσῃ “ γνώσει, ὃ καθὼς τὸ 
e A 

5 ἐβεβαιώθη ἐν ὑμῖν, 


μηδενὶ ἃ χαρίσματι, 


fal / ¢e “ Ἶ le) Le 8 A ‘ 8 / 
TOU ty ee oes oa oe eee βεβαιώσει 


΄ lal 
ὑμᾶς 
ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ. 
r= 01.11.1. 2 Thess. i. 10. 
14. Rom. iii. 23. Phil. iv. 12. 


v Rom. viii. 19, 23, 25. Gal. v. 5. 
x 2 Cor. i. 13 only. 


Heb. xi. 37 al. 


Joel ii. 31). ch. iii. 13. iv. 
13. 2 Cor. i. 18. 


3. v. 5. 2 Cor. i. 14. 


om Tov θεου A! 39. 87 Cyr,/ (ins,)-p]. 


ch. iii. 10. 


* μαρτύριον TOU χριστοῦ ecg ma i 
ud Se ee \ ς Ἂν al. ii 

Ἷ ὥςτε. ὑμᾶς μὴ ᾿ὑστερεῖσθαι ἐν PPh. iit 2.8 

Y ἀπεκὸὃε ομένους τὴν w ἀποκάλυψιν i. 8: James 
lv. 6. 

x ἢ ο 2 Cor. vi. 10. 


ix. 11 only. 
Gen. xiv. 23 


* ἕως * τέλους Y ἀνεγκλήτους ἐν ay 2 ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ κυρίου ΒΡ seers 
reff. 


9 ηγιστὸς ὁ θεὸς ὃ δι 


1. Tim.11./6. ἜΠΗ. i..8. 
ῬΒΧειῖ. 1. 
Phil. iii. 20. Heb. ix. 28. 
μέχρι T., Heb. iii. 14. ἄχρι τ., Rev. ii. 26. 
i. 22. 1 Tim. iii. 10. Tit.i.6,7 only+. 3 Macc. v. 31. ellips., Matt. xii. 13. 

Eph. iv. 30. 
1 Thess. v. 24. 2 Thess. iii. 3. 2 Tim. ii. 13 al. 


͵ eS = iat xv. 
ou ἐκλή έτος 
5 Rom. xv. 8 reff. t Luke xv. 
u = Rom. xi. 29. xii. 6 (ch. xii. 4) al. 
1 Pet. iii. 20 only Te w = Rom. viii. 19 
y Col. 
z= Actsi »" 20 com 
Phil, i. 6, 10. ii. 16. Xe 
b = Rom. i. & 2 Cor. 11]. 


5. ev (1st) is written twice but corrd by X}. 
6. for χριστου, θεου B!(but corrd, Tischdf) F n 46-7. 72. 109-20 lectt-8. 12 arm. 


8. the ver is written twice by &'(corrd by X-corr!). 
nucpa(in diem fri), παρουσια DF Ambrst Cassiod, ; die adventus vulg Pel. 


χριστου B. 
9. om ὁ ΟἹ, 


and to bring out the following contrast 
more plainly. 4. τ. θεῷ μου] so in 
reff. Rom. Phil. πάντοτε] expanded 
in Phil. i. 4 into πάντοτε ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει 
_ Mov. The 7 χάρις 7 δοθεῖσα = τὰ χα- 
ρίσματα τὰ δοθέντα (see below on ver. 7) 
—a metonymy which has passed so com- 
pletely into our common parlance, as to be 
almost lost sight of as such. ‘ Grace’ is pro- 
perly ἐν God: the gifts of grace in us, given 
by that grace. év | not, as Chrys., Theo- 
phyl., Zcum., for διά, [nor = ὃψ 85 E. V., ] 
but as usually in this connexion, in Christ, 
—i.e. to you as members of Christ. So also 
below. 5. ἐν παντί] general: particu- 
larized by ἐν παντὶ λόγῳ κ. πάσῃ γνώσει, in 
all teaching and all knowledge. λόγος 
(obj.), the truth preached. γνῶσις (subj.), 
the truth apprehended. They were rich in 
the preaching of the word, had among them 
able preachers, and rich in the apprehen- 
sion of the word, were themselves intelli- 
gent hearers. See 2 Cor. viii. 7, where to 
these are added πίστις, σπουδή, and ἀγάπη. 

6. τὸ μαρτ. τ. χριστοῦ) the wit- 
ness concerning Christ delivered by me. 

καθώς, as indeed, ‘siquidem.’ 

éBeB., was confirmed, —took deep 
root, among you; i.e. ‘as was to have been 
expected, from the impression made among 
you by my preaching of Christ.’ This con- 
firmation was znternal, by faith and perma- 
nence in thetruth, not external, by miracles. 

7.] So that ye are behind (others) 
in no gift of grace ;—not, lack no gift of 
grace, which would be genitive. χάρισμα 
here has its widest sense, of that which is 
the effect of xapes,—not meaning ‘spiritual 
gifts’ in the narrower sense, as in ch. xii. 4. 


for 
om 


for ews, αχρι DF. 


for δι, up D'[-gr] F[-gr]. 


This is plain from the whole strain of the 
passage, which dwells not on outward gifts, 
but on the inward graces of the Christian 
life. ἀπεκδεχ. | which is the greatest 
proof of maturity and richness of the 
spiritual life; implying the coexistence 
and co- operation of faith, whereby they 
believed the promise of Christ,—hope, 
whereby they looked on to its fulfilment, 
—and love, whereby that anticipation was 
lit up with earnest desire ;—compare πᾶ- 
σιν τοῖς ἤγαπηκόσιν THY ἐπιφάνειαν αὐτοῦ, 
2 Tim. iv. 8. ἀπεκδ. K.7.A., is taken by 
Chrys.,—who understands χαρίσματα of 
miraculous powers,—as implying that be- 
sides them they needed patience to wait 
till the coming of Christ; and by Calv.,— 
“1460 addit expectantes revelationem, quo 
significat, non talem se affluentiam illis 
affingere in qua nihil desideretur; sed 
tantum que sufficiet usquedum ad perfec- 
tionem perventum fuerit.” But I much 
prefer taking ἀπεκδεχομένους as parallel 
with and giving the result of μὴ bor. K.7.A. 
8. ὅς] viz. θεός, ver. 4, not Ἰησοῦς 
χριστός, in which case we should have ἐν 
τῇ ἡμέρᾳ αὐτοῦ. The καί besides shews 
this. ἕως τέλ. ἀνεγκ.] i. 6. εἰς τὸ 
εἶναι Suas ἄνεγκ.; --- so ἀπεκατεστάθη 
ὑγιής, Matt. xii. 18. To the end, see 
reff.—i.e. to the συντέλεια τ. αἰῶνος, 
not merely ‘to the end of your lives.’ 
9.1 See ref. 1 Thess. ; also Phil.i.6. The 
KOLV. TOU vi. avT., as Meyer well remarks, 
is the δόξα τῶν τέκνων τοῦ θεοῦ, Rom. viii. 
21; for they will be συγκληρονόμοι τοῦ 
χριστοῦ, and συνδοξασθέντες with Him,— 
see Rom. viii. 17,23; 2 Thess. ii.14. The 
mention of κοινωνία may perhaps bave been 


476 ΤΕΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. iF 
» ο Ι fal ca ΩΣ al Ἢ] a a lal 

c2Cor. vil θητε εἰς “ κοινωνίαν τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ τοῦ 
«τος / id al 
ὁ Rom. xii. 1 

ape _ muatan ἢ μῶν: dats oe 
eer 10 4 Ἰ]ᾳρακαλῶ δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί. ' διὰ τοῦ ἴ ὀνόματος 
ch. xvi. 12, τ ὦ 2 _ “ ὡς δ “y, q ad ξ 

3, 16. τ e 

15,16... , Τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ, iva τὸ αὐτὸ λέγητε 
ἐν. δι, αι. 8. / \ \ 5 3 toa g ͵ = δε b 

Coin sal. πάντες καὶ μὴ ἢ ἐν ὑμῖν & σχίσματα, ἦτε δὲ ὃ" κατηρ- 
f Acts iv. 30 a " A A . Ait \ a > ra le ’ 
ἢ Tlomevoe EV τῷ αὐτῷ ‘vol Kai ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ * γνώμῃ. 
ΘΟ ν / - / ς Ν a 
Sars. 11} ἐδηλώθη yap μοι περὶ ὑμῶν, ἀδελφοί μου, ὑπὸ ™ τῶν 
18. ji. 25 a , 6 a“ ¢ ,ὔ Ν -“ 
(Mark ii-21!') Χλόης, ὅτι " ἔριδες ἐν ὑμῖν εἰσιν. 13 ο χέγω δὲ τοῦτο, 
only ας (μη, Tee Se Cries Ve Ἢ \ ͵ 4 ΡΠ x a= aN = 
, sai ὅτι ἕκαστος ὑμῶν λέγει ᾿Εγὼ μέν εἰμι αύλου, ἐγὼ δὲ 
). 2 Οοσ. 

iii. 11. Gal. vi. l. Heb. xiii. 21. 1 Pet. v.10. Ezra iv. 13. i = Rom. i. 28. Eph. iv. 17. P. only, exc. 


Luke xxiv. 45. Rev. xiii. 18. xvii. 9. 

exc. Rev. xvii. 13, 17 [Dis]. 2 Macc. xiv. 20. 
ll. 2 Pet. i. lionly. Exod. vi. 3. 

4. Tit. iii. 9. -wdes, here only. 

11. xl. 5, 9 only. o = ch. x. 29. 

xiv. 8. ch. 111. 23 al. 


10. [αδελφοι bef παρ. vu. (omg δε) C3 a 74. | 


xp. bef inc. D[-gr].—om του F(not G). 


k-= ch. vii. 25, 40. “2 Cor. viii. 10. 


m see Rom. xvi. 10, 11. 
sing., Rom. i. 29. xiii. 13. ch. ii. 3. 
Gal. iii. 17. see ch. vil. 29. xv. dU. 


P. or of P. (Acts xx.3) only, 


Ich. ili. 13. Col. i. 8. Heb. ix. 8. xii. 27. 1 Pet. 1. 
n plur., 2 Cor. xii. 20. 1 Tim. vi. 
Gal. v.20. Phil. i. 15 only+. Sir. xxviii. 


Ρ gen., Acts ix. 2. 


ino. xp. bef του κυρ. nu. DF.— 


11. for μου, μοι B'(sic) : om Cl(appy) D-lat Ambrst. 


intended to prepare the way, as was before 
done in ver. 2, tor the reproof which is 
coming. Chrys. remarks respecting vv. 
1—9, σὺ δὲ σκόπει πῶς αὐτοὺς TE ὀνό- 
ματι ἀεὶ τοῦ χριστοῦ προξηλοῖ. καὶ avOpa- 
που μὲν οὐδενός, οὔτε ἀποστόλου οὔτε δι- 
δασκάλου, συνεχῶς δὲ αὐτυῦ τοῦ ποθουμένου 
μέμνηται, καθάπερ ἀπὸ μέθης τινὸς τοὺς 
καρηβαροῦντας ἀπενεγκεῖν παρασκευάζων. 
οὐδαμοῦ γὰρ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ ἐπιστολῇ οὕτω συν- 
εχῶς κεῖται τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ χριστοῦ" ἐνταῦθα 
μέντοι ἐν ὀλίγοις στίχοις πολλάκις, καὶ διὰ 
τούτου σχεδὸν τὸ πᾶν ὑφαίνει προοίμιυν. 
Hom. ii. p. 10. 

10—IV. 21.] REPROOF OF THE PARTY- 
DIVISIONS AMONG THEM: BY OCCASION 
OF WHICH, THE APOSTLE EXPLAINS AND 
DEFENDS HIS OWN METHOD OF PREACH- 
ING ONLY CHRIST TO THEM. 10. | 
δέ introduces the contrast to the thankful 
assurance just expressed. διὰ τ. dv., 
as διὰ τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν τοῦ θεοῦ, Rom. xii. 1: 
“as the bond of union, and as the most 
holy name by which they could be adjured ” 
Stanley. ἵνα (reff.) not only introduces 
the result of the fulfilment of the exhorta- 
tion, but includes its import. τὸ αὐτὸ 
λέγητε -- contrast to λέγει ἐγὼ μὲν... ἐγὼ 
δὲ... ἐγὼ δὲ... ἐγὼ δέ of ver. 12,—but 
further implying the having the same sen- 
timents on the subjects which divided them : 
see Phil. ii. 2. ἦτε δέ] δέ here im- 
plies but rather, as in Thue. ii. 98, ἀπεγίγ- 
VETO μὲν αὐτῷ οὐδὲν TOD στρατοῦ, .. . Mpus- 
eylyvero δέ. Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 
171, gives many other examples. καταρ- 
τίζω is the exact word for the healing or 
repairing of the breaches made by the 
oxlouara,—perfectly united. So Herod. 
v. 28, ἡ MiAntos.... ἐπὶ δύο γενεὰς ἀν- 
δρῶν νοσήσασα ἐς τὰ μάλιστα στάσει, μέχρι 


οὗ μιν Πάριοι κατήρτισαν. νοΐ 
(rett.), disposition, -- γνώμη (do.), opinion. 
11.) We cannot till up τῶν Χλόης, 
not knowing whether they were sons, or 
servants, or other members of her family. 
Nor can we say whether Chloe was (Theo- 
phyl., al.) an inkabitant of Corinth, or 
some Christian woman (Estius) known to 
the Corinthians elsewhere, or (Michaelis, 
Meyer) an Ephesian, having friends who 
had been in Corinth. 12.) λέγω δὲ 
τοῦτο ὅτι,-- οί, ‘J say this because, — 
but (sce reff.) I mean this, that... 
exact. ty λέγ. The meaning is 
clear, but the form of expression not strictly 
accurate, the ἕκαστος being a different per- 
son in each case. Accurately expressed it 
would run thus, ὅτι πάντες τοιοῦτό τι 
λέγετε, ἐγώ εἰμι Π., ἐγὼ "AmoA., ἐγὼ Κηφ., 
ἐγὼ χριστοῦ,---οΟΥ as De W., ὅτι πάντες A., 
6 μέν, ἔγώ εἶμι. . .. ὃ δέ, ἐγὼ κ.τ.λ.---- 
Respecting the matter of fact to which the 
verse alludes, I have given references in the 
Prolegg. § ii. 10, to the principal theories 
of the German critics, and will only here 
restate the conclusions which I have there 
(ib. parr. 5—9) endeavoured to substan- 
tiate: (1) that these designations are not 
used as pointing to actual parties formed 
and subsisting among the Corinthians, but 
(2) as representing the SPIRIT WITH WHICH 
THEY CONTENDED against one another, 


being the sayings of individuals, and not of 


parties (ἕκαστος ὑμῶν λέγει) : α. ἃ. ‘You 
are all in the habit of alleging against one 
another, some your special attachment to 
Paul, some to Apollos, some to Cephas, 
others to no mere human teacher, but 
barely to Christ, to the exclusion of 
us his Apostles.’ (8) That these say- 
ings, While they are not to be made the. 


Rom. 


ABCDF 
LPxrab- 
cdefg 
hkim 
nol7, 
47 





10---15. 


᾿Απολλώ, eyo δὲ Κηφᾶ, ἐγὼ δὲ χριστοῦ. 
ὁ χριστός ; μὴ [ἰαῦλος ἐσταυρώθη ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, ἢ 


13. for ὑπερ, περι BD! : 


basis of any hypothesis respecting defi- 
nite parties at Corinth, do nevertie- 
less hint at matters of fact, and are not 
merely ‘exempli gratia: and (4) that this 
view of the verse, which was taken by 
Chrys., Theodoret, Theophylact, Calv., is 
borne out, and indeed necessitated, by ch. 
iv. 6 (see there). ἐγὼ... Παύλου] 
This profession, of being guided especially 
by the words and acts of Paul, would pro- 
bably belong to those who were the first 
fruits of, or directly converted under, his 
ministry. Such persons would contend for 
his apostolic authority, and maintain doc- 
trinally his teaching, so far being right ; 
but, as usual with partisans, would magnify 
into importance practices and sayings of 
his which were in themselves indifferent, 
and forget that theirs was a service of per- 
fect freedom under one Master, even Christ. 
With these he does not deal doctrinal/y in 
the Epistle, as there was no need for it: 
but involves them in the same censure as 
the rest, and shews them in ch. ii., iil., iv. 
that he had no such purpose of gaining 
personal honour among them, but only of 
building them up in Christ. ἐγὼ 
Απολλώ] Apollos (Acts xviii. 24 ff.) had 
come to Corinth after the departure of 
Paul, and being eloquent, might attract 
some, to whom the bodily presence of Paul 
seemed weak and his speech contemptible. 
It would certainly appear that some occa- 
sion had been taken by this difference, to 
set too high a value on external and rhe- 
torical form of putting forth the gospel of 
Christ. This the Apostle seems to be 
blaming (in part) in the conclusion of 
this, and the next chapter. And from ch. 
xvi. 12, it would seem likely that Apollos 
himself had been aware of the abuse of his 
manner of teaching which had taken place, 
and was unwilling, by repeating his visit 
just then, to sanction or increase it. 

ἐγὼ Κηφα) All we can say in possible 
explanation of this, is, that as Peter was 
the Apostle of the circumcision,—as we 
know from Gal. ii. 11 ff. that his course 
of action on one occasion was reprehended 
by Paul, and as that course of action no 
doubt had influence and found followers, 
it is very conceivable that some of those 
who in Corinth lightly esteemed Paul, 
might take advantage of this honoured 
name, and cite against the Christian 
liberty taught by their own spiritual 
founder, the stricter practice of Peter. If 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


with these persons. 


477 


134 ere a 5, Matt aii 
Γ εἰς τὸ a 
reff.) 3 Kings 


xvi. 21, r = Acts viii. 16 reff. 


txt ACD23FL(P]X rel. 


so, these persons would be mainly found 
amoung the Jewish converts or J udaizers ; 
and the matters treated in ch. vii.— xi. 1, 
may have been subjects of doubt mainly 
ἐγὼ δὲ χριστοῦ] 
A rendering has been proposed (Estius, al.) 
which need only be mentioned to be re- 
jected: viz. that Paul having mentioned 
the three parties, then breaks of, and adds, 
in his own person, ἐγὼ δὲ (ΠαῦλοΞ), χρισ- 
τοῦ (εἶμι) [not of any of these preceding ]. 
Beza represents this as Chrysostom’s view, 
but it is not: οὐ τοῦτο ἐνεκάλει, ὅτι τὸν 
χριστὸν ἑαυτοῖς ἐπεφήμιζον, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι μὴ 
πάντες μόνον. οἶμαι δὲ αὐτὸν καὶ οἴκοθεν 
αὐτὸ προςτεθεικέναι βουλόμενον βαρύτερον 
τὸ ἔγκλημα ποιῆσαι, καὶ δεῖξαι οὕτω καὶ τὸν 
χριστὸν εἰς μέρος δοθέντα ἕν, εἰ καὶ μὴ 
οὕτως ἐποίουν τοῦτο éxeivor:—(Hom. iii. 
Ρ. 16 f.):—meaning by οἴκοθεν, not, as 
his own sentiment, but of his own inven- 
tion, to shew them the inconsistency of 
their conduct. ‘The words seem to apply 
to those who makea merit of not being 
attached to any human teacher,—who 
therefore slighted the apostleship of Paul. 
To them frequent allusion seems to be 
made in this and in the second Epistle, 
and more especially in 2 Cor. x. 7—11. 
For a more detailed discussion of the 
whole subject, see Prolegg. as above, and 
Dr. Davidson’s Introd. to the N. T. ii. 222 
ff. 13.] Some (Lachmann has so 
printed it) take μεμέρισται ὃ xp. as an 
assertion,—‘ Christ has been divided (by 
you), —or, as Chrys. mentions, διενείματο 
πρὸς ἀνθρώπους“ kK. ἐμερίσατο τὴν ἐκκλησίαν. 
But it is far better to take it, as commonly, 
interrogatively : Is Christ (the Person of 
Christ, as the centre and bond of Christian 
unity—not, the Gospel of Christ (Grot., 
al.),—nor the Church of Christ (Estius, 
Olsh.) : nor the power of Christ (Theodo- 
ret), i.e. his right over all) divided (not 
in the primary sense (Meyer, ed. 1), against 
Himself, as Mark iii. 24, 25, where we 
have ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτήν, but ‘into various parts, 
one under one leader, another under an- 
other,— which in fact would amount, after 
all, to a division against Himself)? The 
question applies to all addressed, not to 
the ἐγὼ χριστοῦ only, as Meyer, ed. 1. 
In that case μεμέρισται ὃ xp. would mean 
‘ Has Christ become the property of one 
part only ?’ as indeed Dr. Burton renders 
it. Meyer urges aguinst the interroga- 
tive rendering, that the questions begin 


s ver. 4, 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


1 


ὄνομα ἸΤαύλου ' ἐβαπτίσθητε ; 14% εὐχαριστῶ τῷ 5 θεῷ ὅτι 


as a » , fas / 
οὐδένα ὑμῶν εβάπτισα, εἰ μὴ Κρίσπον καὶ Vaiov, iva 


t ch. iv. 2. 
2 Cor. xili. 11. 
1 Thess. iv. 1. 
ih χε xix.2 
reff. » sy)? 
vconstr., Acts τίνα ἄλλον ἐβαάπτισα. 
xxvi. 17 reff. 
w absol., Rom. 
xy. 20 reff. 


14. om τω θεω BR! 672 [Chr-comm, Damasc-comm]. 


/ v “ τ by \ 3 Ν yv re / θ 
μὴ τις εἴπη ὅτι εἰς τὸ ἐμὸν ὄνομα * ἐβαπτίσθητε. 
\ A ‘ Ss 
πτισα δὲ Kal τὸν Στεφανᾷ οἶκον' ᾿ἱ λοιπὸν οὐκ οἶδα ὃ εἴ 


16 ἐβά- 


17 > \ v2 t “4 \ 

‘ov yap " ἀπεστεῖίλεν μὲ χριστὸς 
/ / 

βαπτίζειν, ἀλλὰ “ εὐαγγελίζεσθαι: οὐκ ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου, 


add μου Ad σ᾽ 17 vulg- 


sixt(with demid fuld harl?) Syr syr-w-ob copt arm Thdrt, Orig-int, Pel Sedul Bede. 


πρισκον NX}, 


15. rec (for εβαπτισθητε) εβαπτισα, with C'7DFLP rel fri Syr [syr-txt] goth Thdrt 
Tert,: txt ΑΒΟΙΝ a m 17 vulg syr-mg coptt arm Chr, Damasec Ambr-mss Pel Primas 


Bede. 


16. for εβαπτισα, βεβαπτικα D' [twice] F[1st]. 


αλλον F fuld [ D-lat]. 


17. for απεστειλεν, ameota(...) A: απεσταλκε 6. 


om ACDLPX rel [Orig-c,}] Chr, Thl Cc. 
σασθαι B: txt ADFLPR rel. (Ὁ uncert.) 


immediately after, with μή. But we may 
fairly set against this argument, that the 
μή introduces a new form of interrogation 
respecting a new individual, viz. Paul: and 
that it was natural, for solemnity’s sake, 
to express the other question differently. 
In μεμέρισται ὃ χριστός, the Majesty of 
Christ’s Person is set against the unworthy 
insinuation conveyed by peuepiotai,—in 
μὴ Παῦλος ἐσταυρώθη ὑπὲρ du.,—the 
meanness of the individual, Paul, is set 
against the triumph of divine Love implied 
in ἐστ. in. ὑμῶν. Two such contrasts 
could hardly but be differently expressed. 
μὴ Π. ἐστ. κτ.λ.} Surely Paul 
was ποῦ crucified for you? By repudi- 
ating all possibility of himself being the 
Head and ἐπώνυμος of their church, he 
does so ἃ fortiori for Cephas and Apollos : 
for he founded the Church at Corinth. On 
eis τὸ ὄν. ἐβαπτ. see Matt. xxviii. 19. 
14.) Olsh. characterizes it as surprising 
that Paul should not have referred to the 
import of baptism itself as a reason to 
substantiate his argument. He does not 
this, but tacitly assumes, between ver. 13 
and 14, the probability that his having bap- 
tized any considerable number among the 
Corinthians would naturally have led to the 
abuse against which he is arguing. 
εὐχ. τ. 8.] “17 am (now) thankful to God, 
who so ordered it that I did not, &e. 
Crispus, the former ruler of the synagogue, 
Acts xviii. 8. Gaius, afterwards the host of 
the Apostle, and of the church, Rom. xvi. 
23. 15.] ἵνα represents the purpose, 
not of the Apostle’s conduct at the time, 
but of the divine ordering of things: ‘God 
so arranged it, that none might say,’ ἄσ. 
16.| He subsequently recollects 
having baptized Stephanas and his family 
(see ch. xvi. 15, 17),—perhaps from infor- 
mation derived from Stephanas himself, 


ins To bef λοιπὸν F. om 


ins o bef xpioros BF Thdrt: 
ί(αλλα, so A(appy) BDR.) ευαγγελι- 


who was with him:—and he leaves an 
opening for any others whom he may pos- 


ABCDF 
LPrab 
edefg 
hklm 
nolj7, 
47 


sibly have baptized and have forgotten it. . 


The last clause is important as against 
those who maintain the absolute omni- 
science of the inspired writers on every 
topic which they handle. 17.) This 
verse forms the transition to the descrip- 
tion of his preaching among them. His 
mission was not to baptize :—a trace al- 
ready, of the separation of the offices of 
baptizing and preaching. ἄνθρωπον μὲν 
γὰρ κατηχούμενον λαβόντας καὶ πεπεισ- 
μένον βαπτίσαι, παντὸς οὑτινοΞςοῦν ἐστιν" 
ἢ γὰρ προαίρεσις τοῦ mposidvros λοιπὸν 
ἐργάζεται τὸ πᾶν, καὶ ἣ τοῦ θεοῦ xapis- 
ὅταν δὲ ἀπίστους δέῃ κατηχῆσαι, πολλοῦ 
δεῖ πόνου, πολλῆς τῆς σοφίας" τότε δὲ 
καὶ τὸ κινδυνεύειν προφῆν. Chrys. Hom. 
iii. p. 18. [Ὁ is evident that this is said 
in no derogation of Baptism, for he did 
on occasion baptize,—and it would be im- 
possible that he should speak lightly of 
the ordinance to which he appeals (Roin. 
vi. 3) as the seal of our union with Christ. 

οὐκ ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου] It seems 
evident from this apology, and other hints 
in the two Epistles, e. g. 2 Cor. x. 10, that the 
plainness and simplicity of Paul’s speech 
had been one cause among the Corinthians 
of alienation from him. Perhaps, as hinted 
above, the eloquence of Apollos was ex- 
tolled to Paul’s disadvantage. év 
god. | in (as the element in which: better 
than ‘ with’) wisdom of speech (i. 6. the 
speculations of philosophy: that these are 
meant, and not mere eloquence or rhetorical 
form, appears by what follows, which treats 
of the subject,and not merely of the manner 
of the preaching) in order that the Cross 
of Christ (the great central point of his 
preaching ; exhibiting man’s guilt and 
God’s love in their highest degrees and 


14—21. 


IIPOS KOPIN@IOTS A. 


479 


iva μὴ *Kevw0 ὁ ἡ σταυρὸς τοῦ χριστοῦ. 15 ὁ 7 λόγος x= Rom.iv. 
ren. 


eral. ᾿ς 


a ec Lal y } -“ - ~ \ ab > ~~ , c ω ί y Ξ 
yap o τοῦ Yatavpev Tos μὲν * ἀπολλυμένοις © μωρία ? τι Ἵ κα; 


Phil. iii. 18. 


3 , A δὲ bd , con € § ΄ θ rag 18 
€OTLY, τοις ε OWCOMEVOLS uv VYALLLS Εεου  EOTLD. z= Acts xiii. 
᾽ μ 


19 γέγραπται γὰρ ᾿᾿Απολῶ τὴν σοφίαν τῶν σοφῶν, 
τὴν δ σύνεσιν τῶν ὃ" συνετῶν ' ἀθετήσω. 
K ποῦ | γραμματεύς ; * ποῦ  συνζητητὴς τοῦ " αἰῶνος " τού- 
του; οὐχὶ °euwpavey ὁ θεὸς τὴν σοφίαν τοῦ κόσμου ; 
91 Ρ ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἐν τῇ ἸΙΠσοφίᾳ τοῦ «θεοῦ οὐκ "ἔγνω ὁ 

only+. Sir. xx. 31. xli. 15 only. Core δ Πα hy 


iii. 4. Col. i. 9. ii. 2. 2 Tim. ii. 7 only. Prov. 11. 2. 
i = Mark vii. 9. Luke x.16. John xii. 48. Gal. ii. 21 αἱ. Isa. xlviii. 8. 


10. Rom. i. 16. ver. 24. 


7only. Prov. xvi. 21. 
k = Rom. iii. 27. Isa. xxxiii. 18. 


m here only +. (-τεῖν, Acts vi. 9. ἴχ. 298. «τησις, Acts xv. 7.) 


Isa, xix. 11. 


o = Rom. i. 22 (reff.) only. 
ili r Rom, i. 21. 


33. Eph. ii. 10. 


18. om yap Ρ b!. 


Gal tve9: 


om 2nd 6 B a! Cyr-jer,. 


Σὰν ΒΝ ἴα 
ἃ = Rom. ii. 12, 
και 2 Cor. ii. 15. 
iv.3. 2 Thess. 
ii. 10. (1 Pet. 
i. 7.) . Lev. 
xxill. 30, 
Ὁ dat., ch. il. 
14. viii. 6. 


20 Κα ποῦ σοφός ; 


ix:.2 
ς« c vv. 21, 23. 
ch. ii. 14, 
iii. 19 

e Acts viii 
Luke ii. 41. Eph. 
Luke x. 21. Acts xiii. 


d pres., ch. xv. 2 reff. 
g Mark xii. 23. 
h Matt. xi. 25. 


1 = Matt. xiii. 52. Epp., here only. Ezra vii. 6. 
n Rom. xii. 2 reff. 
Acts xv. 24 reff. q ver. 24. Rom. xi. 


1 John iv. 6,7,8. (Jer. xxxviii. (xxxi.] 34.) 


owpevois(sic) &. om 


nuw F am? fuld! fri D-lat G-lat Iren-int, Tert Cypr, Hil, Ambrst Cassiod: id est 


nobis vulg Pel Sedul Bede. 


19. om yap D![-gr(appy, Treg) ] k [Orig-c, ]. 
20. ree aft τ. Koou. ins τουτου (fo correspond with tov at. τουτου above), with 


C3D3FLN? rel [latt syrr copt goth arm-mss] Clem, Orig, Chr, Thdrt Tert, : 


om 


ABC! D![-gr] PX! a 17 [spec arm-ed Euthal-ms] Clem, Cyr[-p,} Did, Damase Thi 


Orig-int, Tert,. 
21. om yap F 3. 108-77 arm. 


closest connexion) might not be deprived 
of its effect. This would come to pass 
rather by philosophical speculations than 
by eloquence. 18.] For (explanation of 
the foregoing clause,—and that. assuming 
the mutual exclusiveness of the preaching 
of the Cross and wisdom of speech, and the 
identity of of ἀπολλύμενοι with the lovers 
of σοφία λόγου : q. ἃ. ‘wisdom of speech 
would nullify the Cross of Christ: for the 
doctrine of the Cross is to the lovers of that 
wisdom, folly.’ The reasoning is elliptical 
and involved, and is further complicated by 
the emphatic position of τοῖς ἀπολλ. and τοῖς 
ow(.) the [preaching (speech, or] doctrine 
“there is a word, an eloquence, which is 
most powerful, the eloquence of the Cross : 
referring to οὐφία λόγου." Stanley) of the 
Cross is to the perishing (those who are 
through unbelief on the way to everlasting 
perdition) folly: but to us who are being 
saved (Billroth (in Olsh.) remarks that τ. 
ow(. nu. is a gentler expression than ἡμῖν 
τ. cw. would be: the latter would put the 
ju. into strong emphasis, and exclude the 
opponents in a more marked manner. 

ot σωζόμενοι are those in the way of sal- 
vation :—who by faith have laid hold on 
Christ and are by Him being saved, see reff.) 
it is the power (see ref. Rom. and note. 
Hardly, as Meyer,—a medium of divine 
Power,—etwaé, wodurd) Gott fraftig 
wirft: rather, the perfection of God’s 
Power—the Power itself, in its noblest 
manifestation) of God. 19.] For (con- 
tinuation of reason for οὐκ ἐν copia λόγου: 


-ἔργον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἄλλαι... 


because it was prophesied that such wis- 
dom should be brought to nought by God) 
it is written, &c. The citation is after 
the LXX, with the exception of ἀθετήσω 
for κρύψω. The Heb. is ‘the wisdom of 
the wise shall perish, and the prudence of 
the prudent shall disappear.’ (Lowth.) 
But Calv. says most truly, ‘ Perit sapientia, 
sed Domino destruente: sapientia evanes- 
cit, sed inducta a Domino et deleta.’ 
20.1 See ref. The question implies disap- 
pearance and exclusion. σοφός, the 
wise, generally: ypopp., the Jewish 
scribe [interpreter of the law],—ovwv- 
{nr., the Greek disputer [arguer ] (reff.). 
Tov αἰῶν. τ. is best taken with the whole 
three,—of this present (ungodly) world. 
ἐμώρανεν  μωρὰν ἔδειξεν οὖσαν πρὸς 
τὴν τῆς πίστεως κατάληψιν, Chrys. 
21.] For (explanation of ἐμώρανεν) when 
(not temporal, but illative = ‘since, 
‘seeing that,—so Plato, Gorg. p. 454, 
ἐπειδὴ τοίνυν ov μόνη ἀπεργάζεται τοῦτο Td 
; see Hartung, 
Partikellehre, i. 259) in the wisdom of 
God (as part of the wise arrangement of 
God. De W., Meyer, al., render it ‘ by 
the revelation of the wisdom of God,’ 
which was made to the Gentiles, as Rom. 
i., by creation, and to the Jews by the 
law,—thus connecting ἐν with ἔγνω, and 
making τῇ cog. τ. θ. the medium of know- 
ledge :—Chrys. takes it for the wisdom 
manifest in His works only: τί ἐστιν, ἐν 
τ. cop. τ. θ.; TH διὰ τῶν ἔργων φαινομένῃ, 
δι ὧν ἠθέλησε γνωρισθῆναι. But 1 very 


4830 ΠΡΟΣ. ΚΟΡΙΝΘΊΟΥΣ A. i 
, »“ , , e 

som. xv.28 κόσμος διὰ τῆς σοφίας τὸν * θεόν, " εὐδόκησεν ὁ θεὸς διὰ 

reff. Ξ A ΄ a \ 

tver 18 4, τῆς ᾿μωρίας τοῦ “ κηρύγματος σῶσαι TOUS πιστεύοντας" 

reff. 


22 P ἐπειδὴ καὶ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ¥ σημεῖα “ αἰτοῦσιν καὶ “EXAnves 
“- « e a“ Ν "s Ἀ ᾽ 
σοφίαν * ζητοῦσιν, 35 ἡμεῖς δὲ Υ κηρύσσομεν χριστὸν ἐσταυ- 


y = Matt. xvi. 
L. Isa. vii. 
11 al. 

w Acts xvi. 29 


\ 7 y \ ᾿ 
ref; Tam. ρωμένον, ᾿Ιουδαίοις μὲν * σκάνδαλον, ἔθνεσιν δὲ * μωρίαν, 
=" Matt. xii. a Ν τ , 

"48, ἵν Prov. 24 ἃ αὐτοῖς δὲ τοῖς ἢ κλητοῖς, Ιουδαίοις τε καὶ “EAXnow, 
xiv. Ὁ. 


iii Led “d ‘ a ! On @ \ \ 
yActsvili5  ovgerov θεοῦ ° δύναμιν καὶ θεοῦ ἃ σοφίαν" * ὅτι " TO f wwpov 
5 = Romexiv.” > 

13 reff. a see ch. v. 13. 
Rom. viii. 3. 2 Cor. iv. 17. viii. 8. 


b ver. lal. c ver. 18. d ver. 21. i e neut., 
f Matt. vii. 26. ch. iii. 18. iv. 10 al. Deut. xxxii.6. (-pta, ver. 18.) 


nvdox. C m [Ath,] Chr, Damase, for o Geos, Tw θεω F. πιστευσαντας ἴ,. 

22. for επειδη και, επει F: om καὶ fuld [harl'] Syr [(Clem,) Tert, Cypr, Hil, 
Ambrst }. rec onuciov (Meyer and De W think σημεια a corrn, because only the 
sing could present any difficulty: but Tischdf (Ed. 7 (and 8)) refers to such passages as 
Matt xii. 39, xvi. 4 al as having suggested the sing, which considg the immense weight 
of manuscript authority, seems, I own, more likely), with L rel arm {Euthal-ms Cyr- 
νι] Thi-txt Ee-txt: txt ABCDFPR 17 latt syrr copt goth [eth-pl] Clem, [Sevrn-c, 


Chr, Thdrt Damase] Mcion-t Cypr, Hil. 


emi(ntovo A. 


23. rec (for εθνεσιν) ελλησιν (to suit precedg and follg), with C3D3 rel [Syr(appy) ] 
Clem, Orig-ms, Eus, [Euthal-ns Chr, Thdrt]: txt ABC'D!F LPR m 17 latt syr copt 
goth wth arm Orig,[-int,] Eus, Ath {Cyr-jer, Damasc] Cypr, Hil; [Ambrst]. 


24. [for avrois, avtos C(sic, Tischdf). | 


much doubt the legitimacy of this absolute 
objective use of copia, as = those things 
by which the σοφία is manifested. I can- 
not see with Olsh. why the interpretation 
given above is ‘ganz unpaulint{d “ἢ it is 
merely an expansion οἵ ἐμώρανεν,---πὰ 
agrees much better with Paul’s use of 
the words ἡ σοφία τ. θεοῦ in reff. and in 
ch. ii. 7) the world (Jew and Gentile, see 
next verse) by its wisdom (as a means of 
attaining knowledge: or, but I prefer 
the other, “through the wisdom (of God) 
which I have just mentioned :” so Stanley) 
knew not (could not find out) God, God 
saw fit by the foolishness of preaching 
(lit., ‘of the proclamation : gen. of appo- 
sition,—by that preaching which is reputed 
folly by the world) to save believers. 
Rom. i. 16 throws light on this last 
expression as connected with δύναμις θεοῦ 
in our ver. 18, and with what follows here. 
There the two are joined: δύναμις yap 
θεοῦ ἐστιν (τὸ evay. τ. xp.) εἰς σωτηρίαν 
παντὶ τῷ πιστεύοντι, ᾿Ιουδαίῳ τε πρῶτον κ. 
ἙΕλληνι. 22.} ἐπειδή, not as in 
ver. 21, but = ‘siquidem,’ and explains τ. 
μωρίας τ. κηρ. καὶ--καί see Mark 
ix. 13, unite (De W.) things resembling 
each other in this particular, but else 
unlike. Jews and Gentiles both made 
false requirements, but of different kinds. 

σημεῖα αἰτ. see Matt. xii. 38, 
xvi. 1; Luke xi. 16; John ii. 18, vi. 30. 
The correction σημεῖον has probably been 
made from remembering the σημεῖον of 
these passages. The sign required was 
not, as I have observed on Matt. xii. 38, 
& mere miracle, but some token from 


om τοις F. om τε Fk, 


Heaven, substantiating the word preactied. 
23. | Still the expansion of 7 uwp. τ. 
knpvy. Now, σκάνδ. as regards the 
Jews, and μωρία as regards the Gentiles, 
correspond to the general term μωρία 
before. 
often found in clauses following the 
temporal conjunctions ἐπεί, ἕως, ὄφρα, Kc., 
in Homer, and ὅς, ὡς, ὥςπερ, εἰ, &e., in 
Attie writers: 6. g. Od. & 178, τὸν ἐπεὶ 
θρέψαν θεοί, ἔρνεϊ toov ..., Tod δέ τις 
ἀθανάτων βλάψε φρένας ἔνδον ἐΐσας.--- 
and Xen. Cyr. viii. 5. 12, ὥςπερ οἱ ὅπλῖ- 
ται, οὕτω δὲ Kal of πελτασταὶ K. of τοξοταί. 
See many other examples in Hartung, 
Partikellehre, i. 184 f. It serves to give 
a slight prominence to the consequent 
clause, as compared with the antecedent 
one. 24.) This verse plainly is a con- 
tinuation of the opposition to ver. 22 be- 
fore begun, but itself springs by way of 
opposition out of Ἰουδ. μὲν σκάνδ,, ἔθν. δὲ 
μωρίαν, ---ὐα carries the thought back to 
vv. 18 and 21. αὐτοῖς δὲ τ. κλητοῖς | 
Not, ‘but to the elect themselves, which 
would be either αὐτοῖς δὲ κλητοῖς, Or τοῖς 
δὲ κλητοῖς αὐτοῖς ;—but to these, viz. the 
elect,—the αὐτοῖς serving to identify them 
with the σωζόμενοι of ver. 18. There it 
was }piv,—here αὐτοῖς, because by the 
mention of preaching joined with ἡμεῖς, 
he has now separated off the hearers. 
δύναμιν, as fulfilling the requirement of 
the seekers after a sign :— σοφίαν,--ο 
those who sought wisdom. The repeti- 
tion of χριστόν gives solemnity, at the same 


time that it concentrates the δύναμις and 


σοφία in the Person of Christ; q. d. 


ABCDF 

ΡΝ ἃ Ὁ 

edefg 

hkl τὰ 

nol7, 
47 


The δέ after ἡμεῖς is that so_ 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


48] 


aA »“ / “- g > , > 7 Ν e Ν 
τοῦ θεοῦ σοφώτερον τῶν ὅ ἀνθρώπων ἐστίν, καὶ © ΤΟ zconstr., 


h ’ \ Lal θ aC i 2 la lal ᾽ / 5 / 
ἀσθενὲς τοῦ θεοῦ ‘icyupoTrepoy τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἐστίν. 
΄ \ a ς lal + 
26 Κ βλέπετε yap τὴν ᾿ἰ κλῆσιν ὑμῶν, ἀδελφοί, OTL οὐ πολ- 
\ , 
hot σοφοὶ ™ κατὰ ™ σάρκα, ov πολλοὶ " δυνατοί, οὐ πολ- 
2 ) 
A 2 \ “ Ul , 
Aol ο εὐγενεῖς, 27 ἀλλὰ τὰ fuwpa τοῦ κόσμου » ἐξελέξατο 
« \ ¢/ / \ ΄ Ν A h » a al Ps 
ὁ θεὸς ἵνα 4 καταισχύνῃ τοὺς σοφούς, καὶ TA" ἀσθενῆ τοῦ %. Inde. 
΄ ΕῚ 7 e θ Ν ‘sf q / \ r > / 
κόσμου 9 ἐξελέξατο ὁ θεὸς wa “ καταισχύνῃ τὰ * ἰσχυρά, 
98 \ Seca a a , \ Nat) θ ’ p > 
καὶ Ta " ἀγενῆ τοῦ κόσμου καὶ Ta * ἐξουθενημένα Ὁ ἐξ- 


n Acts xxv. 5. 
p Acts i. 2, 24 al. 
Matt. xii. 29 bis ||. ch. iv. 10 al. 


m Rom. i. 3 reff. 
x. 13 only. 
r see above (i). 


Deut. iv. 37. 


Matt. v. 20. 
John vy. 36. 


1 John ii. 2. 

h ch. iv. 10. 
xii. 22. Gal. 
iv.9. Heb 
vii. 18. 
Wisd. ii. 11. 

i compar., 
Luke iii. 16 ἢ. 


xi. 22. ch. x. 


Phil. iii. 2. 

1 Rom. xi. 29 
reff. Eph. 
iv.1,4 al. 

o = Luke xix. 12 (Acts xvii. 11) only. Jobi.3. 2 Mace. 

q = ch. xi. 4, 5,22. 2 Kings xix. 5, 


s here only t. t = Rom. xiv. 3 reff. 


25. ἐστιν bef των ανθρ. (both times) DF latt [Syr] arm Hil, [Ambrst, 2nd copt]. 
om 2nd εστιν BN! ο 17. 672 Orig, Eus). 


26. for yap, ουν Di -gr] F eth (Pamph, [Orig, your ]). 


copt.—ov8e D![-gr ]. 


om ov πολλ. Suv. F[-gr | 


27. om from [1st] to [2nd] wa A Ff-gr] m[: from 1st @eos to Geos (next ver) | 


Orig[-gr, }. 


rec τοὺς σοφους bef ckataicxvvy, with rel: txt BCDLPR k 17. 47 latt 


syrr copt eth arm Orig{ <sepe Pamph, Cyr-p,] Eus, Tert,. 
28. for ayevn, ασθενη N(txt N-corr!) Orig[-ms,(txt,-¢,) |. 


‘Christ even in His humiliation unto 
death, the power of God and wisdom of 
God, The use of δύναμις and σοφία 
here as applied to Him who was the great- 
est example of both, would not justify the 
absolute use of σοφία in this sense in 
ver. 21. 25. | Because (reason why 
Christ (crucified) is the power and wisdom 
of God) the foolishness of God (that act 
of God which men think foolish) is wiser 
than men (surpasses in wisdom, not only 
all which they call by that name, but 
men, all possible wisdom of mankind) ; 
and the weakness of God (that act of 
God which men think weak) is stronger 
than men (not only surpasses in might 
all which they think powerful, but men 
themselves,— all human might whatsoever. 
For the construction of the genitives, 
see reff.). The latter clause introduces a 
fresh thougbt, the way for which however 
has been prepared by δύναμις, vv. 18, 24. 
The Jews required a proof of divine Might : 
we give them Christ crucified, which is to 
them a thing ἀσθενές : but this ἀσθενὲς 
τοῦ θεοῦ is stronger than men. 26. | 
βλέπετε, imperative, as in reff. If taken 
indicatively, it loses the emphasis which 
its place in the sentence requires. It 
would thus be τὴν γὰρ κλῆσιν ὑμῶν 
βλέπετε. See a similar reminder on the 
part of the Apostle, 1 ‘Thess. i. 4. 

γάρ seems best to apply to what has im- 
mediately gone before. As a proof that 
the foolishness of God is wiser than men 
and the weakness of God stronger than 
men, he calls attention to the fact that 
the Christian church, so full of divine 
wisdom and strength by the indwelling 
Spirit of God, consisted for the most part, 

Vou. II. 


not of the wise or mighty among men, 
but of those whom the world despised. 

κλῆσιν, as in reff. the calling ἐν 7 
éxAnOnuev—the vocation and standing of 
Christian men. ὅτι ov πολλοὶ ... | 
that not many of you are wise according 
to the flesh (‘significari vult sapientiam, 
que studio humano absque doctrina Spiri- 
tus Sancti potest acquiri,’ Estius), not 
many mighty (no need to supply κατὰ 


σάρκα, which is understood as a matter of 


course), not many noble. ‘This is far 
better than to supply (as E. V., and most 
Commentators) ἐκλήθησαν after εὐγενεῖς ; 
and thus Vulg., Chrys., Beza, Meyer, De 
Wette, al. Olsh. observes: “ The ancient 
Christians were for the most part slaves 
and men of low station ; the whole history 
of the expansion of the church is in reality 
a progressive victory of the ignorant over 
the learned, the lowly over-the lofty, until 
the emperor himself laid down his crown 
before the cross of Christ.” 27, 28. | 
τὰ μωρά, neut. for more generalization, 
but = τοὺς μωρούς. This is shewn by 
τοὺς σοφούς following, in that case it being 
necessary to use the masculine. TOU 
kéop., of (belonging to) the world: not 
in the eyes of the world, as Theodoret, 
Luth., Grot., Est., al..—which would not 
fit τὰ ἀγενῇ τ. κόσμ., nor the sense: for 
they were not only seemingly but really 
foolish, when God chose them. κατ- 
αἰσχύνῃ. by shewing to the wise and the 
strong, the foolish and the weak entering 
the kingdom of heaven before them. 

τὰ ἀγενῆ, matter of fact—the low-born: 
τὰ ἐξουθενημένα, matter of estimation, the 
despised. Without the καί, which is 
certainly the true reading, τὰ μὴ ὄντα 

Ex 


482 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. I. 29—381. 


/ ς θ 7 Ν u \ ” 4 \ v7 ν 4 
uso Eur.Troad. ἐλέξατο ὁ θεὸς, τὰ “pn ὄντα, Wa τὰ ovTa ‘ KaTapynon, 


ὃ Ὁ a © “a , ΄ ΄“ fr 
eae 89 ὅπως μὴ "ἡ καυχήσηται * πᾶσα σὰρξ" ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ" 
θεῶν, ὡς τὰ fa) a a? a A > ΄ 
ve wp 80 2 ἐξ αὐτοῦ δὲ ὑμεῖς ἐστὲ * ἐν χριστῷ ᾿Ἰησοῦ, ὃς » ἐγενήθη 
Vo’ a rn a , \ e \ \ 
Ἰὰ μηὲν σοφία ἡμῖν ° ἀπὸ θεοῦ ὁ δικαιοσύνη τε καὶ " ἁγιασμὸς καὶ 


ὄντα, τὰ δὲ 


δοκοῦντ᾽ ἀπώλεσαν. v Paul (Rom. iii. 3, 31. ch. ii. 6. xiii. 8 al.) only, exc. Luke xiii. 7. Heb. 


ii. 14. Ezra iv. 21. w absol.,ch.iv. 7. 2 Cor. xi. 16 al. 1 Kings ii. 3. x Acts ii. 17 reff. 
= Acts xix.9. 3 John 6. 2 = John vii. 22. Rom. xi. 36. a = Rom, viii. 1. xvi. 7, 
11. 2Cor. v.17. Gal. 3. 22. Ὁ = 2 Cor. vii. 14. 1 Thess. i. 5 al. ec = Rom. xiii. 1. ch. 


iv. 5. vi. 19 al. d Rom. iii. 21, 25. e Rom. vi. 19 reff. 

rec ins καὶ bef ta un ovta (a mistaken supplement of the sense: see note), with 
BC3D3LPN?3 rel vulg [F-lat spec] fri syrr copt [eth-pl arm Pamph,] Origaiq Eus, 
Chr, Thdrt [Damase]: om AC? D!(and lat] F[-grj δὲ} 17 eth-rom Orig, [Euthal-ms | 
Iren-int Tert, Ambrst Tich. 

29. Elz καυχησεται, with FP [bo]: txt ABCDLX rel Orig; .epe; Eus,. rec for 
του θεου, αὐτου (corrn, to avoid repetition, not observing the emphasis), with ΟἹ vulg 
syrr arm-use Orig, Dial, [Sevrn-c,] Thdrt Ambrst: txt ABC3DFLPN? rel fri spec 
copt arm-zob eth Orig,[-int,] Eus, Ephr, Bas Chr, Damase Thl Aug Tich,.—% began 
to write αὐτου, but erased it. 

30. rec nuw bef cogia, with L rel vulg-ed(with [harl'}) syrr copt arm Orig, Eus, 


Mac, Chr, Thdrt [Cyr-p, Damasc] Ambr, Aug: 


txt ABCDFPN m 17 am(with 


demid harl? [fuld tol}) Origsepe [Dial,] Eus, Did, Cyr[-p,] Ambr, Ambrst Jer. 


nuev B. 


may belong to all four, the μωρά, ἀσθενῆ, 
ἀγενῆ, and éfovdev.,—but more probably it 
has reference only to the last two. Nothing 
(as e.g. μέγα τι) must be supplied «fter 
μὴ ὄντα: it means as good as having no 
existence: μή being subjective, and imply- 
ing that the non-existence is not absolute 
but estimative. Were it absolute matter 
of fact, it would be expressed by τὰ οὐκ 
ὄντα, as in 1 Pet. ii. 10, of οὐκ ἠλεημένοι, 
viv δὲ ἐλεηθέντες. See Hartung, Par- 
tikellehre, ii. p. 131; Winer, edn. 6, § 55. 
5; and Phil. iii. 3; Eph. v. 4. Olshausen 
refines on the expression too much, when 
he explains it of those who have lost their 
old carnal life and have not yet acquired 
their new spiritual one: it more probably 
means, things (persons) of absolutely xo 
account in the world, unassignable among 
men, which the ἀγενῆ and ἐξουθενημένα 
are. | Meyer remarks that the threefold 
repetition of ἐξελ. ὁ θεός, with the three 
contrasts to σοφοί, δυνατοί, and εὐγενεῖς, 
announces the fact with a triumphant 
emphasis. καταργ.] ‘ reduce to the 
state of οὐκ ὄντα. All the ὄντα, the 
realities, of the world, are of absolutely 
no account, unassignable, in God’s spiritual 
kingdom. 29.| That all flesh may 
have no ground of boasting before God. 
The negative in these clauses goes with the 
verb, not with the adjective; so that each 
word retains its proper meaning. 

30.| But (contrast to the boasting just 
spoken of) of Him are ye (from Him 
ye, who once were as οὐκ ὄντα,---ἐστέ.--- 
He is the author of your spiritual life) in 
(in union with) Christ Jesus, Who was 
made (not ‘is made: see reff. On 
γενήθη see 1 ‘Thess, i. 5 note) to us from 


for dix. τε, και δικ. D2(?]F Orig, [om τε 1)}}. 


God wisdom (standing us in stead of all 
earthly wisdom and raising us above it 
by being ἀπὸ @cod;—Wisdom—in His 
incarnation, in His life of obedience, in 
His teaching, in His death of atonement, in 
His glorification and sending of the Spirit; 
and not only Wisdom, but all that we can 
want to purify us from guilt, to give us 
righteousness before God, to sanctify us 
after His likeness, (and) both righteous- 
ness (the source of our justification before 
God), and sanctification (by His Spirit ; 
observe the τε καί, implying that in these 
two, δικαιοσ. and ἅγιασμ., the Christian 
life is complete—that they are so joined as 
to form one whole—our righteousness as 
well as our sanctification. As Bisping 
well remarks, “duc. and ay. are closely 
joined by the τε (καί) and form but one 
idea, that of Christian justification: δι- 
καιοσύνη the negative side, in Christ’s 
justifying work—ayiacudés the positive, 
sanctification, the imparting to us of sane- 
tifying grace ”’), and redemption (by satis- 
faction made for our sin, reff. :—or perhaps 
deliverance, from all evil, and especially 
from eternal death, as Rom. viii. 23: but I 
prefer the other). The foregoing construc- 
tion of the sentence is justified, (1) as 
regards ἀπὸ θεοῦ belonging to ἐγενήθη, 
and not to σοφία, by the position of ἡμῖν, 
which has been altered in ree. to connect 
σοφία with ἀπὸ θ., (2) as regards the whole 
four substantives being co-ordinate, and ndt 
the last three merely explicative of σοφία, 
by the usage of τε xal—xal, 6. g. Herod. i. 
23, διθύραμβον πρῶτον ἀνθρώπων τῶν ἡμεῖς 
ἴδμεν ποιήσαντά 
διδάξαντα, and Hom. Od. o. 78, ἀμφότε- 
pov, κῦδός τε καὶ ayAain καὶ bvesap,—se 


τε καὶ ὀνομάσαντα καὶ. 


ABCDF 
LPrab 
edefg 
hkim 
nol?. 
47 


11. 1—3. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


483 


f ἀπολύτρωσις, 51 ἵνα ὃ καθὼς γέγραπται Ὁ " καυχώμενος f Rom. i. 24 


2 yaa tl io 8 
ἐν κυρίῳ καυχάσθω. 


II. 1 Κἀγὼ ἐλθὼν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, ἦλθον οὐ i καθ᾽ 


g ch. ii. 9 reff. 

h Rom. ii. 17 
reff. 1Kines 
ii. 10. JER. 


ks \ ΄ BY , ] I econ \ are 
ὑπεροχὴν λόγου ἢ σοφίας ' καταγγέλλων ὑμῖν τὸ ™ μαρὰ 15 ee 


Tuptov τοῦ θεοῦ. 


la} I \ a ΄, 

μὴ ᾿Ιησοῦν χρίστόν, 5“ καὶ τοῦτον ἐσταυρωμένον. 
/ \ ῇ q ͵ 

Péy «ἀσθενείᾳ καὶ ἐν ᾿ φόβῳ καὶ " ἐν ® τρόμῳ 


= Acts xiii. 5 reff. part. pres., Acts xv. 27. 
o Rom. xiii. 11. ch. vi. 6, 8 al. 
30. xii. 5, ἄς. 


only. Ps. liv. 5. s as above (r). 


9 > ἐν n Ψ vg 5 / » 
οὐ yap " ἔκρινά τι εἰδέναι ἐν 


p = Rom. xy. 32 al. 
Heb. v. 2. vii. 28. Job xxxvii. 7. 
Mark xvi. 8 only. 


lil. 6. 


con > k 1 Tim. ii. 2 
ὕμιν, El only. 1Kings 
g 30 yA Ald, 
compl. 
seed bs 2 et xiii. 
a  6only. 
πολλῷ (-έχειν, 


Rom. xiii. 1.) 

n -Ξ Acts xv, 19 reff. 
q = Rom. vi. 19. 2 Cor. xi. 

r 2 Cor. vii. 15. Eph. vi. 5. Phil. 1i. 12 


m = ch. i. 6 reff. 


Cuap. II. 1. for waprupiov, μυστηριον (appy a gloss from ver 7) ACN’ n fri Syr copt 


Ambrst[mss vary] Ambr, Aug, : 
Chr, Cyr[-p Damasc] ΤῊ] (ec ΐ 


txt BDFLPN3 rel vulg syr sah eth arm Orig[-c,] 
Pel] Jer Bede. 


2. rec aft expiva ins tov, with D?L rel Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] ce: om ABCD'3FPR ἃ πὶ 


17 (Orig Ath) Chr, Cyr, Antch, Damase. 


ree εἰδεναι bef 71, with AD2F LN 47 Jatt 


r 
[syrr coptt arm ] Orig-c, Did, [Chr,] Cyr, Tert, [Ambrst]: txt BC(D1:3)P a m 17 
Cyr, Bas, Isid, Chr, Tert Hil, Victorin Aug,.—7i ev paw ed. D'3: τοῦ εν υμιν etd. τι 


D2. 


(The posn of τι, and harshness of τι εἰδεναι, seem to have occasioned the trans- 
posns, and tov would be supplied from elsw, see Acts xxvii. 1, 1 Cor vii. 37.) 


Xp. 


bef ino. F 109 am(with harl tol) Orig-int., Hil, [Ambrst] Aug,. 
3. rec kat eyw, with DFL rel Chr, Thdrt Thl Gc: txt ABCPN ak m 17 Orig,[-c, ] 


Bas, Antch, Damasc. 
49. 119 latt [ Ambrst]. 


that (see Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 103 ; 
Donaldson, Gr. Gram. 551) the words 
coupled by te καί (compare the exegesis 
above) rank as but one with regard to 
those coupled to them by καί, compare 
ἀμφότερον above. Hence these three 
eannot be under one category, as explica- 
tive of σοφία, but must be thus ranged: 
σοφία δικαιοσύνη τε καὶ ἁγιασμός, Kal 
ἀπολύτρωσι-. 31.] The construction 
is an anacoluthon, the citation being re- 
tained in the original imperative, though 
the ἵνα required a subjunctive. It is 
freely made from the LXX. This verse 
declaring, in opposition to ver. 29, the 
only true ground of boasting, viz. in God 
and His mercies to us in Christ, closes the 
description of God's dealing in this matter. 
He now reverts to the subject of his own 
preaching. II. 1—5.] Accordingly, 
Paul did not use among them words of 
worldly wisdom, but preached Christ 
crucified only, in the power of the Spirit. 

1.11 also (as one of the ἡμεῖς of 
ch. i. 23, and also with reference to the 
preceding verse, ὅ καυχ. ἐν κυρ. καυχάσθω) 
when I came to you, brethren, came, not 
with excellency of speech or wisdom 
announcing (pres. part., not fut.,—as in 
ref., and in Xen. Hell. ii. 1. 29, és τὰς 
᾿Αθήνας ἔπλευσεν ἀγγέλλουσα τὰ γεγονότα. 
The time taken in the voyage is over- 
looked, and the announcement regarded as 
beginning when the voyage began) to 
you the testimony of (concerning) God. 

2.| For I did not resolve to know 


om 2nd ev F 49 latt(exe D-lat) [Ambrst |. 


om 3rd ev DE 


any thing (hardly = ἔκρινα εἰδέναι οὐδέν, 
as E. V., but meaning, “the only thing 
that I made it definitely my business to 
know, was”) among you, except Jesus 
Christ (His Person) and Him (as) ecruci- 
fied (His Office). It would seem that the 
historical facts of redemption, and espe- 
cially the crucifixion of Christ, as a matter 
of offence, had been kept in the back- 
ground by these professors of human 
wisdom. ‘“ We must not overlook, that 
Paul does not say ‘ to know any thing of 
or concerning Christ,’ but to know Him 
HIMSELF, to preach Him HimsEtr. The 
historical Christ is also the living Christ, 
who is with His own till the end of time : 
He works personally in évery believer, 
and forms Himself in each one. There- 


' fore it is universally CHrist HIMSELF, 


the crucified and the risen One, who, is 
the subject of preaching, and is also 
Wisdom itself: for His history evermore 
lives and repeats itself iu the whole church 
and in every member of it: it never 
waxes old, any more than does God Him- 
self ;—it retains at this day that fulness 
of power, in which it was revealed at the 
first foundation of the church.” Olshausen. 

8.1 κἀγώ, and I, coupled to ἦλθον 
in ver. 1, and ἐγώ repeated for emphasis, 
the nature of his own preaching being the 
leading subject-matter here. The weak- 
ness and fear and much trembling must 
not beexclusively understood of his manner 
of speech as contrasted with the rhetorical 
preachers, for 6 λόγος μον kK. τὸ κήρυγμά 


Eee 


484 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. IL 
t 3 ͵ ΐ Ν ε - 4 ἈΝ e , \ \ u / 
ἐπι οι αν το, ἡ ἐγενόμὴν πρὸς ὑμᾶς. * καὶ ὁ λόγος μου καὶ TO “KN- 
2 John 12. , > 3 ~ 7 ͵ » ’ > 
see Matt. Vv Ὺ ¥ 
Sas cc) ἢ θυ μα oe Louie ee πειθοῖς “σοφίας "λόγοις, 2 ey 
Mark xiv. x ἀποδείξει Y πνεύματος καὶ δυνάμεως, ὃ ἵνα ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν 
u Rom. xvi. 25 


reff 
v Lukeiv 32. 
w here only +. 
x here only t+. 
(-κνυσθαι, 
Acts li. 22.) 
y. 14 al. 


᾿ς κὰν > / > , > > b] Z QS / a 
μὴ ἢ P ἐν σοφίᾳ ἀνθρώπων, ἀλλ᾽ Ρ ἐν 5 δυνάμει θεοῦ. er 
Ν Lal > Lal / 
6 Σοφίαν δὲ λαλοῦμεν ἐν τοῖς ὃ τελείοις, σοφίαν δὲ οὐ 


= νου. 13, Gal. ν. 5, 16. z ch. i. 18 reff. a=ch. xiv.20. Heb. 
8 


1 Chron, xxv 


4. for πειθοις, πειθοι b1 601. 18). 48. 72. 106-8-53 D-lat G-lat am(with F-lat) Syr 
sah [zth-pl] arm Orig, Eus[-mss, Chr-mss,] Ath, Ambr, Ambrst Sedul Leo. rec 
ins ανθρωπινης bef σοφιας (explanatory gloss), with ACLPN® rel vulg-ed(with demid 
[fuld2] agst am fuld! tol) syr copt Orig, Ath, Mac, [Eus-inss, Bas, (Cyr-p,)] Cyr-jer, 
ΤῺ] (e Ambrst-comm [Pel] Sedul Bede: ανθρωπινοις m 93: om BDFR? 17 latt 
Syr sah wth arm Orig.[-int, Eus-mss,] Nys Cyr-jer, Chr[-mss, Sevrn-c, | Thdrt-ms, 


[ Damase Ambr,] Jer,. 


Aoywv Syr arm Orig,, των λογων Orig,, Aoyou [k] am 


D-lat sah, Aoyos N!: om Fa 18). 74 G-lat Orig, Ath, Ambrst-comm Sedul. 


αλλα B. 


5. om 7 Fem. αλλα B. 


pov follow in the next verse,—but partly 
of this, and principally of his zxternal deep 
and humble persuasion of his own weak- 
ness and the mightiness of the work which 
was entrusted to him. So in Phil. ii. 12, 
13, he commands the Philippians, μετὰ 
φόβον κ. τρόμου τὴν ἑαυτῶν σωτηρίαν 
κατεργάζεσθε, θεὸς γάρ ἐστιν ὁ ἐνεργῶν 
ἐν ὑμῖν. The ἀσθένεια may have refer- 
ence to the παρουσία σώματος ἀσθενής of 
2 Cor. x. 10. Chrys., al., understand it 
of persecutions : but in the places to which 
he refers, it hasa far wider meaning,—viz. 
infirmities, including those resulting from 
persecution. 4.) And (not adver- 
sative, as Olsh., but following naturally on 
the weakness, &c., just mentioned—‘as 
corresponding to it’) my discourse and my 
preaching (λόγος of the course of argu- 
ment and inculcation of doctrine, κήρυγμα 
of the announcement of facts. This (De 
W.) is better than with Olsh. to under- 
stand A. as his private, x. his public dis- 
course: see Luke iv. 32, and ὁ λόγος τ. 
σταυροῦ, ch. i. 18) was not in (did not 
consist of, was not set forth in, see ref.) 
persuasive (πειθός = πιθανός, πειστήριος, 
πειστικός in Greek. The var. readings 
have been endeavours to avoid the unusual 
word, which however is analogically formed 
from πειθώ, as φειδός from φείδομαι, as 
Meyer) words of wisdom (ἀνθρωπίνης, a 
gloss, but a correct one. ‘“ Corinthia verba, 
pro exquisitis et magnopere elaboratis, et 
ad ostentationem nitidis,’’? Wetst.), but in 
demonstration of the Spirit and of power: 
i. e. either, taking the genitives as ob- 
jective, demonstration having for its object, 
demonstrating, the presence or working of 
the Spirit and Power of God (so Estius, 
Hillroth, al., and the gloss ἀποκαλύψει):--- 
or, taking them subjectively, demonstra- 
tion (of the teuth) springing from the 


EF 


οὐ αποδειξει, ἀποκαλύψει 1)}"5, 


Spirit and Power of God (so most Com- 
mentators. I prefer the latter. It can 
hardly be understood of the miracles done 
by the Spirit through him, which accom- 
panied his preaching (Chrys, al., Olsh.), 
for he is here simply speaking of the 
preaching itself. 5. ] ἡ ἐν, may be 
grounded on,—owe its origin and stability 
to. ‘The Spirit is the original Creator of 
Faith, which cannot be begotten of human 
caprice, though man has the capability of 
hindering its production : and it depends 
for its continuance on the same mighty 
Spirit, who is almost without intermission 
begetting it anew.” Olshausen. 

6—16.] Yet the Apostles spoke wis- 
dom among the perfect, but of a kind 
higher than the wisdom of this world ; 
a wisdom revealed from God by the 
Spirit, only intelligible by the spiritual 
man, and not by the unspiritual (ψυχικό5). 
The Apostle rejects the imputation, that 
the Gospel and its preaching is inconsistent 
with wisdem, rightly understood: nay, 
shews that the wisdom of the Gospel is of 
a far higher order than that of the wise in 
this world, and far above their comprehen- 
sion. 6.] δέ contrasts with the fore- 
going. AaA.] viz. ‘we Apostles ? not 
‘I Paul,’—though he often uses the plur. 
with this meaning :—for, ch. iii. 1, he re- 
sumes κἀγώ, ἀδελφοί. ἐν τ. τελείοις | 
among the perfect,—when discoursing to 
those who are not babes in Christ, but 
of sufficient maturity to have thei¥ senses 
exercised (Heb. v. 14) so as to discern good 
and evil. That this is the right interpreta- 
tion the whole following context shews, and 
especially ch. iii. 1, 2, where a difference is 
laid down between the milk administered 
to babes, and the strong meat to men. The 
difference is in the matter of the teaching 
itself: there is a lower, and there is ὃ 


ABCDF 
LPRab 
cdetg 
hklm 
nol7, 
47 





4—8. 


TOU 


, “ Δ lal ἴω 
τούτου τῶν “ καταργουμένων, 7 ἀλλὰ λαλοῦμεν ! θεοῦ 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


435 


b Sa δ Ἔ ὃ \ a cd > / . A bd IA 4 
atQ@VOS TOUTOU OQUOE ΤΩΡ apXOVT@V TOU At@VOS ὃ Hout, xli. 2 
re 


c = Acts xiii. 
27 reff. 
d here bis only. 


f , 5 > h if \ ΝΣ , ἃ k 
σοφιαν δἐν ἢ μυστηρίῳ τὴν αποκεκρυμμενὴν, ἣν “ προ- e = ch.i. 28 


΄ ΄ \ 1 \ A 1 
ὠρισεν ὁ θεὸς ' πρὸ τῶν 
h = Rom. xi. 25. xvi. 25. ch. iv. 1. Col. i. 26 al. 
i. 26 only. 4 Kings iv. 27. 


lhere only. Ps. liv. 19. see Eph. Col, as above (i), 


6. om Ist του ΕἾ ποῦ G]. 


BES, > ΄ e A 
αἰώνων εἰς δόξαν ἡμῶν, 


Dan. ii. 18. 


reff. 
8 ἣν fch. i. 21 reff. 
4) g = ver. 13. ch. 
: xiv. 6. 
: i Luke x. 25. Eph. iii. 9. Col. 
k Acts,iv. 28. Rom. viii. 29, 30. Eph. i. 5, 11 only t. 


Jude 25. 


om from awy. rout. to aiwy. rout. F 114 lect-7 sth. 


7. rec σοφιαν bef θεου (corrn, the emphasis not being noticed), with L rel Thdrt : 
txt ABCDFPR ἃ Καὶ πὶ 17 arm Clem, Orig, Eus, [ Bas, Chr, Cyr-p, }. 


higher teaching. So Erasm., Estius, Ben- 
gel, Riickert, Meyer, De Wette, al. On 
the other hand, Chrys., Theodoret, Theo- 
phyl., Calv., Grot., Olsh., al., understand 
the difference to be merely in the estimate 
formed of the same teaching according as 
men were spiritual or unspiritual, interpret- 
ing ἐν τ. τελείοις, ‘in the estimation of the 
perfect,’ which is philologically allowable, 
but plainly irreconcileable with the whole 
apologetic course of the chapter, and most 
of all with the οὐκ ἠδυνήθην k.7.A. of ch. 
iii. 1, where he asserts that he did not speak 
this wisdom to the Corinthians, We are 
then brought to the enquiry,—what was 
this copia? ‘Meyer limits it too narrowly 
to consideration of the future kingdom of 
Christ. Riickert adds to this, the higher 
views of the divine ordering of the world 
with respect to the unfolding of God’s 
kingdom,—of the meaning of the prepara- 
tory dispensations before Christ, e. g. the 
Jlaw,—of the manner in which the death 
and resurrection of Christ promoted the 
salvation of mankind. According to ver. 
12, the knowledge of the blessings of sal- 
vation, of the glory which accompanies the 
kingdom of God, belongs to this higher 
species of teaching. Examples of it are 
found in the Epistle to the Romans, in the 


setting forth of the doctrine of justifica- - 


tion,—of the contrast between Christ and 
Adam,—of predestination (compare μυστή- 
ριον, Rom. xi. 25), and in the Epistles to 
the Eph. and Col. (where μυστήρ. often 
occurs) in the declarations respecting the 
divine plan of Redemption and the Person 
of Christ: nay, in our Epistle, ch.xv. Of 
the same kind are the considerations 
treated Heb. vii.—x.: cf. iv. 11 ff’ De 
Wette. But a wisdom not of this 
world,—not, as E. V., “ not the wisdom of 
this world,” which loses the peculiar force 
of the negative :—soin Rom. iii. 21, 22, we 
have δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ πεφανέρωται.. .. .. 
δικαιοσύνη δὲ θεοῦ διὰ πίστ. Ἰησοῦ xp. See 
instances of the usage in note there. 

The ἄρχοντες are parallel with the σοφοί, 
δυνατοί, εὐγενεῖς, of ch. i. 26, and are 
connected with them expressly by the τῶν 
καταργουμένων, reterring to ἵνα τὰ ὄντα 


καταργήσῃ, ch. i. 28. They comprehend 
all in estimation and power, Jewish or 
Gentile. ἄρχοντας δὲ αἰῶνος ἐνταῦθα οὐ 
δαίμονάς τινας λέγει, καθώς τινες ὑποπτεύ- 
ουσιν' ἀλλὰ τοὺς ἐν ἀξιώμασι, τοὺς ἐν 
δυναστείαις, τοὺς τὸ πρᾶγμα περιμάχητον 
εἶναι νομίζοντας, φιλοσόφους κ. ῥήτορας κ. 
λογογράφους" καὶ γὰρ αὐτοὶ ἐκράτουν, κ. 
δημαγωγοὶ πολλάκις ἐγίνοντο. Chrys. 
Hom. vii. p. 50. τῶν KaTapy.| who 
are (being) brought to nought, viz. by God 
making choice of the weak and despised, 
and passing over them, ch. i. 28: not 
said of their transitoriness generally, as 
Chrys., Theophyl., Riickert,—nor of their 
power being annihilated at the coming of 
Christ (Grot., Meyer, al.),—nor as Olsh., of 
their having indeed crucified Christ, but 
of their being καταργούμενοι by His Resur- 
rection and the increase of His Church. 
7.] But we speak Gon’s wisdom 
(emphasis on @e0v:—the wisdom which 
God possesses and has revealed) in a mys- 
tery (ἐν μυστ. does not belong to τὴν 
amorex., as Theodoret and Grot., which 
must be τὴν ἐν μυστ. arox.,—nor to 
σοφίαν, as Beza, Bengel, which though not 
absolutely, yet certainly here, seeing τὴν. 
ἀποκεκρ. immediately follows, would re- 
quire the art., τὴν ἐν pvot.,—but to 
AaAovpev,—* we speak God’s wisdom in a 
mystery, i.e. as handling a mystery, deal- 
ing with a mystery. So τὴν σύνεσίν μου 
ἐν τῷ μυστ. τ. χριστοῦ, Eph. iii. 4. 
Estius and the Romanists, taking the con- 
nexion rightly, have wrested the meaning 
to support the disciplina arcani which they 
imagine to be here hinted at, explaining 
ἐν μυστ.. “non propalam et passim apud 
omnes, quia non omnes ea capiunt, sed . .. 
secreto et apud pauciores, scilicet eos qui 
spirituales et perfecti sunt,” Est.), which 
has been (hitherto) hidden (see Rom. xvi. 
25; ref. Col.) :—-which God foreordained 
(nothing need be supplied, as ἀποκαλύπ- 
τειν, or the like, after προώρισεν) before 
the ages (of time) to (in order to, the 
purpose of this preordination) our glory 
(our participation in the things which He 
has prepared for them that love Him, 
ver. 9: δόξα, as contrasted with the bring- 


486 ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. II. 
\ lol , a “ ΄ Li 
mJames iit, Οὐδεὶς τῶν Sapyovtwyv τοῦ δ αἰῶνος ἢ τούτου ἔγνωκεν" εἰ ABCDF 
see Acts Vil. \ A ΄ a 
2 Eph. yap ἔγνωσαν, οὐκ ἂν τὸν ™ κύριον τῆς ™ δόξης ἐσταύρω- cdefg 
1. 5S <i , \ 3 \ ᾽ ἷ k lia 
n Rom, αν 3, σαν' 9 ἀλλὰ " καθὼς γέγραπται °“A ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδεν π ΟἹ. 
1. ch. ‘ b] , > 
olsi-lxiv. 4.” καὶ Pods οὐκ ἤκουσεν καὶ ἐπὶ “ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ 
xv. lé. see ‘ - e Η͂ a as 9 : 
oes .@ ἀνέβη, ὅσα ἴ ἡτοίμασεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν, 
ff. “ ΄ Ν ol / Lal 
3 nets vii23 10 ἡμῖν δὲ S ἀπεκάλυψεν ὁ θεὸς διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος [αὐτοῦ]" 
r 


r > Matt. xx. 23. xxv. 34. John xiv. 2, 3. s = Matt. xi. 25. Rom. i. 17. ch. xiv.30. Prov. xi. 13 al. 


9. om αλλα A Pel. ev C[P] 80 Clem-rom, Smyrn-ep, [Bas, ]. rec (for 
ooa) &, with DFLPN rel Smyrn-ep, [Clem,] Orig, Const, Kus, [Ps-]Ath, Epiph, 
Cyr[-p Mae, Euthal-ms] Chr, Thdrt [Damase ] ΤῊ] (ἔς, gue latt [Orig-int,}: txt AB 
C(appy) Clem-rom, Hip, [Epiph,] Mac,. 

10. for δε, yap B m 39. 46. 57. 71-3. 93. 116 coptt Clem, [Bas, Euthal-ms Antch, }. 

rec o Geos bef ἀπεκαλυψεν (appy, as above, corrn from not noticing the emphasis), 
with L rel syr sah Orig,[-c] Chr, Thdrt [Damasc]: txt ABCDFPX a τὴ 17 latt Syr 
copt «th arm Clem [Ath, Bas, Did,-int, Epiph, Euthal-ms Mac, Cyr, Antch,] 
Orig[-int; Hil]. om αὐτου (perhaps on acct of to mv. follg) ABCR! 17(appy) copt 
Clem, Bas, Cyr[-p, |: ins DFLPN% rel [latt syrr sah eth arm Ath,] Did, Epiph, Mac, 


ing to nought of the &pxovres). 
8.) ἥν is in apposition with the former 
ἥν, and does not refer to δόξαν, as Tert. 
contra Mare. v. 6, vol. ii. p. 483,—* sub- 
jicit de gloria nostra, quod eam nemo ex 
principibus hujus evi scierit ...,” for 
this would be departing from the whole 
sense of the context, which is, that the 
wisdom of God was hidden from men. 
εἰ yap ἔγν. «.7.A., is a proof 
from experience, that the rulers of this 
world, of whom the Jewish rulers were a 
representative sample, were ignorant of 
the wisdom of God. Had they known it, 
they would not have put to a disgraceful 
death (6 σταυρὸς ἀδοξίας εἶναι δοκεῖ, 
Chrys.) Him who was the Lord of glory 
(reff.),—i.e. who possesses in his own 
right glory eternal, see John xvii. 5, 24. 
These words are not a parenthesis, but 
continue the sense of the foregoing, com- 
pleting the proof of man’s ignorance of 
God’s wisdom ;—even this world’s rulers 
know it not, as they have shewn : how 
much less then the rest. 91 But 
(opposition to ver. 8) as it is written, The 
things which eye saw not, and ear heard 
not, and which came not up (reff.) upon 
heart of man, how many things God pre- 
pared for them that love Him, to us God 
revealed through His Spirit. Thereis no 
anacoiuthon (as De W.) nor irregularity of 
construction, as some suppose, supplying 
after ἀλλά, λαλοῦμεν (Estius, &c.) or 
γέγονεν (Theophyl., Grot., al.) ; the δέ in 
the consequent clause after ὅς in the ante- 
cedent, which has occasioned these suppo- 
sitions, is by no means unexampled ;—so 
Herod. iii. 37, ds δὲ τούτους μὴ ὀπώπεε, 
ἐγὼ δέ οἱ onuavéw,—and Soph. Philoct. 86, 
ἐγὼ μὲν ods by τῶν λόγων ἀλγῶ κλύειν, 
Λαερτίου παῖ, τοὺς δὲ καὶ πράσσειν στυγῶ. 


See Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 184 f. 


Whence is the citation made? Origen 
says, ‘In nullo regular: libro invenitur, nisi 
in secretis Eliz prophet,’ a lost apocry- 
phal book :—Chrys., Theophyl., give the 
alternative, either that the words are a 
paraphrase of Isa. lii. 15, οἷς ode ἀνηγ- 
γέλη περὶ αὐτοῦ ὄψονται, κ. of οὐκ ἄκη- 
κόασι συνήσουσι, or that they were con- 
tained in some lost book, of which Chrys. 
argues that there were very many,—xat 
γὰρ πολλὰ διεφθάρη βιβλία, καὶ ὀλίγα δι- 
εσώθη. Jerome, Ep. lvii. (ci.), ad Pam- 
machium, de optimo genere interpretandi, 
9, vol. i. p. 314, says, “ Solent in hoe loco 
apocryphorum quidam deliramenta sectari, 
et dicere quod de Apocalypsi Heliz testi- 
monium sumptum sit : cum in Esaia juxta 
Hebraicum ita legatur: A seculo non 
audierunt, nec auribus perceperunt, oculus 
non vidit, Deus, absque te, que preparas 
tu expectantibus te. Hoc LXX multo 
aliter transtulerunt: A seculo non audi- 
vimus, neque oculi nostri viderunt Deum 
absque te: et opera tua vera, et facies 
expectantibus te misericordiam. Intelli- 
gimus, unde sumptum sit testimonium : 
et tamen Apostolus non verbum expressit e 
verbo, sed παραφραστικῶς eundem sensum 
aliis sermonibus indicavit.” I own that 
probability seems to me to incline to Je- 
rome’s view, especially when we remember, 
how freely St. Paul is in the habit of 
citing. The words of Isa. Ixiv. 4, are 
quite as near to the general sense of the 
citation as is the case in many other 
instances, and the words” ἐπὶ καρδίαν οὐκ 
ἀνέβη may well be a reminiscence from 
Isa, xv. 17, not far from the other place, 


ov μὴ ἐπέλθῃ αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν. 


Such minglings together of clauses from 
various parts are not unexampled with the 
Apostle, especially when, as here, he is 
not citing as authority, but merely ilus- 





9---15. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


487 


\ / A ‘ A aA 
τὸ yap πνεῦμα πάντα "ἐραυνᾷ, καὶ τὰ “ βάθη τοῦ θεοῦ. t= Rom. vii 
, Ν 7 > , a 7 τ 27 reff. ; 
11 τίς yap οἶδεν ἀνθρώπων " ta“ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, εἰ μὴ TO (PIE εν. 


xi. 33} 


a) “ ’ 4 > n » Ε . 
Χ πνεῦμα © τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τὸ ἐν αὐτῷ ; οὕτως καὶ " τὰ τοῦ τοῦ" Judith 


θεοῦ οὐδεὶς ἔγνωκεν, εἰ μὴ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ. 13 ἡμεῖς δὲ ¥ Matt. xvi. 28, 
: JP Luke ii. 49. 


\ e A , a 
ἡ οὐ τὸ “ πνεῦμα τοῦ ὅ κόσμου * ἐλάβομεν, ἀλλὰ TO πνεῦμα w 


James iv. 14. 
ener. art., 
Alls 115 


X35 a θ a aA X ς Ν a Ab , Ἢ 
τὸ ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα εἰδῶμεν τὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ " χαρισθέντα * = Acts xi. 
ΤΟΙ. 


ς 


a Acts viii. 15 reff. 
c = ver..7. 
xvii. 25 reff. 


Chr, Thdrt [Damasc ] ΤῊ] ec Orig{-c, ]-int, Hil. 
11. om avOpwrwy A 17 Ath, Cyr[-p,(ins,) }. 
το Tov θεου D!: τα εν τω θεω ΕἾ -gr] lat-ff. 


Orig.{ins,-int, ] Hil, Ambr,[ins, }. 


y see Rom. viil 


ἡμῖν, 3 ἃ καὶ λαλοῦμεν οὐκ “ ἐν ἃ διδακτοῖς ° ἀνθρωπίνης * 


z here only. 


Ὁ pass., Acts iii. 14. Phil. i. 29, Philem. 22. L.P.+ (2 Macc. iii. 33. 
dhere bis. John vi. 45 only, from Isa. liv. 13. see 1 Thess. iv. 9. rf 


e Acts 


(epavva, so ABICN.) 
om 2nd tov ανθρωπου F arm-mss 


rec. (for εγνωκεν) οιδεν (prob acorrn to corresp with previous clause), with L 
rel Orig, [Ath,] Chr, Thdrt: txt ABCDPX adm 17 Orig, Ath, Cyr-jer, Bas, 
Cyr[-p Euthal-ms] Antch, Damasc, eyyw F 23 Ath, Cyr-jer, Bas, Epiph,, cognovit 


latt(but δοὐέ fri Augsepe) Ambr,. 


at end add το ev avtw P [(Tert,) ]. 


12. aft κοσμου ins τουτου DF [vulg(not fuld harl!) copt arm Bas-ms,] Cyr, [Orig- 


int, Hil,(but mss vary) Ambrst]. 
om last του P [(k) Orig, ]. 
13. om ἅ F/-gr]. 


trating his argument by O. T. expres- 
sions. 10. τὸ πνεῦμα] the Holy 
Spirit of God—but working in us and 
with our Spirits, Rom. viii. 16. “ Suffi- 
ciat nobis Spiritum Dei habere testem : 
nihil enim tam profundum est in Deo quo 
non penetret.” Calvin. épavvg | a 
word of active research, implying accurate 
knowledge: so Chrys., οὐκ ἀγνοίας, ἀλλ᾽ 
ἀκριβοῦς γνώσεως ἐνταῦθα τὸ ἐρευνᾷν 
ἐνδεικτικόν. τὰ βάθη] see reff. 
There is a Ἢ here_ between the 
Spirit of God and the spixit-of_a..man, 
which is further carried out in the next 
verse. And thus as the spirit of a man 
knows the βάθος of a man, all that is in 
him, so the Spirit of God searches and 
knows τὰ βάθη, the manifold and infinite 
depths, of God—His Essence, His Attri- 
butes, His Counsels: and being τὸ πνεῦμα 
τὸ ἐν ἡμῖν, besides being τὸ mv. τοῦ θεοῦ 
(De Wette well observes that the Apostle 
purposely avoids using the expression τὸ 
πνεῦμα τὸ ἐν αὐτῷ of the Spirit of God, 
keeping the way open for the expression in 
ver. 12, τὸ mv. τὸ ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ), teaches us 
according to our capacity, those depths of 
God. 11.] For who among MEN 
knoweth the things of a MAN (τοῦ ἀνθρώ- 
mov, generic, see reff. The emphasis is 
on ἀνθρώπων and ἀνθρώπου, as compared 
with θεοῦ) except the spirit of a man 
which is in him? Thus the things of 
God algo none knoweth, except the Spirit 
of God{ We may remark, (1) that nothing 
need be supplied (as βάθη) after τά in each 
case, see reff. (2) that the comparison 
here must not be urged beyond what is in- 
tended by the Apostle. He is speaking of 


ιδωμεν DFL[P ἃ τὰ (n)] Orig,(elsw εἰδ.). 


the impossibility of any but the Spirit of 
God conferring a knowledge of the things 
of God. In order to shew this, he com- 
pares human things with divine, appealing 
to the fact that none but the spirit of a 
man knows his matters. But further than 
this he says nothing of the similarity of 
relation of God and God’s Spirit with 
man and man’s spirit: and to deduce 
more than this, will lead into error on one 
side or the other. In such comparisons as 
these especially, we must bear in mind the 
constant habit of our Apostle, to contem- 
plate the thing adduced, for the time, only 
with regard to that one point for which he 
adduces it, to the disregard of all other 
considerations. 12.) ἡμεῖς δέ carries 
on the ἡμῖν δέ of ver. 10. τὸ TV. τ. 
κόσμ.} Not merely, the mind and senti- 
ments of unregenerate mankind, ‘sapientia 
mundana et secularis,’ as. Estius, al., but 
the Spirit (personally and objectively 
taken) of the world, = τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ νῦν 
ἐνεργοῦν ἐν τοῖς υἱοῖς THS ἀπειθείας, Eph. ii. 
2, where it is strictly personal. τὸ 
πν. τὸ ἐκ τ. θ.] Not only, ‘the Spirit of 
God,’ but the Spirit which is ἜΡΟΝ Sots 
—to shew that we have received 16 only 
by the will and imparting of Him whose 
Spirit it is. And this expression prepares 
the way for the purpose which God has in 
imparting to us His Spirit, that we may 
know the things freely given to us by 
God, i.e. the treasures of wisdom and of 
felicity which are the free gifts of the 
gospel dispensation, Ξε ὅσα ἡτοίμασεν 6 θεὸς 
τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν, ver. 9. 18.1 καί, 
also; τὰ χαρισθ. ἡμῖν, we 


e_notonly know | 
by the teaching of the Holy Ghost, but. ALL 


/ \ 


{ 
j 


488 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. II. 14—16. 
(ver 4 σοφίας λόγοις, ἀλλ᾽ * ἐν 4 διδακτοῖς f πνευματος, ἕ πνευ- 
Β' = ch.ili. 1 a : j 3 Ὁ». 

χἰν. ὅτ, Gl. μα τικοῖς " πνευματικὰ 'ἱ συγκρίνοντες. 14} ψυχικὸς δὲ ἄν- 


hch. x. 3, ἃ >k Or 
reff. θρωπος ov * δέχεται’ 
i 2 Cor. x. 12 
(bis) only ζ. 
Gen. xl. 8. 
Num. xv. 34. a ) 
ἡ ὧν αν, ὁ TLK@S ° AVAKPWETAL. 
(bis), 46. 
yee iii. 15. Jude 19 only +. 
1, 2]. Prov. iv. 10. 
o Acts iv. 9 reff. 


1 ver. 11 reff. 


“‘ Xovyos a rescript δὲ} ” Tischdf. 


Ta τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ θεοῦ" ™ μωρία n 
‘ lal \ . -“ “ 
γὰρ αὶ αὐτῷ ἐστιν, καὶ οὐ δύναται γνῶναι, ὅτι " πνευμα- 
- ΄ 
169 δὲ ὅ πνευματικὸς ° ἀνακρίνει 
k = Luke viii. 18... Acts viii, 14, xi. 1. xvii. 11. 


1 Thess. i. 6. ii. 13. James 


m ch. i. 18 (reff.). n Rev. xi. 8 only t. 


rec aft mvevuaros ins ayiov, with D3LP rel [fuld? | 


syr eth Eus, Chr, Thdrt: om ABCD!FR 17 latt Syr copt arm Clem, Hip, Orig,{-c, | 


Eus, Epiph, [{ Damasc ]. 
F[-gr]: συγκρινοντος P. 


also speak them, not in words (arguments, 
Thetorical forms, &c.) taught by human 
wisdom, but in those taught by the 
Spirit. The genitives are governed_by 
d:daxtTots-in_each case?r see ref., and cf. 
Pind. Olymp. ix. 153: τὸ δὲ φυᾷ κράτισ- 
Tov ἅπαν. πολλοὶ δὲ διδακταῖς ἀνθρώπων 
ἀρεταῖς κλέος ὥρουσαν ἑλέσθαι: ἄνευ δὲ 
θεοῦ K.T.A. πνευμ... .. TV. συγκρ.] 
interpreting spiritual things to the spi- 
ritual. So Theophyl. altern., πνευματικοῖς 
ἀνθρώποις τὰ πνευματικὰ συγκρίνοντες καὶ 
διαλύοντες" οὗτοι γὰρ μόνοι δύνανται χωρεῖν 
ταῦτα. And very nearly so as regards 
συγκρίνοντες Chrysostom and Grotius ; 
only they take πνευματικοῖς not masc. but 
neuter, ‘ by spiritual things:’ ὅταν mvevua- 
τικὸν Kat ἄπορον ἢ, ἀπὸ τῶν πνευμα“ "κῶν 
τὰς μαρτυρίας ἄγομεν. οἷον λέγω, ὅτι ἂν- 
ἔστη ὁ χριστός, ὅτι ἀπὸ παρθένου ἐγεννήθη. 
παράγω μαρτυρίας κ. τύπους κ. ἀποδείξεις, 
τοῦ ᾿Ιωνᾶ, «.7.A. Chrys. Hom. vii. p. 55. 
‘Exponentes ea que Prophet Spiritu 
Dei acti dixere, per ea que Christus suo 
Spiritu nobis aperuit.’? Grot. Pei 
nies that συγκρίνω ever means to Ἵ = 
pret: but evidently-the LXX do~so-use 
it in Gen. xl. 8, ἐνύπνιον εἴδομεν, καὶ ὃ 
συγκρίνων οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτό. See also ib. vv. 
16, 22, and Dan. ν. 12, Theodotion (where 
he LXX have συγκρίματα ἀπέδειξε). 
Reuse, Beza, Calvin, De Wette, and 
Meyer render it, ‘fitting, or attaching, 
spiritual words to spiritual things’ And 
so I gave and defended it in my earlier 
editions. It seems to. me now more 
natural to take πνευματικοῖς as masculine, 
and as leading to the introduction of the 
two men, the ψυχικός, and the πνευμα- 
τικός, immediately after. 14. He 
now prepares the way for shewing them 
that he could not give out the depths of 
this spiritual wisdom and eloquence to 
them, because they were not fitted for it, 
being carnal (ch. iii. 1—4). ψυχ. 
δὲ ἄνθ.7 The animal man, as distinguished 
from the spiritual man, is he, whose 
governing principle and highest reference 
of all things is the ψυχή, the animal 


for πνευματικοῖς, πνευματικως B17. 218, 


συνκρινομιεν 


soul, αἰτία κινήσεως ζωικῆς ζώων, Plato, 
Definit. p. 411. In him, the πνεῦμα, or 
spirit, being unvivified and uninformed 
by the Spirit of God, is overborne by the 
animal soul, with its desires and its judg- 
ments,—and is im abeyance, so that he 


may be said to have it ποὺ,»---ψυχικοὶ, 
πνεῦμα μὴ ἔχοντες, ref. Jude. oe 
is that.side—of~the--human--soul,.so_ to 
speak, which is twrned.towards.the flesh, 
the world, the devil: so that the ψυχικός 
is necessarily in a measure σαρκικός (ch. iii. 
3), also emiyesos, and δαιμονιώδης, as in 
ref. James. This general interpreta- 
tion of ψυχικός must be adhered to, and 
we must not make it merely intellectual, 
as Theodoret,—6 μόνοις τοῖς οἰκείοις ἀρκού- 
μενος λογισμοῖς,---ἀτοῦ. “qui humane 
tantum rationis luce ducitur :”—Chrys. : 
ὁ τὸ πῶν τοῖς λογισμοῖς τῆς ψυχῆς διδούς, 
καὶ μὴ νομίζων ἄνωθέν τινος δεῖσθαι 
βοηθείας,---Ποῦ merely ethical, ἃ5. Erasm., 
Rosenmiiller (‘qui eupiditatum sub im- 
perio omnem vitam transigunt’), al.,—but 
embracing both these. ov δέχεται, 
receives not, i. 6. rejects, see reff.,—not 
vannot..receive, ‘non capax est,’ under 
stands not, which is against the context, 
\— for we may well understand that which 
seems folly to us, but we reject it, as 
unworthy of our consideration :—and_ it 
besides would involve a tautology, this 
point, of inability to comprehend, follow- 
ing by and by:—and he cannot know 
them (τὰ τοῦ πνεύματος, the matter of our 
spiritual teaching, itself furnished by tve 
Spirit) because they are spiritually (by 
the πνεῦμα of a man exalted by the Spirit 
of God into its proper paramount office of 
judging and ruling, and inspired and en- 
abled for that office) judged of. 15.] 
But (on the contrary) the spiritual man 
(he, in whom the πνεῦμα rules: and since 
by man’s fall the πνεῦμα is overridden by 
the animal soul, and in abeyance, this 
always presupposes the infusion of the 
Holy Spirit, to quicken and inform the 
nvevpa—so that there is no such thing as 
an unregenerate πγρευματικύς) Judges of all 


ABCD? 
LPNab 
cdefg 
hk)m 
o 17, 
47 


-Ξ3... 


ἘΠῚ 


\ See N pA oe bf] \ 
[μὲν] travra, αὐτὸς δὲ ὑπ᾽ οὐδενὸς 
\ » Ρ le) / ἃ ᾳ ΄ ᾽ ΄ 3 ς a δὲ 
γὰρ ἔγνω Ρ νοῦν κυρίου, ὃς ἃ συμβιβάσει αὑτόν ; ἡμεῖς δὲ 


¥ νοῦν χριστοῦ * ἔχομεν. 


III. 1 Kayo, ἀδελφοί, οὐκ ἠδυνήθην λαλῆσαι ὑμῖν 


15. om ver X}(ins &-corr’) harl?. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


489 


΄ 
16 P TUS p Rom. xi. 34, 
from Isa. xl. 
13. (compare 
Wisd. ix. 13.) 
q Acts ix. 22. 
xvi. 10. xix. 


o 2 / 
AVAKPLWETAL, 


ii. 2, 19 only. 
L Lev. 


x. 1. τ Rev. siii. 18. 


om μεν ACD!F latt Syr copt arm (Iren,) 


Clem, Orig, Meth Thdrt, lat-ff: ins BD*-3LP N-corr! rel syr Orig,[-c Euthal-ms Did. ] 
Mac, Chr, Thdrt,. (Has μεν been insd on acct of the δὲ follg, as Meyer,—or omd on 


acct of the δε precedg, as De W ?) 


ins ta bef παντα ACD'P 17 Iren-ms Orig, 


Nys, Chr,: om BD*3FL &-corr! Clem, Orig; Meth Mac, Thdrt, [Damasc]. (τα was 
prob a gloss to shew that παντα was not mase sing acc.) 

16. for χριστου, κυριου B D!{-gr] F Thl-txt Ambrst Aug, Sedul. (Mechanical repetn 
of vouy κυρ. above. So Meyer, rightly : addg, if any gloss had been written in marg 
on κυριου, it wd not have been χριστου, but θεου, seeing that the ref of the foregoing 


κυρ. 7s to GOD.) 


CuapP. III. 1. rec καὶ eyw, with L rel Thdrt ΤῊ] Gc: txt ABCDFPN a m 17 Clem, 


Orig,[-c, Did, Euthal-ms] Chr, Damasc. 


εδυνηθην (Ὁ. uu. bef λαλ. Ὠ2[-ργ]. LP 


abcefgh!1n o vulg Clem, Orig,[-c,-int,] Chr, Damasc [Cypr, Ambrst Pel]. 


things (Meyer, reading τὰ πάντα, interprets 
it, ‘all spiritual things ;’ but the ordinary 
᾿ isbetter : the Apos- 


πάντα would not be used absolutely, for 
‘every man,’ but either πάντα ἄνθρωπον, as 
Col. i. 28, or τὸν πάντα), but himself is 
judged of by none (who is not also mvev- 
ματικός, see ch. xiv. 29; 1 John iv. 1, where 
such judgment is expressly attributed to 
Christian believers). καὶ yap 6 βλέπων, 
πάντα μὲν αὐτὸς καθορᾷ καὶ τοῦ μὴ βλέπον- 
ToS, τὰ δὲ ἐκείνου τῶν μὴ βλεπόντων οὐδείς. 
Chrys. Hom. vii. p. 57. 16.] PRooF oF 
αὐτὸς δὲ ὑπ᾽ οὐδ. avaxpiverar. In order 
for an wnassisted man, not gifted from 
Christ, to judge the πνευματικός, he must 
know the νοῦς κυρίου, the intent and 
disposition of Christ ; yea more, must be 
able to teach, to instruct, Christ—being 
not, as the mvevmatixds,—taught by Him, 
he must have an independent. wisdom of 
his own, which Christ has not :—and who 
is there, of whom this can be said? But 
we (πνευματικοί, among whom he includes 
himself and the other Apostles) have (not 
a wisdom independent of Christ, nor do we 
know His mind, nor can we teach Him, 
but) the mind of Christ: the same mind, 
in our degree of apprehensiveness of it, by 
the imparting of His Spirit, which is in 
Him, and so can judge all things. The 
νοῦς κυρίου is the spiritual intent and de- 
signs of Christ. κυρίου in the prophecy 
is spoken of JEHOVAH ; but in the whole of 
Isa. xl., the incarnate Jehovah is the sub- 


ject. The meaning of συμβιβάζω, to teach, 
belongs to the LXX: in the N. T. it is 
to conclude, to prove, to confirm, see reff. 

III. 1—4,| He could not speak 
to them in the perfect spiritual manner 
above described, seeing that they were 
carnal, and still remained so, as was 
shewn by their divisions. 1.1 κἀγώ, 
I also; i.e. as well as the ψυχικός, was 
compelled to stand on this lower ground, 
—he, because he cannot understand the 
things of the Spirit of God: I, because 
you could not receive them. Or perhaps 
better, with Stanley, “ καὶ ἔγώ, as in ii. 1, 
« What I have just been saying, was ex- 
emplified in our practice.” ’ σαρκίνοις 
is certainly the true reading, being, besides 
its manuscript authority, required by the 
sense. He was compelled to speak to 
them (this affirmative clause is to be sup- 
plied from the former negative one) as to 
men of flesh: not ὡς σαρκικοῖς, for that 
they really were, and he asserts them yet 
to be, ver. 3. I quite agree with Meyer 
(against De Wette) that the distinction 
between σάρκινοι and σαρκικοί is designed 
by the Apostle, and further regard it as 
implied in the very form of the sentences. 
Here, he says that he was compelled to 
speak to them as if they were only of 
flesh, —as if they were babes, using in both 
cases the material comparison, and the 
particle of comparison ὡς. But in ver. 3 
he drops comparison, and asserts matter 
of fact—‘ Are ye not still σαρκικοί (= ὡς 
σάρκινοι), fleshly, carnal, living after the 
flesh, resisting the Spirit ?’—gq.d. ‘I was 
obliged to regard you as mere men of 
flesh, without the Spirit: and it is not far 
different even now: ye are yet fleskly—ye 
retain the same character.’ Both 
the σάρκινοι, the mere men of the flesh, 


490 ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A, Ill. 


s = ch. ii. 15. 

t Rom. vii. (4 A 2 Vv 7 ε a w. / > x a ” 

“eff. OTM. ava vua ἐποτισα υ ωμα" oO 
Pes re Oe σαν 0) “Sst 


25} L. Rom. ayf δύ θε: 
Ry feb. a Ρ ΒΟΥΣῚ bv \ 2 oA nd \ ce ¥ 

3 Ps ὃ σαρκικοί ἐστε. ὃ ὅπου γὰρ ἐν ὑμῖν “ὦ ζῆλος καὶ “ὁ ἔρις, 
xvi. . \ fon 
Pind. Pyth. οὐχὶ ὃ σαρκικοί ἐστε καὶ Ἶ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον ὃ περιπατεῖτε ; 


h. ix. 7. 7 Χ ΄ \ ’ \ r ᾽ . 7 Ψ 

a, 4 ὅταν γὰρ λέγῃ " τὶς ᾿Εγὼ μέν εἰμι ' Παύλου, " ἕτερος δὲ 
13. 1 Pet. ii. 
2 nly. Gch: xviii. 8. w Rom. xii. 20 reff. x Matt. xiv. 15 jj. Luke iii. 11. Rom. xiv. 


a here bis. Rom. 
b = Heb. 


7 y = 2 Cor. vii. 11. z = Acts xix. 2. ch. iv. 3 al. 

xv. 27. ch. ix. 11. 2Cor.i.12. χ. 4. 1 Pet. ii. 11 only. 2 Chron. xxxii. 8 compl. only. 
ix. 16. x. 18. James iii.16. 2 Pet. ii. 11. c Rom. xiii. 13. 2 Cor. xii. 20. Gal.v. 20. Sir. xl. 5. 
e ch. 1. 11 reff. f Rom. iii. 5. ch. xv. 32. Gal. i. 11. 111.15. 1 Pet. iv. 6. (see 

g = Rom. viii. 4. Eph. ii. 2 al. h = Luke xi. 15, 16 al. i gen., ch. i. 12 reff. 


ἃ = Acts xiii. 45 reff. 
Rom. vi. 19.) 


rec σαρκικοις (see notes), with C3D°FLP rel Clem, Orig[-c,]: txt ABC!D!8 17 Clem- 
ms, Orig, Nys,. 


2. [υμιν L Orig-c,.] rec ins kat bef ov Bpwua, with DFL rel Syr eth arm (Orig,) 


Cxs, Thl (ἔξ: om ΑΒΟΡΝ m 17 vulg fri syr copt Iren-gr, Clem, Orig{-c3-intsepe . 


Dial,] Eus, Did Cyr, Cypr, Hil, [Ambrst]. rec novvacbe, with DLacdk ἢ 47 
Iren, Orig, Cxs, Dial, [Did, Chr,] Thdrt: txt A B(sic: see table) CFLP rel Clem, 
Orig,[-c, Chr, Damase]. rec ovte (see note), with L rel Orig, ic: txt ABCDFPN 
edfk 17 Iren Clem, Orig,[-c, Euthal-ms]. (om last clause m (eeth].) om ert 
B Orig-int, Cypr,. 

8. σαρκινοι (twice) DIF Orig[1st,, 2nd,] (error by repeatg σαρκιν. from ver 1, the 
difference not being noticed: see there): txt ABCD*LPX rel Clem,/ 1st, | Orig[1st,- 
¢,, 2nd, Chr, }. ist eore bef 1st σαρκ. DF am(with demid harl tol) Clem, Orig, 
Nys Cypr, [Hil,] Aug: txt ABCLP® rel [vulg-clem Clem,] Orig,[-c, Dial, | Chr 
Thdrt [ Damasc]. quy F[-gr]. rec aft epis ins καὶ διχοστασιαι ( from Gal 
v. 20), with DFL rel syrr Iren-gr, Chr, Thdrt Cypr,: om ABCPR a vulg fri [spec] 


copt 2th arm Clem, Dion Orig, Eus,.—epers A F[-gr] L [6] n [Eus, ]. 


4. τις bef Aeyn DF [vulg fri Ambrst]. 
Chr,: om eyo m. 


and the σαρκικοί, the carnally disposed, 
are included under the more general 
ψυχικοί, which therefore, as Meyer ob- 
serves, is not here used, because this dis- 
tinction was to be made. ὡς νηπ. ἐν 
χρ. The opposite term, τέλειοι ἐν xp., is 
found Col. i. 28, and in connexion with this, 
Heb. v. 13,14. Schéttgen (on 1 Pet. ii. 2) 
and Lightfoot adduce the similar Rabbi- 
nical term nipirn, sugentes, used of novices 
in their schools. A recent proselyte also 
was regarded by them as a newborn infant. 

He speaks of his first visit to Corinth, 
when they were recently admitted into the 
faith of Christ,—and excuses his merely 
elementary teaching by the fact that they 
then required it. Not this, but their οὐδ 
requiring it, is adduced as matter of blame 
to them. 2.) See the same figure in 
Heb. v.12. Soalso Philo de Agricult. § 2, 
vol. i. p. 801, ἐπεὶ δὲ νηπίοις μέν ἐστι 
γάλα τροφή, τελείοις δὲ τὰ ἐκ πυρῶν πέμ- 
᾿ ματα, καὶ ψυχῆς γαλακτώδεις μὲν ἂν elev 
τροφαὶ κατὰ τὴν παιδικὴν ἡλικίαν... τέ- 
λειαι δὲ καὶ ἀνδράσιν ... - Basil, Hom.i. 
p. 403, ed. Paris, 1638, cited by Meyer, 
explains, γάλα, τὴν εἰςταγωγικὴν K. ἅπλου- 
στέραν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου διδασκαλίαν : see also 
Heb. vi. 1,--τὸν τῆς ἀρχῆς τοῦ χριστοῦ 
λόγον. On ἐπότισα. .. . βρῶμα, Wetst. 
quotes νέκταρ τ᾽ ἀμβροσίην τε, τά περ θεοὶ 
αὐτοὶ ἔδουσι, Hes. Theogon. 640. See 


for etep. δε eyw, eyw δε A c 28. 224 


Hom. 1]. 6. 546. Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 66. 
2. e. οὔπω yap ἐδύνασθε] Hither, 
for ye were not yet able (scil. βρῶμα ἐσ- 
θίειν), τοῦ, for ye were not yet strong, 
δύναμαι being used absolutely, as in De- 
mosth. 1187. 8, δυνάμενος τῷ τε πράττειν 
kK. τῷ εἰπεῖν, and 484. 25, τῶν πολιτευο- 
μένων τινὲς δυνηθέντες, and see other reff. 
in Meyer. In the former case, the ellip- 
sis is harsh: the latter meaning seems 
preferable, though not found elsewhere in 
the N. T. ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ ἔτι viv, but 
neither even now . . .; the οὔτε of the 
rec. is grammatically inadmissible,—see 
Winer, edn. 6, § 55. 6. ᾿ 3.7] On 
σαρκικοί, see above, ver. 1. που, 
not = ἐπεί, but putting the assumption 
in a local form, see reff. ζῆλος, emu- 
lation, in a bad sense; or as in reff., 
‘angry jealousy.’ κατὰ ἄνθρ., see 
reff., according to the manner of (unre- 
newed and ungodly) man, = κατὰ σάρκα, 
Rom. viii. 4; see Rote on ch. xv. 32. 

4.1 He names but two of the foregoing 
designations, ch. i. 12: intending, both 
there more fully, and here briefly, rather 
to give a sample of the sectarian spirit 
prevalent, than to describe, as matter 
of fact, any sects into which they were 
actually divided : see note there, and on ch. 
iv. 6. Meyer sees in the mention here of 
Paul and Apollos only, a reference to the 


᾿ ς “- > ᾽ «ς { Sf e u 4 > 
ὡς “πνευματικοῖς, ἀλλ᾿ ὡς ‘oapKivols, ws ἅ νηπίοις εν ABCDF 
ΓΕΡῸ ἃ Ὁ 
defg 
> a h lm 
Yarn 5 οὐδὲ ἔτει νῦν δύνασθε' ὃ ἔτι yap nol 
47 


7. 


2—8. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 491 


\ 3 , 9 
Ἐγὼ ᾿᾿Απολλώ, οὐκ 1ἄνθρωποί ἐστε; ὅ τί[ς] οὖν ἐστιν j see ver. 3. 
=> 5 . 
: , , , ? A , fe 2 reff. 
Απολλώς; τί[ς] δέ ἐστιν Παῦλος ; διάκονοι δι’ Ov, ore pom. 
k 2 ΄ λιτὴν ὅς 7 ς ΄ ΄, ” Ὁ 24s xii. 3. ch. vil, 
ἐπιστεύσατε, καὶ |éxaoTwm ὡς ὁ κύριος ἔδωκεν. © ἐγὼ 
: > \ ‘ ς 
" ἐφύτευσα, ᾿Απολλὼς " ἐπότισεν, ἀλλὰ ὁ θεὸς 5 ηὔξανεν: Matt, αν ἢ 
f e ΄ / e Gen. ii. 8 al. 
7 ὥςτε οὔτε ὁ ™ φυτεύων ἐστίν TL, οὔτε ὁ " ποτίζων, GAN’ n Rom. χη. 'M 
φ ’ ς e reny. 7 
Ὁ °avéavev θεός. 8 ὁ τὰ φυτεύων δὲ καὶ ὁ " ποτίζων 4 ἕν otra, here dis. 


is 
m ch. ix. 7. 
Matt. xv. 13. 


2». Oe0¢ 


F[-gr] " : eer ahs ς : Ξ 2 Cor. ix. 10 

(and also εἰσιν, ἕκαστος δὲ Tov ἴδιον * μισθὸν λήμψεται κατὰ TOV Li's. mid. 

ABCDL 2 Cor. x. 15. Col. 1. 6,10. 1 Pet. ii. 2 only. intr., Acts vi. 7 reff. ῬΞΞ ΟΡ ΡΤ x. 
19. Gal. ii. 6. vi. 3, 15. Demosth. 582. 27. q constr., John x. 30. xvii. 11, &c. Eph. ii. 14. 

ERabe r= Rom. iv. 4 reff. “ P 

defgh i ΧΩ ἶ 

klmn 


017, 47 166 ovyt (corrn from ver 3), with DFLPN rel [Nyss,] Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] Ge: [ov Ὁ k 
Euthal-ms :] txt ABC! 17 Damasc. rec for ανύρωποι, σαρκικοι (corrn from 
ver 3), with LPN? rel syrr [Nyss,]: txt ABCDFN?! 17 latt copt eth arm Damasc Orig- 
int, Ambrst Aug,.—P adds at end καὶ k. ανθ. περιπατειτε (also from ver 8). 

5. τι (twice) ABN! 17 latt eth [Euthal-ms Damasc Ambrst Aug;ep. Pel] (prob 
corrn to suit the sense: the question being rather qualis est than quis est): τις 
CDFLPR? rel syrr copt arm Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] Ge. rec mavAos Tis δε amoAAws 
(alteration of order, to suit ver 4), with D?[-gr] L rel syrr eth arm Chr, Thdrt Opt, : 
txt ABC(D'3F)PX& m 17 latt copt [Euthal-ms] Damasc Ambrst Aug, Pel.—rec om 
2nd εστιν, with DFL latt copt arm Chr, Thdrt [Th] Gc]: ins ABCPX m 17 [Euthal- 
ms Damasc]. rec ins αλλ᾽ ἡ bet διακον. (addition to complete the sense), with 
D*-3[-gr] LP rel syrr [Euthal-ms] Chr, Thdrt Th] ec Opt,: om ABC D'{and lat] FR 
vulg [fri] copt eth arm Damase Ambrst Pel [ Augszpe |. om ws C toll. 

6. (aAAa, so ABD!FN, (for adda o, o δε 17 [ Orig, |.)) 


7. om Ist ουτε A. 


two methods of teaching which have been 
treated of in this section: but as Il have 
before said, the German Commentators 
are misled by too definite a view of the 
Corinthian parties. ἄνθρωποι, i. 6. 
walking κατὰ ἄνθρωπον ,--- σαρκικοί. 

5—15.| He takes occasion, by example 
of himself and Apollos, to explain to 
them the true place and office of Chris- 
tian teachers: that they are in them- 
selves nothing (vv. 5—8), but work for 
God (vv. 9, 10), each in his peculiar 
department (ver. 10; cf. ver. 6), each re- 
quiring serious care as to the manner of 
his working, seeing that a searching trial 
of its worth will be made in the day of 
the Lord (vv. 10—15). 5.] οὖν 
follows on the assumption of the truth of 
the divided state of things among them: 
‘Who then (What then)... . , seeing 
that ye exalt them into heads over you ?’ 
The question is not asked by an objector, 
but by Paul himself; when an objector is 
introduced, he notifies it, as ch. xv. 35; 
Rom. ix 19. ἐπιστεύσατε, as in reff. : 
ye became believers. ἑκάστῳ @S..., 
= ὡς ἔδωκ. 6 κύρ. ἑκάστῳ, see reff? It 
refers, not to the teachers, but to the 
hearers, see below 6 αὐξάνων θεός. In 
the rec. text, the question is carried on 
to the end of the verse by ἀλλ᾽ ἤ, which 
is good Greek for < nisi,’ ‘ preterquam, — 
80 οὐδὲ χρησόμεθα ἐξηγητῇ GAN ἢ τῷ 
πατρῴῳ, Plato, Rep. p. 427, see Hartung, 
‘Partikellehre, ii. 44,—but seems to have 


for 2nd oute, ovde CR}, 


αλλα D}, 


been inserted from not observing the form 
of the sentence. 6.] The similitude 
is to a tilled field (γεώργιον, ver. 9): the 
plants are the Corinthians, as members 
of Christ, vines bearing fruit: these do 
not yet appear in the construction: so 
that I prefer, with De Wette, supplying 
nothing after ἐφύτευσα and ἐπότισεν, re- 
garding merely the acts themselves, as in 
E. V. If any thing be supplied, it must . 
be ὑμᾶς, which would but ill fit ver. 7. 
Apollos was sent over to Corinth 
after Paul had left it (Acts xviii. 27), at 
his own request, and remained there 
preaching during Paul’s journey through 
Upper Asia (ib. xix. 1). 7.) ἐστίν 
τι, either ‘is any thing to the purpose,’ 
as in λέγειν τι, &e., or absol. is any 
thing: which latter is best: compare «i 
kal οὐδέν εἰμι, 2 Cor. xii. 11. 
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ αὐξ. θεός, scil. τὰ πάντα ἐστί,--- 
to be supplied from the negative clauses 
preceding. Theophylact remarks: ὅρα 
πῶς ἀνεπαχθῆ ποιεῖ THY ἐξουδένωσιν τῶν 
προεστώτων ἐν Κορίνθῳ σοφῶν κ. πλου- 
σίων, ἑαυτὸν κ. ᾿Απολλὼ κατὰ τὸ φαινό- 
μενον ἐξουδενώσας, κ. διδάξας, ὅτι θεῷ δεῖ 
μόνῳ προΞέχειν, K. εἰς αὐτὸν ἀνατιθέναι 
πάντα τὰ συμβαίνοντα ἀγαθά. 8.1 
ἕν, in the nature of their ministry,— 
generically, κατὰ τὴν ὑπουργίαν' ἀμφό- 
Tepar γὰρ τῷ θείῳ διακονοῦσι βουλή- 
ματι. Theodoret. ἕκαστος δὲ .. .7 
Here he introduces a new element—th 
separate responsibility of each minister 


492 


[ὃ « r 

s=2Cor. vi.5 LOLOV ~ KOTrOV. 
reff. 

t1 Thess. iti. 2 
only. 

u - Rom. xvi. 
3 reff. 

v here only. 
Prov. xxiv. 
3. xxxi. 16. % ᾿ fs 
(ys, John ἃ γχγῷς ὃ ἐποικοδομεῖ. 


xv. 1. -yeuv, 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


γίον, θεοῦ * οἰκοδομή ἐστε. 
τὴν " δοθεῖσάν μοι ὡς Y σοφὸς 5 ἀρχιτέκτων * θεμέλιον 
Ὁ ἔθηκα, ἄλλος δὲ “ ἐποικοδομεῖ. ἕκαστος δὲ 4 βλεπέτω 
11 ab θεμέλιον γὰρ ἄλλον οὐδεὶς 


TIT. 


9t θεοῦ yap ἐσμεν “ συνεργοί: θεοῦ " yewp- 


10 κατὰ τὴν * γάριν τοῦ θεοῦ 
nv ~ xap 


-- 7 lal Ν Ν ΄ “ » ’ ad 

He iT) δύναται ὃ θεῖναι ‘mapa τὸν ὅ κείμενον, ὅς ἐστιν ᾿Ιησοῦς 
iy tee ἘΝ, Eph. ii. 21 only. (Rom. xiv. 19 reff.) Ezek. xvii. 17. ‘A x ch. i.4 reff. y = Exod. 
xxxv. 10. zhere only. Isa. iii. 3. Sir. xxxvili. 27. 2 Macc. ii. 29 only. a masc., 2 Tim. 
1.19. Rev. xxi. 19. =Rom. xv. 20. Heb. vi. 1. b Luke vi. 48. xiv. 29. c here 
&c.,4 times. Eph. ii. 20. Col. ii. 7, Jude 20 only. Num, xxxii. 38 Ald.(otx., AB) only. see Rom. xv. 20. 

d Luke viii. 18. Eph. v. 15. ¢ = Mark xiii. ὃ al. fr. Ἵ r ¥ f = Luke ili.13. Heb. χὶ. 4. 1. 4 al. ἐποίει 
ἄλλα παρ᾽ ἃ ἐνόμιζεν, Plato, Minos, 320. ἔχομέν τι παρὰ ταῦτα ἄλλο λέγειν, id. Phedo, 80. g Matt, 


v. 14, 


8. om 2nd de C 31 Syr[-ed]. 


for κοπον, τοπον (Ὁ. 


9. aft γεωργιον ins ἐστε D? vulg(not harl?) [Ἐ-1Δ 0] arm Chr, [Pel]. 


10. ree τεθεικα, with 


τέθηκα LP fn 47: txt ABCIN! m! 17 (Chr). 


for the results of his own labour, so 
that, though κατὰ τὴν ὑπουργίαν they 
are one,—kxata τὸ ἔργον (ib.) they are 
diverse. ‘The stress is twice on ἔδιον. 

9.7 Proof of the last assertion, and 
introduction of Him, from Whom each 
λήμψεται. The stress thrice on θεοῦ :— 
shall receive, &c.,—for it is of Gop that 
we are the fellow-workers (in subordi- 
nation to Him, as is of course implied : 
but to render it ‘fellow-workers with 
one another, under God,’ as Estius pre- 
fers, and Olsh., al., maintain, is contrary 
to usage: see reff.;—and not at all re- 
quired, see 2 Cor. v. 20; vi. 1), of Gop 
that ye are the tillage, of Gop that ye are 
the building. This last new similitude is 
introduced on account of what he has pre- 
sently to say of the different kinds of 
teaching, which will be more clearly set 
forth by this, than by the other figure. 

10.1 κατὰ τ. yap. &ec., as an ex- 
pression of humility (reff.), fitly introduces 
the σοφός which follows. So Chrys.: ὅρα 
γοῦν πῶς μετριάζει. εἰπὼν yap σοφὸν 
ἑαυτόν, οὐκ ἀφῆκεν αὐτοῦ τοῦτο εἶναι, ἀλλ᾽ 
ὅλον ἑαυτὸν πρότερον ἀναθεὶς τῷ θεῷ τότε 
ἑαυτὸν οὕτως ἐκάλεσε. Hom. viii. p. 69. 
The χάρις is not the peculiar grace of 
his apostleship—for an apostle was not 
always required to lay the foundation, e. g. 
in Rome :—but that given to him in 
common with all Christians (ver. 5), only 
in a degree proportioned to the work 
which God had for him to do. σοφός, 
skilful, see reff., and many examples in 
Wetstein. The proof of this skill is given, 
in his laying a foundation: the unskilful 
master-builder lays none, see Luke vi. 49. 
The foundation (ver. 11) was and must be, 
Jesus Curist: the facts of redemption 
by Him (obj.), and the reception of Him 
and His work by faith (subj.). The 
mascul. form ὁ θεμέλιος (50. λίθος) is said 
by Thomas Mag. (in Wetst.) to belong to 


C3DN3 rel [Clem,] Orig,[-c,] (Chr-mss,) Thdrt ΤῊ] Cc, 


om 2nd δε D Chr Orig{ -int, | Gild. 


the κοινὴ SiaAexros—the Attic form is 
θεμέλιον, or, if in the plur., of θεμέλιοι : 
—oi yap θεμέλιοι παντοίων λίθων ὑπό- 
κεινται, Thucyd. i. 93. ἄλλος, ‘ who- 
ever comes after me, —another : not only 
Apollos. ἐποικοδομεῖ, pres., as the 
necessary state and condition of the sub- 
sequent teacher, be he who he may. The 
building on, over the foundation, imports 
the carrying them onward in knowledge 
and intelligent faith. πῶς, emphatic, 
= here, with what material. De Wette 
imagines that it also conveys a caution not 
to alter the foundations, and that the yap 
in ver. 11 refers to this, But the identity 
of the foundation is surely implied in 
ἐποικοδομεῖ. On the γάρ, see below. 
11.0. γάρ] q. d. “1 speak of superimposing 
merely, for it is unnecessary to caution 
them respecting the foundation itself: there 
can be but one, and that one HAS ALREADY 
BEEN (objectively, for all, see below) Larp 
BY Gop.’ At the same time, in taking this 
for granted, he implies the strongest pos- 
sible caution against attempting to lay any 
other. δύναται, strictly can,—not “η6- 
mini licet,’ as Grot., al., nor as Theophyl., 
οὐ δύναται θεῖναι, ἕως ἂν μένῃ σοφὸς 
ἀρχιτέκτων, ἐπεὶ ὅταν μὴ ἢ τις σοφ. ἀρχ., 
δύναται θεῖναι, κ. ἐκ τούτου αἱ αἱρέσει :-- 
for it is assumed, that θεοῦ οἰκοδομή is to 
be raised—and it can only be raised on 
this one foundation. All who build on 
other foundations are not συνεργοὶ θεοῦ, 
nor is their building θεοῦ οἰκοδομή at all. 
ἄλλον ... . παρά, see reff. and ef. 
Thucyd. i. 28, πυκνότεραι παρὰ τὰ ἐκ τοῦ 
πρὶν χρόνου μνημονευόμενα. κείμενον | 
not, ‘ by me,’ but ‘by God, for universal 
Christendom ; but actually laid in each 
place, as regards that church, by the 
minister who founds it. De Wette denies 
this universal reference, as introducing a 
new element into the context. But surely 
the reference in 6 θεμέλιος ὁ κείμενος ἰδ 


ABC DL 
Prabe 
defgh 


kilmn 
017. 47 


9---15. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 4.95 
, ¢ > / rn 
χριστός. 8 εἰ δέ τις “ ἐποικοδομεῖ ἐπὶ τὸν * θεμέλιον nMatt.x.9. 
Acts xvii. 29, 
A Lf h " i / i / k 4 J iv. 3. 
ἱτοῦτον] χρυσὸν, “αἀργυρον, λίθους τιμίους, ξ ὑχῶ πον, 
, ΄ ©. 4 Se Ven Πρ 
'yoptov, ™ καλάμην, 15 ἑκάστου τὸ ἔργον " φανερὸν ™ γενή- ἵχ δ 
4. xviii. 12,16. xxi.11,19. Ps. xviii. 10. k =here only. Ezra v. 8. iui 7nd 
only. (Matt. vi. 30 al. fr. Gen. ii. 5.) m here only. Exod. v. 12. xv. 7. Isa. v. 24. 
ἢ Mark vi. 14. Acts vii. 13. Phil. i. 13. Gem xlii. 16. 


11. rec ins o bef χριστος [ with Euthal-ms]: om ABCDLPX rel.—ypior. ino. C3D vulg 
[F-lat]} syr Orig,[-int, Dial] Chr, Max Damase Hil Jer Ambrst Augsepe Sedul: txt 
ABLPNX rel Syr [| coptt eth arm] Orig,!-c,-int,] Marcell, Ath, [Eus, Bas, Did, Chr] 


Arnob: om ina. C!. 


of ch xii. 3.) 


(Lhe rec ino. o xp. appears to have been a corrn to give a 
doctrinal meaning —‘ Jesus (is) the Christ.’ 


xp. ino. may have had the same intention, 


12. om τουτον ABC!N? fuld! sah eth Ambr, ( perhaps from similarity of endgs ; or 
as unnecessary) : ins C31) LPN3 rel latt syrr copt arm [Bas,] Cyr-jer, Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] 


(Ec Orig[-int, Ambrst ] Aug, Jer. 
(C doubtful.) 


xpvovoy BR 73 Clem, [ Bas-mss, Epiph, Damasc]. 
add καὶ Β 73 eth Clem [Orig, ]. 


αργυριον ΒΟΝ 73 Clem. 


13. for εκαστου to γενήσεται, 0 ToLnoas TovTO TO εργον pavepos yernta (see ch v. 2) 


too direct to the well-known prophecy of 
the divinely-placed foundation or corner- 
stone, to surprise any reader or divert 
his mind from the train of thought bya 
new element. ᾿Ιησοῦς χριστός, THE 
PERSONAL, HISTORICAL CHRIST, as the 
object of all Christian faith. If it be read 
as in rec., Ἰησοῦς 6 χριστός, it need not 
necessarily be, that Jesus is the Christ, 
but may be in this case also, JESUS THE 
CHRIST; not any doctrine, even that of 
the Messiahship of Jesus, is the foundation, 
but Jesus HIMSELF (see var. readd.). 

12.] The δέ implies that though 
there can be but one foundation, there are 
many ways of building upon it. To the 
right understanding of this verse it may be 
necessary to remark, (1) that the similitude 
is, not of many buildings, as Wetst. and 
Billroth,—but of one, see ver. 16,—and 
that [one, | raised on Christ as its founda- 
tion; —different parts of which are built by 
the ministers who work under Him,—some 
well and substantially built, some ill and 
unsubstantially. (2) That gold, silver, &c., 
refer to the matter of the ministers’ teach- 
ing, primarily ; and by inference to those 
whom that teaching penetrates and builds 
up in Christ, whoshould be the living stones 
of the temple: not, as Orig., Chrys., Theo- 
doret, Theophyl., Phot., Aug., Jer., &e., to 
the moral fruits produced by the preaching 
in the individual members of the church, 
--εἴ τις κακὸν βίον ἔχει μετὰ πίστεως ὀρθῆς, 
οὐ προστήσεται αὐτοῦ ἣ πίστις εἰς τὸ μὴ 
κολάζεσθαι, Chrys. Hom. ix. p. 77. (3) 
That the builder of the worthless and un- 
substantial zs in the end SAVED (see below) : 
so that even his preaching was preaching 
of Christ, and he himself was in earnest, 
<4) That what is said does not refer, except 
by accommodation, to the religious life of 
believers in general—as Olsh., Schrader, 
see also the anc‘ent Commentators above : 
—but to the DUTY AND REWARD OF 


TEACHERS. At thesame time, such accom- 
modation is legitimate, in so far as each 
man is a teacher and builder of himself. 
(5) That the various materials specified 
must not be fancifully pressed to indicate 
particular doctrines or araces, as e.g. 
Schrader has done, ‘‘ Some build with the 
gold of faith, with the silver of hope, with 
the imperishable costly stones of love,— 
others again with the dead wood of unfruit- 
fulness in good works, with the empty straw 
of a spiritless, ostentatious knowledge, and 
with the bending reed of a continually- 
doubting spirit.”” Der Apostel Paulus, iv. 
p. 66. This, however ingenious, is beside 
the mark, not being justified by any indica- 
tions furnished in our Epistle itself. An 
elaborate résumé of the very various minor 
differences of interpretation may be seen in 
Meyer’s Comm. ed. 2, in loc. Cf. also 
Kstius’s note; and Stanley’s. λίθους 
τιμίους Not “ yems,’ but ‘ costly stones,’ 
as marbles, porphyry, jasper, &c., compare 
1 Kings vii. 9 ff. By the ξύλα, χόρτον, 
καλάμην, he indicates the various per- 
versions of true doctrine, and admixtures of 
false philosophy which were current: so 
Estius, “ doctrina non quidem heretica et 
perniciosa, talis enim fundamentum de- 
strueret: sed minus sincera, minusque 
solida; veluti si sit humanis ac philoso- 
phicis, aut etiam Judaicis opinionibus ad- 
inixta plus satis: si curiosa magis quam 
utilis; si vana quadam oblectatione mentes 
occupans Christianas.” Comm. i. p. 268 B. 
13.] Each man’s work (i. 6. that. 
which he has built : is part in erecting 
the οἰκοδομὴ θεοῦ) shall (at some time) be 
made evident (shall not always remain in 
the present uncertainty, but be tested, and 
shewn of what sort itis): for the day shall 
make it manifest (the day of the Lord, as 
Vulg., ‘dies domini:’ see reff..—and so 
most Commentators, ancient and modern. 
The other interpretations are (1) ‘the day 


494 
h.iSref. σεται" ἡ Ya 
© — Ch. 1. ren. 
1 Thess. ΒΑ 4. ” Y 
Heb. x. 
pch.i. 11 τῆς 
q=Rom.i.18 ς ὃ ΄ 
reff. see OKLULaATEL, 
2 Thess. i. 7, 


8. 
r Acts xxvi. 29 μησεν, 
reff. 
s = Luke xiv. 
19. ch. xi. 
28. 2Cor. xiii. 5. 1 Pet. 1.1. Zech. xiii. 9. 
Υ ver. 8. w Matt. iii. 12 }i L. xiii. 30. 
10. Rev. viii. 7. Isa. xlvii. 14 A. 


xix. 19. xxii. 3. 


D!{and lat] Ambrst. 


[latt syr coptt eth arm ] (Clem,) Orig,[-c,-int, Cyr-p, 
[Ambrst]: ins ABC P(avrw) m 17 Syr Orig,[-¢,] Eus, 
14. rec επωκοδομησεν, with B?C rel [Orig, ]: 


of the destruction of Jerusalem,’ which 
shall shew the vanity of Judaizing doc- 
trines: so Hammond (but not clearly nor 
exclusively), Lightf., Schéttg., al..— against 
both the context, and our Apostle’s habit 
of speaking, and under the assumption, 
that nothing but Jewish errors are spoken 
of :—(2) ‘the lapse of time,’ as in the pro- 
verb, ‘dies docebit ;}—so Grot., Wolf, 
Mosheim, Rosenm., al., which is still more 
inconsistent with the context, which 
necessitates a definite day, and a definite 
Sire :—(8) ‘the light of day,’ i.e. of clear 
knowledge, as opposed to the present time 
of obscurity and night: so Calv., Beza, 
Erasm. :—but the fire here is not a light- 
giving, but a consuming flame; and, as 
Meyer remarks, even in that case the ἡμέρα 
would be that of the παρουσία, see Rom. 
xiii. 12 :—(4) ‘ the day of tribulation ?— 
so Augustine, Calov.: but this again is not 
definite enough: μισθὸν λήμψεται can 
hardly be said of mere abiding the test of 
tribulation) ;—because it (the day—not, 
the work, as Theophyl., Ecum., al., which 
would introduce a mere tautology with the 
next clause) is (to be) revealed (the pre- 
sent ἀποκαλύπτεται expresses the definite 
certainty of prophecy: or perhaps rather 
the attribute of that day, which is, to be 
revealed, &., as in the expressions 6 πει- 
ράζων, 6 σπείρων, ἄς.) in fire (‘accom- 
panied,’ ‘clothed,’ ‘ girt,’ ‘ with fire;’ i. e 
fire will be the element in which the day 
will be revealed. Cf. 2 Thess. i. 8, and 
Mal. iii. 2, 3, iv. 1, to which latter place 
the reference is,—see LXX. But notice, 
that this is not the fire of hell, into 
which the gold, silver, and costly stones 
will never enter, but the fire of judyment, 
in which Christ will appear, and by which 
all works will be tried. This univer- 
sality of trial by fire is equally against 
the idea of a purgatorial fire, which 
lucrative fiction has been mainly based 
by the Romanists on a perversion of this 
passage. See Aug. de Civ. Dei, xxi. 26. 
4, vol. vii. p. 745, who mentions the idea 
with ‘non redarguo, ouia forsitan verum 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOT®S A. 


᾿ μισθὸν λήμψεται. 

} ' θή ιυὐτὸς δὲ σωθή ¥ οὕ δὲ 
καήσεται, * ζημιωθήσεται' αὐτὸς δὲ σωθήσεται, " οὕτως δὲ 
u vv. 10, 12. 


IT. 


ΠῚ « / Ρ ’ “ > q 3 
ἡμέρα δηλώσει, STL ἐν πυρι 3 ἀποκα- 
΄ Nien 2 \ Ν viz Ae 3 \ a a PR a bic 

λύπτεται, καὶ ἑκάστου τὸ ἔργον " ὁποῖόν ἐστιν TO πῦρ αὐτὸ 


14. ” X ΝΜ 
εἰ τινος τὸ ἔργον 


t μενεῖ ὃ ἃ ἐποικοδό- 


15 εἴ Σ w 
εἰ τινος TO Epryov KaTa- 


t= Rom. ix. 11 reff. 
Acts xix. 198]. Gen xxxviii. 24. form also, 2 Pet. tii: 
x Matt. xvi. 26 ||. 2Cor. vii 9. Phil. iii. 8 only. Prov. 


y ch. iv. 1. ix. 26. Eph. τ. 33. James ii. 12. 


recom αὐτὸ (as unnecessary: but see note), with DLN rel 


Damasc} Chr-mss, Thdrt, Thl He 
Bas[ -2- mss, ] Chr *Thdrt, Procop,. 
txt AB!DLEN [π 17 '[Bas, ]. 


est.’ See Estius, who does not main- 
tain the allusion to Purgatory here; and 
Bisping, who does), and each man’s work, 
of what kind it is, the fire itself shall 
try (this clause does not depend upon 
ὅτι, but ranges with the following futures. 
It is a question whether ἔργον is nom. 
or acc.,—of what kind each man’s work 
is (Meyer),—or as above. In the only 
other places where Paul uses ὁποῖος, Gal. 
ii. 6, 1 Thess. i. 9 (see also Acts xxvi. 
29), it commences a clause, as here if 
ἔργον be accus.;—we have a very similar 
expression, Gal. vi. 4, τὸ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ 
δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος :—and it seems more 
natural that the action of the fire should 
be described as directly passing upon the 
work. For these reasons, I prefer the 
accus. τὸ πῦρ αὐτό, the fire itself, of 
its own power, being a πῦρ καταναλίσ- 
κον. 14. If any man’s work shall 
remain (i.e. stand the fire,—being of 
inconsumable materials. μενεῖ fut. (so 
latt syrr coptt), is better than the pres. 
of rec., as answering to ei... . κατα- 
καήσεται below), which he built on the 
foundation,—he shall receive wages (as 
a builder ;—i. e. ‘shall be rewarded for his 
faithful and effectual work as a teacher’): 

15.] if any man’s work shall be 
burnt up (i. 6. consist of such materials 
as the fire will destroy: Stanley adds, 
“It is possible that this whole image, as 
addressed to the Corinthians, may have 
been suggested, or at least illustrated, by 
the comlagr ation of Corinth under Mum- 
mius: the stately temples (one of them 
remaining to this day) left standing amidst 
the universal crash and destruction of the 
meaner buildings”), he shall { suffer loss 
(literally,) be muleted. (ημιωθ., scil. τὸν 
μισθόν, see ref. Matt., and Herod. vii. 39, 
Tov δὲ ἑνός, τοῦ περιέχεαι μάλιστα, THY 
ψυχὴν ζημιώσεαι, and Plato, Legg., vi. p. 
774, εἰς μὲν οὖν χρήματα ὃ μὴ θέλων 
γαμεῖν τοσαῦτα ζημιούσθω) : but he him- 
self shall be saved (having held, and 
built on, the true foundation Jesus Christ, 
he shall not be exeluded from that salva- 


ABCDL 


defgh 
kKlmn 
o 17. 47 


Pe 


F[-gr] 
(and also 
G)ovxer.. 
ABCDF 
ΠΡ ἃ Ὁ 
οἀεοῖρσ 
hklm 
nol7. 
47 


14—17, 


Υ ὡς ? διὰ πυρός. 


\ Ν A “ θ lal c » ὅν. | id “ 17 yy Ν 
καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ ° οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν ; 17 εἴ τις τὸν 
n “ ΄ an a ¢e ΄ id rn 
τοῦ θεοῦ 4 φθείρει, ἃ φθερεῖ τοῦτον ὁ θεός" ὁ yap " ναὸς TOD » 


16. (2 Thess. ii.4al.) Jer. vii. 4. 
bis. ch. xv. : 
16. play on word, ch. vi. 12. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


33. 2 Cor. vii. 2. xi. 3. Eph. iv. 22. 2 Pet. ii. 12. 


495 


16 4 ovK *oldate ὅτι ὃ vaos θεοῦ ἐστε zsee Isa. li 


Zech. xii’ 


\ 
9. 

vaov a Rom. vi. 16. 
ch. v. 6 al. 
= ch. vi. 
19. 2 Cor. vi. 
d = here 
Isa. liv. 


b 


ce Rom. vii. 17 reff. 
Jude 10, Rev. xix. 2 only. 


16. ev υμιν bef ome: BP m 17 [Bas, ] (Tert,). 


17. for φθερει, φθειρει Di -gr] F[-gr] Ρ 47 am: φθειρεῖ L. 


for τουτον, avTov 


(corrn as more usual) ADF Syr syr-mg arm [Orig-c,], iJlwm latt Iren-int, [Orig-int, 
Tert, Hil,] Cypr,: txt BCLP® rel syr[-txt] coptt eth Orig{-c,] Eus, Mac, Did, 
Amphil, Chr, [Cyr-p; Damasc] Thdrt ΤῊ] Cc. 


tion which is the free gift of God to all 
who believe on Christ, but shall get no 
especial reward as a faithful and effectual 
teacher. Cf. 2 John 8, βλέπετε ἑαυτούς, 
ἵνα μὴ ἀπολέσητε ἃ εἰργασάμεθα, ἀλλὰ 
μισθὸν πλήρη ἀπολάβητε. Meyer remarks, 
that our Lord hints at such persons under 
the name of ἔσχατοι, Matt. xx. 16; Mark 
x. 31), but so, as through fire :—i.e. as 
a builder whose building was consumed 
would escape with personal safety, but 
with the loss of his work. Chrys., 
Theophyl., (c., strangely understand it, 
that he shall be burnt for ever in the fire 
of Hell, unconsumed : οὐχὶ καὶ αὐτὸς οὕτως 
ἀπολεῖται ὡς τὰ ἔργα, εἰς τὸ μηδὲν χωρῶν" 
ἀλλὰ μενεῖ ἐν τῷ πυρί, Chrys. σώζεται, 
τουτέστι, σῶος τηρεῖται. δίκας αἰωνίους 
ὑπέχων, Theophyl. But (1) the fire of 
Hell is quite alien from the context (see 
above),—and (2) the meaning given to 
σώζεσθαι is unexampled,—and least of all 
could be intended where the coming of the 
Lord is spoken of: cf. inter alia, ch. v. 
5, παραδοῦναι x.T.A..... ἵνα τὸ πνεῦμα 
σωθῇ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τ. κυρίου. Grot., 
Elsn., al., explain ὡς διὰ πυρός as a pro- 
verb, ‘tanquam ex incendio, for ‘ with 
difficulty.’ But this is needless here, as 
the figure itself is that of an ‘incendium :’ 
and ὡς is not ‘tanguam, but belongs to 
οὕτως, see reff. The whole imagery of 
the passage will be best understood by 
carefully keeping in mind the sey, which 
is to be found in the θεοῦ οἰκοδομή, and the 
ναὸς θεοῦ, as connected with the prophecy 
of Malachi iii.andiv. There, ἐξαίφνης ἥξει 
eis τὸν ναὸν ἑαυτοῦ κύριος... .. αὐτὸς εἰς- 
πορεύεται ὡς πῦρ χωνευτηρίου..... καθιεῖται 
χωνεύων καὶ καθαρίζων ὡς τὸ ἀργύριον καὶ 
ὡς τὸ χρυσίον. .. .. διότι ἰδοὺ ἡμέρα (add 
κυρίου A) ἔρχεται καιομένη ws κλίβανος, 
κ. φλέξει αὐτούς, καὶ ἔσονται... καλάμη, 
K. ἀνάψει αὐτοὺς ἡ ἡμέρα ἣ ἐρχομένη. The 
Lord thus coming to His temple in flaming 
fire, all the parts of the building which will 
not stand that fire will be consumed: the 
builders of them will escape with personal 
salvation, but with the loss of their work, 
through the midst of the conflagration. 


16—23.] The figure is taken up 
afresh and carried further: and made 
the occasion of solemn exhortation, since 
they were the temple of God, not to mar 
that temple, the habitation of His Spirit, 
by unholiness, or by exaltation of human 
wisdom: which last again was irrelevant, 
as well as sinful; for all their teachers 
were but their servants in building them 
up to be God’s temple,—yea all things 
were for this end, to subserve them, as 
being Christ’s, by the ordinance, and to 
the glory of God the Father. 16. } 
The foregoing figures, with the occasion 
to which they referred, are now dropped, 
and the οἰκοδομὴ θεοῦ recalled, to do fur- 
ther service. This budding is now, as in 
Mal. iii. 1, and as indeed by implication in 
the foregoing verses, the temple of God 
(ναὸς θεοῦ, with emphasis on ναός, not θεοῦ 
vads), the habitation of His Spirit. 
οὐκ οἴδατε 6t1—Are ye ignorant that... 
an expression of surprise arising out of their 
conduct. kat... ἐν ὑμῖν-Ξ ἐν ᾧ, τουτ- 
έστιν, ἐν ὑμῖν. Meyer rightly remarks, 
that “ ναὸς θεοῦ is the temple of God, not ὦ 
temple of God: for Paul does not conceive 
(as Theodoret, al.) of the various churches 
as various temples of God, which would 
be inconsistent with a Jew’s conception 
of God’s temple, but of each Christian 
church as, sensu mystico, the temple of 
Jehovah. So there would be, not many 
temples, but many churches, each of which 
is, ideally, the same temple of God.” 
And, we may add, if the figure is to be 
strictly justified in its widest acceptation, 
that all the churches are built together 
into one vast temple: cf. ἐν @ καὶ ὑμεῖς 
συνοικοδομεῖσθε, Eph. ii. 22. 17. ] 
φθείρει, [destroys, or] mars, whether 
as regards its unity and beauty, or its 
purity and sanctity: here, the meaning is 
left indefinite, but the latter particulars are 
certainly hinted at,—by ἅγιος below. 
φθερεῖ, either by temporal death (Mey.), 
as in ch. xi. 30; or by spiritual death, 
which is more probable, seeing that the 
figurative temple is spoken of, not (as 
Mey.) the material temple :—and as tem- 


490 ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. IIT. 18—23. 
a ev , > PN ΄ 3° ΄ a 18 ὃ \ ε 
«— Rom. vi.2. θεοῦ ἅγιός ἐστιν, © οἰτινές ἐστε ὑμεῖς. μηδεὶς εαυτὸν 
{ Rom. vii. 11 A \ > eon 
ef, ἐἐξαᾳπατάτω' εἴ τις ὅ δοκεῖ σοφὸς εἶναι ἐν ὑμῖν ἐν τῷ 
Ε τίς ἼΛΗΣ: “Ἃ he 2 ἢ ΄ i \ t 6 , , 19 ἡ 
a ae αἰῶνι ἢ τούτῳ, * μωρὸς γενέσθω, ἵνα γένηται σοφύς. n 
Phil. iii. 4. = ͵ ; : ͵ \ aA γι 
damesi.26. yap σοφία τοῦ κόσμου τούτου * μωρία 'παρὰ [τῷ] θεῷ 
= om. ΧΕΙ, \ e s \ 
Re 5 ἐστιν. γέγραπται yap ™‘O "δρασσόμενος τοὺς σοφοὺς ἐν 
ich. i. 25 ae! 

k ch. i. 18 reff. a 7, 2 A \ ΄, 7, , \ 
Kom. ἢ. 13. TH “ πανουργίᾳ αὐτῶν. 20 καὶ πάλιν Κύριος γινώσκει τοὺς 
al. Bile al. = τι > ‘ , Ψ 
m Jons.3 (but P διαλογισμοὺς τῶν σοφῶν “ ὅτι εἰσὶν " μάταιοι. 21 5 ὥςτε 

. ‘ / 5 / / \ e -“ 3 
ἀσαξῆόται μηδεὶς ' καυχάσθω * ἐν ἀνθρώποις: πάντα γὰρ " ὑμῶν ἐστιν, 
ἢ pare ἢ 2. ν. 12. Num. τ. 26. (Ps. ii. 13, w. gen.) Herod. iii. 13. Jos. Β. J. iii. 8. 6. Dion. Hal. ix. 21. 
o (=) Luke xx. 23. 2 Cor. iv. 2. xi. 3. Eph. iv. 14 only. Josh. ix. 4 (10). (-yos, 2 Cor. xii. 16.) p = Rom. 
1.21. James ii. 4. Psa. xciii. 11. q constr., ch. xvi. 15 al. fr. Winer, edn. 6,$ 66. 5. a. r Acts 
xiv 15. ch. xv. 17. Tit. iii. 9. James i. 26. 1 Pet. i. 18 only. Exod. xx. 7. ΞΘ ch; iv.o. teh. 
i. 31. Rom. ii. 17 reff. ugen.,ch.i.12. Rom. xiv. 8. 2 Tim. ii. 19. 


18. aft ekamatatw [amatatw 47] ins κενοῖς Aoyors (see Eph v. 6) D 23-marg. 73. 118. 


ev vu. εἰναι goo. P. 


19. rec ins tw bef θεω (corrn: but art is unnecessary aft prepn), with ABLPN rel 
Orig, Dion, Eus, Chr, [Euthal-ms Damasc] Thdrt : om CDF b! ο Clem, Orig,[-c,]. 


om yap [)} -gr]. 


om ὁ and tous F. 


[πανουργει F. | 


21. av@pwrw F | Tert, Ambrst Aug, | (not Pel Bede). 


poral death was the punishment for de- 
filing the material temple (Exod. xxviii. 43. 
Levit. xvi. 2 al. fr.), so spiritual death for 
marring or defiling of God’s spiritual tem- 
ple. ἅγιος, the constant epithet of 
ναός in the O. 'T., see Ps. ν. 7; x. 5 (LXX). 
Hab. ii. 20, and»passim. οἵτινες, 1. 6. 
ἅγιοι, not, ‘which temple are ye. which 
would be tautological after ver. 16, and 
would hardly be expressed by οἵτινες, ‘ ut 
qui,’ or ‘quales.’ Meyer well remarks, that 
οἵτινές ἐστε ὑμεῖς is the minor proposition 
of a syllogism : —‘ Whoever mars the tem- 
ple of God, him will God destroy, because 
His temple is holy ; but ye also, as His 
ideal temple, are holy :—therefore, whoever 
mars you, shall be destroyed by God.’ 

18—20.] 4 warning to those who 
would be leaders among them, against self- 
conceit, 18.1 ἐξαπατάτω, not, as 
Theophyl., νομίζων ὅτι ἄλλως ἔχει τὸ 
πρᾶγμα καὶ οὐχ ὡς εἶπον :---ἰῦ is far more 
naturally referred to what follows, viz. 
thinking himself wise, when he must be- 
come a fool in order to be wise. If any 
man [seemeth to be(i.e., |] thinks that he 
is) wise amoung you in this world (ἐν τῷ 
ai. τούτῳ belongs to δοκεῖ aod. εἶν. ἐν ὑμ., 
—to the whole assumption of wisdom 
made by the man, which as made in this 
present world, must be false: not (1) 
merely to σοφός, Grot., Riickert, al.,—as 
the arrangement of the words shews,— nor 
(2) to μωρὸς γενέσθω, Orig., Chrys., 
Luther, Rosenm., al., in which ease, the 
stress being on μωρός, it must have been 
μωρὸς γενέσθω ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι ToUTw), let him 
become a fool (by receiving the gospel in 
its simplicity, and so becoming foolish in 
the world’s sight), that he may become 


(truly) wise. 19.| Reason why this 
must be :—shewn from Scripture. 

παρὰ 8., in the judgment of God, reff. 

ὁ ὅρασσ.] The sense of the Heb. is equally 
expressed by the Apostle and the LXX. 
The words are taken out of the context as 
they stand, which accounts for the partici- 
ple, see Heb. i. 7. The sense is, ‘ If God 
uses the craft of the wise as a net to catch 
them in, such wisdom is in His sight folly, 
since He turns it to their confusion.’ 
“δρασσόμενος (possibly a provincialism) is 
substituted for καταλαμβάνων, as a stronger 
and livelier expression for ‘ grasping,’ or 
* catching with the hand.’” Stanley. Cf. 
Judith xiii. 7. 20.| The LXX have 
ἀνθρώπων (Heb. Dix); the Psalmist how- 


ever is speaking of the proud, ver. 2 f:, 
and such, when διαλογισμοί are in question, 
would be the worldly wise. 21—23. ] 
A warning to them in general, not to boast 
themselves in human teachers. 21. 
ὥςτε. viz seeing that this world’s wisdom 
is folly with God: or perhaps as a more 
general inference from what has gone be- 
fore since ch. i., that as the conclusion 
there was, 6 καυχώμενος, ἐν κυρίῳ kav- 
xd00w,—so now, having gone into the 
matter more at length, he concludes, μηδεὶς 
καυχάσθω ἐν ἀνθρώποις. This boasting in 
men is explained in ch. iv. 6 to mean μὴ 
εἷς ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἑνὸς φυσιοῦσθαι κατὰ τοῦ ἑτέ- 
ρου. καυχάσθω after ὥςτε isa change of 
construction. A somewhat similar change 
occurred in the parallel ch. i. 31, Wa..-- 
καυχάσθω : but there, by the citation being 
adduced in its existing form. πάντα 
yap up. éor.| ‘For such boasting is ἃ 
degradation to those who are heirs of all 
things, aud for whom all, whether minis- 


ABCDF 
LPxab 
edefg 
hklim 
nolj. 
47 


bs al ΚοΣ 


22 ν 


πάντα “dpov, * ὑμεῖς δὲ ἃ χριστοῦ, χριστὸς δὲ " θεοῦ. 
ΙΝ. 1 *Odtws ἡμᾶς “λογιζέσθω "ἡ ἄνθρωπος, " ὡς ° ὑπηρέτας 
χριστοῦ καὶ ἃ οἰκονόμους “ μυστηρίων θεοῦ. 


b = ch. xi. 28. Gal. vi. 1. 
xii. 42. xvi. 1, &c.) 
i. 16 reff, 


e ch. ii. 7 reff. 


22. ἀπολλω F 17. 
48 Orig,. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


, A » » an 
εἴτε Παῦλος εἴτε ᾿Απολλὼς εἴτε Κηφᾶς, 
Vg \ Μ ΄ 2 a 
εἴτε “ ζωὴ εἴτε ἡ θάνατος, εἴτε “* ἐνεστῶτα εἴτε *Y μέλλοντα, 


c = Acts xiii. 5 reff. 


ins 6? bef ὑμων ΕἾ -»Υ]. 
rec at end ins ἐστιν, with D*3L rel vulg [F-lat syrr copt arm Orig,-int, | 


497 


v / 
ELTE KOO LLOS v so Rom. xii. 
6. Col.i. 16 
w 80 Rom. vii. 
38 


x see 2 Thess. 
ii. 2. 


y = Acts xxiv. 
25 reff. 
ἣς Zz bis 15 
ΔῊΝ κα reff, 
2 ὧδε 8 λοι- a Rom. viii. 36 
reff. ix. 8. 
ἃ = Tit.i.7. 1 Pet.iv. 10. (Luke 
f = Col. iv. 9. Heb. xiii. 14. δ ch. 


μων, and in ver. 23 ques B 


Chr, Thdrt [Tert,]: om ABC D![and lat] F[-gr] PX 17 [eth] Dial, Ambrst Aug). 


Crap. LV. 1. ins του bef θεου F. 


2. rec ὃ de λοιπον, with D?[-gr] L rel Orig 


ters, or events, or the world itself, are 
working together: see Rom. viii. 28: and 
iv. 13. 22, 28.) Specification of some 
of the things included under πάντα : and 
Jirst of those teachers in whom they were 
disposed to boast,—in direct reference to 
ch. i. 12. But having enumerated Paul, 
Apollos, Cephas, he does not say εἴτε χρι- 
ods, but adding the world itself and its 
events and circumstances, he reiterates the 
πάντα ὑμῶν as if to mark the termination 
of this category, and changing the form, 
concludes with ὑμεῖς δὲ (not only one part 
of you) χριστοῦ" χριστὸς δὲ θεοῦ (see 
below). The expressions ζωή, θάνατος, 
ἐνεστῶτα, μέλλοντα, have nothing to do 
with the teachers, as Chrys., Theophyl., 
Grot..—7 (wh, φησι, τῶν διδασκάλων δι 
ὑμᾶς ἔστιν ἵνα ὠφελῆσθε διδασκόμενοι" κ. 
ὁ θάνατος αὐτῶν δι᾽ tuas* ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν γὰρ 
κινδυνεύουσι καὶ τῆς ὑμετέρας σωτηρίας, 
Theophyl.,—and “ presentia, ... lingua- 
rum etsanationum dona... . futura,.... 
rerum futurarum revelationes,’ Grot.,— 
but are perfectly general. ἐνεστῶτα 
is things actually present,—see note on 
2 Thess. ii. 2. 23.] On the change of 
the possessives, see above :—Christ is not 
yours, in the sense in which πάντα are,— 
not made for and subserving you—but (δέ) 
you are His,—and even that does not reach 
the Highest possession: He possesses not 
you for Himself; but (δέ again) κεφαλὴ 
χριστοῦ ὃ θεός, ch. xi. 3. Curist Him- 
SELF, the Incarnate God the Mediator, 
belongs to God, is subordinate to the 
Father, see John xiv. 28; and xvii. pas- 
sim. But this mediatorial subordination 
is in no way inconsistent with His eternal 
and co-equal Godhead: see notes on Phil. 
ii. 6—9; and on ch. xv. 28, where the sub- 
jection of all things to Christ, and His 
subjection to the Father, are similarly set 
forth. There is a striking similarity 
in the argument in this last verse to that 
in our Lord’s prohibition, Matt. xxiii. 


VoL. ἘΠ. 


oL-¢, ] Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] Ge: txt ABCD!FPR 


8—10. See Stanley’s beautiful note. 
IV. 1—5.] He shews them the 
right view to take of Christian ministers 
(vv. 1, 2); but, fur his part, regards not 
man’s gudgment of him, nor even judges 
himself, but the Lord is his Judge (vv. 3, 
4). Therefore let them also suspend 
their judgments till the Lord’s coming, 
when all shall be made plain. 

1.1 οὕτως, emphatic, preparatory to ὡς, 
as in ref. ἄνθρωπος, as Εἰ. V., a man, 
in the most general and indefinite sense, 
as ‘man’ in German: not a Hebraism, 
nor = ἕκαστος. The whole is opposed to 
καύχησις ἐν ἀνθρώποις : the ministers of 
Christ are but subordinates to Him, and 
accountable to God. ἡμᾶς, here, 
not, ‘us ministers generally, see below, 
ver. 6, but ‘myself and Apollos, as a 
sample of such. ὑπηρ χριστοῦ, see 
ch. ili. 5, 22, 28. But in οἶκον. μυστ. 
θεοῦ we have a new figure introduced. 
The Church, 1 Tim. iii. 15, is the οἶκος 
6eov—and those appointed to minister in 
it are οἰκονόμοι, stewards and dispensers 
of the property and stores of the οἰκοδεσ- 
πότης. These last are the μυστήρια, hid- 
den treasures, of God,—i.e. the riches of 
his grace, now manifested in Christ, ch. 
ii. 7; Rom. xvi. 25, 26, which they an- 
nounce and distribute to all, having re- 
ceived them from the Spirit for that pur- 
pose. “ Ea mysteria sunt incarnationis, 
passionis et resurrectionis Christi, redemp- 
tionis nostre, vocationis gentium, et cetera 
que complectitur evangelica doctrina”’ 
Estius, who also, as a Romanist, attempts 
to include the sacraments among the μυσ- 
τήρια in this sense. The best refutation 
of this is given by himself: “sed cum ipse 
Paulus dixerit primo capite, Non misit me 
Christus baptizare, sed evangelizare, rec- 
tius est ut mysteria Dei intelligantur fidei 
nostre dogmata.’ It may be doubted, 
whether, in the N. JT. sense of μυστήρια, 
the sicraments can be in any way reckoned 


k kK 


4.98 


“~ » » 
τ 2 0ον. xii, πὸν » ζητεῖται ἐν τοῖς 3 


ΠΡῸΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ A. 


Iv. 


, U / ; ? A 
οἰκονόμοις ἵνα πιστός τις | εὑρεθῇ. 


3. (ch. i. 22.) \ Ἢ ᾽ , , ᾽ ” > A ᾽ aA 
i=Mattiis. 3 Κ ἐμοὶ δὲ leis ἐλάχιστόν eoTW™ ἵνα Ud ὑμῶν " ἀνακριθῶ 
cts V. = 
7 A \ , e ͵ > ’ 58. Ν 
Rom. vito ἢ ὑπτὸ 5 ἀνθρωπίνης Ῥ ἡμέρας" 4 ἀλλ᾽ 4 οὐδὲ ἐμαυτὸν " ἀνα- 
Phil. ii. 8. , 4. > \ εἶ ᾽ A r ΄ 5 » >] 3 ᾽ ΄ 
, ον, χ.8. μρυνῶ" οὐδὲν yap ἐμαυτῷ σύνοιδα, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ 5 ἐν τούτῳ 
7 at., om. 
i / e \ > ͵ ΄ ͵ o 
ι χάδια, ἣ δεδικαίωμαι ὁ δὲ “avaxpiwwv με κύριός ἐστιν. 5 "ὥςτε 
27. 
τὴ constr., Matt. x. 25. xviii. 6. n Acts iv. 9 reff. o Acts xvii. 25 reff. p = ch. i. 8 reff. 


q = Acts xix. 2. ch. ill. r Acts v. 


s Acts xiii. 39. Rom. v. ‘7 ch. vi. Il. 


17 latt syrr copt eth arm Orig-int, [Ambrst Aug, ]. 


N-corr! 9). 
txt BL rel latt syrr [copt Orig,-c,-int, }. 
bef πιστος D2{-gr] F goth. 

3. ἡμῶν A [ο]. αλλα D!, 

4. for οὐκ, ovde P [nec Jer, Aug, ]. 
Geos D'[and lat]. 


as such: for μυστ. is a (usually divine) 
proceeding, once hidden, but now revealed, 
or now hidden, and to be revealed ; under 
neither of which categories can the sacra- 
ments be classed. 2.] Moreover, here 
(on earth) (see var. readd. and reff. ὧδε 
is emphatic, and points to what follows, 
that though in the case of stewards 
enquiry was necessarily made here below, 
yet he, God’s steward, awaited no such 
enquiry ὑπὸ ἀνθρωπίνης ἡμέρας, but one at 
the coming of the Lord. Lachmann, I 
cannot but think somewhat strangely, 
places ὧδε at the end of ver. 1: οἰκονόμους 
μυστηρίων Oeod ὧδε. Stanley takes ὧδε 
for ‘in this matter,’ and supports the 
meaning by Rev. xiii. 10, 18; xiv. 12; 
xvii. 9) enquiry is made in the case of 
stewards (or, ἐέ is required in the case of 
stewards), in order that (or that, the 
purport of the requirement expressed as 
its purpose) a man may be found (proved 
to be) faithfus (emph.). 8.1 But to 
me (contrast to the case of the stewards 
into whose faithfulness enquiry is made 
ὧδε, here on earth) it 15 (amounts to) very 
little (Meyer compares és χάριν τέλλεται, 
Pind. ΟἹ. i. 122, and Theognis, 162, οἷς τὸ 
κακὸν δοκέον γίγνεται eis ἀγαθόν) that I 
[should] be (the ἵνα, here and always, is 
more or less the conj. of purpose. The 
construction is a mixed one in such clauses 
as this, compounded of ἐλάχιστόν ἐστιν 
ἀνακριθῆναι, and ἐλαχίστου ἂν πριαίμην, 
ἵνα ἀνακριθῶ) judged (enquired into, as to 
my faithfulness) by you, or by the day of 
man ([1. 6., of man’s judgment, | in refer- 
ence to ὧδε above, and contrast to the 
ἡμέρα κυρίου, to which his appeal is pre- 
sently made, ver. 5, and of which, as 
testing the worth of the labour of teachers, 
he spoke so fully ch. iii. 13—15. Jerome, 
Queestiones ad Algasiam, Ep. xxxi. (cli.) 10, 
vol. i, p. 879, numbers the expression 
among the cilicisms of the Apostle. Estius, 


2. xii. 12. xiv. 6 only. Lev. v. 1. 
Gal. ii. 17. iii. 11. v. 4. 


Job xxvii. 6 only. 1 Macc. iv. 21 al. 


t= ch. iil. 21. 


aft Aoroy ins Tt X!(om 


(ntetre (itacism ?) AC D[-gr] F[-gr(-tyre)] PN f g n 17 [Eutha lms]: 


τις evpeOn bef moros D'3f-gr]: [τις] 


for ovde, ovd F. 


for δε, yap NX! Syr eth. at end ins 


al., suppose it to be a Hebraism, referring 
to Jer. xvii. 16, which is irrelevant. Alli 
these are probably wrong, and the expres- 
sion chosen purposely by the Apostle. 
Grot. compares ‘diem dicere,’ ‘ to cite to 
trial ;) to which Stanley adds the English 
‘daysman’ for arbiter (see Job ix. 33), and 
the Dutch ‘dagh vaerden’ and ‘ daghen,’ 
to ‘summon ’),—nay, I do not judge even 
(hold not au enquiry on: lit. ‘but neither 
do I, &c.) myself: 4.| for I [know 
nothing against myself (1. 6.}1 am con- 
scious to myself of no (official) delinquency ; 
so Plato, Apol. p. 21, οὔτε μέγα οὔτε σμικρὸν 
ξύνοιδα ἐμαυτῷ σοφὸς Sv,—ib., Rep. i. 
(Wetst.), τῷ δὲ μηδὲν ἑαυτῷ ἀδίκων ξυνει- 
δότι ἡδεῖα ἐλπὶς ἀεὶ πάρεστι, and Hor., 
Epist. i. 1. 61, ‘Nil conscire sibi, nulla 
pallescere culpa.’ The Εἰ. V., ‘I know 
nothing by myself,’ was a phrase commonly 
used in this acceptation at the time; cf. 
Ps. xv. 4, Com. Prayer Book version, ‘ He 
that setteth not by himself, i.e. is not 
wise in his own conceit. ‘1 know no harm 
by him’ is still a current expression in the 
midland counties. See Deut. xxvii 16; 
Ezek. xxii. 7, in E. V. So Donne, Serm. 
lvii., “ If thine own spirit, thine own con- 
science, accuse thee of nothing, is all well ? 
why, I know nothing by myself, yet am I 
not thereby justified.” This meaning of 
‘by’ does not appear in our ordinary dic- 
tionaries), but I am not hereby justified 
(i.e. it is not this circumstance which 
clears me of blame—this does not decide 
the matter. There can be no reference (as 
Meyer) to forensie justification here, by 
the very conditions of the context: for he 
is speaking of that μισθός of the teacher, 
which may be lost, and yet personal salva- 
tion be attained, see ch. iii. 15); but he 
that judges (holds an enquiry on) me is 
the Lord (Christ, the judge). 5. | 
So then (because the Lord is the soie 
infallible dijudicator) decide nothing (con- 


ABCDF 
LPxNab 
cedefg 
hkimn 
ο 17. 47 


3—6. ITPOS KOPIN@IOT® A. 4.99 


7. e / A \ 

ἔλθῃ ὁ κύριος, OF καὶ u Matt. viii 
ἊΣ ; κ 29 only. Sir. 

καὶ * φανερωσει TAS , ἜΣ tim. i. 


av b / 10 only. Jos. 
ἔπαινος " γενήσεται 


\ ΠῚ \ u A / “ xX 
μὴ ἃ πρὸ " καιροῦ TL κρίνετε, ἕως ἂν 
/ \ A 
ἡ φωτίσει τὰ “ κρυπτὰ τοῦ σκότους 


\ la) a 
3% βουλὰς τῶν * καρδιῶν, Kal τότε ὁ Antt. viii. 5. 


nae ieee hi 3. (Johni. 
ἑκάστῳ ὃ ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ. 9.81.) _ 
τ al / ? / fi > > \ \ eo wid 
6 Ταῦτα δέ, ἀδελφοί, ° μετεσχημάτισα εἰς ἐμαυτὸν Kal x Kom.i.19 
4 \ Sy ie. ἃ 4 > econ , x reff. 
Απολλὼ δι’ ὑμᾶς, ἵνα ἃ ἐν ἡμῖν μάθητε © τὸ μὴ ἴ ὑπὲρ ἃ yplur., here 
xxii. δ al. 2 Sir. xxxvii. 13. a Rom. ii. 29 (reff.). bch. i. 30 reff. 
c 2 Cor. xi. 13, 14,15. Phil. iii. 21 only+. 1 Kings xxviii.8 Symm. Jos. Antt. vii. 10. 5. = John 
xiii. 35.. Gen. xlii. 33. e = Rom. viii. 26 reff. f= ch.x.13. 2 Cor. xii. 6. 


5. κρινεταν (itacism ?) APN 3. 17. 39. 48. 72. 
(ins). om last του D 1. 

6. om δὲ N}(ins X-corr!) arm. om εἰς F[-gr]. 
2) XN}: txt CDFLP N-corr!(?)3 rel [ Euthal-ms ]. ev υμιν D!(and lat?] 1 17. 28. 
115 syr copt Chr,[txt,] Antch,. om To F 2. rec (for &) 6, with DFL rel 
Syr goth arm Chr, Thdrt [Cyr-p, Damasc]: txt ABCPX 17 syr copt Ath, Chr-ms, 
Cyr[-p,]. (Meyer and De W. think that & has been a corrn to suit ravta preceding. 
But I can hardly think this probable: is it not more likely that in a proverbial 


om os D! [and lat | F AUgszne 


απολλων A B} (amo πολλων 


exprn the sing seemed most appropriate, and thus & has been corrd to 6?) 


cerning us, of merit or demerit) before the 
time, until the Lord shall have come 
(explains mpd καιρ.), Who shall also (καί, 
tater alia: as part of the proceedings of 
that Day: or both) bring to light (throw 
light on) the hidden things of darkness 
(general— all things which are hidden in 
darkness), and shall make manifest the 
counsels of the hearts (then first shewing, 
what your teachers really are, in heart), 
and then shall the (fitting) praise accrue 
to each from God. 
media, praise or blame, as the case may 
be, but strictly praise. Theophyl., Grot., 
Billr., Riick., Olsh., suppose the word to 
be used euphemistically, ‘‘ unde et con- 
trarium datur intelligi, sed mavult ev- 
φημεῖν, Grot.: Calv., Meyer, al., think 
that he speaks without reference to those 
who will obtain no praise: “ hee vox ex 
bone conscientiz fiducia nascitur.” Calv. 
But I agree with De Wette, in thinking 
that he refers to καυχᾶσθαι ἐν ἀνθρώποις: 
—they. their various parties, gave erag- 
gerated praise to certain teachers: let 
them wait till the day when the fitting 
praise (be it what it may) will be ad- 
judged to each from God; Christ as the 
Judge being the ὡρισμένος ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ 
κριτής, Acts x. 42, and so His sentences 
being amd θεοῦ. See also Acts xvii. 31, 
and Rom. ii. 16, κρινεῖ ὁ θεὸς τὰ κρυπτὰ 
τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ... διὰ Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ. 

6—13.] He explains to them 
(ver. 6) that the mention hitherto of him- 
self and Apollos (and by parity of reason- 
ing, of Cephas and of Christ, in ch. i. 12) 
has a more general design, viz. to ab- 
stract them fron all party spirit and 
pride: which pride he then blames, and 
puts to shame by depicting, as a contrast, 
the low and offlicted state of the Apostles 


Kx 


ἔπαινος is not a vor — 


themselves. 6.] But (transeuntis: he 
comes to the conclusion of what he has to 
say on their party divisions) these things 
(De Wette, Meyer, al., limit ταῦτα to what 
has been said since ch. iii. 5. But there 
surely is no reason for this. The Apostle’s 
meaning here must on all hands be acknow- 
ledged to be, ‘I have taken our two names 
as samples that you may not attach your- 
selves to and be proud of any party leaders, 
one against another.’ And if these two 
names which had been last mentioned, why 
not analogously, those four which he had 
also alleged in ch. i. 12 ? There can be no 
reason against this, except the determina- 
tion of the Germans to regard their Paulus- 
parthei, and Apollos-parthei, and Petrus- 
parthei, and Christus-parthei, as historical 
facts, and consequent unwillingness to part 
with them here, where the Apostle himself 
by implication repudiates them as such) I 
transferred (the epistolary aorist) to myself 
and Apollos (i.e. when I might have set 
them before you generally and in the ab- 
stract as applying to all teachers, I have 
preferred doing so by taking two samples, 
and transferring to them what was true of 
the whole. This is far more probable than 
the explanation of Chrys., al., that he put 
in his own name and that of Apollos instead 
of those of the real leaders of sects, conceal- 
ing them on purpose. On μετασχ., ser 
reff. and cf. Plato, Legg. x. p. 903, 
μετασχηματίζων τὰ πάντα οἷον ἐκ πυρὸς 
ὕδωρ,---πα p. 906, τοῦτο τὸ ῥῆμα μετ- 
εσχηματισμένον, Meyer) on your account, 
that ye by us (as your example: by 
having our true office and standing set 
before you) might learn this, ‘‘ Not 
above those things which are written” 
(i. 6. not to exceed in your estimate of 
yourselves and us, the standard of Serip- 
9 


«- 


500 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 
f ao ee, τε -ἃ n 
gw.indic. γεγρῶπται, " va μὴ “εἰς ὑπερ του 
pres., Gal. tv. vm ἈΝ 
: iid. K σοὶ : 
Sain oa. TOU ETEPOV. 


h 1 Thess. v. 11. 
i vv. 18, 19. 
ch. v. 2. viii. 
1. xili. 4. 
Col. ii. 18 
onlyt. (-wots, 2 Cor. xii. 20.) 
m absol., ch. i. 29 reff. 
17,18. Luke xii. 21. 


n Acts xxvii. 38 only. 
Hos. xii. 8. 


rec aft yeyparra ins dpovew, with C(appy) D3{-gr}] LPN rel syrr goth arm Chr;. 


"ἢ 


δ ἑνὸς ᾿ φυσιοῦσθε κατὰ 


q ee \ \ 16 / 2 f δὲ v ἃὰ ᾽ 
τίς γὰρ σὲ | διακρίνει ; τί δὲ ἔχεις ὃ οὐκ 
» \ \ Μ / lal ΄ , 
ἔλαβες ; εἰ δὲ καὶ ἔλαβες, τί ™Kavyaoar ὡς μὴ λαβών ; 
΄ , / ΄ -“ 
8 ἤδη " κεκορεσμένοι ἐστέ, ἤδη ° ἐπλουτήσατε, χωρὶς ἡμῶν 


k Rom. ii. 1 reff. 
Deut. xxxi. 20 only. 


1 = here only. see Acts xv. 9 reff. 
ο 2 Cor. viii. 9. Rev. iti. 


Cyr{-p,] Thdrt [Antch, Damase]: om ABD!FR! latt Orig[-c, Ambrst Aug]. 


om 2nd μη D. for ὑπερ, κατα F. 
ture,—which had been already in part 
shewn to them in the citations ch. i. 19, 31; 
iii. 19. To refer γέγραπται to what has 
been written in this Epistle, as Luth., 
Calov., Calv. (altern.), is quite inadmissible, 
for, as Grot. remarks, “ γέγραπται in his 
libris semper ad libros Veteris Testamenti 
refertur.” But he (and Olsh.) refer the 
words to Deut. xvii. 20,—whereas it is far 
better to give them a perfectly general re- 
ference. Chrys., Theodoret, and Theophyl. 
refer it to words of our Lord inthe N. T., 
such as Matt. vii. 1, 3; xxiii. 12; Mark x. 
43, 44, but these could not be indicated by 
yéypanrai,—ef. ch. vii. 10 and note. 

The ellipsis, as here, of the verb in prohibi- 
tory clauses, with μή, is common enough: 
thus, Aristoph. Vesp. 1179, μή μοί γε 
μύθους. Soph. Antig. 577, μὴ τριβὰς ἔτι, 
ἀλλά νιν κομίζετ᾽ εἴσω. Demosth. Phil. i. 
p- 46, μή μοι μυρίους μηδὲ διεμυρίους ξένους. 
Hartung, Partikellehre ii. 153, where see 
more examples), that ye may not one on 
behalf of another be puffed up against a 
third (i. 6. ‘that you may not adhere to- 
gether in parties to the detriment or dis- 
paragement of a neighbour who is attached 
to a different party’). There is a gram- 
matical difficulty here, the occurrence of 
ἵνα with an indic. pres. This is variously 
explained. See Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 41. ὃ. 1. 
c. Some suppose that here, and in ref. 
Gal. St. Paul has commited a philological 
error in the formation of the subjunctive, 
and written the indic. for it. It is at 
least remarkable, that that other instance, 
ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε, is also in the case of 
a contracted syllable in ov,—so that we 
might almost suppose that there was some 
provincial usage of forming the subj. of 
contracted verbs in ow, which our Apostle 
followed. At all events (especially con- 
sidering that we have two other cases of 
ἵνα with an indic., see reff.) it is better to 
suppose a solecism or peculiar usage, than 
with Meyer to give ἵνα a local sense,— 
‘where, i.e. ‘in which ease ye are not 
(pres. for the future) puffed up,’—i.e. if 
you keep to the Scripture measure: the 
double ἵνα of the purpose being, as he 
himself observes, according to Paul's 


usage, Rom. vii. 13; Gal. iii. 14; iv. 5, 
al., and here being absolutely demanded 
by the sense. 7.| For (reason why 
this puffing up should be avoided) who 
separates thee (distinguishes thee from 
others ? meaning, that all such conceits 
of pre-eminence are unfounded. That 
pre-eminence, and not merely distinction 
(Meyer), is meant, is evident from what 
follows? And (δέ connects interrogative 
clauses, as Od. a. 225, τίς dals, τίς δὲ 
ὅμιλος ὅδ᾽ ἔπλετο; and Il. ε. 704, ἔνθα 
τίνα πρῶτον, τίνα δ᾽ ὕστατον ἐξενάριξεν ; 
See Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 169) what 
hast thou which thou receivedst not 
(‘from God ’—not, ‘from me as thy father 
in the faith’)? but if (which I concede ;— 
στέγαι δὲ εἰ καὶ ἡμῖν αὐτοῖς εἰσιν, ἀλλὰ 
μὰ Δί᾽ οὐχ. trmos; Xen. Cyr. vi. 1. 14. 
Hartung, i. 140) thou receivedst it, X&c. 
He speaks not only to the leaders, but to 
the members of parties,—who imagined 
themselves superior to those of other par- 
ties,—as if all, for every good thing, were 
not dependent on God the Giver. 

8.] The admonition becomes ironical: 
‘You behave as if the trial were past, and 
the goal gained; as if hunger and thirst 
after righteousness were already filled, and 
the kingdom already brought in.’ κωμῳδῶν 
αὐτοὺς ἔλεγεν Οὕτω ταχέως πρὸς τὸ TEAUS 
ἐφθάσατε, ὕπερ ἀδύνατον ἦν γενέσθαι διὰ 
τὸν καιρόν. Chrys. Hom. xii. p. 158. The 
emphases are on ἤδη in the two first clauses, 
and χωρὶς ἡμῶν in the third. The three 
verbs form a climax. Any interpretation 
which stops short of the full meaning οὗ 
the words as applied to the triumphant 
final state (so Grot., Est., Calvin., Wetst., 
al., interpreting them of knowledge, of 
security, of the lordship of one sect over 
another), misses the force of the irony, 
and the meaning of the latter part of the 
verse. χωρὶς ἡμῶν | ‘because we, as 
your fathers in Christ,- have ever looked 
forward to present you, as our glory and 
joy, in that day.’ There is an exquisite 


delicacy of irony, which Chrys, has well. 


caught: πολλὴ ἔμφασις ἐνταῦθα καὶ πρὸς 
\ 

τοὺς διδασκάλους Kk. πρὸς τοὺς μαθητάς. 

καὶ τὸ ἀσυνείδητον δὲ αὐτῶν δείκνυται κ. τὸ 


ARCDP 
LPxNab 
cderg 
hkimn 
017. 47 


7---Ἰ1. 


Ρ ἐβασιλεύσατε. 
ἡμεῖς ὑμῖν "συμβασιλεύσωμεν. 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


καὶ 1 ὄφελον ye Ῥ ἐβασιλεύσατε, 


50] 


” 4 
tva Kat p = Rom.v. 17. 
ch. xv. 2d. 
Rev. v. 10. 
xx. 4, 6. 

xzii. 5. 


9 δοκῶ yap, ὁ θεὸς 


΄ lal % » ΄ » Ἄ 
ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀποστόλους ἐσχάτους ᾿ἀπέδειξεν ὡς ἃ ἐπιθανα- « 3 ὁον. αι. ". 


τίους, ὅτι " θέατρον ἐγενήθημεν τῷ κόσμῳ καὶ ἀγγέλοις 
10 ἡμεῖς ᾿'᾿ μωροὶ διὰ χριστόν, ὑμεῖς δὲ 


\ ΕῚ , 
Kat ἀνθρώποις. 


Gal. v. 12. 
Rey. iil. 15 
only. 4 Kings 
v.3. Job 
xiv. 13.) .Ps: 
exviii. 5 only. 


r Ρ] Lal e A 5] a “Ἵ . ° ce . 
* φρόνιμοι ἐν χριστῷ" ἡμεῖς “ ἀσθενεῖς, ὑμεῖς δὲ ¥ ἐσσχυροί: τ Tim. ii. 2 


ὑμεῖς " ἔνδοξοι, ἡμεῖς δὲ Ξἄτιμοι. 


11 a ἄχρι ὃ τῆς ὃ ἄρτι ὥρας 


only +. 

s ch. 111. 18 
reff. 

t Acts ii. 22 


\ c an Χ ὃ a \ d , Ν e 
Kal ° πεινῶμεν καὶ δυψῶμεν καὶ 4 γυμνυτεύομεν καὶ © KO- reff. {-ξις, 


u here only+. see note, 
ch. ii. 3, 14.) x Rom. xi. 25 al. 
17. Eph. v. 27 only. 1 Kings ix. 6 al. 

a Rom. viii. 22 reff. b here only. 


e Matt. xxvi. 67 ; Mk. 2 Cor. xii. 7. 


8. om xwp. nu. εβασ. (hom) A [om καὶ od. ye «Bac. (hom) m nj. 


om γε DIF. ins συν bef vu 


v = here (Acts xix. 29, 31) only +. 
Prov. xi. 12. iron., 2 Cor. xi. 19. 


y Luke vil. 25. xi. 
Mark vi. 4. ch. xii. 23 only. Isa. lili. 3. 
d here only t. 


z Matt. xiii. 57. 
c Rom, xii. 20 reff. 


1 Pet. ii. 20 only t. 


ὠφελον D3L I. 


9. rec aft Soxw yap ins om, with D%,-gr] LPN? rel [vulg-clem fuld? harl syrr copt 
goth arm Orig, ] Chr, Thdrt Ambr, [Ambrst Pel]: om ABC D![and lat] FR! am(with 
demid fuld! tol) Clem, Orig[-c¢,-int, 1 Damase ΤῊ] Tert, [ Hil, ]. 


11. for αχρι Ts, ews F. 


rec yuuryrevouer (see note), with L rel [ Euthal-ms] : 


txt A? B2(sic: see table) CD3FPN a gh m, γυμνειτευομεν B'[D'].—om γυμν. και A}. 


σφόδρα ἀνόητον. ὃ yap λέγει, τοῦτό ἐστιν. 
ἐν μὲν τοῖς πόνοις φησὶν εἶναι πάντα 
κοινὰ καὶ ἡμῖν K. ὑμῖν, ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἐπάθ- 
λοις kK. τοῖς στεφάνοις ὑμεῖς πρῶτοι. p. YI. 

The latter part of the verse is said 
bond fide and with solemnity: And I would 
indeed (γε strengthens the wish; so 7 δ᾽ 
εἵλεθ᾽... ὥς γε μήποτ᾽ ὥφελεν λαβεῖν... 
Μενέλαον, Eur. Iph. Aul. 70. Hartung, 
i. 373. ὄφελον is used in LXX and 
N. T. asa particle, with the indic.: also 
with optative. See, for both, reff.) that 
ye did reign (that the kingdom of the 
Lord was actually come, and ye reigning 
with Him), that we also might reign 
together with you (that we, though 
deposed from our proper place, might at 
least be vouchsafed a humble share in 
your kingiy glory). 9.] For (and 
there is abundant reason for this wish in 
our present afflicted state) I think,— God 
set forth (before the eyes of the world,— 
the similitude is in θέατρον following) us 
the Apostles (meaning all the Apostles, 
principally himself and Apollos) last (the 
rendering of Erasm., Calv., Beza, al., ws 
who were last called to be Apostles, q. d. 
τοὺς ἀπ. τοὺς ἐσχ.; OF τοὺς ἐσχ. aTOTT.,— 
is ungraminatical. ἐσχάτους. last and 
vilest : not, ‘respectu priorum,’ last, as 
the prophets were before us, as Corn.- 
a-lap., and in part, Bengel) as persons 
condemned to death (as καταδίκους, 
Chrys. Tertullian seems to define the 
meaning too closely when, De Pudie. 14, 
vol. ii. p. 1006, he interprets it ‘ veluti 
bestiarios. Dion. Hal. vii. 35, says of 
the Tarpeian rock, ὅθεν αὐτοῖς ἔθος βάλ- 
λειν τοὺς ἐπιθανατίου:)---ἴοῦΥῦ we are be- 
come a spectacle (θέατρον = θέαμα: so 


“nothing but reduce us 


Achilles Tatius, i. p. 55 (Kypke), and 
θέατρα ποιητῶν, Aschines, Dial. Soer. iii. 
20 :—see θεατριζόμενοι, Heb. x. 33) to the 
world, as well to angels (good angels: 
ἄγγελοι absol., never either includes, or 
signifies, bad angels) as to men (κόσμῳ 
being afterwards specialized into angels 
and men). 10.] Again, the bitterest 
irony: ‘ how different our lot from yours! 
How are you to be envied—we, to be 
pitied 1’ There is a distinction in διὰ 
χριστόν and ἐν χριστῷ--α. ἃ. We are 
foolish for Christ’s sike (on account of 
Christ,— our connexion with Him does 
to be fools), 
whereas you are φρόνιμοι ἐν χριστῴ, 
have entered into full participation of 
Him, and grown up to be wise, subtle 
Christians. ἀσθενεῖς --ἰσχυροί are 
both to be understood generally: the 
ἀσθένεια is not here that of persecution, 
but that of ch. ii. 3: the strength is the 
high bearing of the Corinthians. Ye 
are in honour (in glorious repute, party 
leaders and party men, highly honoured 
and looked up to), whereas we are de- 
spised (without honour). Then ἄτιμοι leads 
him to enlarge on the disgrace and con- 
tempt which the Apostle met with at the 
hands of the world. 11—13.] He 
enters into the particulars of this state 
of affliction, which was not a thing past, 
but enduring to the present moment. 

11.] ἄχρι τ. ἄρτι ὥρας is evidently not to 
be taken strictly as indicative of the situa- 
tion of Paul at the time of writing the 
Epistle, but as generally describing the. 
kind of life to which, then ard always, he 
and the other Apostles were exposed: οὐ 
παλαιὰ dinvoduat πράγματα, ἀλλ’ ἅπερ 


502 


f here only ἢ. 

g Rom. xvi. 6, 
12reff. 

h = Acts xvill. 
3 reff. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@OIOTS A. 


TV. 


, a ς 4 - ἡ 9 , 

λαφιζόμεθα καὶ ' ἀστατοῦμεν, 13 καὶ & κοπιῶμεν ™ ἐργαζό- 
nw ; / / > 6 

μενοι ταῖς ἰδίαις iyepoivy ὃ λοιδυρούμενοι | εὐλογοῦμεν, 


, ’ , lal 
iEph. iv.28. ™ διωκόμενοι ἢ ἀνεχόμεθα, 18 ° δυςξφημούμενοι  Tapakanov- 
1 Thess. iv. 3 4 os , Ξ ᾿ ᾿ 
11. Wisd. . q 5 
11. Wisd. | μὲν" ὡς “περικαθάρματα τοῦ κόσμου ἐγενήθημεν, πάν 
Acts iti. 4 / ν᾿ & ” > 3 , ΄ a , 
ae τῶν ἴ περίψημα " ἕως " ἄρτι. |* οὐκ ‘ ἐντρέπων ὑμᾶς γράφω 
] — Rom. xii. a ; a \ 
ref. σχαῦτα, GAN ὡς τέκνα μου ὃ ἀγαπητὰ "νουθετῶ 1 ἐὰν 
m - Matt. v. 
10, ἄς. ch. xv. 9. 2 Kings xxi. 5. n absol., 2 Cor. xi. 4. (Acts xviii. 14 reff.) o here 
only+. 1 Mace. vii.4l only. (-μέα, 2 Cor. vi. 8.) p absol., Luke iii. 18. Rom. xii. 8. 2 Cor. νυ. 


20. 2 Tim. iv. 2 al. q here only. 


only. Jer. xxii. 28 Schol. ap. Tromm.(? Symm.] 
7. xv. 6. 1 John ii. 9 only. 
26. (mid., Luke xviii. 2 al.) Ὁ Rom. i. 7 reff. 


Proy. xxi. 18 only. 


t act., here only. 


rhere only +. Tobit v. 18 (19) 

s Matt. xi.12. John ii. 10. v.17. xvi. 24. ch. viii. 
= pass., 2 Thess. iii. 14. Tit. ii.8only. Ps. xxxiv. 
τ Acts xx. 31 reff. P. 


12. λοιδορ. και ευλ. and διωκ. kat avex. F (Syr) Orig-int,. 
13. rec βλασφημουμενοι (substitution of more usual word), with BDFLN3 rel [vulg] 
Orig,[-int, ] Chr, Thdrt [Ambrst]: txt ACP! 17 Clem, Orig, Eus, Cyr[-p,} Damase. 
περικαθαρμα (for -uata) D'[-gr harl! }. 


14, ταυτα bef ypapw DF k latt [lat ff]. 


νουθετων 


αλλα B(C doubtful). 


ACPR 17 Thi-txt: txt BDFL rel latt (Chr, Thdrt Damase Ambrst ]. 


καὶ ὁ παρών μοι καιρὸς μαρτυρεῖ. Chrys. 
See, on the subject-matter, 2 Cor. xi. 
23—27. γυμνιτ.} are in want of 
sufficient clothing: cf. ἐν ψύχει Kk. yuu- 
vorntt, 2 Cor. xi. 27. Meyer (after 
Fritzsche) believes γυμνιτεύομεν to be a 
mistake in writing the word, of very 
ancient date: but surely we are not justi- 
tied, in such a conventional matter as the 
form of writing a word, to desert the 
unanimous testimony of the oldest Mss. 
And we have the forms γυμνίτης, and 
yuuvitis: why not then γυμνιτεύω ὃ 

κολαφ. are buffeted—see reff., there is 
no need to press the strict meaning. 

aotat.| τουτέστιν, ἐλαυνόμεθα, φεύγομεν. 
Theophyl. 12.) As testimonies to 


Paul’s working with his own hands, see ~ 


Acts xviii. 3; xx. 34; ch. ix. 6; 1 Thess. 
ii. 9; 2 Thess. iii. 8. That the other 
Apostles did the same, need not necessarily 
be inferred from this passage, for he may 
be describing the state of all by himself as 
a sample ; but itis conceivable, and indeed 
probable, that they did. Aoud. ... 
x.7.A.] ‘So far are we from vindicating 
to ourselves places of earthly honour and 
distinction, that we tamely submit to re- 
proach, persecution, and evil repute;—nay, 
we return blessing, and patience, and soft 
words.’ 13.] παρακ., ἀντὶ τοῦ, mpao- 
τέροις λόγοις K. μαλακτικοῖς ἀμειβόμεθα. 
Theophyl. ὡς περικαθάρματα) A 
climax of disgrace and contempt, summing 
up the foregoing particulars. We are be- 
come as it were the refuse of the world. 
mepix. from περικαθαίρω, that which is 
removed by a thorough purification, the 
offal or refuse. So Ammonius (in Wetst.): 
καθάρματα, Ta μετὰ τὸ καθαρθῆναι ἀποῤ- 
ῥιπτόμενα :—Theophbylact, ὅταν ῥυπαρόν 
τι ἀποσπογγίσῃ τις, περικάθαρμα λέγεται 
τὸ ἀποσπόγγισμα ἐκεῖνον : and similarly 
(cum. Wetst. gives many examples of 


the metaphorical usage of the term κάθαρμα 
as a reproach, from Demosth., Aristoph., 
Lucian, al.,and of purgamentum in Latin. 
περικαθάρματα is found in Arrian, Epict 
ili. 22, Πρίαμος, 6 viv γεννήσας περι- 
καθάρματα. But Luther and very many 
Commentators suppose the word to imply 
piacula, as Schol., Aristoph. Plut. 454 
(Wetst.), καθάρματα ἐλέγοντο of ἐπὶ 
καθάρσει λοιμοῦ Tivos ἤ τινος ἑτέρας νόσου 
θυόμενοι τοῖς θεοῖς, τοῦτο δὲ τὸ ἔθος καὶ 
παρὰ Ῥωμαίοις ἐπεκράτησε. Meyer well 
remarks that περικαθάρματα will hardly 
bear this meaning, and that περίψημα 
in the sing. would not suit it. Still we 
may remark, with Stanley, that περι- 
κάθαρμα is so used in ref. Prov., and περί- 
ψημα in ref. Tobit: and that Suidas says, 
περίψημα ... .. οὕτως ἐπέλεγον τῷ κατ᾽ 
ἐνιαυτὸν συνέχοντι τῶν κακῶν Περίψημα 
ἡμῶν γένου" ἤτοι, σωτηρία καὶ ἀπολύτρω- 
σις καὶ οὕτως ἐνέβαλον τῇ θαλάσσῃ ws- 
ανεὶ τῷ Ποσειδῶνι θυσίαν ἀποτίννυντες. 

περίψ.} much the same as περικαθάρ- 
fata,—but the expression is more con- 
temptuous :—the individual περικαθάρματα 
are generalized into one περίψημα, the τοῦ 
κόσμου is even further extended to πάντων, 
—see ch. iii. 22. 14—21.] Conclu- 
sion of this part of the Epistle :—in what 
spirit he has written these words of blame: 
viz. in a spirit of admonition, as their 
Suther in the faith, whom they ought to 
imitate. To this end he sent Timothy to 
remind them of his ways of teaching,-- 
would soon, however, come himself,—in 
mildness, or to punish, as the case might 
require. 14. οὐκ évtpérwv} not 
as one who shames you, see reff., and 
ch. vi. 5; xv. 34,—and for the force of 
the participle, ch. ii. 1. 
contrasts with ἐντρέπων γράφω, the con- 
struction being purposely adopted, to set 
in a more vivid light the paternai inten~ 


ABCDP 
LPNab 
edetg 
hkimn 
ο 17. 47 


νουθετῶ 


12—18. 


yao “ μυρίους * παιδαγωγοὺς ἔχητε ἐν χριστῷ, 
πολλοὺς πατέρας: ἐν γὰρ χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ διὰ τοῦ εὐαγ- 


γελίου ἐγὼ ὑμᾶς 7 ἐγέννησα. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


16 « παρακαλῶ οὖν ὑμᾶς, 
/ / “ “- , 
ὑμιμηταί μου γίνεσθε. 17 διὰ τοῦτο ἔπεμψα “ ὑμῖν Τιμόθεον, 
ef / >? \ \ U ἃ 
ὅς ἐστίν μου τέκνον " ἀγαπητὸν καὶ 4 πιστὸν ἐν ἃ κυρίῳ, ὃς 


503 


᾽ ’ 

Υ ἀλλ᾽ ov w ch. xiv. 19. 
Matt. xviii. 
24 only. 
Esther iii. 9. 

x Gal. iii. 24, 


xiii. 4, 
1 Mace. ii. 
19, 20. 


a 7 Ν ς 7 A DL: 
ὑμᾶς © ἀναμνήσει τὰς ὁδούς μου τὰς ἐν χριστῷ, καθὼς - = Philem. τ0. 


a 3 / ? / ΄ 
ὃ πανταχοῦ ἐν πάσῃ ἐκκλησίᾳ διδάσκω. 


6. ii. 14. Heb. vi. 12 only+. (-μεῖσθαι, 2 Thess. iii. 7, 9.) 


d see Eph.i.l. Acts xvi. 15. 
xiii. 10 reff. 


g Acts xvii. 30 reff. 
Cd. Tyr. 11. 


Winer, edn. 6, 3 65. 9. 


15. om ιἡσου B Clem, Pac, : 
16. for ουν, δε D'[-gr] F[-gr]. 


17. aft τουτο ins αὐτο APR! 17 syr [ Euthal-ms]. 


e Mark xi. 21. xiv.72. 2 Cor. vii. 15. 
only. Gen. viii. 1 Ed-vat. compl. [Β def.] (-μνησις, ch. xi. 24.) 


b ch. xi. 1. 
Eph. v. lL. 
1 Thess. i. 
c dat., Acts xi. 29. Phil. ii. 19. 
2 Tim. 1.6. Heb. x. 32 
f = ch. xii. 31. see Acts 
h w. gen. abs.,2 Cor. v.20. 2 Pet.i.3. Soph. 


189s μὴ ἐρχο- 


ins ΑΟΘΕῚΓΡῚΝ rel vulg Syr Orig-int,. 


rec τέκνον bef μου (corrn to 


more usual order), with DFL rel latt Orig[-c,] Thdrt ΤῊ] Ge lat-ff: txt ΑΒΟΡΝ τὰ 


17 arm [ Euthal-ms] Chr Damasc. 
[as Woide]. avopturynoer(sic) A al, 


o 17 vulg-ed [fuld harl arm] syr copt Chr, Damase [Ambrst 


πιστος F. 


A [has not] χριστω for kupiw 
for χριστω, xp. enoov C D?[-gr] δὲ bm 
7: κυριω ino. D) {and 


lat] F: txt AB D3(-gr] LP rel ain(with demid [tol]) Syr Orig[-c,] Thdrt ΤῺ] Ce. 


tion:—I am not writing these things 
(vv. 8—13) as shaming you,—but I am 
admonishing you as my beloved children. 

15.| Justification of the expression 
τέκνα μου. μυρίους, the greatest 
possible number—see reff. mavoay. | 
He was their spiritual father: those who 
followed, Apollos included, were but 
tutors, having the care and education of 
the children, but not the rights, as they 
could not have the peculiar affection of 
the father. He evidently shews by 
μυρίους, that these παιδαγωγοί were more 
in number than he could wish,—including 
among them doubtless the false and party 
teachers: but to refer the word only 
to them and their despotic leading (as 
Beza, Calvin, al., and De Wette), or to 
confine its meaning to the stricter sense of 
παιδαγωγός, the slave who led the child to 
school, is not here borne out by the facts. 
See ref. and note: and for the wider sense 
of παιδαγ., examples in Wetst. ἀλλ᾽ ov 
brings out the contrast strongly, giving 
almost the sense of ‘at non ideo: so 
Asch. in Ctes. ὃ 155, καὶ yap ἐὰν αὐτὰ 
διεξίῃ τὰ ἐκ τοῦ ψηφίσματος mpostdyuara, 
ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τόγ᾽ ἐκ τῆς ἀληθείας αἰσχρὸν σιω- 
πηθήσεται. See Hartung, Partikellehre, 
ii. 40. ἐν yap xp.] For in Christ 
Jesus (as the spiritual element in which 
the begetting took place: so commonly év 
χριστῷ, applied to relations of life, see ver. 
17, bis,—not to be joined as De W. with 
ἐγώ, ᾳ. ἃ. ἐγὼ yap ev x. Ἰησοῦ δ. τ. εὐ. 
bp. ἐγέννησα) by means of the gospel (the 
preached word being the instrument) I 
᾿ (emphatic) begat you (there is also an 
emphasis on ὑμᾶς, as coming before the 
verb, α. ἃ. in your case, I it was who 
begat you). 16.) οὖν, because I ain 


your father. μιμηταί, not only, nor 
perhaps chiefly, in the things just men- 
tioned, vv. 9—18,—but as ver. 17, in 
ai ὁδοί μου ai ἐν χρ., my manner of life 
and teaching. See reff. 17.] διὰ 
TouTo,—in order that you may the better 
imitate me by being put in mind of my 
ways and teaching: not, as Chrys., Theo- 
phyl., al., ἐπειδὴ ὡς παίδων κήδομαι, καὶ ὡς 
γεγεννηκώς,-ττονν ὨΪΟἢ would make ver. 16 
a very harsh parenthesis, and destroy the 
force of what follows. On the fact, see 
Prolegg. to 2 Cor., § ii. 4. τέκνον] 
see 1 Tim. i. 2,18; 2 Tim. i. ὃ: Meyer 
remarks, that by the strict use of the 
word τέκνον in this passage (vv. 14, 15) 
we have a certain proof that Timothy 
was converted by Paul: see Acts xiv. 6, 
7 and note. “The phrase seems to be 
used here in reference to τέκνα ἀγαπητά, 
ver. 14: ‘I sent Timotheus, who stands 
to me in the same relation that you stand 
(in).’” Stanley. ᾿ ἐν κυρίῳ points 
out the spiritual nature of the relation- 
ship. ἀναμνήσει)] Timothy, by 
being himself a close imitator of the Chris- 
tian virtues and teaching of his and their 
spiritual father, would bring to their minds 
his well-known character, and way of teach- 
ing, which they seemed to have well-nigh 
forgotten. See 2 Tim. iii. 10. καθώς 
specifies what before was expressed gene- 
rally : so Luke xxiv. 19, 20, τὰ περὶ ᾿Ιησοῦ 

. ὅπως τε παρέδωκαν αὐτὸν οἱ apx- 
wpets κιτιλ.; and Thucyd. i. 1, τὸν πό- 
Aeuov τῶν Πελ. κ. ᾽Αθ., ὡς ἐπολέμησαν 
πρὸς ἀλλήλους. πανταχοῦ ἐν 1. 
ἐκκλ. To shew the importance of this his 
manner of teaching, he reminds them of his 
unvarying practice of it: and as he was 
guided by the Spirit, by inference, of its 


504 ΠΡῸΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. ΙΝ, 19—21. ; 
, \ r ; ΄ ΄ % , 

iver.6ef μένου δέ μου πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἢ ἐφυσιώθησάν K τινες" 19 ἐλεύ- 

k=2 ο Ὃς, il. ᾿ . es 

4.5.3. Gal. σομαι δὲ ταχέως πρὸς ὑμᾶς, 1 ἐὰν ὁ | κύριος | θελήσῃ, 37%" 

μ ν ABCDF 
ee τοὶ γνώσομαι οὐ τὸν '' λόγον τῶν | πεφυσιωμένων, ἀλλὰ ἔρκαν 
Ἰ James iv. 15. . = Ε ᾿ ᾿ 4 Υ ΕἾΝ ; pe ~ edfgh 
xxx δ. τὴν ™ δύναμιν" 50 ov yap ἐν ™ λόγῳ ἡ " βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ, ἃ mn 
om. xv. , ? f / ͵ 3 δι Ν ἢ 
isnt GAN ὁ ἐν δυνάμει. 21 τί θέλετε ; PX ἐν ¥ ῥάβδῳ ἔλθω πρὸς °™ 
Dd = Rom. xiv. ᾿ ~ a , > , 9 , ͵ t 2 y 
oes tren, ὑμᾶς, ἢ Pev ἀγάπῃ, § πνεύματι τε ‘ πραὕτητος ; 
» = ch. τ᾿ 8. 
; 2 Cor. ii. 1. Eph. i. 8. iii. 2. iv. 15, 17 al. Rev. ii.'27. Isa. x. 24. τ Matt. x.10'|. Heb. 

i. 8 al. s Rom. xi. 8 reff, t Paul (2 Cor. x. 1. Gal. v. 23. vi. 1 al4.) only, exc. James 

i. 21. iii. 13, 1 Pet, iii. 15. Ps. xhv. 4. 

18. om δε F latt copt lat-ff. 

19. θελησει LP [f}. om ov T)!, aft λόγον ins avtwy F. τον πεφυ- 
σιωμενον Lh mw 8. 401-9. 57. 109-10 lectt-7-12 Orig, (not Clem, Chr, Thdrt [Sevrn-e, ᾿ 
Damasc} &c). 

21. [πνευμα (for -ματι) D)(and lat). } ree teaoTnTos, With DFLPR rel Euthal- | 
ms Clem, Orig, Chr, Thdrt]: txt ABC! or? 17 Damase. 7 
universal necessity in the churches. a view to their amendment, the alterna- > 
18—20.} To guard against misrepresenta- tive: ‘shall his coming be in a judicial or 
tion of the coming of Timothy just an- in a friendly spirit?’ as depending on ᾿ 
nounced, by those who had said and would — themselves. τί not for πότερον (as Meyer, 5 


now the more say, ‘ Paul dare not come to 
Corinth,’ he announces the certainty of his 
coming, if the Lord will. 18.] ὡς μὴ 
ἐρχομένου forms one idea, and the δέ is in 
consequence placed after it all: so Thueyd. 
i. 6, ἐν τοῖς πρῶτοι δὲ ᾿Αθηναῖοι: Isoer. 
περὶ eip., p. 160, ὅτι ἂν τύχῃ δὲ γενησό- 
μενον. Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 190. 
@s expresses the assumption in their minds: 
the present part. ἐρχομένου refers to their 
saying—ovx« ἔρχεται, as Meyer. 19. | 
ἐλεύσομαι is prefixed, for emphasis, being 
the matter in doubt: as we say, ‘Come I 
will? ταχέως) How soon, see ch. 
xvi. 8. γνώσομαι) I will inform 
myself of—not the words of those who 
are puffed up (/hose I care not tor), but 
their power: whether they are really 
mighty in the Spirit, or not. This general 
reference of δύν. must be kept, and not 
narrowed, as Chrys., Theophyl., to [the] 
power of working miracles : or “ quantum 
apud vos sua scientia et doctrina quam 
jactant profecerint,” Est.; or virtuous lives 
(Theodoret, al.), or energy in the work of 
the gospel (Meyer): he leaves it general 
and indefinite. 20. | Justification of 
this his intention by the very nature of that 
kingdom of which he was the ambassador. 
ἡ Bao. τ. θεοῦ, the Kingdom (τ. οὐρ. 
Matt. ili. 2; iv. 17 and passim; 7. θ. Mark 
i. 15, al.) announced by the prophets, 
preached by the Lord and the Apostles, 
being now prepared on earth and received 
hy those who believe on Christ, and to be 
consummated ΜῊΝ He returns with His 
saints: see Phil. iii. 20, 21; Eph. v. 5. 
év bh ig . ἐν δυνάμει... rail 
not (i.e. does not consist in, has not its 
conditions and element of existence ) in 
(mere) word, but in power—is a kingdom 
of power. 21.) He offers them, with 


De W.), but general, and afterwards con- 
fined to the two alternatives: What will 
ye (respecting my coming) Ὁ ἔλθω, 
must I come? ἐν ῥάβδῳ, with a 
rod; but not only ‘with,’ as accompanied 
with: the prep. gives the idea of the 
element ia which, much as ἐν δόξῃ: not 
only with a rod, but in such purpose as to 
use it. There is no Hebraism: see Pas- 
sow under ἐν, No. 3 and 4. He speaks as 
a father: τί ἐστιν, ἐν ῥάβδῳ; ἐν κολάσει, 
ἐν τιμωρίᾳ, Chrys. πνεύμ.. τ. πραὔῦ- 
tyT0S| Generally, and by De Wette, ex- 
plained, a gentle spirit, meaning by πνεύμ. 
his own spirit: but Meyer has remarked, 
that in every place in the N. T. where 
πνεῦμα is joined with an abstract genitive, 
it imports the Holy Spirit, and the abstract 
genitive refers to the specific working of 
the Spirit in the case in hand. So πν. 
τῆς ἀληθείας (John xv. 26; xvi. 18; 
1 John iv. 6), υἱοθεσίας (Rom. viii. 15), 
τῆς πίστεως 2 Cor. iv. 13), σοφίας (Eph. 
i, 17). ἁγιωσύνης (Rom. i. 4). (This does 
not however appear to be without 
exceptions: cf. πνεῦμα ἀσθενείας, Luke 
xiii. 11; δουλείας, Rom. viii. 15; κατα- 
νύξεως, Rom. xi. 8; δειλίας, 2 Tim. i. 
7; τῆς πλάνης, 1 John iv. 6. We may 
indeed Say, that in none of these cases 
is the πνεῦμα subjective, or the phrase 
a mere periphrasis: but the πνεῦμα is 
objective, a possessing, indwelling spirit, 
whether of God er otherwise.) And so 
Chrys., Theophyl.,—éu γὰρ καὶ πνεῦμα 
αὐστηρότητος kK. τιμωρίας, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ τῶν 
x ρηστοτέρων αὐτὸ καλεῖ ὡς καὶ τὸν θεὸν 
οἰκτίρμονα κ. ἐλεήμονά Paper, ἀλλ᾽ ov 
= hae καίτοιγε καὶ τοῦτο ὄντα. ‘Theo- 
p 

v. 1—13.] ConcERNING A GROSS CASE 
OF INCEST WHICH HAD ARISEN, AND WAS 


eS ee 


Wiel 2 


fy 9 / e A ‘ , 
V. τὐΐθλως Y ἀκούεται ἐν ὑμῖν ἡ πορνεία, καὶ τοιαύτη » Matt. τ. a4. 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINGIOTS A. 


505 


ch. vi.'7. xy, 


, > \ > al ” ¢ a 9 
ἡ πορνεία * ἥτις " οὐδὲ ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, ὥςτε γυναῖκά τινα, 9 >t. 


a Ν Z 4 rn 9 a \ . - 
του πατρος EN ELV ~ “ KAL υμεὺς 


here only. 
2 Mace. x. 13. 
see Acts xi. 
22 reff. 


πεφυσιωμένοι ἐστὲ καὶ 


A , 4 A , ΄ A ΄ 
οὐχὶ μᾶλλον © ἐπενθήσατε, ἃ ἵνα ἀρθῇ tex f μέσου ὑμῶν ὁ » Matt. v. 3. 


ch. vi. 13, 18 

al. Gen. 
Xxxviil. 24. x = Heb. ii. 3. y = Matt. vi. 29. ch. xiv. 21. Gal. ii. 5 al. z= Matt 
xiv. 4. xxii. 28. ch. vil. 2,29. Deut. xxviii. 30. a interrog., Luke x. 29. xviii. 26. John 
ix. 36. 2 Cor. ii. 2. b ch. iv. 6 reff. ς Matt. v. 4. ix. 15. Mark xvi. 10. Luke 
vi. 25. 2 Cor. xii. 21. Jamesiv. 9. Rev. xviii. 11,15,19 only. Isa. 1xi. 2. d = John xi. 15. 


e = Matt. xiii. 12. Luke xi. 22. John ii. 16 al. 


Isa. vii. 1, 2. 


f Acts xvii. 33 reff. 


Cuap. V. 1. rec aft εθνεσιν ins ονομαζεται (see note), with LPR3 rel syrr Chr, [ Bas, 
Cyr-p, Damasc] Thdrt Cassiod: om ABCDFR?! 17 latt copt ath arm Orig[-c,-int, 


Euthal-ms] Manes, Tert, Lucif, [Ambrst ]. 
rec εξαρθη (corrn from ver 13), with L rel Chr, [Bas, 


2. for ουχι, ov F. 


HARBOURED, AMONG THEM (vv. 1—8): 
AND QUALIFICATION OF A FORMER COM- 
MAND WHICH HE HAD GIVEN THEM RE- 
SPECTING ASSOCIATION WITH GROSS SIN- 
NERS (9—-13). The subject of this chapter 
is bound on to the foregoing by the ques- 
tion of ch. iv. 21: and it furnishes an 
instance of those things which required 
lis apostolic discipline. 1.] ὅλως, 
actually, ‘omnino,’ see reff.: in negative 
sentences, ‘at all, ἀκούεται ἐν ty. 
πορνεία another way of saying ἀκούουσί 
τινες ev tu. mépvor,—the character of 
πόρνος is borne (by some) among you,— 
fornication is borne as a character among 
you. Krom missing this sense of ἀκούομαι, 
Commentators have gone wrong (1) as to 
ὅλως, rendering it ‘commonly,’ to suit 
ἀκούεται, ‘ts reported, —(2) as to ev duty, 
joining it with πορνεία, whereas it belongs 
to axoverat,—(3) as to ἥτις οὐδὲ ἐν τ. 
ἔθν., see below. καὶ τοιαύτ. 1. | 
And fornication of such a sort (the καί 
rises in a climax, there being an ellipsis of 
ov udvoy ..., GAAa.... before it; so 
Aristoph. Ran. 116, ὦ σχέτλιε, τολμήσεις 
γὰρ ἰέναι καὶ σύ ye; see Hartung, Parti- 
kellehre, i. 134), as (is) not (borne as a 
character) even among the heathen. The 
ὀνομάζεται of the rec. is a clumsy gloss, 
probably from Eph. v. 3: the meaning 
being, that not even among the heathen 
does any one ἀκούει πόρνος in this sense, 
that it was a crime that they would ποῦ 
tolerate as a matter of public notoriety. 
So that one among you has (as wife most 
probably, not merely as concubine: the 
word ἔχω in such cases universally in the 
N. T. signifying to possess in marriage: 
and Meyer remarks that ὁ τὸ ἔργον τοῦτο 
ποιήσας (ver. 2), and τὸν οὕτως τοῦτο 
κατεργασάμενον (ver. 3) seem to point to 
a consummation of marriage, not to mere 
concubinage) his father’s wife (i. 6. his 
step-mother, see Lev. xviii. 8; οὐκ εἶπε 
μητρυιὰν ἀλλὰ γυναῖκα πατρός, ὥςτε TOAAG 
χαλεπώτερον πλῆξαι, Chrys. Hom. xv. 
p. 125). The Commentators gene- 
rally refer to Cicero, Pro Cluentio, 5, 6, 


Tov πατρος exe bef τινα DF. 


“Nubit genero socrus, nullis auspicibus, 
nullis auctoribus, funestis ominibus om- 
nium omnibus. O wmulieris scelus_ in- 
credibile, et preter hance unam, in omni 
vita inauditum,” ἄτα. It may seem 
astonishing that the authorities in the 
Corinthian church should have allowed 
such a case to escape them, or if known, 
should have tolerated it. Perhaps the uni- 
versal laxity of morals at Corinth may have 
weakened the severity even of the Chris- 
tian elders: perhaps, as has often been 
suggested, the offender, if a Jewish con- 
vert, might defend his conduct by the 
Rabbinical] maxim that in the case of a 
proselyte, the forbidden degrees were an- 
nulled, a new birth having been undergone 
by him (see Maimon. in Wetst.). This 
latter however is rendered improbable by 
the fact that thesApostle says nothing of 
the woman, which he would have done had 
she been a Christian :—and that Jewish 
maxim was taxed with the condition, that 
a proselyte might marry any of his or her 
former relatives, ‘modo ad Judaicam re- 
ligionem transierint” The father was 
living, and is described in 2 Cor. vii. 12, as 
ὁ ἀδικηθείς ;—and from the Apostle saying 
there that be did not write on his account, 
he was probably a Christian. 2.] καί 
often introduces a question, especially one 
by which something inconsistent or pre- 
posterous is bronght out,—see reff.: and 
note on 2 Cor. ii. 2. πεφυσ. ἐστέ] 
Not, which would be absurd,—aé the oe- 
currence of this crime, οὐκ ἐπὶ τῷ ἁμαρτή- 
Mate’ τοῦτο γὰρ ἀλογίας. Chrys.: neither, 
as he proceeds,—a@Ad’ ἐπὶ τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ 
τῇ ἐκείνου, imagining the offender to have 
been some party teacher: so also Theo- 
phyl.:—but as before, with a notion of 
their own wisdom and spiritual perfection : 
the being puffed up is only eum hoe, not 
propter hoc. ἐπενθήσατε) And did 
ye not rather mourn (viz. when the crime 
became first known to you), in order that 
(your mourning would be because of the 
existence of the evil, i.e. with @ view fo 
its removal) he who did this dead (the 


506 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. V. 

= ch. xi 18 TO ἔργον τοῦτο ποιήσας ; 3 ἐγὼ & μὲν ἕ γὰρ ' ἀπὼν τῷ σώ- ABCDF 
xii? ματι, i παρὼν δὲ τῷ * πνεύματι. 6n|Kéxpika ὡς | παρὼν cdigh 
iatabove). TOV οὕτως τοῦτο ™ κατεργασάμενον, * ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι TOD 017.47 
Col is κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ "συναχθέντων ὑμῶν καὶ τοῦ ἐμοῦ bare ut 
job vi13 πνεύματος σὺν τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ἰησοῦ c. 


only. ‘ 
j Acts xii. 20. 2Cor. xi. 8 al. 
xv. 19 reff. m Rom. ii. 9 reff. 


Damasc] Thdrt: txt ABCD[F]PX am 17 [ Euthal-ms] Epiph,. for ποιησ., mpatas 
ACR m 17 [Euthal-ms] Epiph Bas,: txt BDFLP rel Chr, [ Bas, Damase] Thdrt. 

3. rec ins ws bef απων (to corresp with ws πσρων below, it being imagined that ἀπὼν 
iat & mvevu. was to be taken together: so Mey), with D*[and lat] FL rel syr Dial, 
Chr, [ Bas, Damasc] Thdrt Th! Gc Lucif, Aug, : om ABC D'[-gr] ΡΝ m 17 vulg [Syr 
zth } copt Manes{-in-]Epiph, Orig-int, [Hil, Ambrst Aug, Pel]. om τουτο F 
latt arm Lucif, [Ambr, ]. 

4. om lst nuwy AN demid Lucif, Pac, [syr has it w-ast}. rec aft 1st ino. 
ins χριστου, with D3[-gr] FLPN rel [vulg] Syr syr-w-ast copt goth [eeth-pl] arm Dial, 
Chr Thdrt [Bas, Damasc Ambrst]: om AB D!{and lat] eth-rom Lucif. (C doubtful.) 

fom 2nd ἡμων P am fuld tol harl Orig,-int, Bas, Thdrt-ms, Lucif,(ins,). syr has 
it w-ast. | rec aft 2nd ing. ins χριστου, with D3[-gr] FL rel [Syr syr-w-ast copt 
goth wth-pl arm] Orig,[-int,] Chr Thdrt [Damase]} Lucif, Aug, Pac: om AB D! [and 


k Acts xvii. 16 reff. Col. ii. 5. 
n epp., here only. 


see ch. vii. 34. 1 = Acts 


= Acts xiv. 27. xx. 7,8 al. 


lat} PX vulg syr-txt ath-rom Orig,[-int, ] Dial, [Bas, Lucif,]. 


past part. ποιήσας is itself used from the 
past point of time indicated by ἐπενθή- 
care, and must therefore be expressed by 
the past) might (may) be removed from 
among you (viz. by your casting him out 
from your society) ? 38—5.] justifies 
the expression ἵνα ἀρθῇ just used, by 
declaring the judgment which the Apostle, 
although absent, had already passed on the 
offender. 8.1 ἐγὼ μὲν yap, I for my 
part ‘ego certe:’ so Aristoph. Plut. 
355, μὰ Δί᾽, ἐγὼ μὲν οὔ: see Hartung, 
Partikellehre, ii. 413. ὡς παρών, a3 
if really present, not, as being present in 
spirit. τὸν οὕτως τοῦτο Kat. | The 
object is put foremost for em»hasis’ sake, 
and after several intervening clauses, taken 
up again with τὸν τοιοῦτον, ver. 5. 
οὕτως, Meyer thinks, alludes to some pe- 
culiarly offensive method in which he had 
brought about the marriage, which was 
known to the Corinthians, but unknown 
to us. Olsh. understands it, ‘under such 
circumstances, ‘being such as he is, a 
member of Christ’s body.’ But this, being 
before patent, would hardly be thus em- 
phatically denoted. Perhaps after all, 
τοῦτο κατεργασάμενον refers to πορνεία 
generally, οὕτως to τοιαύτη πορνεία, ver. 1. 
4. We may arrange this sentence 
in four different ways: (1) ἐν τῷ ov. may 
belong to συναχθέντων, and σὺν τῇ Suv. 
to mapadotvai,—so Beza, Calov., Billroth, 
Olsh., al.: (2) both ἐν τῷ ὃν. and σὺν 
τῇ δυν. may belong to συναχθέντων, ---80 
Chrys., Theophyl. (altern.), Calvin (quoting 
for σὺν τῇ Suv. Matt. xviii. 20), Grot., 
Riickert: (3) both may belong to παρα- 
dovvai,—so Mosheim, Schrader, al.: or (4) 
ἐν τῷ ov. belongs to παραδοῦναι, and σὺν 


ws err « 


τῇ Suv. to συναχθέντων,---80 Luther, Cas- 
tal., Estius, Bengel, De Wette, Meyer, al. 
And this, am persuaded, is the right ar- 
rangement. For according to (2) and (3), 
the balance of the sentence would be de- 
stroyed, no adjunct of authority being 
given to one member of it, and both to the 
other: and (1) is hardly consistent with 
the arrangement of the clauses, the paren- 
thetical portion beginning far more natu- 
rally with the participle than with ἐν τῷ 
ov.,—not to mention that the common 
formula of the Apostles’ speaking authori- 
tatively, is ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι ᾿Ιησοῦ xp. or the 
like: see Acts iii. 16; xvi. 18; 2 Thess. 
iii. 6. The sentence then will stand :—(I 
have decreed),—in the name of our Lord 
Jesus (when ye have been assembled to- 
gether and my spirit with the power of 
our Lord Jesus), (i. 6. “1 myself, in spirit, 
endowed by our Lord Jesus with apostolic 
power: σὺν τῇ dur. belongs to τοῦ ἐμοῦ 
πνεύμ., and is not, as in Chrys.,—see avove 
—merely an element in the assembly) to 
deliver such an one (reff.) to Satan for 
the destruction of his flesh, that his 
spirit may be saved in the day of the 
Lord. What does this sentence import ? 
Not, mere excommunication, though it is 
doubtless included. It was a delegation to 
the Corinthian church of a special power, 
reserved to the Apostles themselves, of in- 
Jlicting corporeal death or disease as a 
punishment for sin. Of this we have no- 
table examples in the case of Ananias and 
Sapphira, and Elymas, and another hinted 
at 1 Tim. i. 20. The congregation itself 
could αἴρειν ἐκ «éoov,—but it could not 
παραδοῦναι τῷ σατανᾷ eis ὄλεθρον τῆς 
σαρκός, without the authorized concur- 


pd 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 507 
- \ wn ΄“ ~ 
5 P παραδοῦναι τὸν 4 τοιοῦτον τῷ σατανᾷ Peis ' ὄλεθρον » = 1 Tim. 1.20, 
uke xxiii. 
A , Ω“ Ν A a , A , A 
τῆς “σαρκός, ἵνα τὸ " πνεῦμα σωθῇ ἐν TH ἱήμερᾳ τοῦ Fyre 
7 6 ᾽ \ νὰ ΄ ς a > ” o p Mark xiii. 12. 
κυρίου. οὐ καλὸν τὸ " καύχημα ὑμῶν. οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι Eph. iv. 19. 
A ’ or κ᾿ Z om sa. il. 1 Ἃ 
νυ μικρὰ ** Cuun ὅλον τὸ Ὗ φύραμα 52 ζυμοῖ ; 7 4 ἐκκαθά- « Acts και! 22 
\ \ , “ 5 , ΄ 1 Thess. v. 3. 
pate τὴν ὃ παλαιὰν * ζύμην, iva ἦτε νέον Υ φύραμα, καθώς * 2 Thess. 1.9. 
1 Tim. vi. 9 
only. Prov. xxi. 7. 5 Matt. xxvi. 41 Mk. Rom. ii. 28, 29. viii. 4 al. t ch. i 8 reff. 
u Rom. iv. 2 reff. v Gal. v. 9. w = John vii. 33 al. x Matt. xiii. 
33. xvi. 6. Exod. xii. 15 al. y Rom. ix. 21 reff. = Exod. viii. 3. z(in N. T. 


a2 Tim. ii. 21 only. Deut. 
b Rom. vi. 6 reff. 2 Cor. iii. 


alw. w. 0A.) as above (w). Matt. xiii. 33} L. only. Hoos. vii. 4. 
xxvi. 13. Judg. vii. 4 B al. [δυκιμ. A Ald. compl.) only. 
14. 1 John il. 7. 


5. for τὸν τοιουτ., avrov ΕἾ -ΟῪ Syr syr-mg eth]. rec aft κυρίου ins inoov, with 
LN rel am(with tol [flor) φῦ} Chr,[(and ms,) Bas,] Thl (ec Orig-int, Aug: ie. 
χριστου D demid [Ambrst]: mnuwy ino. xp. AFP m 17 [vulg-clem fuld harl Syr] 
(nuwy and xp. syr-w-ast) [copt arm] Orig,{-int, Chr, Thdor-mops-c,] Thdrt [Lucif, 
Ambr, Pel}: om B Orig,-int,[-c, Eus,] Tert, Hil, Aug, Pac,. (16 seems evident that 
κυριον alone was the origl, and the other varr are additions.) 

6. for (vuor, δολοι D'-gr Bas-ed Hesych(appy): corrumpit vulg D-lat Iren, Orig- 
int, Lucif; [Ambrst Aug,]: txt ABC D?-gr FLPN rel ([Orig,-c, Chrsepe Bas, Cyr, 
Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc ]. 

7. rec aft exxa@apare ins ovy, with CLPN? rel syr [eth Cyr-p, Euthal-ms Damasc] 
Thdrt Thi Orig-int,[-c,]: om ΑΒ ΕΝ 1 vulg Syr [copt goth spec] Clem, Bas, Chr, 


(Ec Tert Cypr, Lucif, Ambrst [Pel]. 


rence of the Apostle’s πνεύματος, σὺν τῇ 
Suv. τ. Kup. Nu. ᾿Ιησοῦ. What the ὄλε- 
θρος τ. σαρκός was to be, does not appear : 
certainly more than the mere destruction of 
his pride and lust by repentance, as some 
(Estius, Beza, Grot., al.) suppose: rather, as 
Chrys., ἵνα μαστίξῃ αὐτὸν ἕλκει πονηρῷ ἢ 
νόσῳ ἑτέρᾳ. Hom. xv. p. 127. Estius’s 
objection to this, that in 2 Cor. 11. and vii. 
we find no trace of such bodily chastise- 
ment, is not to the point,—because we have 
no proof that this παράδοσις was ever in- 
Jlicted,—nor does the Apostle command 
it, but only describes it as his own deter- 
mination, held as it were in terrorem over 
the offender. See note on ver. 13. 

Obs., σαρκός, the offending element, not 
σώματος. Paul could not say ὄλεθρον τοῦ 
σώματος, seeing that the body is to partake 
of the salvation of the spirit ;—but not the 
σάρξ, seech.xv.50. 5. ἵνα τὸ tv. σωθῇ | 
The aim of the ὄλεθρ. τ. cap.,—which he 
said ἤδη τῷ διαβόλῳ νόμους τιθείς, καὶ οὐκ 
ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸν περαιτέρω προβῆναι, as Chrys. 
p- 128. Thus the proposed punishment, 
severe as it might seem, would be in reality 
a merciful one, tending to the eternal hap- 
piness of the offender. A greater contrast 
to this can hardly be conceived, than the 
terrible forms of excommunication subse- 
quently devised, and even now in use in the 
Romish church, under the fiction of dele- 
gated apostolic power. The delivering to 
Satan for the destruction of the spirit, can 
belong only to those who do the work of 
Satan. Stanley remarks, “ For the popu- 
lar constitution of the early Corinthian 
church, see Clem. Rom. i. 44 (p. 297): 
where the rulers of that society are de- 


scribed as having been appointed συνευ- 
δοκησάσης τῆς ἐκκλησίας waons.” 

6.] “Ηον inconsistent with your harbour- 
ing such an one, appear your high-flown 
conceits of yourselves !’ καύχημα, 
your matter οὗ glorying. Are you 
not aware that a little leaven imparts a 
character to the whole lump? That this 
is the meaning, and not, ‘that a little 
leaven will, if not purged out, leayen the 
whole lump,’ is manifest from the point 
in hand, viz. the inconsistency of their 
boasting : which would not appear by their 
danger of corruption hereafter, but by 
their character being actually lost. One 
of them was a fornicator of a fearfully de- 
praved kind, tolerated and harboured: by 
this fact, the character of the whole was 
tainted. 7.) The παλαιὰ ζύμη is not 
the man, but the crime attaching to their 
character as a church, which was a remnant 
of their unconverted state, their παλαιὸς 
ἄνθρωπος. This they are to purge out from 
among them. The éxxaédp. alludes to the 
careful ‘ purging out’ from the houses of 
every thing leavened before the commence- 
ment of the feast of unleavened bread. 
Schottgen, Hor. Hebr., in loc., gives a full 
account of the extreme care with which 
this was done. See also Stanley’s note. 
That ye may be a new lump (opposed to 
the παλαιὸς ἄνθρωπος of old and dissolute 
days), a8 ye are (normally and by your 
Christian profession) unleavened (i.e. dead 
to sin and free from it). This indicating 
the state by profession, the normal state, 
as a fact, and the grounding of exhortations 
on it, is common enough with our Apostle, 
—see Rom. vi. 3, 4: ch. iii. 16, al. freq., 


508 


c here bls. 
Matt. xxv. 
17. Mark 


Luke xxi. 1, w 

7. Acts xn. 
3. xx. 6 only. ? i hia Bk ᾿ 
Tevit.il 4, κρινείας καὶ " ἀληθείας. 
τ, 

d Matt. xxvi. 2, &c. jj. 4 Kings xxiii. 22. 

f of Christ here only. = Acts xiv. J3 reff. 

h here only. Exod. ν. 1. Deut. xvi. 15. 

k Rom. i. 29. 1 Acts iii. 26. 

n = John iii. 21. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. Υ. 
" c Μ Ν Ν \ de ’ ΄ ~ ef 3 ,0. ’ 
ἐστε “ ἄζυμοι' καὶ γὰρ τὸ ὁ πάσχα ἡμῶν “ἴ ἐτύθη χριστός. 
δ ε ὥςτε " ἑορτάζωμεν μὴ tev ν᾿ ζύμῃ " παλαιᾷ μηδὲ ' ἐν 
ζύμῃ %* κακίας καὶ * πονηρίας, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν © ἀζύμοις ™ εἰλι- 


e Mark xiv. 12. Luke xxii. 7. Exod. xii. 21. 

g = ch. xi. 33, xiv. 39. xv. 58. Phil. ii. 12. iv. 1. 

i = ch. iv. 21 reff. jch. xiv. 20 reff. 
m 2 Cor. i, 12. ii. 17 only τ. {(-νῆς, Phil. i. 10.) 


rec aft πασχ. nuwy adds ὑπερ ἡμῶν (a doctrinal gloss), with C3L P(uu.) &% rel syr> 


goth Hip, 
copt eth | 


! 
ε 


Cyr, Cypr, Tert, Ambrst Jer [Augsepe Zeno}. 


[syr-mg-gr |. (C is here illegible.) 


Orig, Meth, [Cyr-p,| Thdrt Pseud-Ath, Th] Ge: om ABC!DER? 17 lats 
arm | Clem, Origsepe(inss vary,;) Mcion-e, [Dial, Eus,] Archel Ath, Chr, 


elz εθυθη: txt ABDFLPR rel 


ins o bet χριστος Ια, 


8. εορταζομεν A D[-gr} Pd [goth Orig,]: txt BCFLN rel [latt syrr copt eth arm 


Origy-C)-iNtsepe Ke]. παλαιας P. 


movnpias, πορνειας Fi -gr]. (G-lat has both.) 


and involves no tautology here, any more 
than elsewhere. An unfortunate inter- 
pretation has been given to these words, 
—‘as ye are now celebrating the feast of 
unleavened bread ;’ and has met with some 
recent defenders, e. g. Wieseler,—and Co- 
nybeare, Life and Epistles of St. Paul, edn. 
2, vol. ii. p. 40, note. but first, the words 
will not admit it; for ἄζυμοι cannot 
(as joined immediately with ἐν ἀζύμοις, 
ver. 8) without much harshness be ap- 
plied in its literal sense to the celebrators 
of the feast, but must indicate the material 
which was unleavened, see reff.,—&prov 
Cumithy, ἄζυμον, Athenzeus iii. 109, and 
Gen. xix. 3; Exod. xxix. 2. Secondly, the 
celebration of a Jewish feast would cer- 
tainly not be predicated without remark 
of a whole mixed congregation of Gentiles 
and Jews, even supposing that the Gentile 
converts did celebrate it with the Jews. 
It is no answer to this, to cite passages 
(see Conyb. and Howson, ubi supra), where 
he seems to treat mixed churches, 6. g. 
Gal. iv. 8; Rom. vii. 1; xi. 18, as if they 
belonged wholly to one or other of their 
component elements. For this is not a 
parallel case. He would here, as above, 
be distinctly predicating, as a fact, of the 
whole church, a practice which he himself 
would have been the first to deprecate. 
See Gal. iv. 10. Thirdly, it is not at all 
probable that the Apostle would either ad- 
dress the Corinthians as engaged in a feast 
which he, at Ephesus, was then celebrat- 
ing, seeing that it would probably de over 
before his letter could be delivered,—or 
would anticipate their being engaged in it 
when they received his letter, if it were 
yet to come. For be it remembered, that 
in the sense required, they would only be 
ἄζυμοι during seven days. Here again, Ido 
not see how the example of “a birth-day 
letter to a friend in India,” adduced by 
Mr. Conybeare, as an answer to my objec- 
tion, will apply. It seems to me that if 


for unde, μη B Orig, (txt,-c;). for 


strictly considered, in detail, it tells my 
way, not his. But, fourthly,—and even 
could all the other objections be answered, 
this would remain in its full force,—the re- 
ference is one wholly alien from the habit 
and spirit of our Apostle. The ordinances 
of the old law are to him zot points on 
whose actual observance to ground spiri- 
tual lessons, but things passed away in 
their literal acceptance, and become spiri- 
tual verities in Christ. He thus regards 
the Corinthian church as (normally) the 
unleavened lump at the Passover ; he be- 
seeches them to put away the old leaven 
from among them, to correspond with this 
their normal state: for, he adds, it is high 
time for us to be ἄζυμοι in very deed (καὶ 
yap—so Xen. Anab. v. 8. 7, ἀκούσατε, 
ἔφη, καὶ yap ἄξιον. It introduces a power- 
ful reason, for (on other accounts and) 
also. See Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 137, 
8), seeing that our Passover was sacri- 
ficed (see reff.: and cf. Heb. ix. 26, 
28), even Christ (the days of unleavened 
bread began with the Passover-sacritice) : 
therefore (reff.) let us keep the feast (not 
the actual Passover, but the continned 
Passover-feast of Christians on whose be- 
half Christ has died. There is no change 
of metaphor: the Corinthians are the liv- 
ing ἄρτοι, as believers are the living stones 
of the spiritual temple) not in (as our ele- 
ment) the old leaven (general—our old 
unconverted state), nor (particular) in the 
leaven of vice and wickedness (the geni- 
tives are of apposition—‘the Jeaven 
which is vice and wickedness ;’ see Winer, 


edn. 6, ὃ 59. 8. a), but in the unleavened- 


ness (τὰ ἄζυμα, unleavened things, see 
Exod. xii. 15, 18) of sincerity and truth. 
The view here maintained is that of Chrys., 
καὶ αὐτὸς δὲ ἐπιμένει TH μεταφορᾷ, ἀναμιμ- 
νήσκων παλαιᾶς αὐτοὺς ἱστορίας, καὶ πάσχα 
καὶ ἀζύμων, καὶ τῶν εὐεργεσιῶν τῶν τότε 
καὶ τῶν νῦν, καὶ τῶν κολάσεων καὶ τῶν τι- 
μωριῶν" €opTiy ἄρα ὁ παρὼν καιρός. Kat 


ABCDF 
LPN ab 
edtgh 
klmn 
υ 11. 47 


8---11. ΠΡῸΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 509 


9" γραψα ὑμῖν ἐν ° τῇ ἐπιστολῇ μὴ ? συναναμίγνυσθαι © (see note) 


compare 


, > ΄ a ᾿ ’ a , / 
4 πόρνοις" 19 ov "πάντως τοῖς δ᾽ πόρνοις τοῦ κόσμου τού- 2 Gor. vi 8 
tol. iv. 16. 


3 “ / ‘ 
του ἢ τοῖς δ πλεονέκταις Kal " ἅρπαξιν ἢ ** εἰδωλολώάτραις, 1 Thess. v.27. 


oi a4 y = , <7 a ᾿ 5 μᾷ 1] oa E 2 nee iii. 
ἐπεὶ ¥ ὠφείλετε * apa ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου ἐξελθεῖν: 1! νῦν Se}. 
: 2 Thess. iii. 
14 only. Hos. vii. 8 A Ald. compl. (συμμίγν., B) only. q as below (s,t). 1 Tim. i.10, Heb, 
xii. 16. xiii. 4only +. Sir. xxii. 16, 17 only. r see Rom, iii. 9 reff. s ch. vi. 
9. Eph. v.5. _ tas above (s). Rev. xxi. 8. xxii. 15. u as above (s). here bis 
only t+. Sir. xiv. 9 only. v here bis. Matt. vii. 15. Luke xviii. 11. ch. vi. 10 only. Gen. 
xlix. 27 only. w as above (s, t). here bis. ch. x. 7 only +. (-τρεία, οἷν, κ.14.} χ οἷν, 
vii. 14 only. y Rom. xv. | reff. 


10. rec ins ka bef ov παντως, with D3LPR3 rel syr Orig-ec Chr Thdrt ΤῊ] Ge: txt 
ABCD'FN! 17 latt copt [goth] Orig[-int,] Tert, Lucif, Aimbrst Pel. τουτου bef 
τ. κοσμ. 1). rec (for kas) ἢ (alteration to conform to the general context), with 
D?4[-gr] LX? rel [vulg E-lat syrr copt goth arm] Orig[-c,-int, Bas, Damase] Chr, 
Thdrt Lucif: txt ABC D!{and lat} FPR! m[y καὶ) 17 eth. rec opeiAete (corrn 
JSrom misunderstanding : see note), with b?P rel [ Bas, Euthal-ms} Chr, Thdrt: txt 
AB'CDFL® cn 17. 47 latt Damase Tert, Lucif, [Ambrst]. 

11. ree vu, with CD!*N? rel Orig{-c, | Chr, ΤῊ] Gc : txt AB [D9(Tischdf)] FLPR$ 
dkn17 [Sevrn-c, Euthal-ms] Bas, Chr, Thdrt Damase. 


γὰρ εἰπὼν ἑορτάζωμεν, οὐκ ἐπειδὴ πάσχα 
παρῆν, οὐδὲ ἐπειδὴ ἡ πεντηκοστή, ἔλεγεν, 
ἀλλὰ δεικνὺς ὅτι πᾶς 6 χρόνος ἑορτῆς ἐστι 
καιρὸς τοῖς Χριστιανοῖς διὰ τὴν ὑπερβολὴν 
“ὧν δοθέντων ἀγαθῶν. Hom. xv. p. 128. 

With regard to the chronological 
superstructure which has been built (by 
Wieseler and others) on this passage, that 
the Epistle was written shortly before 
Easter, we cannot of course say that 
the approach of the Passover may not 
have suggested to the Apostle this simili- 
tude: and we know from ch. xvi. 8 that 
he was looking forward to Pentecost. But 
further than this it would not be safe to 
assume: see Prolegg. to this Epistle, ὃ vi. 
3, 4. 9—13.] Correction of their mis- 
understanding of a former command of 
his respecting keeping company with forni- 
cutors. 9.11 wrote to you in my 
letter (not this present epistle, which τῇ 
ἐπιστολῇ might mean, see reff.,—for tliere 
is nothing in the preceding part of this Epis- 
tle which can by any possibility be so inter- 
preted,—certainly not either ver. 2 or ver. 
6, which are commonly alleged by those 
who thus explain it—and ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ 
would be a superfluous and irrelevant addi- 
tion, if he meant the letter on which he 
was now engaged :—but, a former epistle, 
which has not come down to us :—ef. the 
similar expression, ref. 2 Cor. used with 
reference to this Hpistle,—and see note on 
2 Cor.i. 15,16. So Ambrose, Calvin, Beza, 
Estius, Grot., Calov., Bengel, Wetst., Mosh., 
De Wette, Meyer: so also Lightfoot, under- 
standing however an Epistle committed to 
Timothy, see ch. iv. 17: which could not 
be, as Timothy was not coming to them till 
after they had received this Epistle, ch. xvi. 
10, and thus the words would be unintel- 
ligible to them :—on the other side are 
Chrys., Theodoret, ‘Theophyl., Krasm., 
Corn.-a-lapide, Wolf, al. It has been sug- 


gested (see Stanley, in loc.) that the whole 
passage, ch. v.9—vi.8, may have beena post- 
script or note inserted subsequently to the 
rest of the Epistle, and referring especially 
to ch. vi. 9—20) not to keew company 
with fornicators. 10.] οὐ πάντως 
limits the prohibition, which perhaps had 
been complained of owing to its strictness, 
and the impossibility of complying with it 
in so dissolute a place as Corinth, and ex- 
cepts the fornicators of this world, i.e. who 
are not professing Christians: not under 
all circumstances with the fornicators 
of thismworld: so Theophr. C. P. vi. 25, 
cited by Wetst. on Rom. 111. 9, ποιεῖ γὰρ 
οὐ πάντως-,-ἀλλ᾽ ἐὰν OVAN τις ἢ ὑπόκαυστος. 

ov, not μή, because not the whole 
context of the prohibition is negatived, but 
only one portion of it, and thus οὐ πάντως 
τ. π. τ. κόσ. τ. Stands together as one idea. 
So Thucyd. i. 51, ὑποτοπήσαντες am’ ᾿Αθη- 
νῶν εἶναι οὐχ ὅσας ἑώρων ἀλλὰ πλείους. 
See more examples in Hartung, Partikel- 
lehre, ii. p. 125, 6. τοῦ κόσμ. 
τούτου, belonging to the number of unbe- 
lievers, — Christians who were πόρνοι be- 
ing expressly excluded. So Paul ever uses 
this expression, ch. iii. 19; ‘2 Cor. iv. 45) 
Eph. ii. 2. πλεονέκταις and ἅρπαξιν 
are joined by καί, ἃ5. belonging to the same 
class—that of covetous persons ;---πλεονέκ- 
της being an avaricious person, not a la- 
seivious one, as sometimes rendered (e. g. 
Conybeare, vol. ii. p. 41, edn. 2), nor does it 
seem to have any where merely this mean- 
ing; see Eph. iv. 19 and note. Compare 
on the other side Stanley’s note here, which 
however has not convinced me. The root 
of the two sins being the same, viz. lust or 
greed, they come often to be mentioned 
together and as if running into one an- 
other. See Trench, N. T. Syn. pp. 91, 2. 
On ἅρπαξιν, Stanley remarks, “It is 
diflicult to see why it should be expressly 


510 ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOT® A. V. as: 
teh. vi 10 only ἔγραψα ὑμῖν μὴ Ῥσνναναμίγνυσθαι, ἐάν τις ἀδελφὸς 
>rov. XXv1. 2 , > 
a1. Cpe, ὀνομαζόμενος ἢ “ὃ πόρνος ἢ ἃ πλεονέκτης ἢ SY εἰδωλολά- 
τρία, 1 Tim. Tong  % λοίδορος ἢ ὃ μέθυσος ἢ " ἅρπαξ, τῷ ὃ τοιούτῳ μηδὲ 
. vi. 1 ζ 
gr Prov. ς συνεσθίειν. 18 ἀτί γάρ. wo “τοὺς “ ἔξω ἴ κρίνειν ; 
ταν 9 οὐχὶ Ε τοὺς ξ ἔσω ὑμεῖς ' κρίνετε; 18." τοὺς δὲ “ ἔξω ὁ θεὸς 
Sir. xix. 1, X : ". ρ ‘¢ 5 : 
i. - / “ Ν 5 A . A 
bres. (κρίνει. ™ E€apate tov πονηρὸν ἐξ ὑμῶν ' αὐτῶν 
e Luke xv. 2. 


Acts x. 41. xi. 3. Gal. ii. 12only. Gen. xliii. 32. Ps. c. 5 only. d here only. 
xvi. 10. Matt. vii. 29.) see Matt. xxvii. 4. John xxi. 22, 23. e (Acts xxvi. 11. 
bis. Col iv. 5. 1 Thess. iv.12. Mark iv. ll only. (ef. τοῖς ἐκτός, Sir. prol.) 
ni. 7. g = here only. see Rom. vii. 22. 

. Devt. xvii. 7, 12. xxiv. 7. 


(Mark v.7. 2 Kings 
2 Cor. iv. 16.) -- here 
f = John viii. 15. Rom. 
2 Cor. iv. 16. Eph. iliv16. 3 Kings vi. 15. here 
1 see ch. i. 24, 


Steph for 7, #, with (B? D-gr, perhaps) F-lat G-lat arm Aug,: txt (not defined in 
the other uncials) vulg [D-lat | syrr copt goth eth Iren-int, Tert, [Lucif, Ambrst] Aug). 
πορν. n μεθ. ἢ €1d. ἡ λοιδ. ἡ TA. ἡ apr. C. εἰδωλ. ἡ πλεον. τὴ [arm]. 

for unde, μη Α 119 [Orig,]: μητε F. (non aut nec G-lat.) 

12. for τι, εἰ F[-gr]. rec aft μοι ins και, with D[-gr] L rel syr goth arm Chr, 
Thdrt Thl ec: om ABCFPN 17 latt Syr copt eth Orig{-c,] Chr, Tert, [Ambr, }. 

vuas ΟἹ. κρινειτε N'(txt N-corr’). 

13. κρινεῖ [B? P(Tischdf)]abdfg hk lo [vulg F-lat] arm lat-ff: txt L D-lat. 
(κρινει B! sed antea et mox «pew. Vere.) rec (for efapare) και εξαρειτε (και insd 
as above more than once, for connexion: but the abruptness is characteristic: -peire 
from Lxx-A), with D3L rel (¢ollite autem Syr, et tollite syr &c) [Orig-c,] Chr(om 
και ὃ and -pare ms, in Matthai) Thdrt: καὶ εξαρατε 17: txt ABCD!FPRN ἃ m latt copt 


goth arm [ Bas, Euthal-ms]. 


introduced here, especially if πλεονέκτης 
has the meaning of sensuality.” Cer- 
tainly: but not, if 7A. retains its proper 
meaning, as containing the key to πορνεία 
on the one hand, and ἁρπαγή on the other. 

ἐπεὶ ὠφ. For in that case ye 
must go out of the world,—as Chrys. and 
Theophyl., ἑτέραν οἰκουμένην ζητῆσαι. 
The past ὠφείλ., as ἔχρην, al., because the 
necessity would long ago have occurred and 
the act have passed. 11, νῦν δὲ ἔγραψα] 
But my meaning was .. . ;—‘ but, the 
case being so, that ye must needs consort 
with fornicators among the heathen, I wrote 
to you, not to consort, &e.’ That this 
is the meaning and not ‘ But now I write 
(the epistolary aorist), &c.,’ seems plain, 
from the use of ἔγραψα twice so close to- 
gether, and therefore probably in the same 
reference,—from thefact noticed by Meyer, 
that ifa contrast had beenintended between 
ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ and νῦν, ἐν τῇ ἐπ. must 
have preceded éypava:—and from tlie 
usage of νῦν δέ, of which Hartung, Par- 
tikellehre, ii. 25, gives examples, e.g Plut. 
Protag. p. 347, viv δὲ σφόδρα γὰρ καὶ περὶ 
τῶν μεγίστων ψευδόμενος δοκεῖς ἀληθῆ 
λέγειν, διὰ ταῦτά σε ἐγὼ Wéeyw,—and Ly- 
curg. Leocr, p. 138, ἐβουλόμην δ᾽ ἂν, ὦ 
ἄνδρες. . -. νῦν δὲ... See also Heb. 
xi. 16. Thus by the right rendering, we 
escape the awkward inference deducible 
from the ordinary interpretation,—that 
the Apostle had previously given a com- 
mand, and now retracted it. ἐάν τις] 
If one who is called a brother be, «ec. 
(Ecumenius, Augustine, Ambrose, Estius, 


al., join ὀνομαζόμενος with πόρνος, and 
understand it either as = ὀνομαστός, ‘ be a 
notorious πόρνος, &e., or ‘be named a 
πόρνος Ye.’ But ὀνομαζόμ. or even dvo- 
μαστός, in the bad sense, is hardly ad- 
missible,—and in either case Paul would 
have written ἀδελφός tis, the stress on 
ἀδελφός in that case requiring it to precede 
Tis, as it now precedes ὀνομαζόμενος. 
εἰδωλολάτρης | One who from any motive 
makes a compromise with the habits of the 
heathen, and partakes in their sacrifices : 
Chrys. well remarks, προκαταβάλλεται τὸν 
περὶ τῶν εἰδωλοθύτων λόγον ὃν μετὰ ταῦτα 
μέλλει γυμνάζεσθαι. μέθυσος was, 
in pure Greek, not used of a man, but of 
a woman only. So Phrynichus, p. 151 
(but see Lobeck’s note), μέθυσος ἀνὴρ 
οὐκ ἐρεῖς, ἀλλὰ μεθυστικός᾽ γυναῖκα δὲ 
ἐρεῖς μέθυσον kK. μεθύσην : and Pollux, vi. 
25 (Wetst.), μέθυσος ἐπὶ ἀνδρῶν Μενάνδρῳ 
δεδόσθω. Seeing that μηδὲ συνεσθίειν 
must imply a more complete separation 
than μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι, it cannot be 
applied to the ἀγάπαι (as Mosheim, al.), 
but must keep its general meaning,—not 
even to sit at table with such an one. 
This rule, as that in 2 Thess. iii. 14, re- 
gards only their private intercourse with 
the offending person: nothing is here said 
of public excommunication, though for 
some of these crimes it would be implied. 
12.] Ground of the above limita- 
tion. τί yap pot... .} for what 
concern of mine isit...% So Mlian, 
Var. H. vi. 11, τοὺς δὲ ἄλλους ἐῶ. τί γάρ 
for κωφοῖς κ. ἀνοῆτοις συμβουλεύειν τὰ 


ABCDF 
LPNab 
edfgh 
kimn 
017.47 


ἡ ὁ δ ὁ 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


511 


a ς a A ” . Ἀ 
εἐχὼν VI. 1 ΚΤολμᾷ τις ὑμῶν ' πρᾶγμα ' ἔχων ™ πρὸς © τὸν k= Αεἰον. 13. 
ABCFL ἡ α ; SNe »Ὸ ν 4.) 4 3. a oe = in 
Ρν δὺο ἢ €TEpov ὃ κρίνεσθαι Ρ ἐπὶ τῶν 4 ἀδίκων καὶ οὐχι Peml τῶν τον vib. 
defgh 1 here only.Xen. 
klmn Mem. ii. 9. 1. m = Acts xxiv. 19 reff. n Rom. ii. 1 reff. o = Matt. v. 
o 17, 47 τ δα. xxvi. 21. Job ix. 3. p = Acts xxiii. 30 reff. q = here only. see Gal. ii. 
red, 


CHap. VI. 1. ins εἰ bef vuwy ΑΓΡΊ al ἃ τὰ 17 syrr Chr, Thdrt. 


προς τ. ετερ. 


bef πραγμα εχων DF [copt goth Chr, | Thdrt Cypr [Ambrst. Aug, ].—om τὸν B. 


AvotteAéotata; see other examples in 
Wetst. τοὺς ἔξω] reff. It was among 
the Jews the usual term for the Gentiles. 
Cf. Schéttgen in loc. He means, ‘this 
might have been easily understood to be 
my meaning: for what concern have I 
with pronouncing sentence on the world 
without, or with giving rules of discipline 
for them? I could only have referred 
to persons among yourselves.’ 

οὐχὶ τοὺς ἔσω] “ Ex eo, quod in ecclesia 
fieri solet, interpretari debuistis monitum 
meum, ver. 9. Cives judicatis, non alienos: 
quanto magis ego.” Bengel. But lam not 
quite certain of this interpretation, which 
is also that of De Wette and Meyer, be- 
cause it would more naturally correspond to 
οὐχὶ τοὺς ἔσω καὶ ὑμεῖς κρίνετε; A prefer- 
able way seems to be this; ‘ My judgment 
was meant to lead your judgment. ‘This 
being the case, what concern had I with 
those without? Is it not on those within, 
that your judgments are passed?’ The 
arrangement mentioned by Theophylact, 
and adopted by Knatchbull, Hammond, 
Michaelis, Rosenm,, al., οὐχί: τοὺς ἔσω ὑμεῖς 
κρίνετε, ‘ No : those within do ye (imper.) 
judge, —is clearly wrong, for οὐχί is no 
answer to τί, and would require ἀλλά after 
it,—even supposing wo: τοὺς ἔξω κρίνειν 
and τοὺς ἔσω ὑμεῖς κρίνετε formed any 
intelligible logical contrast, which they do 
not. 13.] But those who are with- 

out Gop judgeth. The pres. κρίνει both 
expresses better the attribute and office of 
God, and answers better to the other pre- 
sents than the future κρινεῖ. I have there- 
fore retained it. The future perhaps came 
from Heb. xiii. 4. ‘ To judge those without, 
is God’s matter” These remarks about 
judging form a transition point to the sub- 
ject of the next chapter. But having now 
finished his explanation of the prohibition 
formerly given, and with it the subject of 
the fornicator among them, he gives, before 
passing on, a plain command in terms for 
the excommunication (but no more: not 


the punishment mentioned in vv. 3—5) of 


the offender. And this he does in the very 
words of Deut. xxiv. 7 (from which the 
reading καὶ ἐξαρεῖτε has come). ὑμῶν 
αὐτῶν is in Deut., but need not therefore 
lose its emphatic force: from among your 
own gelves. 
Cuap. V1. 1—11.] 


PROHIBITION 10 


SETTLE THEIR DIFFER CES IN THE LE- 
GAL COURTS OF THE HEATHEN: RATHER 
SHOULD THESE BE ADJUDGED AMONG 
THEMSELVES (1—6): BUT FAR BETTER 
NOT TO QUARREL—RATHER TO SUFFER 
WRONG, WAITING FOR JUSTICE TO BE 
DONE AT THE COMING OF THE LORD, 
WHEN ALL WHO DO WRONG SHALL BE 
EXCLUDED FROM HIS KINGDOM (6—11). 
1.1 On τολμᾷ, Dares... , Bengel 
remarks, “ Grandi verbo notatur lesa ma- 
jestas Christianorum.” τις, no par- 
ticular individual, but any one: for he 
proceeds in the plur., vv. 4, 7. 
πρᾶγμα] So ref. and Demosth. κατὰ Στεφ. 
a. p. 1120, τῷ μὲν viet τῷ τούτου πολλῶν 
πραγμάτων ὄντων οὐ παρέστη πώποτε οὐδ᾽ 
ἐβοήθησεν ; κρίνεσθαι, reff., to go to 
law. So Eur. Med. 609, ὡς οὐ κρινοῦμαι 
τῶνδε σοὶ τὰ mAciova,—and Anthol. ii. 
30, δυεκώφῳ δύςκωφος ἐκρίνετο, καὶ πολὺ 
μᾶλλον ἦν ὁ κριτὴς τούτων τῶν δύο κωφό- 
τερος. Wetst. on Matt. v. 40. ἐπί 
(reff.), before, as judges. τῶν ἀδί- 
κων] οὐκ εἶπεν, ἐπὶ τῶν ἀπίστων, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ 
τῶν ἀδίκων, λέξιν θείς, Hs μάλιστα χρείαν 
εἶχεν εἰς τὴν προκειμένην ὑπόθεσιν, ὥςτε 
ἀποτρέψαι κ. ἀπαγαγεῖν. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ περὶ 
δίκης αὐτῷ 6 λόγος ἦν, οἱ δικαζόμενοι δὲ 
οὐδὲν οὕτως ἐπιζητοῦσιν, ὧς τὸ πολλὴν 
εἶναι πρόνοιαν τοῦ δικαίου παρὰ τοῖς δικά- 
ζουσιν, ἐντεῦθεν αὐτοὺς ἀποτρέπει, μονον- 
ουχὶ λέγων Ποῖ φέρῃ καὶ τί ποιεῖς, ἄνθρωπε, 
τοὐναντίον πάσχων ὧν ἐπιθυμεῖς, καὶ ὑπὲρ 
τοῦ τῶν δικαίων τυχεῖν ἀδίκοις ἐπιτρέπων 
ἀνθρώποις ; Chrys. Hom. xvi. p. 137. 
The Rabbinical prohibitions against going 
to law before Gentiles may be seen in 
Wetst.: e.g. “Statutum est, ad quod 
omnes Israelite obligantur, eum qui litem 
cum alio habet, non debere eam tractare 
coram gentilibus.” Tanchuma, xcii. 2. 
καὶ οὐχὶ ἐπὶ τ. ἁγίων] The Apostle 
does not mean that the Christians had 
their courts of law, but that they should 
submit their differences to courts of arbi- 
tration among themselves. Such courts 
of arbitration were common among the 
Jews. In Jos. Antt. xiv. 10. 17, there 
is a decree by which the Jews of Sardis 
are allowed the use of 8 σύνοδος ἰδία 
το ἀν καὶ τόπος ἴδιος, ἐν ᾧ τά τε πράγ- 
ματα κ. τὰς πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἀντιλογίας 
κρίνουσι. Theodoret shews, ὡς οὐκ 
ἐγαντία ταῦτα τοῖς πρὸς Ῥωμαίους γραφεῖ- 


519 ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN 
r= Acts ix. 13 : ἁγίων; 9 ἢ 
re a \ 
oa 9, 15, 16, Porsaiitig και εἰ 
t ie iii. 17 
al. fr. 


u = Matt. xix. 
28. Luke xxii, 30. see Dan. vii. 22. 


bis. James ii.6 only. Judg. vy. 10 B Ald. compl. 


2. rec om #, with D3[-gr] L rel: 


ἢ "οὐκ οἴδατε OTL οἱ 
Vv 7 δ, αν u / e ‘ 
ev ὑμῖν “ κρίνεται ὁ κόσμος, 


Y@IOTS A. 


“ \ t f tu 
ἅγιοι τὸν ‘ κόσμον ™ κρι- 


Υ ἀνάξιοί 


Acts xvii. 31. see note. 
(-tws, ch. xi. 27.) 


w here 
x here 


ins ABC D'fand lat] FPX am 17 Syr syr-w-ast 


copt arm Clem, Chr, Damase (Hil, Ambr Ambrst, an nescitis vulg F-lat Cypr Aug 


Pel}. far ει, εαν Ε: 


om D!fand lat] k! Hil,. 


8, 4, 5, 6. om A (homeotel, -ἰστων ending ver 2, and also ver 6). 


ow (Rom. xiii. 1 ff.) :— οὐ yap ἀντιτείνειν 
κελεύει τοῖς ἄρχουσιν, ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἠδικη- 
μένοις νομοθετεῖ μὴ κεχρῆσθαι τοῖς ἄρ- 
χουσι. See Stanley in loc., who thinks 
the existence of such courts is here im- 
plied. But his support of his view from 
the Ap. Constt. and the Clementines, cir. 
A.D. 150, would only go to shew that 
the Apostie’s injunction here had been 
obeyed, and that those courts were the 
result. 2.1] οὐκ οἴδατε (161) ap- 
peals to an axiomatic truth. οἱ 
ἅγιοι τ. κ΄ κριν.} that the saints shall 


judge the ψου]ᾶ 1---ἰ. 6. as assessors of 


Christ, at His coming: so Daniel vii. 22 
(Theod.), ἦλθεν ὃ παλαιὸς ἡμερῶν, καὶ τὸ 
κρίμα ἔδωκεν ἁγίοις ὑψίστου ; see also 
Matt. xix. 28. So Calv., Beza, Grot., Est., 
Wolf, Olsh., Billroth, Rtickert, Meyer, 
De Wette, All attempts to elude this plain 
meaning of the words are fucile: whether 
of Chrys., Theophyl., Theodor- Mops., Theo- 


doret, Erasm ,---2κρινοῦσι δὲ οὐχὶ αὐτοὶ 
/ > ~ > \ 
καθήμενοι Kk. λόγον ἀπαιτοῦντες, ἀλλὰ 


κατακρινοῦσι (Matt. xii. 41, 42), Chrys.— 
for this would be no parallel to the case 
in hand ;—or of Lightf., Vitringa, Bengel 
(but only as a preludium futurorum), al., 
—‘ quod Christiani futuri sint magistiatus 
et judices in mundo, —Lightf., which does 
not satisfy ver. 3, nor agree with the Apos- 
tle’s earnest Bo ge (see 2 Cor. v. al., 
and note on 2 Thess. ii. 2) that the coming 
of Christ was near at hand: or of Mosheim, 
Krnesti, Rosenm., ‘quod Christiani pro- 
faunos judicare possint,’ Rosenm., in the 
sense of ch. ii. 15, 16,—for no such mean- 
ing can be conveyed by the future, which is 
fixed here by the following κρινοῦμεν. 
καί brings out an inconsequence or a con- 
tradiction between the members of the sen- 
tence, which it is the object of the question 
to remove: so Xen. Cyr. s.r 2h, GAA 
εἴποι ἄν τις, ὅτι παῖδες ὄντες ἐμάνθανον. 
καὶ πότερα παῖδές εἰσι φρονιμώτεροι ὥςτε 
μαθεῖν τὰ φραζόμενα κ. δεικνύμενα ἢ ἄν- 
δρες ; see Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 147. 
ἐν ὑμῖν] Chrys. attempts by this 
prepos. to defend his view (see above), -- 
οὐ γὰρ εἶπεν, ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ὑμῖν 
(‘ exemplo yestro’), But in vain: nor as 


Grot., al., is ἐν, by :—for κρίνεσθαι ἐν is 
the expression for to be judged before, as 
judges : 
judgment, its conditioning element, as in 
ref. Acts. So Aristides, Platon. ii. p. 214 
(Wetst.), τινὲς ἤδη λέγονται τῶν ἡρώων 
ἐν θεοῖς δικασταῖς κριθῆναι, and Polyb. 
ν. 29. 6, Πτολεμαῖον . . .. κρίνας ἐν 
τοῖς Μακεδόσιν ἀπέκτεινε. See other 
examples in Wetst. Hence (Meyer) by 
this ‘coram vobis’ it appears plainly, 
though it might be otherwise inferred from 
the context, that the Saints are to be the 
judges, sitting in judgment. ἀνάξιοί 
ἐστε κριτ. ἔλαχ.] are ye unworthy of 
(i.e. to hold or pronounce) the smallest 
judgments ὃ κριτήρια cannot be, as usually 
rendered, ‘matters to be judged :’ it signi- 
fies either (1) criteria, lit. or metaphor., 
which sense is irrelevant here: (2) ἐγὶ- 
bunals, courts of justice :—so Glossar. 
κριτήριον, δικαστήριον, and Polyb. ix. 33. 
12, κοινὸν ἐκ πάντων τῶν Ἑλλήνων καθίσας 
κριτήριον, ---οὐ (3) judgments held in such 
courts, judicia,—as Lucian. bis accus. (§ 
25, p. 253, ed. Hagan. 1526); Hermes 
describes Pyrrhon as being not in court, 
ὅτι οὐδὲν ἡγεῖται κριτήριον ἀληθὲς εἶναι : 
to which Δίκη replies, τοιγαροῦν ἐρήμην 
αὐτοῦ καταδικάτωσαν. The last meaning 
suits both this place and ver. 4. So 
Cicero speaks of ‘in privatis minimarum 
rerum judiciis.” Here, they are ἐλάχιστα 
in comparison with the weighty judgments 
which shall be held hereafter ; = βιωτικά, 
ver. 4. 3.] The same glorious office 
of Christians is again referred to, and even 


a more striking point of contrast brought 


out. ἀγγέλους always, where not 
otherwise specified, good angels: and 
therefore Rae the λειτουργικὰ πνεύματα 
of Heb. i. 14: but exactly Aow we shall 
judge bier is not revealed tous. Chrys., 
Theodoret, (cum., Theophyl., and most 
Commentators interpret it of bad angels, or 
of bad and good together: and Chrys. as 
before, understands that the bad angels 
will be condemned by comparison with us, 
ὅταν γὰρ αἱ ἀσώματοι δυνάμεις αὐταὶ ἔλατ- 
τον ἡμῶν εὑρεθῶσιν ἔχουσαι τῶν σάρκα περι- 
βεβλημένων, χαλεπώτερυν δώσουσι δίκην: 


ὙΣ, 


the judges being the vehicle of 


ABCFL 
PNrabe 
defgh 
kimn 


ἐστε * κριτηρίων ἐλαχίστων ; ; ὃ SovK οἴδατε ὅτε ἀγγέλους ο 17. 47 


v Luke xi. 15. 
only. Jer. xv. 19 Ed-vat. F Ald. compl.(not ABNI.) Sir. xxv. 8 (not δὲ) only. 





2—5. 


»“ / f ‘ “ 
υ κρινοῦμεν, Y μήτι Yye 5 βιωτικά ; 4. βιωτικὰ * μὲν οὗν 
Χ ΄ BN vv \ b , Us ’ “ ᾿] / 
κριτήρια ἐὰν ἔχητε, τοὺς "ἢ ἐξουθενημένους ἐν TH ἐκκλησίᾳ, 


τούτους “καθίζετε. 


b Rom. xiv. 3 reff. 
ἃ = ch, vil. 35 reff. 


ech. xv. 34 only. 
18. John xviii. 22. pr 53} 


Gal. iii. 3. 


3. for μητι ye, ποσω μαλλον F vulg eth Pel. 


5. for Aeyw, λαλω 5. (C doubtful.) 


p. 188. Butsee above on ver. 2. μήτι 
γε, to say nothing of, ‘ut omittam:’ so 
Demosth. p. 24. 29, οὐκ ἔνι δ᾽ αὐτὸν ap- 
γοῦντα οὐδὲ τοῖς φίλοις ἐπιτάττειν ὑπὲρ 
αὐτοῦ τι ποιεῖν, μή τί γε δὴ τοῖς θεοῖς. 
See Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 155. 
βιωτικά, matters relating to 6 Bios, @ 
man’s livelihood: see ref. and Clem. Alex. 
Strom. vii. 12 [69], p. 873 P., θλιβόμενον 
ἐπικουφίζει mapauvdlais..., Tats βιωτικαῖς 
χρείαις ἐπικουρῶν. It is a word of later 
Greek usage, see Lexx. In classic Greek it 
would beta τοῦ Biov. The meaning here 
then will be civil causes, matters of meum 
and tuwm, as De Wette. ‘The sense is best 
with only a comma at κρινοῦμεν. 
4. βιωτικά is emphatically repeated, as 
being the only sort of κριτήρια which were 
in question here. Meyer compares Herod. 
vii. 104, τὰ ἂν ἐκεῖνος ἀνώγῃ" ἀνώγει 
δὲ THT ἀεί, and Aristoph. Ran. 287 f. 
μὲν οὖν, ‘2mmo vero,’ reff. (see below). 
It corrects a foregoing misapprehension : 
so Soph. Cd. Col. 31, ““ἢ δεῦρο προ-- 
στείχοντα κἀξορμώμενον ;" “kal δὴ μὲν 
οὖν παρόντα. Hartung, Partilkell. ii. 400. 
See also Moulton’s Winer, p. 556, note 2. 
κριτήρια, again, not matters to be 
judged, but judgments: the matters about 
which, are expressed in βιωτικά. The 
following words may be rendered in two 
ways: either, (a) ‘Yea, rather (so far from 
remembering your high prospect, of judg- 
ing angels, your practice is), if ye have in 
hand judgments concerning civil matters, 
—those men who are of no account in the 
church (viz. the heathen), those you set 
up (place on the bench) as judges’ (i.e. 
by bringing your causes before them, you 
set them up as judges over you). καθίζω 
occurs in this sense in Plato, Legg. ix. p. 
873, ἐὰν δὲ ἄψυχόν τι ψυγῆς ἄνθρωπον 
στερήσῃ,. .. δικαστὴν μὲν αὐτῷ καθιζέτω 
τῶν γειτόνων τὸν ἐγγύτατον 6 TposhKwr 
yéevet,—and Polyb. ix. 33. 12, cited above 
on κριτήριον. Thus, making καθίζ. in- 
dicative, Valla, Castal., Luther, Calov., 
Wolf, al., Schrader, Riickert, Olsh., De 
Wette, Meyer. But (8) Syr., Vulg., Chrys., 
Theodoret, Theophyl., Erasm., Beza, Calvin, 
Grot., Estius, Bengel, Wetst., al., take 
καθίζετε as imperative, and τοὺς ἐξουθεν. 
ἐν τ. ἐκκλ. as ‘minimos de piorum plebe, 
So E. V.: set them to judge who are 
least esteemed in the ehurch. And to 


ΝΟ ὙΠ: 


ΠΡῸΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


ο 5 d Tv ‘ ue 3 \ ς “ Xe { oe 
pos “ἐντροπὴν ὑμῖν λέγω. * οὕτως 


c trans., Acts ii. 30. 
Ps, xxxlv. 26. 


515 


y here only t+. 

z here bis. 
Luke xxi. 

34 only +. 

a = Ver, 74 ch. 
ix. 25. Phil. 
ik. 23. 

1 Kings xxx. 21. mid., Matt. xix. 28. 

f = Matt. xxvi. 40. Mark vii. 


Eph. i. 20 only. 
4. for μεν ovy, your F, 


this last interpretation I am_ inclined 
to accede, both from the context and 
from the arrangement of the words. The 
context is this: ‘ Your office is to judge 
angels :? mere business causes of this 
world are almost beneath your notice. 
If such causes arise among you (he con- 
tinues in a lofty irony) set those to judge 
them who are of no account among you: 
—do not go out of your own number to 
others to have them judged: the meanest 
among you is capable of doing it. Let 
it be noticed that he is passing to ver. 7, 
where he insists on the impropriety of 
βιωτικὰ κριτ. between Christians aé all, 
and is here depreciating them ironically. 

But the arrangement and construction of 
the words are even more strongly in favour 
of the imperative rendering. For (i) on the 
other, no account is given of the emphatic 
position of βιωτικά. (2) the μὲν οὖν is 
not so naturally rendered (see above) ‘ yea 
rather your course is,’ as ‘ yea rather let 
your practice be:’ it expresses more natu- 
rally a subjective correction, in the mind 
of the speaker, than an objective one: see 
below, ver. 7. (8) if the sentence had re- 
ferred to their existing practice of going 
before heathen tribunals, it would have 
been expressed not βιωτικὰ μὲν οὖν κριτ. 
ἐὰν ἔχητε, but B. μ. οὖν Kp. ἔχοντες, as in 
ver. 1. (4) οἱ ἐξουθενημένοι ἐν τῇ ἐκκ. 
are much more naturally the despised in 
(within) the church, than those who tn 
(the estimation of) the church are held of 
no account. Meyer argues against this 
that it would be in this case τοὺς ἐξουθ. 
τοὺς ἐν τῇ éxkA., but surely he can hardly 
be serious, or I do not understand him 
rightly. (5) καθίζετε applies much better 
to the appointing judges over a matter 
among themselves, than to going before 
judges already appointed. (6) as to the 
objection that on this rendering the word 
‘rather’ must be inserted, τούτους μᾶλλον 
καθίζετε, it has no force, for no such sup- 
plement is required. The command is ab- 
solute, but given to shew them the absur- 
dity of their going to law about βιωτικά at 
all, rather than bona fide. 5.] πρὸς 
évrp. tp. λέγω refers to the ironical com- 
mand in ver. 4—I say this to put you to 
shame. οὕτως} Is there so com- 
pletely a lack of all wise men among 
you.... He now suggests the more 


Lt 


514 


g Gal. iii. 28 
(3ce). Col, Tere i 5 
- ll. 
ny ava Γ ΠΥ" 
rly. ay. K μετὰ ἀδελφοῦ *! 


h = here only. 
Ezek. xxxiv. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


/ \ - 
κρίνεται, ™ καὶ ™ τουτο 


VI. 


bd g » 5 © ἰνς i) \ 4 ἃ ὃ Ψ h - 
οὐκ ἕ ἔνι ἐν ὑμῖν οὐδεὶς σοφός, ὃς δυνήσεται ὃ" διακρῖναι 
τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ; 


6 ἀλλὰ ἀδελφὸς 


| ae rs / 
E€7Tb ATTLO TMV. 


\ 5 ε a ε 
7 ἤδη ° μὲν οὖν Ῥὅλως 4 ἥττημα ὑμῖν ἐστιν ὅτι ἴ κρίματα 


11,20. 
” } ς n \ / ME a > ων 
i Matt, xii. δι. ἔχετε μεθ᾽ 5 ἑαυτῶν. ‘dia τί οὐχὶ μᾶλλον ἀδικεῖσθε ; 
Rev. vii. 17 \ ie SN cr ’ a ἄν adius a 
only. Exod. 'Oud τί οὐχὶ μᾶλλον "ἡ ἀποστερεῖσθε ; ὃ ἀλλὰ ὑμεῖς ἀδικεῖτε 
as sa, \ er ἐδ \ A > ΄ xX 2 / 
Wit. δ. ne Καὶ ἡ ἀποστερεῖτε, ™ Kai ™ τοῦτο ἀδελφούς. 9 ἢ * οὐκ οἴδατε 
ly 
k ee Job ix. 3 A. l ver. 1. m Rom. xiii. 11 reff. n= ch. vii. 
12, ἄς. x. 27. xiv. 22, &e. 2 Cor. vi. 14,15. 1 Tim. v. 8. o ver. 4. p ch. v. 1 reff. 
ἢ Rom. xi. 12 only. Isa. xxxi. 8 only. r= here only. Exod. xviii. 22. s = Eph. iv. 
32. Col. iii. 13 (see note there). t Matt. ix. 14. Rom. ix. 32 (reff.) al. Num. xi. 11. u = here 


only, mid., cf. δογματίζεσθε, Col. ii. 20. 
only. Mal. iii. 5. W VV. 2, 3. 


rec (for ev) ἐστιν, with DF m Ath,: 
Thi Ce. 
Thi Ge: 
D!{and lat] eth Orig[-c,] Ath, : 
FP am [Ambrst ] Aug). 

6. [xpwate F-gr(not G).] 
μετα D', 


v Mark x. 19. ch. vii. 5. 1 Tim. vi. 5. James v. 4 


txt BCLPN rel Orig{-c,] Chr, Thdrt Damase 
rec gopos οὐδε ets (Rom iii. 10), with D°L rel vulg syr (Chr,) Thdrt 
[σοφ. ovders 137 Euthal-ms, sapiens quisquam vulg Ambr, Pel :] om ovdes 
txt BCX 17 copt [Syr Orig- ¢,] Damasc ; ovde εἰς cop. 
aft os ins ov L. 
for τουτο, ταυτα CD? syr-mg Thdrt. 

at end ins καὶ ov em αγιων F. (ov sic F and ἃ.) 


avakpiva: X! n Orig{ -c, |. 
for em, 


7. om ovy ΠΝ a 17 latt copt arm Orig-int, [Cypr, Ambrst Aug, ], marked with an 


asterisk in syr. 
[ Damase ] ΤῊ] Orig-int, Cypr, 
Chr, Thdrt Antch, Ee. 
αποστερεισθε L [ Antch, |}. 

8. transp adic. and αποστ. D. 


om ὅλως A Syr Orig,{-c]. 
: om ABCDLPN rel syrr copt Orig,{-c Euthal-ms] Bas, 
κριμα τὲ [| Antch, Damasc ]. 


rec ins ev bef υμιν, with vulg }-lat 


transp αδικεισθε and 


rec (for tovto) tauvta (probably because two 


things, adix. and ἀποστ., are mentd), with L rel syr arm Chr Thdrt {Bas, Damasc] : 
txt ABCDPR 17 latt copt Orig,[-c Euthal-ms] Antch, Cypr,. 


Christian way of settling their differences, 
viz. by arbitration: and asks, ‘Are you 
come to this, that you are obliged καθίζειν 
any δικαστάς at all,’—have you no wise 
man among you (the rec., οὐδὲ εἷς, would 
be ‘quod est vehementius, cum sitis tam 
multi.’ Erasm.) who shall be able (in such 
event) to decide (as arbitrator) between 
his brother (i. e. his brethren)? This last 
is a harsh method of expression, and ap- 
parently only to be accounted for by the 
singular form of οὐδεὶς σοφός having 
attracted the other into the singular like- 
wise, so that instead of σοφοὶ of δυνήσον- 
ται διακρ. ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν ἀδελφῶν αὐτῶν, 
we have σοφὸς ὃς δυνήσεται διακρ. ἀνὰ pm. 
τοῦ ἀδ. αὐτοῦ. But it is not without use: 
it prevents the apparent inference, which 
might be made if τῶν ἀδελφῶν αὐτοῦ were 
used, that one wise man was to be appointed 
universal arbitrator,—and confines the ap- 
pointment of the arbitrator to each possi- 
bly arising case respectively. 6.] (lt 
seems not to be so): nay, &c., as implied 
in ver. 1. ἀλλά after a question passes 
rapidly on to the other alternative, the 
particle negativing the question being sup- 
pressed. So Xen. Mem. i. 2. 2, πῶς οὖν 
αὐτὸς ὧν τοιοῦτος ἄλλους ἂν ἀσεβεῖς... 


ἐποίησεν ; “AAA” ἔπαυσε μὲν τούτων πολ- 
λούς, ἀρετῆς ποιήσας ἐπιθυμεῖν. See Har- 
tung, Partikellehre, ii. 37. 7.) He 


gives his own censure of their going to 


Jaw at all. μὲν οὖν as above, ver. 4. 
ὅλως, altogether, without the aggrava- 
tion of ἐπὶ ἀπίστων. ἥττημα, 8, 


falling short, viz. of your inheritance of 


the kingdom of God—a hindrance in the 
way of your salvation: see ver. 9:—not as 
ordinarily understood (see especially Estins 
in loc.) a moral delinquency (cf. the usage in 
reff.), nor an ἡττᾶσθαι τῇ ὀργῇ, as CEcum. 

Kpipara, matters of dispute, lead- 
ing to κρίνεσθαι ; not = κρίσεις,---μεθ᾽ Eav- 
τῶν, with one ‘another (reff.), as being 
brethren in Christ. ἀδικεῖσθε and 
ἀποστερεῖσθε not passives, but middle (ef. 
Bernhardy, Syntax, chap, viii. § 4, p. 346: 
Menander frag.: οὗτος κράτιστός ἐστ᾽ 
ἀνήρ. ὦ Γοργία, ὅςτις ἀδικεῖσθαι πλεῖστ᾽ 
ἐπίσταται βροτῶν : Hesiod. ἔργ. 347, εὖ μὲν 
μετρεῖσθαι παρὰ γείτονος, εὖδ᾽ ἀποδοῦναι) 
—allow yourselves to be wronged and 
defrauded. See Matt. v. 39 ff. 8.] 
cannot be, as Meyer, a continuation of the 
question, on account of the emphatic ὑμεῖς, 
which would thus be without meaning. 
The account of this emphatic ὑμεῖς is to be 
found in an ellipsis after ἀποστερεῖσθε to 
the effect, ‘as our Lord commanded us His 
disciples,’ or ‘as it behoves the followers of 
Christ... Then ὑμεῖς comes in contrast : 
You on the contrary (ἀλλά, see above 
ver. 6) do wrong, and defraud, and that 
(your) brethren. 9.1 ‘Ye commit 
wrong τ᾿ this looks as if you had forgotten 


oo OTL 
στων, 
και ον 
ἐπι αγι- 
ων Ε 
[-gr] 
(and also 
). 
ABCDL 
PrNrabe 
defen 
klm») 
017.47 


6—11. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 515 


iia BA A , / 

ὅτι ἄδικοι θεοῦ * βασιλείαν ov *Y κληρονομήσουσιν ; 2 M7 x — Matt. xxv. 

Ζ x n 6 ” a ͵ ” b "ὃ ΄ ” = 34. ch. xv. 
πλανᾶσθε. οὔτε * πόρνοι οὔτε ὃ εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε © μοι- δ0: Gal.¥. 


21. see James 


\ ” \ 5 7 r , , 
χοὶ οὔτε ἃ μαλακοὶ οὔτε ° ἀρσενοκοῖται 1ῦ οὔτε ! KNEMTAL yl Batt v5 


΄ 5) ΄ 5 ch. xv. 33. 
οὔτε " πλεονέκται, ov © μέθυσοι, οὐ 8 λοίδοροι, οὐχ ὃ ἅρ- ἡ Gal-vi7. 
James i. 16, 


Isa. xli. 10. 


/ “, 
mayes, * βασιλείαν θεοῦ LL καὶ , ae 
=! ᾿' 5 > We sis ΄ i 7 © ΄ ᾿ 11 reff. / 
" ταῦτά τινες ἦτε' ἀλλὰ ἱ ἀπελούσασθε, ἀλλὰ * ἡγιάσθητε, chs 10,11 
(reff.). 


/ > “ ’ lal / “ aes 
ἀλλὰ ἵν ἐδικαιώθητε τ ἐν TH ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου ᾿Τησοῦ “ ΤΈΡΕΝ ΣΝ. 
aA £ ἴω fal A - : 
καὶ ™ ἐν τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν. 


*Y κληρονομήσουσιν. 


4only. Job 
xxiv. 15. 
d = here (Matt. 


xi.8bis. Luke vii. 25) only}. (Prov. xxv. 15. xxvi. 22 only.) e 1 Tim. i. 10 only +. see Levit. 
xviii. 22. Matt. vi. 19 al. Obad. 5. g ch. v. 11 (reff.). h bebe tis 
17. 3John 4. i Acts xxii. 16 only. Jobix. 30 only. see Rev. i. 5. k Rom, xv, 16 
reff, 1= Rom, iii. 20, 30. v. 1 8]. m Acts xiii. 39 reff. 


9. There is an erasure of two letters (οι ?) bef αδικοι in A. rec βασιλειαν bef 
θεου (as below in ver 10), with L rel latt Polye, Clem, Chr, Thdrt [ Antch, Damasc } 
Iren-int,[some mss om dez] Tert, Cypr,: txt ABC D[-gr] PX m 17 [ Orig-c, Euthal- 
ms]. om ov B'(ins B-corr!) o}, ουδὲ (throughout vv. 9, 10) Ὁ]. 

10. πλεονεκται ovre κλεπται D[-gr?] Lbcdefgh1 n047 syrr Clem, Chr, Thdrt 
Damase Thl: om oute πλεονεκται k 8. 35. 42. 238. rec (for Ist ov) ουτε, with 
BD8L rel (Clem, Ps-Ign, Meth,(in Epiph) Eutha!-ms] Ath, [Iren-int, Cypr,]: ουδὲ 
D}(as above): txt AC[P]€ ἃ 17 Clem, [Ps-Ath, Julian,(in [Cyr]}) Chr, Thdrt [Damasc ]. 

transp. μεθ. and λοι. P [ Ps-Ath, ]. θεου bef Bac. D'[-gr]. rec ins ov 
bef κληρονομησουσιν (prob from writing the ov of θεου twice over: the mistake being 
perpetuated, or even the readg occasioned, by the ov κληρ. of ver 9. This seems a 
more likely account than that a variation betw the two vv should have been sanctioned by 


perpetuating an accidental omn of the ov), with LP rei Ign(but readg varies. 


Coteler 


has κληρονομῆσαι δυνανται, omg ov) (Clem, Orig,-c,] Ath, Ps-Ath, Cyr-jer, Chr-ms, 
Thdrt, Thl: om ABCDX 1} 17 Polye, Orig[-c,] Meth, Ath, Chr, Thdrt, Damase,. 
11, (αλλα (8ce), so AB(D)[PJ&: C has ada’ all three times; D!, the Ist time; L 


m, the 2nd and 3rd times.) 


aft κυριου ins nuwy B C(appy) P 1 m 17. 47 vulg [F-lat 


spec] Syr syr-w-ast copt «th arm Athb,[-int, Ps-Ath, Chr, Euthal-ms Dial, Thdrt] 
Did, Epiph, Iren-int, Orig-int; Cypr;: om ADLN rel [(Clem,) Did, Cyr, Damase 


Iren-int, Tert;, ]. 


aft maou ins χριστου B C(appy) D![and lat] P81 m 17 &e (as 


precedg) [and Cyr, Tert,]: om AD°L [Damasc] ΤῊ] (Ec. 


the rigid exclusion from the kingdom of 
God of all wrong-doers of every kind 
(included here under ἄδικοι) ; see Gal. 
v. 21. μὴ πλανᾶσθε] This caution 
would be most salutary and needful in 
a dissolute place like Corinth. It is 
similarly used, and with an express refer- 
ence to ὁμιλίαι κακαί, ch. xv. 33. 

πόρνοι refers back to ch. v., and is taken 
up again, vv. 12 ff. μαλακοί = 
παθικοί (sec in Wetst.). μέθυσοι. see 
on ch. v. 11. 11.] ‘These things were 
the former state of some among you: but 
ye are now in a far different state.’ These 
things (I cannot think with Meyer that 
ταῦτα is used with an implication of 
contempt, such a horde, or rabble: it is 
rather ‘of such a kind, see Winer, Gr. 
§ 23.5) were some of you (τινες limits the 
duets which is the suppressed subject of 
ἦτε): but ye washed them off (viz. at your 
baptism. The 1 aor. mid. cannot by any 
possibility be passive in signification, as it 
is generally, for doctrinal reasons, here 
rendered. On the other hand the middle 
seuse has no doctrinal import, regarding 
merely the fact of their haying submitted 


themselves to Christian baptism. See ref, 
Acts), but (there is in the repetition of 
ἀλλά, the triumph of one who was under 
God the instrument of this mighty change) 
ye were sanctified (not in the dogmatic 
sense of progressive sanctification, but so 
that whereas before you were unholy, by 
the reception of the Holy Ghost you be- 
came dedicated to God-and holy), but 
ye were justified (by faith in Christ, you 
received the δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ, Rom. i. 17), 
in the Name of the Lord Jesus, and in the 
(working of the) Spirit of ourGod. These 
two last clauses must not be fancifully 
(as Meyer, al.) assigned amongst the pre- 
ceding. They belong to all, as De Wette 
rightly maintains. The spiritual washing 
in baptism, the sanctification of the chil- 
dren of God, the justification of the be- 
liever, are all wrought in the Name of the 
Lord Jesus, and are each and all the work 
of the Spirit of our God. By the ἡμῶν 
again, he binds the Corinthians and him- 
self together in the glorious blessings of 
the gospel-state, and mingles the oil of joy 
with the mourning which by his reproof 
he is reluctantly creating. 


Lu?2 


516 


n constr., Mark 
11.24. ch. x. 
23 bis. 

o Acts xxi. 37 
re 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@OIOT® .A. 


VE 


ς r ἢ , 
19. 5 Ἰ]άντα μοι ὁ ἔξεστιν, ἀλλ᾽ ov πάντα συμφέρει. 
2 5 / , 
" πάντα mot ἔξεστιν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἐγὼ 1 ἐξουσιασθήσομαι ὑπό 


cons 13 ᾿ 5 f ee { se : % 
P con: str AOR, TOS: Ta βρώματα TH ᾿ κοιλίᾳ, καὶ ἢ ὑ Κοιλια τοῖς 
/ e \ \ ΄ \ “ 
iio. sn ὃ βρώμασιν: ὁ δὲ θεὸς καὶ " ταύτην καὶ " ταῦτα " καταρ- 
ae 28. , \ 8 \ a > a x 7 5 ΝΟΥ \ A / 
poe γῆσει. τὸ ὃὲ σώμα ov TH * πορνείᾳ, ἀλλὰ TH κυρίῳ, 
111. 11 al. ais ξ ΄ a ΄ wn, Bae δὲ θ \ \ \ + 
rLukexxii, KQL O Κύριος τῷ .OWLATL 0 ὃὲ θεὸς καὶ τὸν KUpLOY 
25. ch. vil. 4 
ae he es Eccl. ix. 17. s plur., Matt. xiv. 15|| LL. Mark vii.19. Lukeiii.1l. 1 Tim.iv.3. Heb. 
ix. 10. xiii. 9only. Job vi. 5. t = Matt. xv. 17. Rev. x.9,10. 2 Kings xx.10. 2 Chron. xxi. 
15, 18, 19. u see ch. vii. 7. v Rom. iii. 3 reff. x ch. vy. 1 reff. 


12. om 2nd μοι ΟἹ Orig, Terts. 


12—20.] CoRRECTION OF AN ABUSE OF 
THE DOCTRINE OF CHRISTIAN FREEDOM 
WHICH SOME AMONG THEM HAD MADE, 
THAT, AS MEATS WERE INDIFFERENT, SO 
WAS FORNICATION (vv. 12—17). STRoNG 
PROHIBITION OF, AND DISSUASIVE FROM 
THIS SIN (vv. 18—20). 12.) State- 
ment of the true doctrine of Christian free- 
dom. πάντα μοι ἔξεστιν are the bona 
Jide words of the Apostle himself, not, as 
some have understood them, the saying of 
an opponent cited by him. For (1) the 
sentiment is a true Christian axiom: πάντα 
being of course understood, as it evidently 
was even by the abusers of the doctrine, of 
things (supposed by them) ἀδιάφορα. (2) 
It is not introduced by any clause indica- 
tive of its being the saying of another, 
which is Paul’s habit in such cases, see 
Rom. xi. 19. (8) The Apostle does not 
either deny or qualify the ἔξεστιν, but 
takes up the matter from another point 
of view, viz. the συμφέρει. The por is 
spoken in the person of Christians gene- 
rally. ‘Seepe Paulus prima persona sin- 
gulari eloquitur que vim habent gnomes: 
in hac presertim epistola, ver. 15, ch. vii. 7, 
viii. 13, x. 23, 29, 30, xiv. 11.” Bengel. 
συμφέρει} are advantageous—in 

the most general sense: distinguished from 
οἰκοδομεῖ, ch. x. 23, where the words again 
occur. Meyer cites from Theodor. Mops., 
-ὀπειδὴ yap ov πάντα συμφέρει, δῆλον 
ὡς οὐ πᾶσι χρηστέον, ἀλλὰ τοῖς ὠφελοῦσι 
μόνοις. ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἐγὼ ἐξ. Meyer 
thinks that the ἐγώ here has an emphasis, 
as meaning the real J, my moral per- 
sonality. But this can hardly be so: the 
real emphasis is on οὐκ, and ἐγώ corre- 
sponds to μοι, expressed more to bring out 
the first person as the sample of Christians 
in general, than for any such formal dis- 
tinction. ἐξουσιασθήσομαι}) I will 
not be deprived of my freedom by any 
practice ;—i.e. indulge in any practice 
which shall mar this liberty and render it 
no real freedom, making me to be one 
under ἐξουσία, instead of one exercising it. 
The play on ἔξεστι and ἐξουσία cannot 
be given in English. 10. 124° 8 
ibis ad venerem non valet consequentia.” 


Bengel. The argument is,—meats (of 
which he doubtless had often impressed on 
them that they were ἀδιάφορα, whence the 
abuse) are expressly created for the belly, 
and the belly for them, by its organization 
being fitted to assimilate them; and both 
these are of a transitory nature: in the 
change to the more perfect state, God will 
do away with both. Therefore meats are 
ἀδιάφορα. But neither is the body created 
for fornication, nor can this transitoriness 
be predicated of it: the body is for the 
Lord, and the Lord (in his mediatorial 
work) for the body: and God raised up 
the Lord, and will raise up us (i.e. our 
bodies) : so that the body is not perishable, 
and (resumed ver. 18) he that fornicates, 
sins against his own body. THEREFORE, 
fornication is not an ἀδιάφορον. It is 
very remarkable how these verses contaf 
the germ of three weighty sections of the 
Epistle about to follow, and doubtless jn 
the Apostle’s mind when he wrote them, 
(1) the relation between the sexes: (2) the 
question of meats offered to idols: (3) the 
doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body 
See Neander, Pfl. u. Leit. p. 401, note 21. 
18.] τῇ κοιλ., scil. ἐστιν. The 
belly is their appointed receptacle—they, 
its appointed pabulum. Of course even 
this part of the argument must be under- 
stood within the limits of οὐ πάντα cup- 
φέρει. ὁ δὲ 6.... καταργ.] viz. at 
the appearing of the Lord: when, ch. xv, 
51, 52, we shall be changed from a σῶμα 
ψυχικόν, to be a σῶμα πνευματικόν : ποῦν 
at death. τῇ twopv.| The body was 
not made for the practice of fornication. 
The reciprocal subserviency of the belly 
and meats is shewn by their coextensive- 
ness in duration, and perishing together : 
but when πορνεία (and even that lawful 
use which is physically the same, but which 
is not kere contemplated) shall have for 
ever passed away, the body shall be sub- 
serving its real use—that of being an 
instrument for the Lord’s work. 
κ. ὃ κύρ. TO σώμ. | not, only for the body: 
but for the body; to sanctify our bodies 
by His Spirit, and finally to glorify them 
for Himself, see Rom. viii. 11, This final 


Ee a ee LU 


[α is 
cited on 
ver 14. ] 
F[-gr] 
(and also 
G) [yn] 
OUK Ot- 
Sate... 
ABCDF, 
KLPRa 
bedef 
ghkl 
mno 
17, 47 


12—16. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 517 
Υ ἤγειρεν, καὶ ἡμᾶς 7 ἐξεγερεῖ διὰ τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ. y= Matt. x. 8 
nY ρ ’ ημας 24 ρ b a nS VVALLEDS UTOU. Een Leh 
Weare ἮΝ “ iS Z Cs ee aD , ΩΣ 21 4]. Isa 
ουκ OLOATE OTL TA σώματῶ ὑμῶν MEAN χριστου ΕΟ ἾἼΕΡΟΣ τὸν 
cy 5 \ b t aA rn d / e ΄ z = here only. 
apas ουν Ta μέλη του χρίστου TTOLNOD TOPVHS ed a 

only. Judg. 
b ,ὔ Pied: ν᾿ , 63 a 2 " “ eer ΄ ΓΙ 516]: 
μέλη; fun γένοιτο. 16 ἢ δοὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ὁ 8 κολλώ- 53), 
ae ΄ A a mrs " ΄ h Theod.-B. 
μενος Τῇ TOPV?) εν σώμα EOTLW |; Eoovtat yap φησιν &c.(not A). 
. 2,3, 9. 
b = Rom. xii. 4, 5 (vi. 13 reff.). ς = Matt. xxi. 21. Johnii. 16. xi. 39. mE Eph. iv. 31. 


ἃ = Matt. iv. 19. John vi. 15 al. 
f Rom. iil. 4 reff. 


27. (see Rom. iv. ὃ. ix. 17. 


Gen. χῖν. 9. e Matt. xxi. 31,32. Luke xv. 30 al. Gen. xxxiv. 31. 
g Acts v. 13 reff. see Matt. xix. 5. 


C h ellips., Heb, viii. 5. ch. xv. 
1 Tim. vy. 18.) 


14. elz vuas (error? Mey thinks, perhaps from Rom viii. 11), with arm: txt 
ABCDKLPN rel [vulg F-lat syrr copt wth] Polye, [Meth, Euthal-ms] Iren-int, 
[ Tert, }. εξεγειρει A D!{ (and lat) Q]: εξεγειρεῖ P m: εξηγειρεν B 672 : suscitavit 
am [fuld] harl(but qu, for -d2¢?): txt (see note) C D3[-gr] K(e sil) LX rel vulg-ed 
[F-lat arm] syrr copt eth Meth, Ath-mss, Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Iven-int, Archel, 


Tert,, συνεξεγερει 47. 
15. ins ἡ bef ove F Meth,. 


quwy AX! 238. 
apas, apa Ῥ [Ὁ] ἃ e? g k] 472, ἡ apa F Orig,[-c,] Meth Tert. 


om eorw F[-gr]. for 
μελη bef ropyns 


DF latt [Antch, | Iren-int, [Tert ] Cypr Lucif. 
16. om 7 D{-gr] KL rel syr Mcion-e, Dial, Thdrt-ms Damasce Tert,: ins ABCFPN 


alh m 17 [vulg D-lat Syr copt] Clem, Meth, Chr, {Euthal-ms] 


(Ec Cypr, Lucif,. 


om φησιν A Epiph, Cypr, Ambr.xpe (Tert,): ins BCDFKL[P]® rel latt Dial, 
Mcion-e, [Meth, Euthai-ms] Chr Thdrt Lucif,. 


reference must not be excluded here, 
though it is not the principal thought :— 
rather, the redemption of the body from 
sin, and making it into a member of Him- 
self by the Spirit. 14.] So far from 
the case of the Lord and the body answer- 
ing to the other, God raised up the Lord 
(Rom. viii. 11, al. fr.), and will raise up 
us too by His power. I cannot adopt 
here the reading (ἐξήγειρεν), or the view, 
of Meyer. He holds, that all reference to 
the resurrection, as a thing future, is out 
of place: that the Apostle refers to the 
virtual and proleptic resurrection which 
has already taken place in the case of 
the believer, as Eph. ii. 6; Col. 11. 12,— 
and thinks that the reading ἐξεγερεῖ has 
arisen from not seeing this. But how 
unnatural will the construction thus be— 
ὁ δὲ θεὸς καὶ τὸν κύριον ἤγειρεν, Kal ἡμᾶς 
ἐξήγειρεν, διὰ τ. δυν. αὐτοῦ! I can con- 
ceive no account of such a sentence, except 
that some emphasis is meant to be laid on 
the distinction between ἤγειρεν and ἐξήγει- 
pev, which idea (maintained by Bengel, al.) 
Meyer himseit very properly repudiates : 
see below. The future corresponds to 
καταργήσει, and is used with 7juas,—con- 
trary to the usual practice of Paul, who 
expected to be alive at the mapovoia,— 
as the expression, in the first person, of 
the truth of the future resurrection, not 
destruction of the body. ἤγειρεν, viz. ἐκ 
νεκρῶν, Acts ili. 15; Rom. iv. 24, and 
passim : é&eyepet, viz. ἐκ νεκρῶν. So that 
there is no real difference between the two 
words. 15.] Resumption of τὸ σῶμα 
τῷ κυρίῳ kK. 6 κύριος τῷ σώματι. The two 
are so intimately connected, that the Lord 
is a mystical Body, of which our bodies, 


parts of ourselves in our perfect organiza- 
tion, are members. ‘This Christian axiom 
is introduced as before (reff.) by οὐκ οἴδατε 
ὅτι. Having then (οὖν, ‘ concesso,’ that 
my body is a member = my members are 
members of Christ) alienated ((or, taken 
away | ἄρας is not merely pleonastic, ‘ Shall 
I take....and make them..... as 
E. V. This is shewn by its position first 
in the sentence) the members of Christ 
(i. 6. my own members) shall I make them 
an harlot’s members? ‘The expression 
πόρνης μέλη δ put as coarsely and startlingly 
as possible, with the emphasis on πόρνης. 
ποιήσω may also be the aor. subj, 
‘must I, have I any right to, make them ?? 
But μὴ γένοιτο answers better to the 
future. 16.| Explanation and justifi- 
cation of the expression πόρνης μέλη. ἤ, 
as De Wette well, “Do you think the 
expression ποιήσω πόρν. μέλη too strong ?” 
κολλ, “ tibliher Ausdruct fir 
Gefchledhtévereinigung.” De Wette. 
τῇ πόρνῃ) with a harlot, generic: or 
which in fact amounts to the same, with 
‘the harlot,’ presupposed in the hypothesis. 
ἐν σῶμα, viz. ‘with her” The full 
construction would be ὅτι 6 KoAA. TH πόρ. 
καὶ ἡ πόρ. ἕν σ. εἶσιν, but he is here bring- 
ing out the criminality of the fornicator, 
and leaves the other out of view. The 
citation is spoken of marriage ; but here as 
above (see on ver. 13) he is treating merely 
of the physical act, which is the same in 
both cases. φησιν, viz. Gop, Who 
is the speaker in the Scriptures: so in 
citing the same words, our Lord gives them 
to 6 ποιήσας (αὐτοὺς) am ἄρχῆς, Matt. 
xix. 5. They were spoken by the mouth 
of Adam, but prophetically, divino afflatu. 


518 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. VI. 17—20. 
Gx. ἢ. 24. 6 οἱ δύο ' εἰς σάρκα μίαν' 17 ὁ δὲ 8% κολλώμενος τῷ J κυρίῳ 
Rom.ii28. ὃν πνεῦμά ἐστιν. 18 ἢ φεύγετε τὴν | πορνείαν. πᾶν 
ὁ Ὁ Deut, x. ™ ἁμάρτημα ὃ ἐὰν ἃ ποιήσῃ ἄνθρωπος, ° ἐκτὸς τοῦ σώμα- 
ΣΕ TOs ἐστιν' ὁ δὲ Ρ πορνεύων “ εἰς τὸ ἴδιον σῶμα “ ἅμαρ- 


11 / 19 x a > ἴὸ “ x fal e lal r Ν fal 
pe ee ἢ *ovK οἴδατε ὅτι TO σῶμα ὑμῶν * ναὸς τοῦ 

. A , ‘ a \ 
. ἐν ὑμῖν ἁγίου πνεύματός ἐστιν, Sov ἔχετε ἀπὸ θεοῦ, καὶ 


a ς A , 
οὐκ ἐστὲ ‘éavTav; 29" ἠγοράσθητε γὰρ " τιμῆς. ~* δοξά- 


m Mark iii. 28, xX A \ A, 5 lal / ς lal 
22. “Rom. it. GaTE * δὴ τὸν θεὸν ἐν TO σώματι ὑμῶν. 
Sa. 


o = 2 Cor. xii. 2 [3 v. r.j ft. (Acts xxvi. 22. ch. xv. 27 αἱ. 3 Kings iv. 23.) 


p ch. x.8 bis onlyin Epp. Rev. ii. 14, 20. xvii. 2. xviii. 3,9 only. Ps, xxii. 27. q Matt. xviii. 15. Luke 
xv. 18, 21. ch. vili..12. Gen. xx.6,9. Xen. Hell. i. 7. 20. r ch. iii. 16 reff. s attr., Acts 
i. 1 reff. t gen., ch. i. 12. iii. 23. Rom. xiv. 8. u= ch. vii. 23. 2 Pet.ii.1. Rev. 
v. 9. xiv. 3, 4. v Acts xix. 19 reff. w Rom. i. 21 reff. x = Lukeii. 15. Acts 


xiii. 2, xv. 36. Gen. xviii. 4. 


18. for devy., φυγετε F. for εαν, av D! 17. 106 [ Meth, ]. 

19. for To σωμα, Ta σωματα (corrn to suit υμωνὴ A-corr’ Le df g τῇ ἢ 17 syr copt 
arm Orig.{ -c,-int, |] Meth, Did, [Cyr, Euthal-ms Hil,] Jer Ambrst Aug Vig: membra 
vestra vulg [spec] Ambr Pel Fulg Bede: txt Al(appy) BCDFKPN rel Syr [basm] 
Chr, Orig-int, Tert,. πνευματος bef αγιου B vulg [F-lat spec Orig-int, Did-int, 
Ambrst ]. ins tov bef θεου PX? [ Orig-c, Did, Chr, }. for εαυτ., αυτων NR}. 

20. (for δοξασατε δη, glorificate et portate vulg | F-lat | G-lat Cypr, [Lucif, Ambrst 
(but clarificate Cypr, Ambrst) |; g/. et tollite spec Tert, δοξασατε δὴ apa Chr-txt(Sav and 
Matth’s ms,), δοξασατε δη apare Chr-txt(Montf and Matth’s ms,), dog. τ. θ. τουτεστιν 
apate τ. 8. Chr-txt(ms,)—see Griesb, who adds “‘ Ceterum in comm istud ἄρατε non 
attingit, preter hom. 4. in 1 Tim. hee habet δοξάσωμεν δὴ τὸν θεὸν, ἄρωμεν τὸν θεὸν 
ἐν τῷ σώματι᾽᾽ &e.—om δὴ N'(ins N-corr!) [D-lat copt Orig-c, Did, Thdrt Iren-int, ].) 


rec at end adds ka: ev Tw πνευματι ὑμων aTiva εστι του θεου (insd appy with a 


view to make the exhortation complete. 


An ecclesiastical portion began at δοξασατεὶ, 


with Οὐ D?-3[-gr] KLP rel syrr [arm-usc(and as far as vuwy arm-zoh)] Chr, Thdrt, : 
om ABC!D!FX 17 latt copt [basm arm-ms] sth Orig{-c,] Meth,(in Epiph) Did, 
Cyr, {Euthal-ms] Max Damasce Iren.int, Tert, Cypr Lucif [Ambrst]. 


To render φησιν impersonal, ‘it says,’ 
‘heift e6,? though justified by classical 
usage, see Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 58. 9, would, 
as Meyer remarks, be altogether without 
precedent in the citations of Paul. The 
words οἱ δύο are not in the Heb., but in 
the LXX and the Samaritan Pentateuch, 
and are found in the Rabbinical citations 
of the passage. See note on Matt. xix, 5. 

171.) Union to God, His service, and 
His ways, is often expressed by this word 
(KoAA.) in the LXX (reff.): but here that 
enner union with Christ in spirit is meant, 
which is the normal state of every believer, 
and of which it may be said that he ἕν mv. 
ἐστιν with Christ. See John xvii. 21, and 
the parable of John xv. 1—7. Meyer 
rightly remarks, that the mystical marriage 
between Christ and His Church must not 
(as Olsh. from Eph. v. 23 ff.) be pressed 
here, as the relations of the compared are 
not correspondent. Still, however, the 
inner verity of that mystical relation is the 
ground of both passages. 18—20. | 
Direct prohibition of fornication, and its 
grounds. 18.| φεύγετε might be 
followed by οὖν, but is more forcible in 
this disconnected form. πᾶν ἅἁμάρτ.] 
The assertion, which has surprised many of 
the Commentators, is nevertheless strictly 
true. Drunkenness and gluttony, 6, g. are 


sins done im and by the body, and are 
sins by abuse of the body,—but they 
are still ἐκτὸς τοῦ odématos—introduced 
Srom without, sinful not in their act, but 
in their effect, which effect it is each 
man’s duty to foresee and avoid. But 
fornication is the alienating that body 
which is the Lord’s, and making it a 
harlot’s body—it is sin against a man’s 
own body, in its very nature,—against the 
verity and nature of his body; not an 
effect on the body from participation of 
things without, but a contradiction of the 
truth of the body, wrought within itself. 
When man and wife are one in the Lord, 
—united by His ordinance,—no such 
alienation of the body takes place, and con- 
sequently no sin. 19.] Justification 
ot the εἰς τὸ ἴδ. σῶμ. ἅμαρτ. above,—and 
this by an amplification of the above σῶμα 
τῷ κυρίῳ, and ἕν πνεῦμά ἐστιν. Your body 
(i. 6. the body of each man among you, 
but put singular, to keep, as in ch. iii. 16, 
the unity of the idea of God’s temple, 
or perhaps because the body in its attri- 
butes is in question here) is the temple 
of (possessed by, as His residence: the 
temple, not a temple, see note on ch. iii. 
16) the Holy Spirit who is in you (re- 
miniscence of the reality of His indwell- 
ing), Whom ye have from God (reminis- 


ABCDFP 
KLPNa 
bedef 
ghkl 
mno 
17. 47 


“Φ πὰ - 





Whee Ts 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINGIOTS «A. 


519 


T 1 Ν \ y φι 5 ΄, Z Ἂ a) , 
VII. 1 Περὶ δὲ Yoav ἐγράψατε, “ καλὸν * ἀνθρώπῳ 5 attr, Rom. 


2 = Rom. xiv. 21 reff. vy. 8, 26. 


a = Matt. xix. 5 (from Gen. ii. 24), 10. 


Cuap. VII. 1. rec aft εγραψατε ins μοι, with ADFKLP rel [vulg-clem] syrr copt 
[basm wth arm] Orig[-c,] Meth, Chr, Thdrt Jer, Ambrst,; Aug: om BCX 17am fald! 


| Euthal-ms] Tert,. 


cence, whose Spirit He is, and so prepara- 
tion tor the following inference), and are 
not your own (so that ye have no right to 
alienate your body, not being yours). 
20.| Proof, that ye are not your own. 
The possession of your body as His temple, 
by the Holy Ghost, is a presumptive proof 
that ye are not; but there is also a proof 
in matter of fact: For ye were bought 
(not, as Εὖ, V. are bought, which destroys 
the historic reference) with a price (viz, 
the blood of Christ, see 1 Pet. i. 18, 19; 
Matt. xx. 283; Gal. iii. 13,—not as Vulg. 
pretio magno: τιμῆς merely recalls the 
fact here, that a price was paid and so the 
purchase completed). This buying is here 
mentioned mainly with reference to the 
right of possession, which Christ has 
thereby acquired in us. In other places it 
is alleged as a freeing from other services : 
e,g. that of sin (Rom. vi. 17, 18), of the 
law and its curse (Gal. iii.), of Satan (Col. 
i. 13). δοξάσ. δὴ. . . .] Glorify 
then (57, not exactly an inference from the 
foregoing, but = “ eja,’ ‘agedum,’ tending 
to enforce and intensity the command: “as 
a cheering or hortatory expression,” Stan- 
ley. So Od. v. 17, τέτλαθι δή, κραδίη ; 
see Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 284 f.) God 
(i.e. not praise God, but glorify Him by 
your acts) in your body (not, by means 
of your body, but im your body, as 
the temple of God ; see John xiii. 32). 
Cuap. VII. 1—40.] ΒΈΡΙΣ To THEIR 
ENQUIRIES RESPECTING MARRIAGE; BY 
WHICH OCCASION IS GIVEN FOR VARIOUS 
COLLATERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND COM- 
MANDS. In order to the right understand- 
ing of this chapter, it will be well to re- 
member, that the enquiries in the letter of 
the Corinthians appear to have been made 
in disparagement of marriage, and to have 
brought into doubt whether it were not 
better to avoid it where uneontracted, and 
break it off where contracted, or this last 
at all events where one of the parties was 
an unbeliever. These questions he an- 
swers, vv. 1—16: and puts on their true 
grounds, vv. 17—24. They appear also to 
have asked respecting virgins, what was 
their duty and that of their parents, as to 
their contracting marriage. This he dis- 
cusses in its various aspects of duty and 
Christian expediency, vv. 25—38. Then 
he concludes with an answer and advice, 
respecting the liberty of a woman to marry 
after the death of her husband. The 
whole is written under the strong impres- 


sion (see on this, notes, Acts ii. 20; Rom. 
xiii. 11, and 2 Cor. v.: and Prolegg. to 
Vol. III. ch. v. § iv. 5—10) of the near 
approach of the end of this state of things 
(vv. 29 -- 81), and as advising them under 
circumstances in which persecution, and 
family division for the Gospel’s sake, might 
at any time break up the relations of life. 
The precepts therefore and recommenda- 
tions contained in the chapter are to be 
weighed, as those in ch. viii. al., wath re- 
Jerence to change of circumstances ; and 
the meaning of God’s Spirit in them with 
respect to the subsequent ages of the 
Church, to be sought by careful com- 
parison and inference, not rashly assumed 
and misapplied. I may also premise, 
that in hardly any portion of the Epistles 
has the hand of correctors and interpo- 
lators of the text been busier, than here. 
The absence of all ascetic tendency from 
the Apostle’s advice, on the point where as- 
ceticism was busiest and most mischievous, 
was too strong a testimony against it, to 
be left in its original clearness. In conse- 
quence, the textual critic finds himself in 
this chapter sometimes much perplexed be- 
tween different readings, and in danger of 
on the one hand adopting, on overwhelin- 
ing manuscript authority, corrections of 
the early ascetics,—and on the other ex- 
cluding, from a too cautious retention of 
the rec. text, the genuine but less strongly 
attested simplicity of the original. 
1, 3.1 Concession of the expediency (where 
possible) of celibacy, but assertion of the 
practical necessity of marriage, as a re- 
medy against fornication. 1.] 5¢, 
transitional, passing on to another subject. 
καλὸν. . . .] not, morally good: 
for in ver. 28 expressly not sin, but inex- 
pediency, is the reason for not marrying : 
nor good in the sense of ὑπερέχον, as 
Jerome, adv. Jovin. i. 7, vol. 11. p. 246, 
‘si bonum est mulierem non tangere, 
malum ergo est tangere ’ but expedient, 
generally: ‘more for a man’s best inte- 
rests under present circumstances :’ Ang]. 
‘it is the best way,’ in the colloquial 
sense: so also throughout the chapter: 
see the word qualified ver. 26, καλὸν. . - 
διὰ τὴν ἐνεστῶσαν ἀνάγκην. ᾿ἀν- 
θρώπῳ] though of necessity by what fol- 
lows, the man only is intended, yet 
ἀνθρώπῳ does not here or in reff. = ἀνδρί, 
but as Meyer remarks, regards the man 
not merely in his sevual but in his human 
capacity. Thus in its deeper reference, it 


09 


NPOS ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


Vir: 


\ A / a 
b—Gen.xx.6. γυναικὸς μὴ » ἅπτεσθαι: 2 διὰ δὲ Tas “ πορνείας ἕκαστος 


Prov. vi. 29. 

e ch. v. 1 reff. 
abstr. plur., 
2 Cor. xii. 20. 
Gal. ν. 20. 
James ii. 1. 
Winer, edn. 
6, 3 27. 3. 

d Matt. xviii. 
32. Rom. 
xiii. 7 only t. 
(-nua, Rom. 
iv. 4.° 


5 / 
EX ETO. 


e = Rom. xiii. 
ἢ (xii. 17 


, \ e 7 
σώματος οὐκ 8 ἐξουσιάζει, ἀλλὰ ὁ ἀνήρ' 


\ ς fa) a > / \ € / 4, vo ” ὃ 
τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα ἐχέτω, καὶ EXATTH τὸν LOLOY ἄνδρα 
8 “Ὁ \ «ς 3 \ \ d 2 xe e > ὃ 60 

τῇ γυναικὶ ὁ ἀνὴρ τὴν “ οφειλὴν © ἀποδιδοτω, 
fo / f δὲ f \ ¢ \ A ᾽ ὃ / 

μοίως ‘Oe * Kal ἢ γυνὴ τῷ avopl. 


4, ¢ Ν δ SOs 
ἡ γυνὴ τοῦ ἰδίου 
f ὁμοίως f δὲ ἴ καὶ 


ὁ ἀνὴρ τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος οὐκ ὅ ἐξουσιάζει, ἀλλὰ ἡ γυνή. 


k 


5 μὴ " ἀποστερεῖτε ἀλλήλους, | εἰ ! μή Te ἂν * ἐκ 'συμφώνου 


\ , ~ 4 A a \ ΄ 
fhere bis. Matt. ™ πρὸς ™ καιρόν, wa " σχολάσητε τῇ 5 προςευχῆ καὶ πάλιν 


xxvii. 41 
(ΜΚ. ν. r.). Luke v. 10, x. 32. James ii. 25 only. see Rom. i. 27. g ch. vi. 12 reff. h = here 
only. (ch. vi. 7,8 reff.) Exod. xxi. 10. i Luke ix. 13. 2 Cor. xiii. 5 only. k = John iii. 


34. 2 Cor. viii. 13. ix. 7. 


Acts νυ. 9. -νησις, 2 Cor. vi. 15.) 


n Matt. xii. 44 (|| L. v. r.) only. Exod. νυ. 8,17 bis. Ps. xlv. 10 only. 
2. C [has not] te [for δε, as in Tischdf’s Codex Ephraemi]. 


vulg syrr Orig-int, Tert, Cypr, [Ambrst ]. 
F 48; 114-77 Tert,. 
3. om 6 F(not G). 


lhere only. Eccl. vii. 14 AN Ald. compl.(-vws B, -νεῖν C) only. (-νεῖν, 


m Luke viii. 13 (1 Thess. ii. 17) only. 
© absol., Rom. xii. 12, 


Wisd. iv. 4. 


Τὴν πορνειαν F 
om καὶ ἐκαστ. τ. 1d. avd. εχ. (homeotel) 


rec (for οφειλην) οφειλομενὴν εὐνοιαν (see note), with KL 
rel syrr [Anton, Damase] Thdrt ΤῊ] (e: txt ABCDFP[Q]N! 17 latt copt [basm} 
eth arm Clem, Orig.[-c,] Meth, Chr, [Euthal-ms] Tert, Cypr, Ambrst. 


αποδιδετω 


Α om de A 55 Syr copt [basm ] arm Orig, Chr-mss, Cypr,. 


4, (adda(twice), so ΑΒΟΝ (2nd, D! 17).) 
rec σχολαΐητε, with KL rel Meth, Chr, Thdrt 
[Damase]: txt ABCDFPR Orig,[-c, Euthal-ins Cyr, ] (Dion) Chraiiq. 


5. om αν B Orig, [ Damasc, }. 


rec ins τῇ 


νηστεια και bef τη mposevxn (see note), with KLN? rel syrr goth Chr,[-txt-ed, Dion, | 


would embrace the other sex also. 

ante Gat | so in reff.; and in Latin tangere, 
attingere, virgo intacta. See examples in 
Wetst. This expression is obviously here 
used in the widest sense, without pre- 
sent regard to the difference between the 
lawful and unlawful use of the woman. 
The idea that the assertion applies to ab- 
stinence from intercourse in the already 
married (see again below), is altogether a 
mistake. 2.| The former course is 
expedient—would avoid much trouble ‘ in 
the flesh :’ but as a general rule ἐξ may 
not be, seeing that for a more weighty 
reason the contrary course is to be recom- 
mended. But on account of [the] forni- 
cations (the many instances of fornication 
current. The plur. of an abstract noun 
implies repetition, or varieties of the occur- 
rence: so Herod. vii. 158, ὑμῖν μεγάλαι 
ὠφελίαι τε K. ἐπαυρέσεις γεγόνασι : iii. 40, 
ἐμοὶ δὲ ai σαὶ μεγάλαι εὐτυχίαι οὐκ ἀρέσ- 
κουσι, see reff., and Kiihner, Gramm. ii. 28 
(8 408, y)) let each man possess his 
own wife, and let each woman possess 
her own husband. ‘The ἐχέτω is (1) not 
concessive, but imperative; not ‘ habere 
liceat, but ‘habeto. So the other ex- 
pressions, γαμησάτωσαν ver, 9, μενέτω 
ver. 11, &c. (2) not here in the sense 
of ‘ utatur, eique commisceatur, as Estius, 
al., which does not come into considera- 
tion till the next verse. (3) not emphatic, 
let each retain, according to the mistaken 
idea mentioned on ver. 1, that he is speak- 
ing to the married, who though they are 
not to cohabit are yet to remain together. 


Had either of the two latter senses 
been meant, the sentence would rather 
have stood ἐχέτω ἕκ. τ. ἕαυτ. γυναῖκα, 
K. ἐχέτω ἑκάστη τ. ἴδ. ἄνδρ. With 
regard to the assertion of Riickert, that 
the Apostle here gives a very low estimate 
of marriage, as solely a remedy against 
fornication, the true answer is, that Paul 
does not either here, or in this chapter at 
all, give any estimate of marriage in the 
abstract. His estimate, when he does, is 
to be found Eph. v. 25—32. 

3, 4.] The duty of cohabitation incumbent 
on the married. This point was in all pro- 
bability raised in the letter of the Corin- 


' thians. The Apostle’s command is a legiti- 


mate following out of διὰ τὰς πορνείας 
above. 3. τὴν ὀφειλήν] “ debitum 
tori.’ The rec. was perhaps an euphemism 
(we have also the varieties, ὀφειλομένην 
τιμὴν, Chrysostom once: ὀφ. τιμὴν καὶ 
εὔνοιαν in the ms. 40) for the same thing. 
Meyer will not concede this, but thinks it 
arose from a mistaken interpretation of 
ὀφειλή as meaning merely ‘ benevolentia : 
thinking that not εὔνοια, but φιλότης would 
be the word in the other case. But some 
of the later examples in Wetst. seem to 
bear out this meaning of εὔνοια. 

4.] The axiom is introduced without a γάρ, 
as frequently. τοῦ ἰδίου... .. οὐκ ἐξ- 
ουσιάζει | ‘sui,cum potestatem non habet, 
elegans facit paradoxon.’ Bengel. The 
ground of this being another’s while they 
remain their own, is to be found in the 
oneness of body, in which the marriage 
state places them. 5. | ἀποστερεῖτε 


ABCDF 
KLPNa 
bedef 
ghkl 
mno 
17. 47 
[6 is 


, cited on 


ver 3.] 





2—7. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 521 


pq ’ \ \ BION Pp 9S C/ \ r , e r e “- ς \ 23 
ΕἾΤ TO AUTO * TE, LWA [LN πειράζῃ υμᾶς ὁο σατανᾶς " OL P Acts ii. 1, 44. 
; q 


Luke xvii. 


ti / ς Le 6 ce δὲ λέ ΝΞ ἢ 4 3d. Acts i. 
την ‘axpaciav ὑμῶν. ὁ τοῦτο δὲ λέγω κατὰ ἃ συγγνώμην, 33 Δ αν, 
> > y2? ΄ "7 , \ ΄ > , 5 xi. 20. xiv. 
ov κατ᾽ " ἐπιταγήν. 1 θέλω δὲ πάντας ἀνθρώπους εἶναι ἢ ΘΠ 
ς \ ΕῚ Loose ΕῚ \ 7] r Ma εἰν, ore 
ὡς Kal ἐμαυτόν. ἀλλὰ ἕκαστος ἴδιον ἔχει ἡ χάρισμα ἐκ FX 13, 
θ A e \ x ee ἰὴ ὃ \x Ψ 3 Kings x. ]. 
εοῦ, ὁ μὲν * οὕτως, ὁ δὲ * οὕτως. Pes 5 22 

15 reff. 


u here 


t Matt. xxiii. 25 only +. Jos. Antt. viii. 7.5. Xen. Mem. iv. 5, 6. (-τής, 2 Tim. iii. 3.) 
: (Rom. i. 11 reff.) 


only. Sir. iil. 13 only. v Rom. xvi. 26 rett. w = here only. 
x see ch. vi. 18, 


Thdrt : om ABCDFPN! 17 latt copt [basm] eth arm (Clem,) Orig,[-c,-int,] Dion, 
Meth, [Epiph, Cyr-p, Euthal-ms Damasc Ambrst | Cypr,. [612] (for ητε) 
συνερχεσθε (gloss: see note), witha ὁ ἢ Meth, Chr, Thdrt, Thl: [Steph] συνερχησθεῖ, 
with} KLP rel [copt basm] Thdrt,: γινεσθε Tat[-in-]Clem,: revertimini vulg [syrr 
soth arm Cypr, |: txt ABC D[-gr] FN 17 eth Orig,[-c,-int, | Dion, Cyr, [Euthal-nis ] 
amase, Aug(estotesepe). [πειραζεν P(appy) 47!. | om vuwy B Tat(in Clem) Meth. 
7. rec yap (gloss, substituted for δε, as more appropriate), with B 1) 5: -σὐ } KLPR3 
rel [vulg-clem] syrr [eth arm] Chr, Thdrt, Th] He: txt AC D!/and lat] FR'd 17 am 
(with demid fuld) copt goth Orig,[-c,] Chr, Cyr, [Euthal-ms] Damase [ Cypr, Ambrst]. 
(adda, so BCD! 17.) rec xapioua bef exer, with KL rel { vulg-clem hart] 

syrr goth arm Ephr, Chr, Thdrt, [Damase Ambrst Augsepe]: txt ABDF[ PJ m17 an 
(with [fuld] demid tol) Clem, Orig,{-c,-int, | Cyr[-p, Euthal-ms] Cypr,, C(appy) has exec 


bef exaortos { Tischdf, ed 8, suspects that it reads as txt]. 


ins Tov bef @eov DF ὁ Thart,. 


rec ὅς (twice), with KLN3 [47(sic) | rel Orig,[-c,] Chr Thdrt [Damasc] : txt 
ABCDFPR®! 17 Clem, Cyr[-p, Orig-c, Euthal-ms }. 


is applied by Meyer to τῆς e&ovcias,— 
by Billroth, al., to τῆς ὀφειλῆς; De Wette 
suggests τοῦ σώματος, but prefers, and 
rightly, leaving its reference indefinite, 
to be supplied in the reader’s mind. 
ei μή τι, unless perchance (reff). 
av | “ The verb is sometimes omitted after 
this particle, but always so that it can be 
supplied from a foregoing clause. So Eur. 
Alcest. 181, σὲ δ᾽ ἄλλη γυνὴ κεκτήσεται, 
σώφρων μὲν οὐκ ἂν μᾶλλον, εὐτυχὴς δ᾽ 
ἴσως. Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 330. 
ἐκ, according to: the mutual agreement 
being the ground, and the measure, of the 
act. ἵνα σχ.] in order that ye may 
have undisturbed leisure for prayer. ‘lhe 
pres. σχολάζητε of the rec. would refer to 
the general habit, and would thus make 
τῇ mpos., ‘your ordinary prayers, —being 
thus inconsistent with the direction given 
πρὸς καιρόν : the aorist expresses this tem- 
porary purpose, and shews that the prayer 
meant is not ordinary but extraordinary, 
—seasons of urgent supplication. 
Both the alteration to the present and the 
addition of τῇ νηστείᾳ καί, shew how such 
passages as this have been tampered with 
by the ascetics: see also Mark ix. 29. 
ἦτε, ποῦ συνέρχησθε as it has been 
amended (nor -εσθε as it has been re- 
amended), because εἶναι ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό in 
this sense is the normal state of the 
married. For the expression see reff. 
The subjune. still depends on va—the 
aim of the temporary separation is πού 
that you may keep apart, but for a certain 
end, and then that you may be united 
again. iva μὴ πειρ.1 Purpose of the 
re-union stated, by that which might hap- 


pen did it not take place. πειράζῃ now is 
present, not aor., rs betokening the danger 
of a state of abstinence if continued, 

ἀκρασία here, not that from ἄκρᾶτος 
(~"~>),—which signifies a bad mixture, as 
ἄκρ. aépos, ‘insalebrity of the air: but 
that from ἀκρατής (~ ~~~),—incontinence ; 
see reff. διὰ τ. ἀκρ. dp., On account 
of your incontiuence,—but hardly, as 
Meyer seems to tiink, with allusion to the 
proverbial fault of the Corinthians in this 
particular, which would be more definitely 
expressed, were it intended. The ὑμῶν is 
necessary to carry out the form of the sen- 
tence, corresponding to ὑμᾶς above. 

6.] But this I say by way of allowance 
(for you), not by way of command. 

τοῦτο refers, not to ver. 2, as Beza, Grot., 
and De Wette, because the precept there 
given depends on a reason also given, 
διὰ Tas πορνείας, from the nature of which 
reason it must be kat’ émitayhy: nor to the 
whole since ver. 2, as Billroth, Rickert, 
al.,—because the precept in ver. 3 de- 
pends on the general truth in ver. 4, and 
is also a command: nor to πρὸς καιρόν, 
as Theophyl.:—unor as the ascetics, Orig., 
Tert., Jerome, Estius (also Calvin), to 
ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ἦτε, because both these are 
but subordinate members of the preceding 
sentence :—still less to what follows, as 
Rosenm., al. :—but, as the context (ver. 
7) shews, to the whole recommendation 
given in ver. 5. ‘This recommendation 
all depended on the possibility of their 
being tempted by incontinence: he gives 
it not then as @ command in all cases, 
but as an allowance for those to whom 
he was writing, whom he kuew, and ass 


522 ΤΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. VIT; 
x \ “ , , \ A , . 
ae 8 Λέγω δὲ τοῖς "ἡ ayaduots καὶ ταῖς # χήραις, ὃ καλὸν 
34 only + 5 Ξ Ν ΄ e » 7 ih? ὃ A ΤΑ e2 ΄ 
z er iv. bg QuTOlLS €AV μεινῶσιν WS KAY@. El O€ OUK εγκρατευ- 
ἽΝ ἘΣ ἰῇ 7 - 7, " a ‘a 
a ovTal, γαμησάτωσαν" ἃ κρείσσον yap ἐστιν γαμῆσαι ἢ 
ΓΞ τ e a 10 A δ \ f , > 
b Mat ee πυροῦσθαι. τὸ TOLS Εε γεγαμήῆκοσιν παραγγεέλλω ουκ 
42. > 
Viii. or ech. ix. 25 only. Gen. xliii. 31. 1 Kings xiii. 12 only. (-τής, Tit. i. 8. ττεια, Acts xxiv. 25.) 
d = Phil. i. 23. 1 Pet. iii. 17. 2 Pet. ii. 21. (ver. 38. ch. xi. 17. Heb. i.4 4112.) Prov, iii. 14. e = here 
(2 Cor. a Eph. vi. 16. 2 Pet. iii. 12. Rev. i. 15. iii. 18) only. (2 Mace. iv. 38. Ps. xi. 6.) f Acts 
xvi. 18 reff. 


8. ins ort bef καλον A [syrr]. 


rec aft αὐτοῖς ins ἐστιν, with D?-3K(om avr.) I 


rel syr [basm] goth Thdrt [Damasc,] Thl @e: om ABCD!FPR 17 Syr copt [arm } 


Orig[-c,] 
B. 


kat eyw DF Meth,: eyo a. 
9. for οὐκ εγκρ., ov κρατευονται F. 
κρειττον BDN a in 17. 
Meth,. 


sumes, to be thus tempted. The mean- 
ing ‘by permission, Εἰ. V., is ambiguous, 
appearing as if it meant by permission 
of the Lord (to say it): that given by 
Hammond, al., κατὰ τὴν ἐμὴν γνώμην, is 
philologically inadmissible. Pah 
rather (δέ) wish that all men were as 
I myself also am (καί comparandi, so 
Xen. Anab. ii. 1. 22, kal ἡμῖν ταὐτὰ δοκεῖ 
ἅπερ καὶ βασιλεῖ. See Hartung, Partikell. 
i. 126) —viz., ἐν ἐγκρατείᾳ, which Chrys. 
seems to have read in the text; see below 
on ver. 8. ἀλλὰ Exactos ... said 
in the most general way, as a milder ex- 
pression of ‘all have not the gift of con- 
tinence.’ οὕτως .... οὕτως] both 
are said generally, not one in the way in 
which I have it (of continence), another iz 
the way of marrying (i.e. though he have 
not ¢his, and be therefore better married, 
yet has some other), which should be ἐκεί- 
vws,—but, one thus, and another thus, — 
i.e. ‘one in one way, another in another.’ 
8, 9.] Advice to the unmarried, 
that it is best so to remain, but **tter to 
marry than be inflamed with lust. 
8. λέγω δέ] taking up the former ἰέγω, 
ver. 6, and bringing this advice under the 
same category as ver. 7, viz, his own wish 
that all were as himself. The stress is on 
λέγω, not on τοῖς dy. k. ταῖς χ., which 
would in that case be placed first, as τοῖς 
γεγαμηκόσιν below. τοῖς ἀγάμοις, 
the unmarried, of both sexes: not as 
usually interpreted, widowers, α" unmar- 
ried males alone: this is shew. by the 
contrasted term γεγαμηκόσιν, which em- 
braces (see vv. 10, 11) both sexes. καὶ 
ταῖς χήραις may be added as singling out 
widows especially ;—or more probably, 
because τοῖς ἀγάμοις would naturally be 
taken as those who never were married, 
and thus widows would not be understood 
to be included. καλόν, see on ver. 1, 
it is good for them, i.e. ‘their best way, 
ws κἀγώ) i.e. ἄγαμος. This 


Meth, Epiph, Chr, Cyr[-p, Cyr-jer, Euthal-ms] Damase,. 
ins ovtws bef μεινωσιν Ὁ late Meth, [Ambr Ambrst] Aug; bef ws m [basm]. 


for εαν, av 


γαμειτωσαν F [ἢ Epiph-ed,] Chr-ed,. 
om ἐστιν D}{-gr] F{-gr] ¢ copt [basm] Orig[-c,(txt,)-int, ] 
yauew ΑΟἸΝῚ 17 Clem, Orig{-c, Euthal-ms] Damasc,. 


brings the Apostle’s own circumstances 
more clearly before us than ver. 7, which 
might be misunderstood: and there can be 
little doubt from this, that he never was 
married. Grot. says, “ex ἢ. 1. non im- 
probabiliter colligitur, Paulo fuisse uxorem, 
quod et Clemens Alex. putat, sed cum hee 
scriberentur, mortuam.” But this rests 
on the mistaken interpretation οἵ ayduos 
noticed above. The passage of Clem. Alex. 
(Strom. iii. [6.] 53, p.535 P., alluded to in 
Kuseb. iii. 30) is grounded on Paul’s having 
in a certain epistle addressed τὴν αὐτοῦ 
σύζυγον, ἣν ov περιεκόμιζε, διὰ τὸ THs 
ὑπηρεσίας εὐσταλές. But the words σύν- 
ζυγε γνήσιε, Phil. iv. 8, certainly have no 
reference to a wife: see note there. 

9.) but if they are incontinent .. . οὐκ 
must be joined not with εἰ, which would 
require μή, but with the verb. So reff. 
and Soph. Aj. 1131, εἰ τοὺς θανόντας οὐκ 
ἐᾷς θάπτειν παρών, ‘vetas’ See other 
examples in Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 
122 f. ἐγκρατεύω is said by Lobeck, ad 
Phryn. p. 44, not to be found except in 
the LXX and N.T. But both Phrynichus 
and Thom. Mag. say ἀκρατεύεσθαι μη- 
δαμῶς εἴπῃς, ἀλλὰ οὐκ ἐγκρατεύεσθαι. See 
in Wetst. yapnnoar.} Lobeck, in 
Phrynichus, p. 742, says, “post @ynua (ut 
ἔγηρα) ἐγάμησα invaluit quod non solum 
in N. T. libris, ut quidam putaverunt, sed 
etiam in ipsa Grecia reperitur, auctore, 
ut videtur, Menandro: ἐγάμησεν ἣν ἐβου- 
Adunv ἐγώ, nihil impediente pedum mo- 
dulatione quominus usitato uteretur aoris- 
to.” πυροῦσθαι) “melius nuberent 
quam urerentur, id est, quam occulta flam- 
ma concupiscentiz in ipsa conscientia vas- 
tarentur.” Aug. de sancta Virginitate, 34, 
vol. vi. p. 415. 10,11.] Prohibition of 
separation after marriage; or in case of 
separation, of another marriage. These 
γεγαμηκότες, as the &yauo and χῆραι 
above, are all Christians. The case of 
mixed marriages he treats ver. 12 ff, 


ABCD 
KLPR: 
bede 
ghkl 
mno 
17. 47 


Ὁ is 
rited on 
rer 13. ] 





8—13. 


ἱ καταλλωγήτω" καὶ ἄνδρα γυναῖκα μὴ 1 ἀφιέναι. 
\ lal , ͵ Ν 
δὲ λοιποῖς λέγω ἐγώ, οὐχ ὁ κύριος, εἴ τις ἀδελφὸς 


γυναῖκα ἔχει * 


9 int Η \ 
Ρ μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ, μὴ Ἰ᾿Ἰάἀφιέτω αὐτήν" 15 καὶ γυνὴ “1 ἥτις ἔχει 


” ὃ k » 
avopa avr la TOV, 


bis (Luke xi. 48. 


o Rom. vii. 17 reff. p = here bis only ¥. 


10. (adda, so AB C(appy) D!.) 


Acts viii. 1. xxii. 20. Rom. i. 32) only +. 
(Gen. xxvii. 44.) Soph. Cid. Tyr. 990. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS, A. 523 


yy l \ m ee n Lal op , n 10. 
ATLOTOV, Kab αὐτῇ συνευδοκεῖ οὐκειν τ ch. vi. 6 reff. 


= 2 John 2. 
Luke xvii. 31. 
m Acts ix. 20 


\ ἥν a m ff. 
lxal τὰ οὗτος " συνευδοκεῖ “Ὁ οἰκεῖν Ῥ μετ᾽ u~ ana 


constr., here 
2 Mace. xi. 24, 35 only.) 
q = Acts x. 41 reff. 


(1 Mace. i. 57. 


xwpilerda ADF Orig[-c,] Epiph, Bas, Ces, : 


txt BCKLPX® rel Clem, Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt. 


11. pevew ἄγαμον, and καταλλαγηναι F latt goth lat-ff. 


ins 151m bef ανδρι P. 


12. rec eyw bef λεγω, with DFKL rel latt syr goth Orig,[-int,] Chr, Thdrt Iren- 
int, : txt ΑΒΟΡΝ m 17 Syr copt eth Clem Orig,. 
18. for nris, εἰ τις DIFP b' h Καὶ latt Chr,({and] ms,) Thdrt, Thi-mss, [ Damase 


Ambrst Aug]. 


They are those already married. 

10. οὐκ ἐγώ, ἀλλὰ ὁ κύριος) Ordinarily, 
the Apostle (ἐγώ) writes, commands, gives 
his advice, under conscious inspiration of 
the Holy Spirit of God. See ver. 40. He 
claims expressly, ch. xiv. 37, that the things 
& γράφω ὑμῖν should be recognized as 
κυρίον (ἐντολή). But here he is about to 


. give them a command resting, not merely 


on inspired apostolic authority, great and 
undoubted as that was, but on that of THE 
LorD HIMSELF. So that all supposed dis- 
tinction between the Apostle’s own writing 
of himself and of the Lord, is quite irre- 
levant. He never wrote of himself, being 
a vessel of the Holy Ghost, who ever spoke 
by him to the church. The distinction 
between that which is imperative, and that 
which is optional, that which is more and 
that which is less weighty in his writings, 
is to be made by the cautious and believing 
Christian, from a wise appreciation of the 
subject-matter, and of the circumstances 
under which it was written. ALL is the 
outpouring of the Spirit, but not all for 
all time, nor all on the primary truths of 
the faith. Not I, but the Lord, viz. in 
ref. Matt. See also Mark x. 12, where the 
woman's part is brought out. That τέ oc- 
cupies the principal place here, is perhaps 
because the Christian women at Corinth 
may have been the most ready to make the 
separation: or perhaps, because the woman, 
from her place in the matrimonial union, 
may be more properly said ἀπὸ ἀνδρὸς 
χωρισθῆναι than the man ἀπὸ γυναικὸς 
χωρισθῆναι. χωρισθ., be separated, 
whether by formal divorce or otherwise ; 
the καταλλαγήτω below, is like this, an 
absolute passive ; undefined whether by her 
own or her husband’s doing. 11.) ἐάν 
to καταλλαγήτω is parenthetical. It sup- 
poses a case of actual separation, contrary 
of course to Christ’s command: if such 


g rec (for ovtos) avros, with D4/-gr] KL rel syrr arm Chirysepe) Thdrt : 
txt ABCD!FP[Q]& m latt copt goth Cyr, [lat-ff]. (17 def.) 


for συνευδ., ευδοκει Ὁ. 


have really taken place (καί, veritably : 
see note on 2 Cor. v. 3, and Hartung, 
Partikell. i. 132), the additional sin of a 
new marriage (Matt. v. 32) must not be 
committed, but the breach healed as soon 
as possible. καταλλ.] see above on 
χωρισθῇ. κ. ἄνδρ. γυν. μὴ ad.| The 
Apostle does not add the qualification παρ- 
εκτὸς λόγου πορνείας Matt. v. 32 (xix. 9), 
not found in Mark x. 11 or Luke xvi. 18. 
But we cannot hence infer that he was not 
aware of it. The rule, not the exception, 
here was in his mind: and after what 
had been before said on the subject of for- 
nication, the latter would be understood 
as a matter of course. 12—16. } 
Directions for such Christians as were 
already married to Heathens. Such a@ 
circumstance must not be a ground per 
se of separation,—and why: but if the 
unbelieving party wished to break off the 
union, let it be so. 12. τοῖς λοι- 
mots, the rest, perhaps in respect of 
their letter of enquiry,—the only ones not 
yet dealt with. At allevents, the meaning 
is plain, being those who are involved in 
mixed marriages with unbelievers. 

ἐγώ, οὐχ ὁ κύρ.] I, 1.6. I Paul, in my 
apostolic office, under the authority of the 
Holy Spirit (see above on ver. 10), not 
the Lord, i.e. not Christ by any direct 
command spoken by Him: it was a ques- 
tion with which Hx did not deal, in His 
recorded discourses. Inthe right arrange- 
ment of the words (txt) the stress is not on 
ἐγῴ, but on λέγω: But to the rest I say 
(I, not the Lord). συνευδοκεῖ presup- 
noses his own wish to continue united. 
αὕτη, not αὐτή, and οὗτος, not αὐτός, below, 
—see reff. 13.] The change of con- 
struction καὶ γυνὴ itis .. . καὶ οὗτος . .,18 
found frequently with καί: so Il. a. 78, ἡ 
γὰρ ὀΐομαι ἄνδρα χολωσέμεν, ὃς μέγα πάν- 
των |’Aoyelwy κρατέει καί οἱ πείθονται. 


524 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. VII. 


14 


Σ = Acts xx. 
32. xxvi. 18. 
Exod. xxix. 
37. 


, A ἈΝ j > 4 \ » ὃ Petey \ e Lares 
αὐτῆς, μὴ 1 ἀφιέτω Tov avopa. ἡγίασται γὰρ ὁ ἀνὴρ 
A / \ ΄ Γ ΄ ΄ 
ὁ "ἄπιστος ‘év τῇ γυναικί, καὶ "ἡγίασται ἡ γυνὴ ἡ 


. 12. 5 A ᾽ a ’ \ , \ , or 
ἐπὰν ἄπιστος tév τῷ ἀδελφῷ " ἐπεὶ ἃ ἄρα τὰ τέκνα ὑμῶν 
reff. ἐν σοὶ v2 , ἌΝΕΥ “- δὲ ev Ἂ 15 > δὲ fs ¥ 
rag’ ἔγωγε ᾿ ἀκάθαρτά ἐστιν, νῦν δὲ ἅγιά ἐστιν. 15 εἰ δὲ ὁ " ἄπιστος 
σώζομαι, 


Soph. Aj. 519. uch. y. 10 only, v = Acts x. li reff. 


rec (for tov ανδρα) avrov (corrn to conform to αὐτὴν above, ver 12), with KLP 
rel syr Chr, ‘'hdrt [Damasc] Tert, : αὐτὴν (οἱ ?) 106: txt ABCDF[Q] m 17 vulg Syr 
copt goth eth arm Cyr, [Euthal-ms] Jer Ambrst Aug Pel Bede: αὐτὸν avipa &, but 
av erased by δὲ] οἵ 3, 
14. om yap P. aft γυναικὶ ins τὴ πιστὴ DF latt Syr Mart-Clem Tert,. (om Aug- 
mss and expr.) (στος of 2nd amoros is supplied in smaller letters by N-corr!.) 
rec (for αδελφω) ανδρι (explanatory gloss, substituted as more appropriate : but αδελφω 
has peculiar force here), with D3[-gr}] KLN3 rel vulg syrr goth eth arm Chr, Thdrt 
fEuthal-ms Damasc} ΤῊ] (ἔς Iren{-int, Tert, ] (but add tw πίστω vulg Syr Iren-int Tert 


{Ambrst]): txt ABC D?(and lat] FPN! 17 copt [Cyr-p,} Augespr. 
[om ἐστιν A(appy). It reads νυν de ay... the end of the line being def). | 


[and ms]. 
᾿Αχαιοί. See τοῦ, and Kihner, ii. 526 
(§ 799). Meyer remarks, that the 


Apostle uses the vox media ἀφιέναι here, 
of both parties, the husband and wife, not 
ἀπολύειν (as Matt. v. 31, &.), which would 
apply only to the husband. In the E. V. 
this identity of terms is unfortunately neg- 
lected. The same word, part from, would 
well have expressed ἀφιέτω in both cases. 

By the Greek as well as Roman cus- 
toms the wife had the power of effecting 
a divorce. At Athens,—when the divorce 
originated with the wife, she was said ἀπο- 
λείπειν the house of her husband: when 
with the husband, ἀποπεμπέσθαι. At 
Rome, the only exception to the wife’s 
liberty of effecting a divorce appears to 
have been in the case of a freedwoman 
who had married her patronus. See 
Smith’s Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Antt. artt. 
Divortium, and ἀπολείψεως δίκη. Olsh. 
thinks that Paul puts both alternatives, 
because he regards the Christian party 
as the superior one in the marriage. But, 
as Meyer remarks, this would be incon- 
sistent with the fundamental law of mar- 
riage, Gen. iii. 16, and with the Apostle’s 
own view of it, ch. xi. 3, xiv. 34; Eph. v. 
22, 23; 1 Tim. ii. 11, 12. 14.] Ground 
of the above precept. ἡγίασται] ‘The 
meaning will best be apprehended by re- 
membering (1) that oliness, under the 
Gospel, answers to dedication to God 
under the law; (2) that the ἡγιασμένοι 
under the Gospel are the body of Chris- 
tian men, dedicated to God, and thus 
become His in a peculiar manner: (3) 
that this being so, things belonging to, 
relatives inseparably connected with, the 
people of God are said to be hallowed by 
their ἁγιότης : so Theophylact, οὐχ ὅτι 
ἅγιος γίνεται ὁ Ἕλλην. οὐ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι 
ἅγιός ἐστιν ἀλλ᾽, ἡγίασται" τουτέστι, τῇ 
ἁγιότητι τοῦ πιστοῦ νἐνίκηται. Chrysos- 
tom well shews the distinction between 


vuve D1 F Chr, 


this case and that in ch. vi. 15, that 
being a connexion κατὰ τὴν ἀσέβειαν,---ἰπ 
and under the condition of the very state, 
in which the other party is tmpure: 
whereas this is a connexion according 
to a pure and holy ordinance, by virtue 
of which, although the physical unity in 
both cases is the same, the purity over- 
bears the impurity. ἐν TH γ.. ἐν τῷ 
ἀδελ.] in, i.e. his or her ἁγιότης is 
situated in, rests in, the other (see reff.: 
and note, ch. vi. 2). ἐπεὶ ἄρα] as ref., 
but here ellipticaliy : since in that case 
(i.e. as understood, the other alternative, 
—the non-hallowing). ἐστιν, not 
ἂν εἴη, nor ἦν [E. V.], but pres.: because 
the supposed case is assumed, and the ind. 
pres. used of what has place on its as- 
sumption. ἅγια] as ἡγίασται above: 
holy to the Lord. On this fact, Chris- 
tian children being holy, the argument is 
built. This being so,—they being hal- 
lowed, because the children of Christians, — 
it follows that that union out of which they 
sprung, must as such have the same hal- 
lowed character ; i. e. that the insanctity 
of the one parent is in it overborne by the 
sanctity of the other. The fact of the 
children of Christians, God’s spiritual 
people, being holy, is tacitly assumed as a 
matter of course, from the precedent of 
God’s ancient covenant people. With 
regard to the bearing of this verse on the 
subject of Infant Baptism,—it seems to 
me to have none, further than this: that 
it establishes the analogy, so far, between 
Christian and Jewish children, as to shew, 
that if the initiatory rite of the old cove- 
nant was administered to the one,—that 
of the new covenant, in so far as it was 
regarded as corresponding to circumcision, 
would probably as a matter of course be 
administered to the other. Those, as 
Meyer, whodeny any such inference, forget, 
as it seems to me, that it is not personal 


ABCDF 
ΚΙΡΝ ἃ 


bede 


ghkl 


mno 


17. 47 


f 





14—16. 
“vapilera, * χωριζέσθω. 


ἡ ἀδελφὴ ἐν YTols τοιούτοις, 5 ἐν δὲ εἰρήνῃ * κέκληκεν 


΄ lal Ὁ 
ἡμᾶς ὁ θεός. 
28. ch. xvi. 16,18. Acts xxii. 22 reff. 


only ζ. b John ix. 25. 
14. Jonah iii. 9. 


15. om ἡ FPN?! [k'] w[Ser states that m omits 4] Chr-ms,. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS, A. 


16 ἃ γί γὰρ * οἶδας, γύναι, 


2 Kings xii. 22. 
c Acts xix. 2 (Ὁ) reff. 


525 


οὐ " δεδούλωται ὁ ἀδελφὸς ἢ) wey. i0,1. 


x Acts vil. 6 


reff. see 
ver. 39. 
ΡΟΝ ν ” y neut., Rom. 
be ey τον avopa i. 32 al. 
masc., ver. 
z— Gal.i.6. Eph. iv. 4. 1 Thess. iv. 7. a here 


Eccl. iii. 21 ABN compl.(elée Ed-vat. Ald.j Joel ii. 


vuas ACK! copt 


(sic Treg) [Euthal-ms ] Damase Thl Pel Sedul Bede: txt BDFLN?® rel latt syrr goth 
wth arm Nys, Chr, Thdrt Phot{-c,}] ic Ambrst. (P def.) 


holiness which is here predicated of the 
children, any more than of the unbelieving 
husband or wife, but holiness of dedication, 
by strict dependence on one dedicaled. 
Notwithstanding this ayidrns, the Chris- 
tian child is individually born in sin anda 
child of wrath ; and individually needs the 
washing of regeneration and the renewing 
of the Holy Ghost, just as much as the 
Jewish child needed the typical purifying 
of circumcision, and the sacrificial atone- 
ments of the law. So that in this ἁγιότης 
of the Christian child there is nothing in- 
consistent with the idea, nor with the 
practice, of Infant Baptism. — On νῦν δέ, 
see note, ch. v. 11. 15.] But ¢f the 
wish for separation (implied by the pre- 
sent xwpiferai,—is for being separated, 
see Winer, edn. 6, αὶ 40. 2. a, and compare 
John x. 32, xiii. 6, 27) proceed from the 
side of the UNBELIEVER (emphasis on 6 
ἄπιστος), let him (or her) depart (be sepa- 
rated off). ov δεδούλ.] οὐκ ἔχει 
ἀνάγκην ὃ πιστὸς ἢ ἣ πιστὴ ἐν τοῖς ἀπίσ- 
τοις τοιαύτην, οἵα αὐτῷ ἐπίκειται ἐπὶ τῶν 
πιστῶν. ἐκεῖ μὲν γὰρ παντὶ τρόπῳ, χωρὶς 
λόγῳ πορνείας, οὐκ ἔξεστιν ἀπ᾿ ἀλλήλων 
τοὺς συναφθέντας χωρισθῆναι" ἐνταῦθα δέ, 
ἂν μὲν. συνευδοκῇ τὸ ἄπιστον μέρος τῷ 
πιστῷ συνοικεῖν, δεῖ μὴ λύειν τὸ συνοικέ- 
σιον. ἂν δὲ στασιάζῃ καὶ τὴν λύσιν ἐκεῖνος 
ποιῇ, οὐ δεδούλωται ὃ πιστὸς εἰς τὸ μὴ χω- 
ρισθῆναι. Photius, in cumenius. ἐν 
τοῖς τοιούτοις may be taken as mase., in 
the case of such persons,—as above by 
Phot. :—but the ἐν seems harsh; it is better 
therefore to render it, in such cases. 

ἐν δὲ cip.] Not = εἰς εἰρήνην [Ε. V.], but 
signifying the moral ‘element iz which we 
are called to be: see reff. and ver. 22 
below. The meaning is, ‘ let the un- 
believer depart, rather than by attempting 
to retain the union, endanger that peace 
of household and peace of spirit, which is 
part of the calling of a Christian.’ 
Observe, (1) that there is no contradiction, 
in this licence of breaking off such a mar- 
riage, to the command of our Lord in 
Matt. v. 32,—because the Apostle ex- 
pressly asserts, ver. 12, that our Lord’s 
words do not apply to such marriages as 
are here contemplated. They were spoken 
to those within the covenant, and as such 
apply immediately to the wedlock of 


Christians (ver. 10), but not to mixed 
marriages. De Wette denies this, and 
holds that Paul is speaking only of the 
Christian’s duty in cases where the mar- 
riage is already virtually broken off,—aud 
by his remarks on Matt. v. 32, seems to 
tuke πορνεία in a wide sense, and to regard 
it as a justifiable cause of divorce because 
it is such a breaking off. This however 
appears hardly consistent with ver. 12; for, 
if it were so, there would be a command 
of the Lord regarding this case. At all 
eveuts, we may safely assume that where 
the Apostle is distinctly referring to our 
Lord’s command, and supplying what it 
did not contain, there can be no real in- 


‘consistency : if such appear to be, it must 


be in our apprehension, not in his words. 
(2) That the question of re-marrying after 
such a separation, is here left open: on 
this, see note on Matt. v. 32. (3) That 
not a word here said can be so strained as 
to imply any licence to contract marriages 
with unbelievers. Only those already 
contracted are dealt with: the ἑτεροζυγεῖν 
ἀπίστοις is expressly forbidden, 2 Cor. vi. 
14, and by implication below, ver. 39. 

16.] This verse is generally understood as 
a ground for remaining united, as ver. 13, 
in hope that conversion of the unbelieving 
party may follow. Thus ver. 15 isregarded 
as altogether parenthetical. But (1) this 
interpretation is harsh as regards the con- 
text, for ver. 15 is evidently not paren- 
thetical,—and (2) it is hardly gram- 
matically admissible (see below, for it 
makes εἰ = εἰ μή,---« What knowest thou 
.... whether thou shalt nof save... .?’ 
Lyra seems first to have proposed the true 
rendering, which was afterwards adopted 
hesitatingly by Estius, and of late decided- 
ly by Meyer, De Wette, and Bisping: viz. 
that the verse is ποέ a ground for remain- 
ing united, in hope, &c.,—but a ground for 
consummating a separation, and not mar- 
ring the Christian’s peace for so uncertain 
a prospect as that of converting the un- 
believing party. τί οἶδας ei thus preserves 
its strict sense, What knowest thou (about 
the question) whether . . . .? and the verse 
coheres with the words immediately pre- 
ceding, ἐν εἰρήνῃ κέκλ. ἡμᾶς ὃ 8. I may 
observe, in addition to Meyer and De W.’s 
remarks, that the position of the words 


526 


, xX 
4 σώσεις; ἢ ὃ 


d .- Rom. xi. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


b io » be > \ “' 
οἰδας, ἄνερ, “εὖ τὴν γυναίκα 


VEL. 


d , 
σωσεις; 


14 reff. ΠΣ 17 6 ᾽ Η f ce , an os g ee to td , fv ec 
e—a 
pb ete Gal. ws μὴ εκαστῳ ς εμερ €V O sia eit: ἘΦΘΒΕΝ ὡς 
ἥ .ὦΣ, ce ΄ i? Η / Ξ [ lad 
ee ὦ KeKANKEV O Geos, οὕτως ' περιπτατείτω᾽ καὶ οὕτως EV ταῖς 
f constr., ch. k , 18 1 , 
hi. 9. “Rom, Ἰ ἐκκλησίαις πάσαις * διατάσσομαι. ΠΕεριτετμημένος 
xil. 
= ’ > ΄ ’ 
eM τὶς S™ ἐκλήθη, μὴ " ἐπισπάσθω" ἐν 5 ἀκροβυστίᾳ © κέκληταί ...2 
ii. S$. 9.0 
x. 13. Heb. vii ‘ii. 2. Josh. xiii. 7. h = ver. 16 reff. i = ch. iii, 3 reff. j plur., Rom. 
xvi. 16 reff. k = ch. xvi. 1 reff. 1Lukei. 59. Acts vii.8. Gal. ii. 3 al. L. ἘΝ exc. John 
vii, 22. Gen. xvii. 10 al. m hypothet. indic., ver. 27. James vy. 13. n here only $. Isa. ν. 18. 


o Rom. iii. 30 reff. 


16. yury and ανηο F. 

17. peuepikey BR}. [ P def. ] 
Thdrt [Damasc] : 
A Bi(sic: 
euepioev A: 


[Syr}. 


Geos (twice) 32-3. 63. 93 goth : 
see table) CDFN m 17 latt Syr copt arm [{Euthal-ns Ambrst].—o κα bef 
o Os εμερισεν and o ks κεκληκεν k. (P def.) 

πασαις bef ras εκκλησιαις X 17. 47 vulg [ Origy(omg tars) }. 


for ἡ τι, εἰ τι A. 
rec transp kuptos and θεος, with KL rel Syr Chr, 


o xs and o xs o 6s G}[and lat]: txt 


ins ka bef exacrov ws Ἐὶ 
for 


διατασσομαι, διδασκω (see ch iv. 17) D'F, doceo latt lat-tf. 


18. εκληθη bef Ist τις D!-3F [ copt basm ] goth. 
(conformation to former), with D3KL rel Chr, Thdrt : 
arm [ Euthal-ms], tis κεκλ. D'F [ Damasc]. 


further establishes this rendering. If the 
point of the argument had been the im- 
portance, or the prospect, of saving (= con- 
verting) the unbelieving party, the ar 
rangement would probably | have been εἶ 
σώσεις τὸν ἄνδρα, and εἰ σώσεις τὴν 
γυναῖκα, whereas now the verb holds in 
both clauses a subordinate place, rather 
subjective to the person addressed, than 
the main object in the mind of the writer. 

Those who take εἰ for εἰ μή, attempt 
to justify it by reff. 2 Kings, Joel, Jonah, 
where the LXX have for the Heb. yy Ἢ, 
τίς oldev ei, to express hope: but (1) in 
every one of those passages the verb stands 
in the emphatic position, and (2) the LXX 
use this very expression to signify un- 
certainty, e.g. ref. Eccles., τίς εἴδε(οῖδεν 
ABN: add τό AN%) πνεῦμα υἱῶν τοῦ ἀν- 
θρώπου, εἰ ἀναβαίνει αὐτὸ (add eis ΑΒΟΝ) 
ἄνω; The rendering then of the verse 
will be as follows: (Let the unbeliever 
depart: hazard not for an uncertainty 
the peace in which you ought to be 
living as Christians): for what assurance 
hast thou, Ὁ wife, whether thou shalt be 
the means of thy husband's conversion ? 
Or what assurance hast thou, 0 husband, 
whether thou shalt be the means of thy 
wife’s conversion? “ This interpretation 
is the only one compatible with the obvious 
sense of ver. 15, and of the expression (not 
τί oldas εἰ μή, but) τί οἶδας εἰ σώσεις ; 
and is also in exact harmony with the 
general tenor of the Apostle’s argument, 
which is not to urge a union, but to 
tolerate a separation.” Stanley; the rest 
of whose note is deeply interesting as to 
the historical influence of the verse as 
commonly misunderstood. 17.) εἰ μή 
takes an exception, by way of caution, 
to the foregoing motive for not remaining 
together (yer. 10). The Christian partner 


rec (for κεκληται me τις EKANON 
txt ΑΒΡΝ a m 17 copt goth 


might carry that motive foo far, and be 
tempted by it to break the connexion on 
his own part ; a course already prohibited 
(vv. 12—14). Therefore the Apostle adds, 
But (q. d. only be careful not to make this 
a ground for yourselves causing the sepa- 
ration) as to each (ἑκάστ. ὡς = ὡς ἑκάστ., 
reff.) the Lord distributed (his lot), as (i.e. 
κλήσει, ver. 20) God has called each, 
so (in that state, without change) let him 
walk (reff.). The et μή has raised con- 
siderable difficulties. (1) some cursives, 
with syr-marg and Sevrn., read εἰ τὴν 
γυναῖκα σώσει, ἢ wn;—and Knatechbull, 
al. +» join εἰ μή similarly ἃ to the foregoing ; 
ei... . odoets,—ei uh. But as De W. 
remarks, this would be, as Matt. xxii. 17, 
ἢ ov: and then we should have the 
strictly parallel clauses of ver. 16 rendered 
unequal, by an appendage being attached 
to the second, which the first has not: be- 
sides that ver. 17 would be disjoined alto- 
gether. (2) Pott would supply χωρίζεται, 
—Mosheim, Vater, and Riickert, σώσεις, 
after εἰ un. But so, to say nothing of the 
irrelevancy of the idea thus introduced, εἰ 
δὲ μή, or ef δὲ καὶ μή (as Meyer), would 
be required. (3) Theodoret, al., join all 
as far as κύριος to the foregoing : ‘ What 
knowest thou, &c., except in so far as the 
Lord has apportioned to each?’ But 
thus the evidently parallel members, 
ἑκάστ. ὡς ἐμ. ὃ κύρ., and ἑκάστ. ὡς KEKA. 
6 θ., would be separated, and a repetition 
occasioned which, except in the case of 
intended parallelism, would be alien from 
St. Paul’s habit of writing. οὕτως 
. διατ.] τοῦτο εἶπεν. ἵνα τῷ ἔχειν καὶ 
ἤλλον magna προθυμότεροι περὶ τὴν 
ὑπακοὴν διατεθῶσι. Theophyl. 
18—24.] Examples of the precept Just 
given. εἶτα συνήθως ἀπὸ τοῦ προκειμένου 
εἰς ἕτερα μεταβαίνει, πᾶσι νομοθετῶν τὰ 





17—22. 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. 


57 


cre 


ny |} ιτεμνέσθ 19 ἡ Ῥπεριτομὴ 4 οὐδέν ἐ ἘΠ δα 
Tis, μὴ 'περιτεμνέσθω. ἡ ριτομὴ “ οὐδέν ἐστιν, PPautony, 


/ 
καὶ ἡ 5 ἀκροβυστία “ οὐδέν ἐστιν, ἀλλὰ τ τήρησις * ἐντο- 


λῶν * θεοῦ. 
μενέτω. 


54. ch. xiii. 2. 2 ΟὟΥ, xii. 11. 
constr., see ch. iii. 7. 

12only. Ezra x. 3. 

xxvii. 17. ver. 31. ch. ix. 12, 15. 


19. om Ist 7 F. 
21. αλλα D'. 


κατάλληλα. Theodoret. 

First example: CIRCUMCISION. 
18. ἐκλήθη) Was any one called in cir- 
cumcision, —i. e. circumcised at the time 
of his conversion. ἐπισπάσθω) By 
a surgical operation; see Theophyl., 
Wetst.,— Winer, RealwGrterbuch, art. Be- 
schneidung,—Jos. Antt. xii. 5. 1; 1 Macc. 
i. 15; Celsus de Re Medica, vii. 25 (in 
Wetst.). The practice usually was adopted 
by those who wished to appear like the 
Gentiles, and to cast off their ancient faith 
and habits. Among the Christians a strong 
anti-Judaistic feeling might lead to it. 
περιτεμνέσθω | See Gal. v. 2, al. 19. ] 
See Gal. v. 6, where our τήρησις ἐντολῶν 
θεοῦ is expressed by πίστις δι’ ἀγάπης 
ἐνεργουμένη ; and Gal. vi. 15, where it is 
given by καινὴ κτίσις. Cf. an interesting 
note in Stanley, on the relation of these 
three descriptions. After θεοῦ, supply τὰ 
ΤΡ ΠΕ eotty: see ch, ili. 7... _  20.] 
formal repetition of the general precept, 
as again ver. 24. κλῆσις is not the 
calling in life, for it never has that mean- 
ing either in classical or Hellenistic Greek 
(in the example which Wetst. gives from 
Dion. Hal. Antt. iv. 20, κλήσεις is used to 
express the Latin ‘ e/asses,—&s καλοῦσιν 
“Ρωμαῖοι κλήσεις, and so is not a (reek 
word at all); but strictly calling (" vo- 
eatio’) by God, as in ref. The κλῆσις of 
a circumcised person would be ὦ calling 
in circumeision,—and by this he was to 
abide. ἐν τῇ - ., ἐν ταύτῃ] See ch. 
vi. 4: emphatic. 21—24.] Second 
example: SLAVERY. Wert thou called 
{converted) [being] a slave, let it not be 
a trouble to thee: but if thou art even 
able to become free, use it (i.e. remain 
in slavery) rather. This rendering, which 
is that of Chrys., Theodoret, Theophyl., 
(£cum., Phot., Camerar., Estius, Wolf, 
Bengel, Meyer, De Wette, al., is required 
by the usage of the particles, εἰ xat,—by 
which, see Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 139, 
the καί, ‘also,’ or ‘even,’ does not belong 
to the εἶ, as in καὶ εἰ, but is spread over 
the whole contents of the concessive clause : 
so Soph. Gd. Tyr. 302, «τόλιν μέν, εἰ καὶ 


18 —20.] 


20 ἕκαστος ἐν TH ἃ κλήσει ἡ ἢ ἐκλήθη, ἐν ταύτῃ 
21 δοῦλος » ἐκλήθης, μή σοι Y μελέτω" ἀλλ᾽ εἰ καὶ 
δύνασαι ἐλεύθερος γενέσθαι, μᾶλλον “ χρῆσαι. 


s Sir. xxxyv. (xxxii.) 23. 
u = Rom. xi. 29 (reff.). 
1 Tim. i. 8. y. 23. 


om from ἐστιν to ἐστιν F. 
om «a F ms-of-vulg copt. 


Vii. 22, 23. 
Acts vii. 8. 
- x. 45. xi. 2. 
Gen. xvii. 13. 
Exod. iv. 26, 
Jer. xi. 16 
only. 
92 S \ q = Matt. 
~“O YAP xxiii. 16, 18. 
John viii. 
r = here (Acts iy. 2. νυ. 18) only +. Wisd. vi. 18 al. ellipt. 
t Matt. xv. 3 ||. Rey. xii. 17. xiv. 
Υ ch, ix. 9 reff. w Acts 
Prov. x. 26. 


20. τουτω A. 


μὴ βλέπεις, φρονεῖς δ᾽ ὅμως, ofa νόσῳ 
ξύνεστιν. Plato, Rep. p. 387, εἰ δ᾽ οὖν καὶ 
μή ἐστιν ὅμοιον, φαίνεται δὲ τῷ ἐρωτηθέντι 
τοιούτων. Aristoph. Lysistr. 254, χώρει, 
Apaxns, ἡγοῦ βάδην, εἰ Kat τὸν ὦμον ἀλγεῖς. 
Thucyd. ii. 64, μήτε ἐμὲ δι’ ὀργῆς ἔχετε... 
εἰ καὶ ἐπελθόντες οἱ ἐναντίοι ἔδρασαν, ἅπερ 
εἰκὸς ἦν μὴ ἐθελησάντων ὑμῶν ὑπακούειν. 
See more examples in Hartung. It is also 
required by the context: for the burden 
of the whole passage is, ‘Let each man 
remain in the state in which he was 
called.’ Itisgiven in the Syr.: which has 


“μα. 992» ie aS “choose for 


thyself that thou mayest serve,” or simply, ~ 
“ prefer servitude :’”’ not as Meyer from the 
erroneous Latin of Tremelius, “ elige tibi 
potius quam ut servias” (I am indebted 
for this correction of some of my earlier 
editions to the kindness of the Rey. Henry 
Craik, of Bristol). The other interpreta- 
tion,—mentioned by Chrys., and given by 
Erasm., Luther. (Stanley is mistaken in 
quoting him as favourable to the other 
interpretation: his words are, ‘Sift du 
ein Knedht berufen, forge der nicht: doch, 
Eannft du frei werden, fo brauche def viel 
lieber 7), Beza, Calvin, Grot., and almost 
all the moderns,—understands τῇ ἐλευϑερίᾳ 
after χρῆσαι: ‘but if thou art able to 
become free, take advantage of it rather’ 
The objections to this are, (1) the position 
of καί, which in this case must have been 
after δύνασαι,---εἰ δύνασαι καὶ ἐλεύθερος 
γενέσθαι, or have been absent altogether. 
(2) The clause would hardly have begun 
with ἀλλὰ εἰ, but with εἰ 8€—so the alter- 
native suppositions in vv. 9, 11, 15, 28, 36. 
The ἀλλά brings out a strong opposition to 
the μελέτω, and implies a climax which 
would ill suit a merely parenthetic clause, 
but must convey the point of the sentence. 
(3) The absence of a demonstrative pro- 
noun after χρῆσαι, by which we are thrown 
back, not on the secondary subject of the 
sentence, ἐλευθερίᾳ, but on the primary, 
δουλείᾳ. (4) Its utter inconsistency with 
the general context. The Apostle would 
thus be giving two examples of the pre- 
cept ἕκαστος ἐν ᾧ ἐκλήθη ἐν τούτῳ με«' 


528 


x here only t. 


ἐν κυρίῳ 


Jos. ere vii. 
1-2. Imad ὁμοίως ὁ ἐλεύθερος © κληθεὶς δοῦλός 
49." (5 at, 92 
ie (90 20.) wy τιμῆς y ss ee 
y ch. vi. 20 - 
reff.) 24 ἕκαστος ἐν 7@ 


z Acts xvii. 23 Ε δι « 
δι ἃ παρὰ θεῶ 

a= here - ρ ri 
only (?). see 
Luke xviii. 27. John viii. 38. 


22. rec aft ouows ins καὶ (as being usual aft ομοιως : 
syr-w-ast copt eth arm Chr, Damase ΤῊ] Ge Orig-int, Ambr, : 
om ABPN 17 vulg Syr goth Chr-ms, Thdrt Ambr, Aubrst Pel Bede. 


bef ἐστιν FN! c copt. 


24. αδελφοι bef ev w εκληθη D(-@nre D') F Ambrst : 
rec ins tw bef dew, with Ae k Gc: om BDFKLPNR rel Thdrt, Damase ΤῊ], 


Thdrt,. 


vérw, one of which would convey a re- 
commendation of the contrary course. 
See this followed out in Chrysostom. (5) 
Its entire contradiction to ver. 22: see 
below. (6) It would be quite inconsis- 
tent with the teaching of the Apostle, 
—that in Christ (Gal. iii. 28) freeman and 
slave are all one,—and with his remarks 
on the urgency and shortness of the time 
in this chapter (ver. 29 ff.),—to turn out 
of his way to give a precept merely of 
worldly wisdom, that a slave should be- 
come free if he could. 
χράομαι in sucha connexion, which suits 
better the remaining in, enduring, labour- 
ing under, giving one’s self up to, an 
already-existing state, than the adopting 
or taking advantage of a new one; cf. 
such expressions as τοιούτῳ μόρῳ ἐχρή- 
σατο 6 παῖς, Herod. i. 117: συμφορᾷ, 
συντυχίᾳ, εὐτυχίᾳ, χρῆσθαι, often in He- 
τοῦ, : ἀμαθίᾳ χρῆσθαι, and the like. The 
instance quoted by Bloomfield for ‘ become 
free, ἑκὼν yap οὐδεὶς δουλίῳ χρῆται Wye, 
#Esch. Again. 953, telis just the other 
way. There χρῆται is used not of entering, 
but of submitting to, the yoke of slavery, 
as here. 22.| Ground of the above 
precept. For the slave who was called 
in the Lord (not, as E. V. and De Wette, 
‘ He who is called in the Lord, being a 
slave, which would be δοῦλος κληθείς, 
see above, δοῦλος ἐκλήθης: ἐν κυρίῳ, 
as the element in which what is about to 
be stated takes place) is the Lord’s freed- 
man (““ ἀπελεύθερος with genit.is not here 
in the ordinary sense of ‘libertus alicujus,’ 

‘any one’s manumitted slave? for the 
former master was sin or the devil, see on 
ch. vi. 20;—but only a freedman belong- 
ing to Christ, viz. treed by Christ from 
the service of another. This the reader 
would understand as a matter of course.” 
Meyer): similarly he that was called 
being free (not here, κληθεὶς ἐλεύθερος, 
see above) is the slave of Christ. Christ’s 
service is perfect freedom, and the Chris- 
tian’s freedom is the service of Christ. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


" κληθεὶς δοῦλος 


" ἐκλήθη, ἀδελφοί, ἐν 


(7) The import of 


Vit. 


* ἀπελεύθερος κυρίου ἐστίν' 

χριστοῦ. 
fa » ΄ 

μὴ γίνεσθε δοῦλοι ἀνθρώπων. 


ἐστιν 


“τούτῳ μενέτω 


so also δε kat), with KL rel 
de καὶ DF 1 m(Treg) : 
χριστον 


om αδελφοι al 39. 120 (Chr,) 


But here the Apostle takes, in each case, 
one member of this double antithesis from 
the outer world, one from the spiritual. 
The (actual) slave is (spiritually) free: the 
(actually) free is a (spiritual) slave. So 
that the two are so mingled, in the Lord, 
that the slave need not trouble himself 
about his slavery, nor seek for this world’s 
freedom, seeing he has a more glorious 
freedom in Christ, and seeing also that his 
brethren who seem to be free in this world 
are in fact Christ’s servants, as he is a 
servant. It will be plain that the reason 
given in this verse is quite inconsistent 
with the prevalent modern rendering of 
ver. 21. 23. | Following out of δοῦλός 
ἐστιν χριστοῦ, by reminding them of the 
PRICE PAID whereby Christ PURCHASED 
them for His (ch. vi. 20): and precept 
thereupon, BECOME NOT SLAVES OF MEN: 
i.e. ‘do not allow your relations to human 
society, whether of freedom or slavery, to 
bring you into bondage so as to cause you 
anxiety to change the one or increase the 
other.’ Chrys., al., think the precept 
directed against ὀφθαλμοδουλεία, and ge- 
neral regard to men’s opinion. But it is 
better to restrict it (however it may legiti- 
mately be applied generally) to the case in 
hand. Hammond, Knatchbull, Michaelis, 
al., understand it as addressed to the free, 
and meaning that they are not to sell 
themselves into slavery: but this is evi- 
dently wrong: as may be seen by the 
change to the second person plur. as ad- 
dressing all his readers: besides that a 
new example would have been marked as 
in vv. 18, 21. See Stanley’s note. 

24.| The rule is again repeated, but with 
the addition παρὰ θεῷ, reminding them 
of the relations of Christ’s freedman 
and Christ’s slave, and of the price paid, 
just mentioned:—of that relation to 


ABDF 
KLPx 
bede 

ghkl 

mno 
17. 47 


God in which they stood by means of 


their Christian calling. “The usual ren- 
dering, Deo inspectante (Grot.), i. e. ‘ per- 
petuo memores, vos in ejus conspectu ver- 


sari’ (Beza), does not so well suit the local- 


23—27. 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPIN@OIOTS A. 529 


"Ὁ Tlept δὲ τῶν ἢ παρθένων ° ἐπιταγὴν κυρίου οὐκ ἔχω, » Paul, here 


de γνώμην δὲ “ δίδωμι ὡς * 


ἠλεημένος ὑπὸ κυρίου 8 πιστὸς 


&c. (7 times 
and 2 Cor. xi. 


2only. Matt. 
Ca / 9 a \ . ΄ \ A i. 23 (from 
εἶναι. 78 νομίζω οὖν τοῦτο ἢ καλὸν ‘imapyew διὰ THY Isa. Mi td) 
’ “ > , [7 \ ᾽ ΄ al. : 
* ἐνεστῶσαν ' ἀνάγκην, ὅτι ἢ καλὸν ἀνθρώπῳ τὸ ™ οὕτως ° Rom: xvi 26 
3 9 , / \ , 7 ὰ =ch.i. 10 
εἶναι. 27 υ δέδεσαν γυναικί, μὴ ° ζήτει, Ρ λύσιν" 4 λέλυσαι ἣ Get}. Ὁ 
f pass., Rom. xi. 30, 31 reff. δ᾽ = ch. iv..2 al. fr. h = ver. 1. one μεν τ Ξ 
viii. 16 reff. Ny k Rom. viii. 38. ch. iii. 22. Gal. i.4, 2 Thess. ii. 2. 2 Tim. iii. 1. Heb. ix. 9 
only. 1 Macc. xii. 44. (see note.) 1 = Luke xxi. 23. 2Cor. vi. 4. xii. 10. 1 Thess. iii. 
7. 1 Kings xxii. 2. : m = ver. 40. n = Rom. vii. 2. ver. 39. o = Matt. 
vi. 33. Col.iii. 1. 1 Pet. iii. 11. 1 Macc. ii. 29. p here only. Eccl. vii. 30 (viii. 1). Wisd. 


viii. 8 only. 


26. aft or: καλον ins εστιν D!F [latt syrr]. 


word μενέτω. Meyer. 25—38. | Ad- 
vice (with some digressions connected with 
the subject) concerning the MARRIAGE OF 
VIRGINS. 25. | παρθένων is not, as 
Tbecdor-mops., Bengel, Olsh., al., wnmar- 
ried persons of both sexes, a meaning 
which, though apparently found in Rev. 
xiv. 4 (see note there), is perfectly un- 
necessary here, and appears to have been 
introduced from a mistaken view of vv. 
26—28. The emphasis is on ἐπιταγήν 
—command of the Lord have I none, i. 6. 
no expressed precept: so that, as before, 
there is no marked comparison between 
6 κύριος and ἐγώ. πιστὸς εἶναι] to 
be faithful, as in ref..—as a steward and 
dispenser of the hidden things of God, 
and, among them, of such directions as 
you cannot make for yourselves, but re- 
quire one so entrusted to impart to you. 
This sense, which has occurred in the esti- 
mate given of himself in this very Epistle, 
is better than the more general ones of 
true(Billroth, Riickert) or delzeving (Olsh., 
Meyer, De Wette). 26. | The ques- 
tion of the marriage of virgins is one 
involving the expediency of contracting 
marriage im general: this he deals with 
now, on grounds connected with the then 
pressing necessity. ovv, then, fol- 
lows on γνώμ. δίδωμι, and introduces 
the γνώμη. τοῦτο indicates what is 
coming, viz. τὸ οὕτως εἶναι. καλόν, 
see note on ver. 1: the best way. 

τὴν ἐνεστῶσ. avayK.| the instant neces- 
sity: viz. that prophesied by the Lord, 
Matt. xxiv. 8, 21, &c.: which shall precede 
His coming: see especially ver. 19 there : 
not, the cares of marriage, as Theophyl., 
διὰ τὰς ἐν αὐτῷ SuskoAlas, κ-. τὰ τοῦ 
γάμου ὀχληρά: nor persecutions, as Pho- 
tius in Ecum., al., which are only a part 
of the apprehended troubles. These the 
Apostle regards as instant, already begun: 
for this is the meaning of ἐνεστῶσαν, not 
imminent, shortly to come: see reff. and 
Jos. Antt. xvi. 6. 2, τὸ ἔθνος τῶν "Iov- 
δαίων εὐχάριστον εὑρέθη, οὐ μόνον ἐν τῷ 
ἐνεστῶτι καιρῷ, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῷ προ- 
yeyernuévw,—where all time future is 

Vot, I1. 


q = Acts xxii. 30. Ps. cxly. 7. 


om to F Meth,. 


evidently excluded. See note on 2 Thess. 
ii. 2, where this distinction is very im- 
portant. Ort Kad. avO......] De 
Wette takes ὅτι as because, understanding 
τοῦτο above = τὸ παρθένον εἶναι, ‘ that 
this (virginity) is best on account of the 
instant necessity, because it is ( generally) 
best for a man so to be (i. 6. unmarried).’ 
But this seems constrained, and tauto- 
logical, and the only rescue of it from the 
charge of tautology is found in the word 
‘generally,’ which is not in the text. Far 
better, with Meyer and most interpreters, 
to view the sentence as an anacoluthon, 
begun with one construction, τοῦτο καλὸν 
ὑπάρχειν, and finished, without regard to 
this, when on account of the intervening 
words it became necessary to restate the 
καλόν, with another construction, ὅτι, &e. 
Thus we shall have it, literally rendered : 
I think then this to be the best way on 
account of the instant necessity, that it is 
the best way for a man thus to be. 
ἀνθρώπῳ, not as in ver. 1 (which in its out- 
ward form will not bear the wider mean- 
ing), but here purposely general, includ- 
ing those treated of, young females. 
οὕτως = ὡς κἀγώ as ver..8? or perhaps. 
ὧς ἐστίν, which seems better on account 
of the following context, ver. 27. This, in 
the case of the unmarried, would amount 
to the other: and the case of virgins is 
now that especially under consideration. 
21.) τὸ οὕτως εἶναι restated and 
illustrated : neither the married nor the 
unmarried are to seek for a change. The 
general recommendation here is referable 
alike to ail cases of marriage, and does not 
touch on the prohibition of ver. 10,—only 
dissuading from a spirit of change, in 
consideration of the ἐνεστῶσα ἀνάγκη. 
It seems better to take the verse thus, 
than with Meyer and De Wette, to regard 
it as inserted to guard against misunder- 
standing of the preceding γνώμη of the 
Apostle. λέλυσαι does not imply 
previous marriage, but as Phot., οὐχὶ πρὸς 
τοὺς συναφθέντας, εἶτα διαλυθέντας,.. .. 
GAN ἅπλῶς πρὸς τοὺς μὴ συνελθόντας 
ὅλως εἰς γάμον κοινωνίαν, ἀλλὰ λελὺυ- 


M mw 


530 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. Vib 


ἀπὸ γυναικός, μὴ ° ζήτει γυναῖκα. 


r γαμέω, of 
the woman 


23 ἐὰν δὲ καὶ yaunons, 


ν. > ee \ aN r , ς b / ’ “ 

νει ἢ. OUX ἥμαρτες, καὶ ἐὰν " γήμῃ [77] παρθένος, οὐχ ἥμαρτεν 
: ἢ a a \ “ ΄ a oN ee ee 
ivonly. οἰ SOX δὲ τῇ capKi " ἕξουσιν ἃ οἱ τοιοῦτοι, ἐγὼ δὲ ὑμῶν 
ly. of the a , xr ¢ \ 
man, Matt. v.Y φείδομαι. 29 ἡ τοῦτο δέ ἡ φημι, ἀδελφοί, ὁ καιρὸς * συν- 
32 αἱ. τ 
(2 Macc. xiv. ~ > \ x y , “ Ν c w# - 
20 bis only.) εσταλμεένος ἐστὶν TO Y AOLTOV, Wa Καὶ οἱ ἔχοντες γυναίκας 
s John xvi. 33. 


Rev. ii. 10. Sir. li. 3. 
w = ch. xv. 50. see ch. i. 12. : 
xxvi.45. Heb. χ. 13. (Eph. vi. 10 


¢dat .2\Cor. xii. 7. 
x = here (Acts v. 6) only t+. Sir. iv. 31. 
reff.) 


vy Rom. xi. 21 reff. 
y — Matt. 


u ver. 15. 
see Tobit xii. 13. 


28. rec for yaunons, ynuns (to conform to the follg), with KUL rel Orig[-c,] Chr, 
Thdrt [Damasey..} ; λαβης γυναικα DF: acceperis uxorem latt {Tert, Ambrst|: duxeris 
Tert,: txt A(-on) ΒΓΡῚΝ m 17 Bas [ Euthal-ms | Damasce. for ynun, yaun DF. 

om ἡ BF: ins ADKLPR rel [Orig-c Meth, Bas, ]. ins ev bef τη σαρκι 
D'{-gr] F[-gr]. 

29. elz ins ot: bef o καιρος (supplementary: see ch. xv. 50, where there is no 
var readg), with DF de ἢ 1 (syrr) copt [basm arm Damasc] Thl Orig{-int,] Tert,: om 
ABKLPRX rel vulg [spec] Eus, Meth, Bas, (Chr,) Thdrt [Tert, Ambrst]. συννε- 
σταλμενον(ϑ10) &. rec To Aoirov bet ἐστιν, with ΠΡ], rel Thdrt [ Damasc] ΤῊ]: 
ἐστιν λοιπὸν εστιν F 67? latt [(Clem,) Orig-int,] Tert, Jer, {Ambrst Augyepe]: txt 
AB D!2(om το D') PX a! m 17 (Syr ?) syr copt arm Eus-ms, Bas, [Kuthal-ms]}. There is 
great var in the punctn :—[elz] has συν. 70 A. ἐστιν", with L ἄς syrr copt [basm arm Chr, 
Damasc] Thdrt ; [Steph] συνεστ." to λοιπὸν ἐστιν wal, with] DF 67-8. 71 latt lat-ff 
(Aug,: To λοιπὸν twicealiq) ; TUVETT. ἐστιν" TO λοιπ. B?: συνεστ. ἐστιν τὸ λοιπον τη. (716 
varr have appy arisen from a desire to fix the connexion of to λοιπὸν more definitely.) 


μένους ὄντας Tov τοιούτου Seouov,—and 
Estius, “ intelligit liberum a conjugio, sive 
uxorem aliquando habuerit, sive non.” 
28.] Not sin, but outward trouble, 

will be incurred by contracting marriage, 
whether in the case of the unmarried man 
or of the virgin; and it is to spare them 
this, that he gives his advice. But ifalso 
(καί, of the other alternative : see ver. 21) 
thou shalt have married, thou didst not 
sin (viz. when thou marriedst); and if a 
virgin (if the art. is to stand, it is generic) 
shall have married, she sinned not; but 
such persons (viz. of γήμαντες) shall 
have tribulation in the flesh (it is doubt- 
ful, as Meyer remarks, whether the dative 
belongs to the substantive,—trouble for 
the flesh,—or to the verb,—shall have in 
the flesh trouble): but I (emphatic—my 
motive is) am sparing you (endeavouring 
to spare you this θλῖψιν τῇ σαρκί, by ad- 
vising you to keep single). 29—31.] 
He enforces the foregoing advice by so- 
lemnly reminding them of the shortness 
of the time, and the consequent duty of 
sitting loose to all worldly ties and em- 
loyments. 29. τοῦτο δέ φημι... 
4. d. ‘ What I just now said, of marrying 
being no sin, might dispose you to look 
on the whole matter as indifferent: my 
motive, the sparing you outward afflic- 
tion, may be underrated in the importance 
of its bearing: but I will add this solemn 
consideration.’ 6 καιρ. συνεστ. ἐστ. 
τὸ λοιπόν] The time that remains is 
short: lit., ‘the time is shortened hence- 
forth :’—i.e. the interval between now and 
the coming of the Lord has arrived at an 


extremely contracted period. These words 
have been variously misunderstood. (1) 6 
καιρός has been by some (Calvin, Estius, 
al.) interpreted ‘the space of man’s life 
on earth: which, however true it may be, 
and however legitimate this application 
of the Apostle’s words, certainly was not 
in his mind, nor is it consistent with Ais 
usage of 6 καιρός : see Rom. xiii. 11; Eph. v. 
16,—or with that in the great prophecy of 
our Lord which is the key to this chapter, 
Luke xxi. 8; Mark xiii. 33. (2) συνε- 
σταλμένος has been understood as mean- 
ing calamitosus (so Rosenm., Riickert, 
Olshausen, al.). But it never has this sig- 
nification. In such passages as 1 Macc. iii. 
6, v. 3; 2 Mace. vi. 12, mapakad@.... μὴ 
συστέλλεσθαι διὰ Tas συμφοράς : 3 Macc. 
v. 33, τῇ ὁράσει... συνεστάλη,---ἰῦ has 
the meaning of humbling, depressing, 
which would be obviously inapplicable to 
καιρός. The proper meaning of συστέλ- 
λεσθαι, to be contracted, is found in Diod. 
Sic. i. 41, διὸ καὶ τὸν Νεῖλον εὐλόγως 
κατὰ τὸν χειμῶνα μικρὸν εἶναι καὶ συ- 
στέλλεσθαι. It is, as Schrader well ren- 
ders it, ‘in Rirzem ftiirzt die alte Welt zu- 
fammen.’ συστέλλεσθαι and συστολή are 
the regular grammatical words used of the 
shortening of a syllable in prosody. (3) 
τὸ λοιπόν has been by some (Tertull. ad 
Uxorem i. 5 (vol. i. p. 1288), Jer. de perp. 
virg. B. V. M. adv. Helv. 20 (vol. ii. p. 
227), on Ezek. vii. 18 (lib. ii., vol. v. p. 
69), on Keel. iii. (vol. iii, p. 410),— 
Vulg., Erasm., Luther, Calvin, Estius ; 
also Εἰ. V. and Lachm.) joined to what 
JSollows ; ‘it remains that both they, &e. 


ABDFK 
LPRab 
cdetg 
hklim 
nol7, 
47 


28—82. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. 531 


e AG af Φ Ω \ ΄ f e \ / “ 
WS μὴ ἔχοντες WO), 30 Kal οἱ κλαίοντες ὡς μὴ κλαίοντες, τυ δα 


= 2 Cor. vi. 


/ ς \ / \ ’ ΄ 
καὶ οἱ χαίροντες ὡς μὴ χαίροντες, καὶ οἱ * ἀγοράζοντες * ἴο, sesh 
e , \ 7 ial; 
ὡς μὴ δ᾿ κατέχοντες, 31: καὶ οἱ ἢ χρώμενον τὸν ΚΟσμον, υ ver. 21 reff 


ὡς μὴ “ καταχρώμενοι" ἃ 


κόσμου τούτου. 
only. w.acc., 3 Macc. v. 22. 
exliii. 4. e Phil. ii. 8 only. 
15. vii. 23 only. 


om wot F arm. 
80. for κλαίοντες (twice), κλεθοντες F. 


acc., Wisd. 


παράγει yap TO °aynua τοῦ "1.1. BR! 
ρ Ὗ ¥ ρ ἔα XE &c. see note. 
, \ ς a > 3 Ὁ. 5 
82 θέλω δὲ ὑμᾶς fapmepimvous εἶναι. °Sniyt. 


Ep. Jer. 28 


ip. Jer. 
d intrans., Matt. ix. 9 (and always, exc. 1 Johnii. 8,17). Ps. 
Isa. iii. 17 only. f{M 


att. xxviii. 14 only +. Wisd. vi. 


31. rec (for τον κοσμονὴ Tw κοσμω TovTw (gramml corrn, and supplementary addn), 
with D?-3K LPN? rel (vulg[F-lat spec] syrr) [ Eus, Ephr, Bas, Chr, Euthal-ms Sevrn-c, | 
Thdrt. ΤῊ] [Damase (Orig-int, Tert, Cypr, Ambrst)]: tov κοσμον τουτον D*[and 


lat] F[-gr]: 
napaxp. ἴ, Bas, Th 


Tw(sic, appy) κοσμον τουτον 17: txt ABN! coptt. 
drt, ; χρωμενοι 121 latt [Cypr, Ambrst] (not Tert;). 


for καταχρ., 


32. om de F ο 61 fuld D-lat [spec] Meth, [Ambrst]: yap 38 Clem. 


But thus (a) the sense of ἵνα will not be 
satisfied—see below: (8) the usage of τὸ 
λοιπόν is against it, which would require 
it to stand alone, and the sense not to be 
carried on as it is in ‘ swperest ut,’ τὸ λοι- 
πόν, va....,—see reff. and Phil. iii. 1, 
iv. 8; (1 Thess. iv. 1;) 2 Thess. iii. 1. 
(vy) The continuity of the passage would 
be very harshly broken: whereas by the 
other rendering all proceeds naturally. 
We have exactly parallel usages of τὸ 
λοιπόν in reff. ἵνα καὶ... The 
end for which the time has been (by God) 
thus gathered up into a short compass : 
in order that both they, &c.: i.e. in 
order that Christians, those who wait for 
and shall inherit the coming kingdom, 
may keep themselves loosed in heart from 
worldly relationships and employments: 
that, as Meyer, “ the married may not 
fetter his interests to his wedlock, nor the 
mourner to his misfortunes, nor the joyous 
to his prosperity, nor the man of com- 
merce to his gain, nor the user of the 
world to his use of the world.” This 
is the only legitimate meaning of ἵνα with 
the subj. The renderings which make 
it = ὅτε, ‘tempus .... futurum cum ei 
qui uxores habent pares futuri sint non 
habentibus,’ Grot., or ‘ubi’ (local), are 
inadmissible. We may notice that ac- 
cording to this only right view of ἵνα, the 
clauses following are not precepts of the 
Apostle, but the objects as regards us, 
of the divine counsel in shortening the 
time. 30. ὡς μὴ κατέχοντες | as not 
POSSESSING (their gains). So in the line 
of Lucretius (iii. 984), “ Vitaque mancupio 
nulli datur, omnibus usu.” 31. χρώ- 
pevor..... καταχρώμενοι] The κατά. as 
in κατέχοντες, appears here to imply that 
intense and greedy use which turns the 
legitimate use intoa fault. This meaning 
is better than ‘aduse,’ which is allowable 
philologically, and is adopted by Theo- 
doret, Theophyl., (c., Luther, Olsh., al., 


but destroys the parallel. I would render 
them, and they who use the world, as 
not using it in full. So, or merely ‘as 
not using it,’ regarding καταχρ. = xp.,— 
Vulg., Calv., Grot., Estius, al., and Meyer 
and De Wette. χρῆσθαι with an acc. 
is found only here: never in classical 
Greek, and very rarely in Hellenistic. 
Almost the only undoubted instance (in 
ref. Wisd., A reads κτησάμενοι, and is 
supported by #4. In Xen. Ages. xii. 
11, we have τὸ μεγαλόφρον. .. ἐχρῆτο, 
but most edd. read τῷ μεγαλόφρονι) seems 
to be in a Cretan inscription, Boeckh, 
Corp. Inser. ii. 400, καὶ τὰ ἄλλα πάντα χρή- 
μενοι, ἐν δὲ τᾷ ὁδῷ τὰς ξενικὰς θοίνας. See 
Bornemann, note on Acts xxvii. 17, where 
βοηθείας is a var. read. in some mss. 
παράγει yap....] gives a reason for ὃ 
kaip. συνεσταλμ. ἐστ. τὸ λοιπ., the clauses 
which have intervened being subordinate 
to those words: see above. Emphasis on 
παράγει: for the fashion (present ex- 
vernal form, ef. Herodian i. 9, ἀνὴρ φιλο- 
σόφου φέρων σχῆμα, and other examples 
in Wetst.) of this world is passing away 
(is in the act of being changed, as a passing 
scene in a play: cf. πάραγε πτέρυγας, 
Eur. Ion, 165). This shews that the time 
is short :—the form of this world is already 
beginning to pass away. Grot., al., ac- 
cording to the mistaken view of ver. 20, 
—‘non manebunt, que nunc sunt, res 
tranquille, sed mutabuntur in turbidas. 
Theophyl. and many Commentators un- 
derstand the saying of worldly affairs in 
general—txpis ὄψεώς εἰσι TA TOD παρόντος 
κόσμου, Kal ἐπιπόλαια :---αῦ this is in- 
consistent with the right interpretation of 
ver. 29: see there. Stanley compares a 
remarkable parallel, 2 Esdr. xvi. 40—44, 
probably copied from this passage. 
32—34.] Application of what has been 
just said to the question of marriage. 
32. θέλω δὲ... .] But (i.e. since 
this is so—since the time is so short, and 


M mM 2 


539 ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. VII. 

lal 9 A ς A A a“ 
gers ὁ &a@yapos ᾿μεριμνᾷ ita τοῦ κυρίου, πῶς ὃ ἀρέσῃ τῷ 
ἢ constr., ch, ‘ ΄ \ , an * \ an ; rn 
xii. 25.) Kupio ° ὁ δὲ yaunoas ὃ μεριμνᾷ ἱ τὰ τοῦ κόσμου, πῶς 
Sarees ae a ; \ \ Tale 
Exod, ¥-9 (a. K ἀρέσῃ TH γυναικί. 53 καὶ | μεμέρισται καὶ ἡ γυνὴ Kal ἡ 
i Rom. ii. 


reff πὶ παρθέ ἡ 8 ἄγαμος ὃ" μεριμνᾷ ‘ta τοῦ κυρίου, ἵνα ἢ 
wt, ΟΣ παρθένος. ἡ ὃ ἄγαμος " μεριμνέ ὃ κυρίου, 7 
; ; A , \ A , ς \ 4 
as ἁγία καὶ τῷ " σώματι Kal TO " πνεύματι" ἡ δὲ ° γαμήσασα 


n1 Thess. ν. 23. see ch. νυ. 3 reff. o of the woman, see ver. 28 reff. 


reff. 
m vv. 25, 28. 

33. rec (for apern vv 32-3-4) apeoe:, with KLP 17(ver 33) rel Clem,[ver 33] Orig, 
Meth, [Euthal-ms] Epiph, Cyr,{ver 33] Ephr Thdrt Damase Thl Gc: txt ABDI 
17 Eus, [Meth,(and ms,) Bas,(but mss vary) ]. for κυριω, θεω F vulg Orig Cypr. 

84. rec om Ist «a, with D%{and lat] F[-gr] KL 47(Treg) rel [G-lat spee}] Chr, 
Thdrt, [Damasc, Tert, Ambr, Ambrst mss-in-Jer]: ins AB D!/-gr] PX 6. 17. 31. 71-3 
vulg [F-lat] syrr copt [basm eth arm] Eus, Meth, Bas, Cyr[-p, Ephr, Euthal-mns] 
Pel Jer, Aug Fulg Primas Bede. rec om 2nd καὶ, with D! demid(and fuld) copt [basm 
arm spec] Tert, [Ambr, Ambrst mss-in-]Jer Aug: ins AB D#(and lat] F[-gr] KLPR 6. 
31. 71-3 rel vulg [am harl tol F-lat eth] syr Eus, Meth, Bas, Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt, 
Damase.—weu. δε 30, μεμ. δε kar Syr. aft ἢ γυνὴ ins 7 ayouos (retaining it also 
after map@evos) AF2N 17 [Bas-ed Euthal-ms Aug,]; so (but omg the 2nd) BP 6. 31. 
71-3 vulg [coptt] Eus, [Ambr,] Pel Jer,. om καὶ (bef τω σωματι) A D(sie, 
Treg)[-gr?] Ρ m 17 vulg-ed(with some mss, but agst am demid [fuld harl?]) Syr copt 
arm Did,[-int, Epiph, Ps-]Ath, Orig[-int, Ath-int, Pel] Tert. rec om Tw (bef cwu. 
and bef πνευμ.), with DF KL rel (Orig,) Meth, Did, [Bas,] Thdrt, Thl: ins ABPR a 


that, in order that we Christians may sit 
loose to the world) I wish you to be with- 
out worldly cares (undistracted). Then 
he explains how this touches on the sub- 
ject. πῶς apéoy—how he may 
please: πῶς &peoei—‘ how he shall please.’ 
The variety being not in reality a various 
reading, but only an itacism, I retain the 
form found in the most ancient Mss. 

34.] See var. readd.: I treat here 
only of the text. Divided also is the 
(married) woman and the virgin (i.e. 
divided in interest (i.e. in cares and pur- 
suits) from one another: οὐ τὴν αὐτὴν 
ἔχουσι φροντίδα, ἀλλὰ μεμερισμέναι εἰσὶ 
ταῖς σπουδαῖς, Theophyl.: not merely, 
different from one another, as Ἐπ V., 
Chrys., Luth., Grot., al. Divisa est mulier 
et virgo D-lat G-lat Tert), It may be 
well to remark as to the reading, on 
which see Digest,—that Jerome testifies 
to this having been the reading of the 
old Latin copies, and himself sometimes 
quotes the passage in this form; but, 
when speaking of it critically, he states 
that it is not in the “apostolica veritas,” 
i.e., it would seem, the Greek as under- 
stood by him. ‘ Mune illud breviter 
admoneo in Latinis codicibus hune locum 
tta legi: “ Divisa est virgo et mulier ;’? quod 
quamquam habent suum sensum, et a me 
quoque pro qualitate loci sic edissertum 
sit, tamen, non est apostolice veritatis. 
Siquidem Apostolus ita scripsit, ut supra 
transtulimus: ‘Sollicitus est que sunt 
mundi, quomodo placeat uxori, et divisus 
est.” Et hac sententia definita transgre- 
ditur ad virgines et continentes et ait: 
*Mulier inuupta et virgo cogitat quae sunt 


Domini ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu.’ 
Non omnis innupta, et virgo est. Que 
autem virgo utique et innupta est. Quam- 
quam ob elegantiam dictionis potuerit id 
ipsum altero verbo repetere, ‘ mulier in- 
nupta et virgo :’. vel certe definire voluisse 
quid esset innupta, id est virgo: ne mere- 
trices putemus innuptas, nulli certo matri- 
monio copulatas” (Jer. contra Jovin. i. 
13, vol. ii. p. 260). The sing. verb seems 
to be used, as standing first in this sen- 
tence, and because ἡ γυνὴ kK. 7 Tap. em- 
braces the female sex as one idea: so 6. g. 
Plato, Lys. p. 207, φιλεῖ σε ὃ πατὴρ καὶ ἣ 
μήτηρ : Herod. v. 21, εἵπετο γὰρ δή σφι κ. 
ὀχήματα κ. θεράποντες καὶ ἣ πᾶσα πολλὴ 
παρασκευή : α. ἃ. ‘There loves thee father 
and mother,’—‘ there followed them,’ &c. 
See more examples in Kiihner, ii. p. 58 
(§ 433, exception 1) :—Reiche thinks that 
one and the same woman is intended at 
different periods: but 4 δὲ γαμήσασα is 
against this: it would be yaunoaca δέ 
(Meyer). The judgment of marriage 
here prononnced by the Apostle must be 
taken, as the rest of the chapter, with ifs 
accompanying conditions. He is speaking 
of a pressing and quickly shortening period 
which he regards as yet remaining before 
that day and hour of which neither he, nor 
any man,knew. He wishes his Corinthians, 
during that short time, to be as far as pos- 
sible totally undistracted. He mentions 
as an objection to marriage, that which is 
an undoubted fact of human experience : 
—which is necessarily bound up with that 
relation: and wi/hout which the duties of 
the relation could not be fulfilled. Since 
he wrote, the unfolding of God’s providence 


ABDFK 

LPRab 

cdefg 

hklim 

ἢ τῶν 
47 


etl. 


990-.-96. ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. 533 
Η \ fa! , a “ a. 

h μεριμνᾷ ‘Ta τοῦ κόσμου, πῶς " ἀρέσῃ TO ἀνδρί. 538 τοῦτο P= ch. τ. δ, 
SN \ \ ‘ e tal A Tate - 
δὲ Ῥπρὸς TO ὑμῶν αὐτῶν “ σύμφορον λέγω, οὐχ Wa ας 

, an / ) \ \ 5 \ ly +. 
᾿ βρόχον ὑμῖν " ἐπιβάλω, ἀλλὰ P πρὸς τὸ ᾿εὔσχημον καὶ Kec iis 

᾿ - ; 7 Symm. 

" εὐπάρεδρον τῷ κυρίῳ " ἀπερισπάστως. 6 εἰ δέ Teg there only, 


3 st 52]. XXi. 


> a > \ \ “ a 
ἡ ἀσχημονεῖν " ἐπὶ τὴν ἡ παρθένον αὐτοῦ * νομίζει, ἐὰν ἢ 


25 only. 
ς , \ , ς , δ s and constr,,. 
ἃ ὑπέρακμος, καὶ οὕτως ὃ ὀφείλει γίνεσθαι, ὃ θέλει ποιείτω: Mark xi.7. 


Prov. xx. 26: 
t Acts xiii. 50 reff. u here only +. (παρεδρεύειν, ch. ix. 13.) v here only +. Polyb. ii, 
Qual, (- -στος͵ Wisd. xvi. 11. περισπᾶσθαι, Luke x. 40. Sir. xli. 2.) w ch. xiii. 5 
only. Deut. xxv.3, Ezek. xvi. 8. see ch. xii. 23. -μοσύνη, Rom. i. 27.) x Mark xv. 
24 || J. James v. 14. y = Eur. [ph, in Aul. 114. , ἐκεῖσ᾽ ἀπάξει σὴν ἐμήν τε παρθένον; 
Soph. Cad. Tyr. 1462 »ταῖν ἀθλιαῖν οἰκτραῖν τε παρθένοιν ἐ ἐμαῖν. 2 and constr., Acts 
τι 20 st a here only t. see Sir. xiii. 9. b = ch. vy. 10. ix. 10. Heb. 
Me 17: ΧῊ oe 


m 17 Clem, Orig, [Euthal-ms. Ps-|Ath,. om. ta του κοσμου B [ Tert,(appy) 1]. 

35. rec συμφερον, with D3FK LPN m(sic, Treg): [47(sic)] rel Meth, Eus, Chr, [ Bas, 
Euthal-ms Damasce, ] Thdrt,: txt ABD1X8! 17 Hesych. rec eum posed pox, with K 
rel Chr, ic: mposedpov Lz: evmposexrov [eumposdexrov Tischdf, ed 8] 5. 6: txt 
ABDFPR πὶ, 17 Clem, Eus, Bas[s2pe Chr-ms,, ἀπαρεδρον o ].. 

36. acxnmover (for ασχημονειν) ΕἾ -gr}. εαυτου. P [6]. 
ins bef ε. τ. π. av. D! [latt (Syr), basm arm]. for ουτως, τοντο. 


om νομιζει F[-gr]: 
γενεσθα, 


F a Meth,. 


has taught us more of the interval before 
the coming of the Lord than it was given 
even to an inspired Apostle to see. And as 
it would be perfectly reasonable and proper 
to urge on an apparently dying man the 
duty of abstaining from contracting new 
worldly obligations,—but both unreason- 
able and improper, should the same person 
recover his health, to insist on this absti- 
nence any longer: so now, when God has 
manifested His will that nations should 
rise up and live and decay, and long cen- 
turies elapse before the day of the coming 
of Christ, it would be manifestly unreason- 
able to urge,—except in so far as every 
man’s καιρός is cuveoTaduevos, and similar 
arguments are applicable,—the considera- 
tions here enforced. Meanwhile they stand 
here on the sacred page as_a. lesson to us 
how to regard, though in circumstances 
somewhat changed, our worldly relations ; 
and to teach us, as the coming of the Lord 
may be as near now, as the Apostle then 
believed it to be, to aet at least in the 
spirit of his advice, and be, as fur as God’s 
manifest will that we should enter into 
the relations and affairs of life allows, 
ἀμέριμνοι. The duty of ver. 35 fin. is in- 
cumbent on all Christians, at all periods. 
95.) Caution against mistaking what 
has been said for an imperative order, 
whereas it was only ὦ suggestion for their 
best interest. τοῦτο! vv. 32—34. 
πρὸς TO Up. αὖτ. σύμ.) For your own 
(emph.) profit, —i.e. not for my own pur- 
‘poses—not to exercise my apostolic au- 
thority: not that I may cast a snare 
(lit. ‘a noose;? the metaphor is from 
throwing the noose in hunting, or in war; 
so Herod. vii. 85, oF δὲ μάχη τούτεων 
τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἥδε. ἐπεὼν συμμίσγωσι τοῖς 


πολεμίοις, βάλλουσι τὰς σειρὰς ἐπ᾽ ἄκρῳ 
βρόχους ἔχουσας, ὕτευ δ᾽ ἂν τύχῃ ἤντε 
ἵππου ἤντε ἀνθρώπου, ἐπ᾽ ἑωῦὐτὸν ἕλκει" οἱ 
δὲ ἐν ἕρκεσι ἐμπαλασσόμενοι διαφθείρονται. 
See otherexamples in Wetst.) over you (i.e. 
entangle and encumber you with difficult 
precepts), but with a view to seemliness 
(cf. Rom. xiii. 18) and waiting upon the 
Lord without. distraction, De W. re- 
marks, that πρὸς τὸ παρεδρεύειν τῷ κ. ἄπερ. 
would be the easier construction.. Stanley 
draws out the parallel to the story in ref. 
Luke. 36—38.] For seemliness’ sake: 
and consequently, if there be danger, by a 
father withholding his consent to his 
daughter’s marriage, of unseemly treat- 
ment of her, let an exception be made in 
that case: but otherwise, if there be no 
such danger, it is better not to give her in 
marriage. But (introduces an inconsis- 
tency with εὔσχημον) if any one (any 
father) thinks that he is behaving un- 
seemly towards his virgin daughter (viz. 

in setting before her a temptation to sin 
with her lover, or at least, bringing on her 
the imputation of it, by withholding his 
conseut to her marriage. Or the reference 
may be to the supposed disgrace of having 
an unmarried daughter in his house), if 
she be of full age (for defore that the 
imputation and the danger consequent on 
preventing the marriage w ould not be such 
as to bring in the ἀσχημοσύνη. The 
ἀκμή of woman is defined by Plato, Rep. v. 
p- 460, to be twenty years, that of man 
thirty. See Stanley’s note [and ref. Sir. }), 

and thus it must be (i.e. and there is no 
help for it,—they are bent on it beyond the 
power of dissuasion : —depends not on ἐάν, 
as the indic. shews, but on εἰ. οὕτως. viz. 
that they must marry. Theopby|, takes 


534 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. VII. 57—40. 


e 7 A ‘ “ ’ - 
cseever.28 οὐχ ἁμαρτάνει, “ γαμείτωσαν. 51 ὃς δὲ ἕστηκεν ἐν τῇ 
Won. 58. δί > n ad ὃ a \ e a. > ΄, ν fg ἐξουσίαν 
char 58 καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ “ ἑδραῖος, μὴ “ ἔχων © ἀνάγκην, 
onlyt. Ps. 


. ‘ fal -“ ; , 
vi.sSymm. δὲ f€yet 8 περὶ Tov ἰδίου " θελήματος, καὶ τοῦτο ' κέκρικεν 


e = Luke xiv. 


2 fol ’ , ΄- e a / sp 
isis ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ καρδίᾳ * τηρεῖν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ " παρθένον, ' καλῶς 
ii. 27. Jud ΄ e A ΄ κ , 
3. Jos. Ant. ποιήσει. 38 ὥςτε καὶ ὁ " [ἐκ] γαμίζων [τὴν ἑαυτοῦ παρθένον] 
xvi. 9. 3. 
f Matt. 


vii. 


fal a e Ν ͵ a / 
lKaN@s ποιεῖ, καὶ ὁ μὴ ™ [ἐκ] γαμίζων " κρεῖσσον ποιήσει. 


29. ix. 6 
Luke xii. 5. xix. 17. Actsix.14. Rom. ἰχ. 21. 2 Thess. iii. 9. 1 Macc. x. 35. g here only. 
ἢ of man, Luke xxiii. 25. Johni. 13. ch. xvi. 12. Eph. ii.3. 2 Pet. i.21. 3 Kings v. 8. i = Acts xv. 


19 reff. x = 1 Thess. v. 23. see John xii. 7. 1 Pet. i. 4. 1 = Acts x. 33, Phil. iv. 
m There bis.] Matt. (xxii. 30 |j L. rec.) xxiv. 


n ver. 9 reff. 


14. James ii. 8,19. 2 Pet. i.19. 3 Kings viii. 1s. 
38 only τ. (γαμίζ., Mark xii. 25. Luke xvii. 27 +.) 


for γαμειτωσαν, γαμειτω D'F [Syr arm] Epiph, Aug, 
D-lat [Ambrst ]. 

37. rec εδραιος bef ev tn καρδια, with KLN? rel [Syr] Thdrt, ΤῊ] : om edpa:os F D-lat 
arm: txt AB D-gr PX? a ἃ m 17 vulg syr coptt Bas, Thdrt, [Ambr, Ambrst]. (The 
transposn seems to have been made for perspicuity, to bring εστηκεν and εδραιο5 
together.) rec om αὐτου, with KL rel syr Thdrt, Damase Thl Gc: ins ABDFPR 
d m 17 [latt Syr coptt 2th arm] Bas, Thdrt, [Euthal-ms Ambr.zpe Ambrst ]. 
om de A [coptt]. rec (for δια kapdia) καρδια αὐτου, with DFE KL rel [ Bas, | Thdrt, 
Damasc: ἰδια kapdia αὐτου m: καρδια (alone) 672: txt ΑΒΡΝ a. rec ins tov bef 
tnpew, with DFKL rel [Bas,] Damase He: om ABPN c ἃ 17 [ Euthal-ms]. rec 
(for ποιήσει) moet, with DFKL[P] rel syrr eth Thdrt Damase ΤῊ] Ec: txt ABN 6. 
17. 672 coptt [ Bas, ]. 

38. om wste to ποίει (homeotel) Fb! ἃ. rec εκγαμιζων (twice), with K2LP &#(2nd) 
rel (Chr, Thdrt,] Thl (ἔς : [eyyau. K! Thdrt, Damase :] γαμιζων ABD F(once) δὲ} 17 
Clem, Meth, Bas, [Euthal-ms]. rec om τὴν eav. παρθ., with KL rel (Chr, | Thdrt 
Damase Augaliq: ins A[P]& m 17 Meth, Bas,: τὴν παρθ. eav. BD vulg Syr syr-w-ob 
coptt {wth arm spec] Clem, Aug, [Ambrst Pel]. for rove, ποιησει Β m 6. 67? 
[Bas, |: txt ADKLPRN 17 rel [vulg Clem, Meth, Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt,]. rec 
(for και 6) ὁ δε (corrn for contrast), with KLPX3 rel syr eth [Chr,| Thdrt ΤῊ] Gc: 
txt ABDFN! m 17 latt Syr coptt arm Clem Meth Bas, [Euthal-ms Ambrst Augszpe ]. 


: st nubat vulg(including F-lat) 


rec (for ποιησει) ποιει, with DFKLP rel latt [Clem, Meth, Chr, Damasc] 
Thdrt,: txt ABN m 6. 17. 67? [copt Bas, Euthal-ms]. 


the words for the beginning of the conse- 
quent sentence = οὕτως καὶ γενέσθω. But, 
as Meyer remarks, the words would thus 
be altogether superfluous, and after ὀφείλει, 
οὐχ ἁμαρτάνει would be inapplicable), 
what he will (as his determination on this 
voulCew), let him do (τὸ δοκοῦν πραττέτω, 
Theodoret), he sinneth not (ἁμαρτίας 
yap 6 γάμος ἐλεύθερος, Theodoret); let 
them (his daughter and her lover) marry. 
Some (Syr., Grot., al.) take ἀσχημονεῖν 
passively,—‘ thinks that he is (likely to 
be) brought into disgrace as regards his 
daughter,’ viz. by her seduction, or by her 
being despised as unmarried. But this 
would require (1) the future ἀσχημονήσειν. 
—(2) ἐπί with a dative, the acc. shewing 
that the verb is one of action: Meyer com- 
pares ἀσχημονεῖν εἴς τινα, Dion. Hal. ii. 
26. And (3) the active sense of the verb 
is found in this Epistle (ref.), the only 
other place where it occurs in the N. T. 

37.] But he who stands firm in 
his heart (= purpose,—having no such 
misgiving that he is behaving unseemly), 
not involved in any necessity (no ὀφείλει 
γενέσθαι as in the other case; no deter- 
mination to marry on the part of his 
daughter, nor attachment formed), but 


has (change of construction :—the clause 
is opposed to ἔχων ἀνάγκ.) liberty of action 
respecting his personal wish (to keep his 
daughter unmarried), and has determined 
this in his own (expressed, as it is a matter 
of private deternnination only) heart (τοῦ- 
το, not stated what, but understood by 
the reader to mean, the keeping his 
daughter unmarried :—but this would not 
be in apposition with nor explained by τοῦ 
Tnp. τ. €avT. παρθ., see below), to keep (in 
her present state) his own virgin daughter 
(the rec., τοῦ tnp., would express the 
purpose of the determination expressed in 
κέκρικεν : not (as commonly given) the 
explanation of τοῦτο, which would require 
τὸ τηρεῖν or τηρεῖν. It shews that the 
motive of the xexpixey is the feeling of a 
father, desirous of retaining in her present 
state his own virgin daughter. So Meyer, 
and I think rightly: see note on Acts 
xxvii. 1. De Wette, on the other hand, 
regards the words τοῦ rnp. .. . , as merely 
a periphrasis for not giving her in mar- 
riage. Our present text merely explains 
the τοῦτο), shall do well. 38.] The 
latter καί has been altered to δέ because a 
contrast seemed to be required between 
καλῶς and κρεῖσσον. One account might 


ABDFK 
LPS ab 


edefg 

bkim 

nol7. 
47 


Vii 1. ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 535 
39 Turn ° δέδεται Peg’ Pdcov P χρόνον ζῇ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς" ο΄. Rom. vi 
ἐὰν δὲ 4 κοιμηθῇ ὁ ἀνήρ, " ἐλευθέρα ἐστὶν ᾧ θέλει yapn- ? Rom. vii} 


05 , ae , 401 , ὃ es 9\  q— Matt. xxvii. 
val, μονον εν κυρίῳ. μακαριωτερᾶ € ἐστιν, EAV δ2. Acts vii. 


“obras μείνῃ. κατὰ τὴν ἐμὴν Vyvapmy " δοκῶ δὲ κἀγὼ 2 
OUTWS μεινῇ. KATA τὴν εμὴν γνωμήν ΘΚ ε Καγω το 6, &e. 
na aA ” 1 Thess. iv. 
* πνεῦμα θεοῦ * ἔχειν. 18; 1s λον» 
\ \ a ᾽ ΄ὔ y “ xiv. 8. 
VIIT. 1 Περὶ δὲ τῶν 5 εἰδωλοθύτων, 5 οἴδαμεν ὅ ὅτι τυ. int here 
only. 
s = Rom. xvi. 2, 8, 11 al. t compar., here only +. see Acts xx. 35. u ver. 26. ; v =ch, 
i. 10 reff. w ch. iii. 18 reff. x Rom. viii. 9. Jude 19. y vv. 4,7, 10. ch. ὦ 
19. Acts xv. 29. xxi. 25. Rev. ii. 14, 20 only +. a= chi vi..2.al. fr. 
39. [at beg ins 7 Coisl-oct-marg coptt Clem. | rec aft δεδεται ins vouw (from Rom 


vii. 2), with D?*5[-gr] FLPR? rel vulg-ed(with fuld F-lat) Syr syr [Epiph-ms,] Chreepe 
Thdrt, Damase, Ambrst,: om AB D!{and lat] δὲ} Coisl-oct-marg 17 am(with demid 
tol harl?) coptt eth arm Clem, Orig,[-c, Tert, Cypr,; Ambr, Augaiic]. om Ist 6 F 
(not G). ins καὶ bef κοιμηθη D3 ΕἸ -ργίκεκοιμ.)} La befhlosyr Thdrt, Bc: om 
ABD!KPN rel Clem, Orig.[-c, Chr, ]. for κοιμηθη, arofavn A 73 syr-mg basm 
Clem Orig{[-c, Epiph,] Bas, Tert, [Jer]. rec aft 2nd o aynp ins αὐτης, with DFL 
a m 17. 47 vss (syr-w-ast) Orig, Damasce ΤῊ] lat-ff: om ABKPR Orig,[-c, Chr,] Bas 
Thdrt, Ee Vig,. for γαμηθηναι, γαμηθη F latt [Tert, Cypr,]: yaunoa L'(appy). 
40. for 2nd δε, yap B πὶ 4. 17. 672. 71-3. 116 tol syr(Se in marg) basm eth [Cyr, 
(txt-p,)] Orig[-int,(txt,-c,)] Ambrjaiicy) Ambrst Vig Sedul (not Tert; Ang Jer). 
exw F Tert, Ambrst Aug. 


be (as M. and De W.) that Paul had in- preferred ; also as making a better limita- 
tended to write καλῶς ποι. twice, but tion of @ θέλει. 40. paxapiwrépa | 
currente calamo, intensified the expres- [not merely happier, in our merely social 
sion to κρεῖσσον ποιήσει. Perhaps a better secular sense, but including this] happier, 
one will be found by referring the καὶ--- partly by freedom from the attendant 
kai to that which καλῶς and κρεῖσσον trials of the ἐνεστῶσα avayxn,—but prin- 
have in common: ‘both he who gives in cipally for the reason mentioned verse 34. 
marriage does well, and he who gives not “Τὸ higher blessedness in heaven, which 
in marriage shall do well, even in a higher became attached to celibacy afterwards in 
degree. I need hardly remind the tiro _ the views of its defenders (Ambrose, Corn.- 
that ‘both—and’ here does not, as Bloomf. a-Lap., al.), there is no allusion here.” 
objects, represent te xai,—each subject Meyer. δοκῶ δὲ κἀγώ] This is 
being accompanied by its own predicate. modestly said, implying more than is 
Observe the ποιήσει---ποιεῖ---ποιήσει ; the expressed by it,—not as if there were any 
pres., of the mere act itself, the fut., of its uncertainty in his mind. It gives us the 
enduring results. 39, 40.] Concern. true meaning of the saying that he is 
ing second marriages of women. giving his opinion, as ver. 25: viz. not that 
39. δέδεται} viz. τῷ ἀνδρί, or perhaps _ he is speaking without inspiration, but that 
absolutely, is bound, in her marriage state. in the consciousness of inspiration he is 
γαμηθῆναι] γαμηθῆναι and γαμῆσαι giving that counsel which should determine 
are later forms, reprobated by the gram- the question. The rationalizing Grotius 
niarians : γαμεθῆναι and γαμέσαι being the explains πνεῦμα θεοῦ, ‘non revelationem, 
corresponding ones in good Greek. See sed sincerum affectum Deo et pilis ser- 
Lobeck on Phrynichus, p. 742. Meyer viendi,’ referring to ch. iv. 21, where (1) 
cites Sclol. on Eur. Med. 593, γαμεῖ μὲν the meaning is not this (see note) ; and 
γὰρ ὃ ἀνήρ, γαμεῖται δὲ ἡ γυνή. But (2) the expression is not πνεῦμα θεοῦ. 
not invariably, see ver. 28. μόνον κἀγώ] ‘as well as other teachers.’ 
ἐν κυρίῳ] only in the Lord, i.e. within Whether said with a general or particular 
the limits of Christian connexion—in the reference, we cannot tell, from not being 
element in which all Christians live and sufficiently acquainted with the circum- 
walk ;—‘ let her marry a Christian” So __ stances. 
Tertull., Cypr., Ambrose, Jerome, Grot., III. 1—XI.1.] ON THE PARTAKING 
Est., Bengel, Rosenm., Olsh., Meyer, De } OF MEATS OFFERED TO IDOLS, AND AS- 
W. But Chrys. explains it μετὰ σωφρο- SISTING AT FEASTS HELD IN HONOUR OF 
σύνης, μετὰ KoomidTnTos:—and so (but in IDOLS. 
some cases including in this the marrying Cuap. VIII. 1—18.] Though (vv. 1—6) 
of a Christian) Theodoret (τουτέστιν duo- for those who are strong in the faith, an 
πίστῳ, εὐσεβεῖ, σωφρόνως, evvduws), Theo- idol having no existence, the question has 
phyl., Calv., Beza, Calov., al. This how- 0 importance, this is not so with all (ver. 
ever seems flat, and the other much to be 7); and the infirmities of the weak must 


11, Hes. iv. 
6. see 1 Tim. 
vi. 20. 
b ch. iv. 6 reff. 
c = Acts ix. 31 reff. 


© οἰκοδομεῖ. 


Cuap. VIII. 2. rec aft εἰ ins δε, with DFKL 


Thdrt Thi ec Jer: [aft τις m:] om ABPN [al] 
int, Nys, Melet, [Euthal-ms] Damase Tert, Cypr, Ambrst. 
with KL rel Chr, Thdrt Thl Ge, seere vulg [ F-lat 
m 17 coptt Clem, Orig[-c,] Nys, [Chr Euthal-ms | 
at has both cognoscere and scire.) 
DFKL rel Chr, Thdrt, Damasc Thl Ge: om m: txt ABPN 17 peas 


coptt arm Clem, Orig[ -¢, ]- 

rec (for εγνωκεναι) εἰδεναι, 
Tert, Cypr, Ambrst ]: txt ABDFPS® 
Thdrt, Damase, cognovisse \-lat. (G-1 
ουϑεπω, with 
Orig[-c,] Melet, [Nys, 
KL rel syrr Chr, Thdrt, 
Orig{-c,-int, ] Nys Melet 
D3KL rel Chr, Thdrt, ΤῊ] ic: 


Chr, Kuthal-ms ]. 
Damase Thl Ec: 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


Thdrt, (Chr, Euthal-ms Tert, Cypr, |. 
txt ABD!IFPXN a m 


, A "4 ΄ “; “ ~ i \ ’ i 

πάντες δ γνῶσιν ἔχομεν" ἡ "γνῶσις " φυσιοῖ, ἢ δὲ ἀγάπη 
’ - , A ΝΜ 

2 εἴ τις ἡ δοκεῖ ἐγνωκέναι τί, οὕπω Ἔγνω 


rel να] οἴου} syr-w-ast (ath) Chr, 
al] 17 am(with fuld harl'(appy) tol) 


rec 


rec aft ου(δε)πω ins οὐδεν, with D[-gr?-3 


om ABD!FPR 17 latt coptt [ath arm] Clem 


rec εγνωκεν, with 


Clem Orig[-c] Nys Melet 


[Euthal-ms] Thdrt, Damase.—for oumw eyvw καθως der yywvat, ovdev ede. (= ἤδει) 


καθως ede: 17. 


in such a matter be regarded in our con- 
duet (vv. 8—13). 1. δέ, transitional, 
as in ch. vii. 1, al. fr. As regards the 
construction, we may observe, that περὶ δ. 
τῶν €i5.,is again taken up ver. 4, περὶ τῆς 
βρώσ. οὖν τῶν εἰδ., after ἃ parenthesis. 
We may also observe that in the latter 
case οἴδαμεν ὅτι is restated, bearing there- 
fore, it is reasonable to suppose, the same 
meaning as before, viz. we know, that. 
This to my mind is decisive against begin- 
ning the parenthesis with ὅτι, and render- 
ing ὅτι ‘for, as Luther, Bengel, Valckn., 
al.:—‘we know (for we all have know- 
ledge), fe. Are we then to begin it with 
πάντες, leaving wep)... οἴδαμεν ὅτι broken 
off, corresponding to the words resumed in 
ver. 4? We should thus leave within the 
parenthesis a very broken and harsh sen- 
tence: πάντες γνῶσιν ἔχομεν (what γνῶ- 
σις ὃ if yy. about the εἰδωλοθ., it should be 
joined with the preceding; if yv. in general, 
it should be τὴν γνῶσιν, see ch. xiii. 2, 
which would be absurd; if some yv. on 
some subjects, as σὺ πίστιν ἔχεις, James il. 
18, it would here be irrelevant), ἢ γν. 
φυσιοῖ, ἡ δὲ ay. κιτιλ. The first logical 
break in the sense is where the concrete 
γνῶσις, that περὶ τῶν εἰδ., is forsaken, 
and the abstract ἣ γνῶσις treated of. 
Here therefore, with Chrys., &c., Beza, 
Grot., Calv., Est., al., De Wette, and Meyer, 
I begin the parenthesis,—. . .we are aware 
that we all (see below) have knowledge ; 
knowledge, &c.; not however placing tt 
in brackets, for it is already provided for 
_ in the construction by the resumption of 
περὶ . . οὖν below; and is nota grammati- 
cal but only a logical parenthesis. The 
εἰδωλόθυτα were those portions of the ani- 
mals offered in sacrifice which were not laid 
on the altar, and which belonged partly to 
the priests, partly to those who had offered 
them. These remnants were sometimes 
eaten at feasts holden in the temples (see 
ver. 10), or in private houses (ch. x. 27, f.), 


sometimes sold in the markets, by the 
priests, or by the poor, or by the niggardly. 
Theophrastus, Charact. xvili., describes it 
as characteristic of the ἀνελεύθερος,---ἐκδι- 
Subs αὑτοῦ θυγατέρα, τοῦ μὲν ἱερείου, πλὴν 
τῶν ἱερῶν, τὰ κρέα ἀποδίδοσθαι. They were 
sometimes also reserved for future use: 
Theophr. mentions it as belonging to the 
ἀναίσχυντος,---θύσας τοῖς θεοῖς αὐτὸς μὲν 
δειπνεῖν παρ᾽ ἑτέρῳ, τὰ δὲ κρέα ἀποτιθέναι 
ἁλσὶ πάσας. Christians were thus in con- 
tinual danger of meeting with such rem- 
nants. Partaking of them was an abomi- 
nation among the Jews: see Num. xxv. 
2; Ps. evi. 28; Rev. ii. 14; Tobit i. 1O— 
12; and was forbidden by the Apostles and 
elders assembled at Jerusalem, Acts xv. 29; 
xxi. 25. hat Paul in the whole of this 
passage makes no allusion to that decree, 
but deals with the question on its own 
merits, probably is to be traced to his wish 
to establish his position as an independent 
Apostle, endowed with God’s Holy Spirit 
sufficiently himself to regulate such mat- 
ters. But it also shews, how little such 
decisions were at that time regarded as 
lastingly binding on the whole church : 
and how fully competent it was, even 
during the lifetime of the Apostles, to 


Christians to open and question, on its own 


merits, a matter which they had, for a 
special purpose, once already decided. 
There should be a comma at εἰδωλοθύτων, 
as the resumed sentence (ver. 4) shews. 
πάντες γνῶσιν ἔχομεν) Who are 
πάντες Meyer says, Paul himself and 
the enlightened among the Corinthians: 
Estius, al., these latter alone; and some 
think it said ironically, some concessively, 
of them: Grot., “pars maxima nostrum, 
ut Rom. iii.12.” But it is manifest from 
vv. 4—6, which is said in the widest possi- 
ble rererence to the faith of all Christians, 
that all Christians must be intended here 
also: and so Chrys., Theophyl., Gcum., 
Caloy., al., and De Wette. But then, ver. 


Wit. 


no li, 
47 


ABDFK 
LPR a oF 
cdete 
hk 1] oe 


ee 
δια 


OO κμυνονοννωνουνω κσν........΄ ὡς “πἰὐκῶνλιν.....ὄϑ«.. νων μμομονκικοδο.".,»». νὰ... 
δ ge er eee 


2—B5. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 937 


\ a) a ΒΞ » , " “~ \ _ , - 
καθὼς δεῖ γνῶναι: ὃ εἰ δέ τις ἀ ἀγαπᾷ τὸν ἃ θεόν, οὗτος 4 Matt. xxii 
37 ||,and Luke 
x. 27, from 


, ig ,’ b] a rn > “ 
“ἔγνωσται ὑπ αὐτοῦ. 3. περὶ τῆς ἱ βρώσεως ody τῶν τ 27, ποι 
opera - Vl. ὁ. 
2 Vy ” .“ > ᾿] ΄ ase ΦἈ 
Β εἰδωλοθύτων, ὅ οἴδαμεν 8 ὅτι οὐδὲν εἴδωλον ἐν KOO LW, 1 Sohn iv. 20; 


21. v. 2. 


N pcer > \ aN > \ rte 
καὶ ὅτι οὐδεὶς. θεὸς. " εἰ μὴ εἷς" .5 καὶ γὰρ εἴπερ εἰσὶν «- Gal. iv.9. 
(from Num. xvi. 5). Matt. vii. 23, f Rom. xiv. 17 reff. g ver. Lan ee att, 


Xie aoe Gale is 19 


3. om um αὐτου ἕξ] 17 Clem. 
4. for π. της Bp. ovy, π. δε της Bp. D?[Treg]-3(and lat: D! has both δὲ and ovr(Treg, 


expr [in error, according to Tischdf ed 8, who says that D! has π. δετ. yywoews, D2 π. τ. 
Bp. ovv})) 6 1. 17. 108-15 vulg (autem vulg al: enim spec: ergo F-lat) Aug,.—for 
Bpwoews, γνωσεως DIP 121. aft ovdey ins ἐστιν F vulg Syr syr-w-[ob copt spec] 
Iren[-int, | Orig-int, [Ambrst Aug, ]. rec aft θεὸς ins erepos, with K LN? rel syrr 
Chr, Thdrt Damasc ΤῊ] (ic: om ABDFPR? 17, 47 latt copt [basm] zth arm Bas, 
Cyr, [Euthal-ms] Iren-int, [Ambrst Aug, ]. 


7,he says, οὐκ ἐν τᾶσιν 7 γνῶσις [obviously knowledge but the Supreme been treated 
“pointing at the weak Christian brother]: of, the natural one, viz. οὗτος ἔγνω αὐτόν. 
and how are the two to be reconciled? By We cannot be said to know God, in any 
taking, I believe, the common-sense view full sense (as here) of the word to know. 
of two such statements, which would be, But those who become acquainted with 
in ordinary preaching or writing, that God by love, are known by Him: are the 
the first was said of what is professed and _ especialobjects of the divine Knowledge,— 
confessed,—the second of what is actually their being is pervaded by the Spirit of 
and practically apprehended by each man. God, and the wisdom of God is shed abroad 
Thus we may say of our people, in the inthem. So in ref. 2 Tim., ἔγνω κύριος 
former sense, ‘ all are Christians ; all be- τοὺς ὄντας αὐτοῦ. See also Ps. i.6. “Cog. 
Reve in Christ? but in the latter, ‘all are nitionem passivam sequitur cognitio activa 
not Christians ; all do not believe.’ ec. xili, 12, Egregia metalepsis : cognitus 
γνώσιν, scil. περὶ αὐτῶν. From 7 yv.to est, adeoque cognovit.” Bengel. γινώσκω 
end of ver. 3 (see above) is a logical paren- does not seem, any more than y? in Ps. i. 
thesis. ἡ γνώσις, knowledge, abstract, 6, xxxvii. 18, for which the LXX have 
—scil. when alone, or improperly predomi- γινώσκω, to signify to approve, any further 
nant: it is the attribute of 7 γνῶσις, than personal knowledge of an intimaty 
‘barely’ [to puff up]. ἡ ἀγάπη] viz. ᾿ kind necessarily involves approval. 
‘towards the brethren, see Rom. xiv. 15, | 4 The subject is resumed, and furthey 
and ch. x. 23. οἰκοδ.] helps to build Cified by the insertion of τῆς βρώσεως. 
up (God’s spiritual temple), ch. 111. 9. οὖν resumes-a_broken t hador ds 
2, 8.1 The general deductions, (1) froma course: so Plato, Apol. p. 29, ὥςτε οὐδ᾽ εἴ 
profession of knowledge, and (2)from the μὲ ἀφίετε. . . εἴ μοι πρὸς ταῦτα εἴποιτε, 
presence of love, in a man:—expressed &c.... εἰ οὖν με, ὅπερ εἶπον, ἐπὶ τούτοις 
sententiously and without connecting par- ἀφίοιτε... See Hartung, Partikellehre, 
ticles, more, as Meyer observes, after the ii. 22. We know that there is no idol 
manner of St. John in his Epistles. On in the world, ie. that_the etseXa@~of thie” 
the text, see var. readd. | The case sup- “heathen (meaning not strictly the tmages, 
posed is the only one which can occur but the persons represented by them) 
where love is absent and conceit present: have no existence in the world. That 
a_man can then only think he knows,—no _ they who worship idols, worship devils, the 
real. lyatladie Reus aeceaerOte without Apostle himself asserts ch. x. 20; but that 
humility and love. } Such a man knows is no contradiction to the present sentence, 
not yet, as he ought to know: has had_ which asserts that the deities imagined by 
no real practice in the art of knowing. them, Jupiter, Apollo, &c., have absolutely 
Sut if-aman loves God (which is 70 existence. Of that subtle Power which, 
the highest and noblest kind of love, the under the guise of these, deluded the na- 
source of brotherly love, 1 John v. 2), tions, he here says nothing. The rendering 
this’man. (and not the wise in his own of Chrys., Theodoret, Theophyl. (Ecum., 
conceit) is known.by.Him.. The expla-. Vulg., E. V., Luther, Beza, Grot., Est., al. 
nation of this latter somewhat difficult (‘an idol is nothing in the world,’ ch. x. 


expression is to be found in ref. Gal., νῦν 19; Jer. x. 3. Sanhedr. 63. 2 (Wetst.), 
“noverant utique Israelite idolum nihil 


δὲ γνόντες “τόν, μαχχὸν δὲ γνωσθέντες 
“tro θεοῦ. 50 ἘΠΕῚ here ΝΟ ma fairly 6556), is certainly wrong here, on account 


“assume that he chooses the expression, of the parallel οὐδεὶς θ i μὴ εἷς whic 
ἔγνωσται ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ in preferencetothat. follows. And that there is no 
which would have been, had any object of One: the insertion of ἕτερος has probably 


e 


538 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. VIII. 
i , \ »” ᾽ > “~ » 9 Ἁ ΄“ “ 
i-2Thess. ii, ᾿ λεγόμενοι θεοὶ εἴτε ἐν οὐρανῷ, εἴτε ἐπὶ γῆς, ὥςπερ 
4. Eph. ii. 1]. \ 9 a 
k=Actsxxr. εἰσὶν θεοὶ πολλοὶ καὶ * κύριοι πολλοί, 8.) adr ™ ἡμῖν εἷς 
date, θεὸς ὁ πατήρ, "ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα καὶ ἡμεῖς " εἰς αὐτόν 
m dat. --- ch. i. $ Ps € vie 1) bo ς Α 
18 reff. | \ ᾿ ΄ >| a , ° \ / \ 
n Rom. xi ὅδ. καὶ εἰς κύριος Ἰησοῦς χρίστος, " δι οὗ τὰ πάντα καὶ 
Ν τ τὸν ys a ’ a , Cal ς Lal eB \ 
ὁ Acts xiii. 15° ἡ μεῖς "Oe αὐτοῦ. 1 ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ° ἐν πᾶσιν ἡ Ῥ γνῶσις" τινὲς 
p ver. 1. A , ς » ΟΣ ΠΟΥ, - > , 
gw. gen, obj. δὲ τῇ * 4 συνειδήσει * ἕως ἴ ἄρτι τοῦ εἰδώλου ὡς 8 εἰδωλόθυτον 
et. τι. . St ERIN acre ml 
Fick. τὴ 5. awe, cha Oe ehh aca eee, 


5. ins ot bef λεγόμενοι FK Iren{-int,] Hil). 
rec ins τῆς bef yns, with rel [Chr, Damasc] 


aft Ist θεοι ins καὶ κυριοι Ὁ) Ainbrst. 


om from εἰσιν to εἰσιν L. 


Thdrt, @e: txt ABDFKPN f g kl m ἢ 17 Orig, Eus, Cyr-jer, Chr, Thdrt, Dion-areop. 
6. om add’ Bbasm Eus, Iren{-int, ].—nuw δε 17 copt [ Cyr-jer,(txt,) Epiph, Ps-]Ath 


Cyr,[-p(txt,, adAa,)] Epiph, Orig-int,. 
om Ist τα D!. 


ins o bef Geos F. 
ins o bef xp. P. 


om θεος X}(ins X-corr?). 
δι ov B eth. 


7. * συνηθείᾳ ABPR! 17 syr-mg copt «th {Euthal-ms] Damase: συνειδήσει 


DFLN? rel latt syrr [arm] Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] (ἔς Tert [Ambrst] Aug,. 


rec Tov 


εἰδωλου bef ews apt: (corrn for perspicuity), with ALP rel syr {basm] Chr, [ Euthal-ms 
Damasc} Thl Ge: txt BDFX m latt Syr (copt eth] arm Thdrt [Aug, }. 


been occasioned by the first commandment, 
οὐκ ἔσονταί σοὶ θεοὶ ἕτεροι πλὴν euov. ὁ 
8,61 Further explanation and confirma- 
tion of ver. 4.. ~~~ §.] For even sup- 
posing that (εἴπερ makes an hypothesis, 
so that “in incérto relinquitur, jure an in- 
juria sumatur,” Herm. ad Viger., p. 834. 
See also Hartung, Puartikellehre, i. 343, 
who gives many examples. καὶ yap ei, 
as Eur. Med. 450, καὶ yap εἰ σύ με στυγεῖς, 
οὐκ ἂν δυναίμην σοὶ κακῶς φρονεῖν ποτε; 
see Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 140 f.) 
beings named gods (not those who are 


as(we know that) there are(viz> as beige 
‘spoken of, Deut. x. 17, ὁ yap κύριος ὁ θεὸς 
ὑμῶν, οὗτος θεὸς τῶν θεῶν Kal κύριος τῶν 
κυρίων, see also Ps, cxxxv. 2,3) gods many, _ 
and lords many (the ὥςπερ brings in an 
acknowledged fact, on which the possibility 
of the hypothesis rests—‘ Even if some of 
the many gods and_many lords whom we 
Tie ΤΟ ἘΡΕΙ͂, be actually identical with 
the heathen idols...’ The Apostle does 
not concede this, but only puts it). This” 
éxegesis, which is Meyer’s, is denied by 
De Wette, who takes εἴπερ as concessive, 
‘even though,’ and understands εἰσίν both 
times as only ‘are,’—in the meaning of 
the heathen,—imagining it impossible that 
Paul should have seriously said in an ob- 
jective sense, ‘ there are gods many. But 
in the sense in which he uses θεοί (see 
above) there is no unlikelihood that he 
should assert this. Chrys. gives the fol- 
lowing explanation: καὶ yap εἴπερ εἰσὶ λεγό- 
μενοι θεοί, ὥςπερ οὖν καὶ εἰσίν, οὐχ ἁπλῶς 
εἰσίν, ἀλλά, λεγόμενοι, οὐκ ἐν πράγματι, 
ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ῥήματι τοῦτο ἔχοντες" εἴτε ἐν 
οὐρανῷ, εἴτε ἐπὶ γῆς᾽ ἐν οὐρανῷ τὸν ἥλιον 


λέγων κ. τὴν σελήνην kK. τὸν λοιπὸν τῶν 
ἄστρων χορόν" καὶ γὰρ καὶ ταῦτα προΞξεκύ- 
νησαν “Ἕλληνες᾽ ἐπὶ γῆς δὲ δαίμονας, καὶ 
τοὺς ἐξ ἀνθρώπων θεοποιηθέντας ἅπαντας. 
Hom. xx. p. 172. And similarly Theo- 
doret, Theophyl., Gcum., Calv., Beza, 
Calov., Estius, Schrader, al. See the vari- 
ous minor differences of interpretation, in 
Pool’s Synopsis and De Wette: and a 
beautiful note in Stanley. There is a 
sentence in Herodotus (ix. 27) singularly 
resembling this in its structure: ἡμῖν δέ, 
εἰ μηδὲν ἄλλο ἐστὶ ἀποδεδεγμένον, ὥςπερ 
ἐστὶ πολλά τε Kal εὐἔχοντα,. .. ἀλλὰ καὶ 
ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐν Μαραθῶνι ἔργου ἄξιοί ἐσμεν, 
κιτιλ. Cf. also Hom. II. a. 81 f. ; o. 576 f. 

Yet (see reff. just given, and 
ch. iv. 15) 0 us (emphatic : however that 
matter may be, we hold) there is ONE 
Gop, the Father (ὁ πατήρ answers to 
Ἰησοῦς χριστός in the parallel clause be- 
low, and serves to specify what God—viz. 
the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ), of 
Whom (as their Source of being) are all 
things, and we unto (i.e. for) Him (His 
purposes—to serve His will); and one 
Lord Jesus Christ (netice the εἷς θεός 
opposed to θεοὶ πολλοί, and εἷς κύριος to 
κύριοι πολλοί), by Whom (as Him by 
whom the Father made the worlds, John 
i. 3; Heb. i. 2) are all things, and we 
(but here secondly, we as his spiritual 
people, in the new creation) by Him. 
The inference from the foregoing is that, 
per se, the eating of meat offered to idols 
is a thing indifferent, and therefore al- 
lowed. The limitation of this licence now 
follows. 1.) But (fondern) not in all 
is the knowledge (of which we have been 
speaking: i.e. see above, is not in them in 
their individual apprehension, though it 
is by their profession as Christians): but 
(aber) some through their conscious- 


ἢ γὙνω- 
σις K. 
ABDFL 
PNabe 
detgh 


klmn- 


017, 47 


6—10. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@OIOTS A. 539 


3 , \ es / ee tis \ by u . 
ἐσθίουσιν, καὶ ἡ " συνείδησις αὐτῶν "ἀσθενὴς οὖσα " μο- sw. gen. subj., 


Rom. ii. 15. 


΄ : » \ ae Mb A a i . 5 . 
λύνεται. 8 " βρῶμα δὲ ἡμᾶς οὐ “ παραστήσει τῷ θεω" τ Ὁ 
t = here (366) 


A 2A / xf ΄ θ ἡ ὟΝ fs 
οὔτε ἐὰν μὴ φάγωμεν, * ὑστερούμεθα, οὔτε ἐὰν φάγωμεν, 


only. {(-νεῖν, 
Rom. xiv. 1. 


aa ΟἿΣ. μ - δὲ 4un 3 Ὁ de ᾳ ὑμῶ i 
Y περισσεύομεν. 5.5 βλέπετε δὲ ὃ μή ὅπως ἡ ἐξουσ ἰώ ὑμῶν ἀν ind. 
᾿ Η ἢ A Ae teed θ , 7 10) 2, , xiv. 4 only. 
αὑτὴ “ προςκομμα γενηταν τοις ᾿ασύενεσιν. ἡ. ,εαν YAP isa. Inv. dal. 
= Sir. xx:. 28. 


Yj A 3 fis 
τις ἴδῃ σὲ Tov ἔχοντα ὃ γνῶσιν ἐν 1 εἰδωλείῳ “© κατακεί- ¥ Rom. xiv. 15 


reff. 


ΩΝ > fas 3 [οὶ of rie be Ἐν 
μενον, ovyt ἡ " συνείδησις αὐτοῦ ‘ ἀσθενοῦς ὄντος " Tyr" 
ὙΠ ΡΟ αν {Ὁ 
x ch. i. 7 reff. y = ch. xiv. 12 8]. (Rom. iii. 7 reff.) z = Acts xiii. 40 reff. 
a — Rom. xi. 21. b = ch. vii. 37 al. c Rom. ix. 32, 33 reff. d here 
only+. Esdr.ii.10. 1 Macc. i. 47. x. 83 only. e = Mark ii. 15), L. xiv. 3. Luke vii. 37 
only}. (Prov. vi. 9.) 


for εσθιουσιν, ἐστιν N'(txt X-corr!). 


8. vuas &'c Κα 1 m 17 [Damasc]. rec παριστησι (corrn to suit the follg pres 
tenses), with DLPN% rel vulg Orig, Ath-4-mss Chr, [ Bas, Euthal-ms] Thdrt Jac-nisib, 
[Tert, Cypr,]: σινιστησιν F [συνιστ. G]: txt ABR! 17 coptt Clem, Orig, Ath, 
Damasc,. rec aft ουτε ins yap, with DFLP rel latt syrr Clem, Orig, Chr, Thdrt 
[Bas, Damase] Jac-nisib, Ambrst: om ABN 17 am(with tol) coptt ath arm Orig, 
[ Bas, Euthal-ms] Cypr, Aug, (Tert,). rec oute cay gary. περισσευομεν bef ovte 
eav un pay. υστερουμεθα (appy to bring closer the clause φαγωμ. περισ., to Bpwu. ov 
παριστ., as being logically connected with it), with DFLPN vel [vulg-clem fuld eth | 
syrr Clem, Orig, Chr, [Bas, Cyr,-p Euthal-ms Damasc] Thdrt Jac-nisib Cypr, Exerk. 
Ambrst Aug]: eav μὴ φαγωμεν περισσευομεν ουτε εαν φαγωμεν υστερουμεθα A*(but in 
A “epic. usque ad var. voces rescripte : quid olim non liquet ”) 17![om μη altogether 
172]: txt (A'?)B am(with demid flor mar tol) coptt arm Bas,.—epiooevoneba BOrig). 

9. μων P. rec ασθενουσιν (appy corrn to suit acbevwy below, which however 
is gradually introduced,—ac0cveow,—acbevous οντος,---ασθενων), with L rel Chr, 


Thdrt [Antch,] ΤῊ] @e: txt ABDFPX 17 Clem, [Euthal-ms] Damasc,. 


10. edn A 17. 


exovta &! 17 Orig-int,. 
(ιδωλ. AFR 17). 


ness (or, according to the other reading, 
habituation) to this day, of the (par- 
ticular) idol (1. 6. through their having 
an apprehension to this day of the reality 
of the idol, and so being conscientiously 
afraid of the meat offered, as belonging to 
him: not wishing to be connected with 
him. τῇ συνειδήσει ἕως ἄρτι is not = τῇ 
ἕως ἄρτι ovv., but ἕως ἄρτι stands sepa- 
rate, as above: so διὰ τῆς ἐμῆς παρουσίας 
πάλιν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, Phil. i. 26) eat it as 
offered to an idol, and their conscience, 
in that it is weak, is defiled. By ἕως 
ἄρτι, it is shewn that these ἀσθενεῖς must 
have belonged to the Gentile part of the 
Corinthian church : to those who had once, 
before their conversion, held these idols to 
be veritable gods. Had they been Jewish 
converts, it would not have been συνείδησις 
τοῦ εἰδώλου which would have troubled 
them, but_apparent violation of the Mosaic 
law. 8.1 Reason why we should 
accommodate ourselves to the prejudices of 
the weak in this matter : because it is not 
gue in which any spiritual advantage 15 fo 
be gained, but one perfectly indifferent : 
not; with Calv., al., an objection of the 
strong among the Corinthians: no such 
assumption must be made, without a plain 
indication in words that the saying of 


om σε BF vulg Orig-int, [Ambrst Aug,]: ins ADLPR rel syrr 
coptt goth arm [(Bas,) Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Antch, Damasc]. 
ειἰδωλίω (for -λειω) AB D[}(Tischdf)] L[P]& ἃ Καὶ ΠῚ m 17 


yvwow bef 


another is being cited: see Rom. ix. 19; 
xi. 19; and as Meyer well remarks, if the 
eaters had said this, they would have ex- 
pressed it, οὔτε ἐὰν ph φάγωμεν περισσ., 
οὔτε ἐὰν φάγ.. ὕστερ., as it has actually 
been corrected (see var. readd.) in some 
Mss., and adopted by Lachm. in his last 
edn. The δέ carries on the argument. 
Bengel remarks (against the ordinary 
rendering, which takes παρίστημι = συν- 
ίστημι, ‘commendo,’ which meaning it will 
not bear) that παραστήσει is a verbum 
μέσον, after which may follow a good or a 
bad predicate :—will not affect our (future) 
standing before God ;—and to this indif- 
ferent meaning of παραστήσει answers the 
antithetic alternative which follows. 


Ἴ9.).δέ- α. ἃ. “1 acknowledge this indif- 
ere 


nce—this licence to eat or not to eat; 
but it is on that very account, because it 
is a matter indifferent, that yeroust_take 
heed,” &e. The particular πρόσκομμα in 
this case would be, ΤΣ tempting them to. 
act against their conscience :»a~practice 
above all others dangerous to a Christian, 
see below, ver. 11. {10 Explanation 
how the mpéskoppa may arise. tis, 
scil. (see below) ἀσθενὴς dv. TOV 
ἔχοντα γνῶσιν seems to imply that the 
weak brother is aware of this,and looks up 


540 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINGIOTS A. VIII. 11—13. 


; ? \ ἈΠ oy es ͵ 7 \ 
s—actsix.n folkodopnOnoetar εἰς TO, τὰ ὅ εἰδωλόθυτα ἐσθίειν )καὶ 


reff. (iron., h2 7 Shoe ἣν κ᾿ Α, ΑΚ 4 ἐ * 
here only." @TONAUTAL O ἀσθενῶν "ἐν τῇ σῇ γνώσει, ὁ ἀδελφὸς 
15.} constr. a. Ww \ ͵ . « \ ͵ 

δρῦν, δ’ ὃν χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν ; 13,)οὕτως δὲ | ἁμαρτάνοντες ! 


ε > 
us 

g ver. 1 reff. ὃ 
h Rom. xiv. 15 


\ \ uf a 
τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς καὶ ™TUTTovTes αὐτῶν THY 5 συνείδησιν ... 
ΑΝ 13 ὁ διό ; 
διόπερ εἰ. 


ren. 
i Rom. iv. 19 


= a \ ΄ 
ἱ ἀσθενοῦσαν, ‘eis χριστὸν | ἁμαρτάνετε. 


reff. 

k Matt. vi. 7. A —_—— \ 7, 

reonstr.,eh. Ρ βρῶμα 9 σκανδαλίζει τὸν ἀδελφόν μου, οὐ μὴ φάγω * κρέα ς 
δ κε κεν σε > \ IA “ \ \ , e 

m= bere only. δ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, ἵνα μὴ τὸν ἀδελφόν μου ἃ σκανδαλίσω. 
Prov, xxvi. 5) > ΄ 5 , Stak 
ge ty, IX. 1 Οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐλεύθερος ; οὐκ εἰμὶ ἀπόστολος ; οὐχὶ 


n ver. 7. 


och. x. 14 (xiv. 13 v. r-) only. p Rom. xiv. 15 reff. q Matt. xv. 12. xvii. 27. Rom. xiv. 
21+. Sir. ix. 5. xxiii. 8. xxxv. (xxxii.) 15 only. r Rom. xiv. 21 only. Gen. ix. 4 al. s Matt. 
xxi.19. Mark iii. 29. John viii. 35. Deut. xv. 17. 


ἐσθιειν bef τα εἰδωλοθυτα DF [vulg syrr coptt eth] Orig-int [Ambrst] Aug. 

11. for καὶ απολ., aor. yap BX! 17 coptt goth Clem,(elsw cites freely aAAa απ.) 
fAntch, (Thdrt,)]: amoa. ουν AP: καὶ απ. ovy 46 Damase: txt DFLN% rel vulg syrr 
[Ὡ arm Euthal-ms] Chr, Iren-int, [Ambrst] Jer. (The sentence has prob been 
tampered with to get rid of the apparent awkwardness of tie question being carried 
on through ver 11,—and ovv and yap have been attempts to break it off at εσθιειν.) 

rec απολειταῖι (to suit the fut above), with D3[-gr] FL rel [vulg syrr eth arm | Chr, 
(edd and mss vary) Thdrt Thi (ec Iren-int,; [Ambrst] Jer: txt AB D}{and lat] ΡΝ [a 
basm] copt goth Clem, Bas[(edd and mss vary) Euthal-ms] Antch, Thdrt, Damasc. 
(απολυται D!, απολλυται D?: 17 illeg.) rec emi (= ‘on account of,’ seems to have 
been a corrn for the more difficult ev,—see note), with L rel Chr, [Antch,] Thdrt ΤῊ] 
(ic: txt ABDFPN 17 Bas, Thdrt, [Eutbal-ins Damasc]: im latt Iren-int [Ambrst] 
Jer: om εν Clem, (Orig)). om on B. rec adcAgos, omg art, bef ev τη on 
γνωσει (attempt to simplify, at the expense of the emphatic character of the sentence), 
with LPN? rel fuld syr(aé. 0 ao.) farm] Chr, Thdrt, [Antch, Damasc]: om adeAgos 
vulg-ms Syr: txt AB D[om o D?3] FN! m(omg 6) 17 latt copt [basm] goth zth Bas, - 
Iren-int, Ambrst Jer (Clem, has 0 a5. ασθ. : elsw, he cites απ. yap 0 ασθ. τὴ σὴ Ὑν.). 

12. om Tous F. om και F(including F-lat G-lat) D-lat | basm]. 

13. ins to bef Bpwua F. om pov (twice) F(including F-lat G-lat) Cypr, ; 
[D-lat'] goth Clem, also om 1st μου; D}(and lat) Cypr, [Ambrst Aug; Sing-cler] om 
2nd. κρεας NI. 


Cuap. IX. 1. rec transp ελευθερος and αποστολος (possibly to bring the weightiest 
question into prominence,—or, as Mey, οὐκ εἰμ. απ. having been omd in mistake (as 71. 
178), was re-insd first as the weightier and first treated, cf vv 2, 3), with DFKL rel 
fuld syr basm goth Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Ambrst: txt ABP m 17 vulg [am demid 
harl tol] Syr copt eth arm Orig, Tert,; Ambr, Aug, Pel Cassiod Bede. 


ἂν τὸν νοσοῦντα τύπτοντος ; Chrys. p. 176 


to thee as such. ἐν εἰδωλείῳ Kat. ] See 
3. | Fervid expression of his own 


on εἰδωλοθ., ver. 1. εἰδωλεῖον, as Πυσει- 


δεῖον, ᾿Απολλωνεῖον, Ἰσεῖον, Xe. 

“οἰκοδομηθήσεται is not a vox media, 
as Le Clere, Elsner, Wolf, al., nor is 
it impelletur, as Castal., Bengel, Kypke, 
al., nor confirmabitur, as Syr., Grot., 
Billroth, al.’ (Mey.), but as Meyer and 
De Wette, edificabitur, not without a 
certain irony, seeing it is accompanied 
by ἀσθενοῦς bvros,—for thus the building 
up would be without solid foundation— 
a ruinosa edificatio, as Calv. 11.) 
.... and (thus) the weak perishes (here- 
after: see the parallel, ref. Rom. and 
note) in (as the element in which,—he 
. entering into it as his own, which it is not) 
thy knowledge,—the brother, in whose 
behalf Christ died? See again Rom. as 
above. 12. οὕτως, viz. as in vv. 10, 
11. καί fixes and explains what is meant 
by auapr. εἰς τ. ad. τύπτοντες | smit- 
ing: τί yap ἀπηνέστερον ἀνθρώπου γένοιτ᾽ 


resolution consequent on these considera- 
tions, by way of an example to them. 
βρώμα, tood, i. 6. any article of food, 

as ver. 8; purposely indefinite here; ‘if 
such a matter as food. ...,’ but presently 
particularized. ov pH φάγω, strong 
future, I surely will not eat; ‘there is 
no chance that I eat.’ κρέα] ‘Quo 
certius vitarem carnem idolo immolatam, 
toto genere carnium abstinerem.’ Bengel. 
cKavdadiow| be the means of offend- 
ing; “ commutatur persona: modo dixit sé 
cibus offendit.” Bengel. ‘ Non autem hoe 
dicit quod hoe aliquo easu opus sit, sed ut 
ostendat multo graviora quam de quibus 
hie agitur sustinenda pro proximorum 
salute.’ Grot. IX. 1—27.] He di- 
gressively illustrates the spirit of self- 
denial which he professed in the resolution 
of ch. vii. 13,—by contrasting his rights 
as un Apostle with his actual conduct va 





IX. 1—4. IPOs 


KOPINOIOTS A. 


541 


? A / o x 
Inootv τὸν "κύριον ἡμῶν "ἑώρακα; οὐ TO ἔργον MOU t John xx 18, 


= “ ᾽ 3 / 9 ? 
υμεις ἐστε ἐν KUPlL® ; εὐ 


an Bots 


\ ͵ et 
" ἄχλοις οὐκ εἰμὶ ἀπόστολος, Ph 


15 reff. 


ἡ ἀλλά γε ὑμῖν εἰμι ἡ γὰρ ἡ σφραγίς μου τῆς * ἀποστο- vch.iv.15 


A e a 3 > , 
λῆς ὑμεῖς ἐστε ἐν κυριῳ. 
/ οὶ 7 
“ ἀνακρίνουσίν ἐστιν αὕτη. 


only. Deut. xxii. 7, 
z Acts iv. 9 reff. 


a here bis. Rom. x. 18,19. ch. xi. 22 only. P. 


reff. 


3 ἐμὴ Υ ἀπολογία τοῖς ἐμὲ = Rom. ἐν. 


11 (reff.) only. 


\ » ” 3 x Acts 3. 25. 
48 μὴ 5 οὐκ ὃ ἔχομεν ὃ ἐξου- * Rom is. 
Gal ii. 8 
y w. dat., 1 Pet. iii. 15 only. see Acts xxii. 1 pe 16 reff.). 


Ὁ cn. vil. 37 reff. 


rec aft ino. adds xpiorov, with DKLP rel Syr syr-w-ast copt [goth eth-pl arm] Chr 
Thdrt: om ABN a am(with [fuld] harl tol) sah eth{-rom] Orig, [(Tert,)] Ambrst : 


pref, F vulg-ed(with demid) Tert, Aug, [Pel]. (17 illeg.) 
2. om A (i.e. from ev Kupiw to ev κυριω). 


eopaka BID3Fl PIN 6. 
rec (for μου tns) της euns, with 


DFKL rel Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt, apostolatus mei vulg D-lat [Ambrst Aug,]: txt 


(Meyer objects to tat, that opp. μου is prob a corrn to suit epy. μου above. 
surely improb) BPX 17 Orig, [Damasc], mei apostolatus F-lat G-lat. 


kuptw D}(and lat) tol [Syr] goth Chrg. 


This is 
om ev 


3. rec αὐτὴ bef ἐστιν, with DFKL rel [vulg syr copt arm Euthal-ms] Thdrt ΤῊ] Ge: 


txt ABPX m 17 Chr, Damasce. 


abstaining from demanding them (vv. 1— 
22). This self-denying conduct he further 
exemplifies, vv. 23—27, for their imita- 
tion. See Stanley’s introductory note; and 
Conyb. and Howson, vol. i. pp. 61, 457, 
edn. 2. 1.1 He sets forth, (1) his in- 
dependence of men (contrast ver. 19); (2) 
his apostolic office (for the order, see var. 
readd.) :—(3) his dignity as an Apostle, in 
having been vouchsafed a sight of Christ 
Jesus our Lord ;—(4) his efficiency in the 
office, as having converted them to God. 
ἐλεύθ.] So that the resolution of ch. 
viii. 13 is not necessitated by any depend- 
ence on my part on the opinion of others. 
ἑώρακα] Not, during the life of our 
Lord on earth, as Schrader, nor is such an 
idea supported by 2 Cor. v. 16; see note 
there ;— but, in the appearance of the Lord 
to him by the way to Damascus (Acts ix. 17; 
ch. xv. 8: see Neand. Pfl. u. Leit. p. 151, 
note) ; and also, secondarily, in those other 
visions and appearances,—recorded by 
him, Acts xviii.9 (Ὁ), xxii. 18,—and possibly 
on other occasions since his conversion. 
ov μικρὸν δὲ καὶ τοῦτο ἀξίωμα ἦν, Chrys. 
Hom. xxi. p. 180. ἐν κυρίῳ is not a 
mere humble qualification of τὸ ἔργον μου, 
as Chrys. ib., τουτέστι τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ ἔργον 
ἐστίν, οὐκ é€uov,—but designates, as else- 
where, the element, in which the work is 
done: they were his work as an Apostle, 
i. e. as the servant of the Lord enabled by 
the Lord, and SO IN THE Lorp. See ch. 
iv. 15. 2.) At least my apostle- 
ship cannot be denied by you of all men, 
who are its seal and proof. Chagan.* 
οὐκ εἰμί] οὐκ, because it belongs closely t 
the hypothesis: ‘if I am 2zo-Apostle,’ 
see ch. vii. 9. ἄλλοις, to others, i.e. 
in the estimation of others. ἀλλά ye, 
yet at least, is stronger than ἀλλά alone. 
The particle shews that the sentiment 
which it introduces has more weight than 


the other to which the ἀλλά is a reply. 
See Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 385. Meyer 
(after Klotz) remarks that “in the classics 
ἀλλά γε is never found without one or 
more words intervening :” those words 
being emphatic: e. g. Aristoph. Nub. 
399, πῶς οὐχὶ Σίμων ἐνέπρησεν ..... 
ἀλλὰ τὸν αὑτοῦ γε νεὼν βάλλει; 
σφραγίς] as being the proof of his apos- 
tolie calling and energy, by their con- 
version; better than,—by the signs and 
wonders which he wrought among them, as 
Chrys. (al.) from 2 Cor. xii. 11—13, and 
perhaps misled by the similarity of σημεῖον 
and σφραγίς. Their conversion was the 
great proof: so Theodoret, ἀπόδειξιν yap 
τῶν ἀποστολικῶν κατορθωμάτων τὴν ὕμε- 
τέραν ἔχω μεταβολήν. ἐν κυρ. belongs 
to the whole sentence, see above, on ver. 1. 
9.1 This belongs to the preceding, 
not to the following verses: αὕτη, Viz. 
the fact of your conversion: this word is 
the predicate, not the subject—as in John 
1.19; xvii. 3, and stands here in the em- 
phatic place before the verb ; referring to 
what went before. With ver. 4a new course 
of questions begins, which furnish no ἀπο- 
λογία. τοῖς ἐμὲ dvakp.| For the dat. 
see Acts xix. 33; 2 Cor. xii. 19 :—to those, 
who call mein question: ἐμέ, emphatic, as 
Chrys. says, of ver. 2, κἂν βούληταί Tis. . 
μαθεῖν ποθεν ὅτι ἀπόστολός εἶμι, ὑμᾶς προ- 
βάλλομαι, p. 181. 4,) He resumes the 
questions which had been interrupted by 
giving the proof of his Apostleship. 
μὴ οὐκ éx.] μή asks the question: οὐκ 
ἔχομεν is the thing in question: Is it so, 
that we have not power....?% The plur. 
seems to apply to Paul alone: for though 
Barnabas is introduced momentarily in ver. 
6, there can be no reference to him in ver. 
11. It may perhaps be used as pointing 
out a matter of rzght, which any would 
have had on the same conditions (see ver. 


542 ΠΡΟΣ 


/ a \ 

ctrans.,here OLAV φαγεῖν και 

only. Ezek. "ὃ Ὧν \ » ss 

XXXVii. 2. VVALK 

intrans., Acts aoe φὴν ¥ 

xiii. 1 reff. 
d — Acts xiv. 

4 (note), 14. 9 


KOPINOIOTS A. 


c / ΄ \ e Ν d 
περιάγειν, ὡς καὶ οἱ oOLTrOL 


IX. 


econstr., acts ἐγὼ καὶ BapvaBas οὐκ ὃ" ἔχομεν ὃ ἐξουσίαν [" τοῦ] μὴ 


xiv. 9 reff. 


4. (ew, so B'(Tischdf), mw DI FN?) 


5. for αδελφην γυναικα, γυναίκας I (Clem,) Tert,: adeAdas γυναικας arm(and mss 
mentioned by Jer): adeApa: γυναικα lectt 8. 56: Sedul says, ὅη gr@co sorores, non 
mulieres, legitur : uxores Helvid Cassiod : mulierem sororem vulg(with harl’, | sororem 


mulierem] am demid fuld [Aug, }). 


(The variations shew, as in ch vii., how the 


sacred text was tampered with by the parties in the controversy on celibacy.) 


om 2nd of Καὶ [Damasc]. 


6. om του (to conform to vv 4 and 5) ABD'FPR 17 Orig[-c, Euthal-ms] Isid,: ins 
D3KL rel [ Bas, ] Chr, Thdrt Damase Thl Cc. 


11), and as thus not belonging personally 
to Paul, as do the things predicated in vv. 
1, 2,15. This however will not apply to 
ver. 12, where the emphatic ἡμεῖς 7s per- 
sonal. φαγεῖν x. πεῖν] To eat and 
to drink, sc. at the cost of the churches: 
not with any reference to the eating of 
things offered to idols (as Schrader, iv. 
132), nor to Jewish distinctions of clean 
and unclean (as Billroth and Olshausen) ;— 
see below, vv. 6, 7. 5. | Have we not 
the power to bring about with us (also to 
be maintained at the cost of the churches, 
for this, and not the power to marry, is 
here the matter in question) as a wife, a 
(believing) sister (or, ‘to bring with us 
a believing wife: these are the only ren- 
derings of which the words are legitimately 
capable. Augustine, De Opere Monacho- 
rum, 4 (5), vol. vi. p. 552, explains it 
thus: “Ostendit 5101 licere quod ceteris 
Apostolis, id est ut non operetur manibus 
ad hoc 
enim et fideles mulieres habentes terrenain 
substantiam ibant cum eis, et ministra- 
bant eis de substantia sua,” &c., and 
similarly Jerome adv. Jovin. i. 26, vol. ii. 
p- 277. So likewise Tertull., Theodoret, 
(Ecum., Isid. Pelus., Theophylact, Ambrose, 
and Sedul. SotooCorn.-a-Lap.and Estius. 
See Estius, and Suicer, γυνή, 11. And 
from this misunderstanding of the passage 
grew up a great abuse, and such women 
are mentioned with reprobation by Epi- 
phan. Her. 78, vol. i. (ii. Migne), p. 1043, 
under the name of ayarnrai. They were 
also called ἀδελφαί: and were forbidden 
under the name of συνείξακτοι by the 
3rd Canon of the 1st Council of Nicza. 
See these words in Suicer), as also the 
other Apostles (in the wider sense, not 
only the twelve, for ver. 6, Barnabas is 
mentioned. It does not follow hence that 
all the other Apostles were married: but 
that all had the power, and some had 
used it) and the brethren of the Lord 
(mentioned not because distinct from the 
ἀπόστολοι, though they were absolutely 


distinct from the Twelve, see Acts i. 14, 
—but as a further specification of the 
most renowned persons, who travelled as 
missionaries, and took their wives with 
them. On the 46. τοῦ κυρ. see note, 
Matt. xiii. 55. They were in all proba- 
bility the actual brethren of our Lord by 
the same mother, the sons of Joseph and 
Mary. The most noted of these was 
James, the Lord’s brother (Gal. i. 19; ii. 
9, 12, compare Acts xii. 17; xv. 13; xxi. 
18), the resident bishop of the Church at 
Jerusalem: the others known to us by 
name were Joses (or Joseph), Simon, and 
Judas, see note on Matt. ib.), and Cephas 
(Peter was married, see Matt. viii. 14. A 
beautiful tradition exists of his encouraging 
his wife who was led to death, by saying 
μέμνησο, ὦ αὕτη, Tov κυρίου, Clem. Alex. 
Strom. vii. § 11 (63), p. 868 P. Euseb. 
H. E. iii. 30. Clem. Alex. Strom. iii. § 6 
(52), p. 535 P., relates that he had chil- 
dren)? On a mistake which has been 
made respecting St. Paul’s (supposed) wife, 
see note on ch. vii. 8. 6.] Or (im- 
plying what the consequence would then 
be, see ch. vi. 2, 9: does not introduce 
a new ἐξουσία, but a consequence of 
the denial of the last two) have only I 
and Barnabas (why Barnabas? Perhaps 
on account of his former connexion with 
Paul, Acts xi. 30; xii.25; xiii. 1—xv. 39; 
but this seems hardly enough reason for 
his being here introduced. It is not im- 
probable that having been at first asso- 
ciated with Paul, who appears from the 
jirst to have abstained from receiving 
sustenance from those among whom he 
was preaching, Barnabas, after his separa- 
tion from our Apostle, may have re- 
tained the same _ self-denying practice. 
“This is the only time when he is men- 
tioned in conjunction with St. Paul, since 
the date of the quarrel in Acts xv. 39.” 
Stanley) not power to abstain from work- 


ing (i. 6. power to look for our mainte- ἡ 


nance from the churches, without manual 
labour of our own. The Vulg. has ‘hoe 


k 
ο 


πεῖν; ὃ * μὴ "οὐκ ὃ ἔχομεν ὃ ἐξουσίαν ΑΒΡΡῚ 
΄ R 

ἀπόστο- cet 
\ n / a A , 

λοι Kal of ἀδελφοὶ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ Kndas; ὃ ἢ μόνος 


| 
Ι 


al 
gi 
mi 
1. 4 


5—10. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 543 
: , 

Cy fépyaterOar; 7 Tis ® στρατεύεται ἰδίοις ἃ ὀψωνίοις ' ποτέ ; t absol., Acts 
ζεσθαι... 7 4 ΄ 1. rn \ \ \ HY a ᾽ ho ΝΡ 
aBcDE τίς Κ φυτεύει ᾿ἀμπελῶνα, καὶ τὸν καρπὸν αὐτοῦ οὐκ TR δ 
\KLPNa 5 ͵ , χὰ , n / at. ~ Ρ , al. Exod. νυ. 
Ibcefge ἐσθίει; τίς τ ποιμαίνει " ποίμνην, καὶ ° Ex τοῦ ὃ γάλακ- ἘΣ A 
hkim a , > et Be” Ἢ ὦ g Luke iii. - 
nol7, TOS τῆς "ποίμνης οὐκ : ἐσθίει ; 8 μὴ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον ἜΤΗ i 
a A \ a ? , > 2 Tim. ii. 4. 

ταῦτα λαλῶ, *H ‘Kal ὁ νόμος ταῦτα ov λέγει; 5 EV James y.1. 


Ν A M , 4 / Οὐ 8 7 a ieee pte 
yap τῷ Μωυσέως νόμῳ γέγραπται Ov * κημώσεις βοῦν only. , Isa. 


᾿ 2 . 2 5 4 A A 2 > ¢ mh Luke iii. 14. 
ἀλοῶντα. μὴ τῶν βοῶν ἃ μέλει τῷ θεῷ, 10 ἢ Ov ἡμᾶς Ron Vi 3 
2 Cor. xi. 5 


only +. Esdr. iv. 56. 1 Macc. iii. 28. xiv. 32 only. dat.,ch. xi.5. 2 Cor. i. 15 al. i = Heb. 


i. 5, 13. k ch. iii. 6 reff. Deut. xx. 6. 1 Matt. xx. 1, &c. | al. in Gospp. elsw., 
here only. Isa. v. 1. m = Luke xvii. 7. 1 Kings xxv. 16. see Acts xx. 28 reff. 
nhere bis. Matt. xxvi. 31. Lukeii.8. John x. 16 only. Gen. xxxii. 16. o = here only (ver. 
13). 2 Kings xii. 3. see John vi. 26, 50, 51. : p ch. iii. 2 reff. q Rom. iii. 5 reff. 
r Luke xi. 11,12. xviii. 11. Rom. ii. 15. ch. xvi. 6. 2Cor.i. 13. Job ix. 26. interrog., Luke xii. 41. Rom. 
i s here only +. (-0s, Ps. xxxi.9. Ezek. xix.4,9.) Deur. xxv. 4. t here 


iv. 9. 
bis. 1 Tim. v. 18 (froml.c.) only. 1 Chron. xxi. 20. 
Cyr. iii. 1. 30. gen., here only. usu. w. πέρι, Matt. xxii. 16 al. 


u constr., but ellipt., ch. vii. 21. Xen, 


%. rec (for Tov kaprov) ek Tov καρπου (corrn to conform to the follg ex του γαλ.), with 
(C3 ?)D2-3K LN3 rel [syrr copt arm] Chr, [Bas, Euthal-ms] Thdrt, de fructu vulg-ed 
(with am fuld): εἰς τῶν καρπων (C3?) Damase: txt ABC!D!FPN! 17 sah goth Orig-c,, 
Sructum G-lat flor(and harl tol) F-lat Bede. aft εἐσθιει ins Kat πινει DF. 
rec ins 7 bef τις ποιμ., with ACIKLPN rel Syr copt [Bas, Cyr,] Damase ce: txt B 
C?(appy) DF latt syr sah goth arm Chr, [ Euthal-ms] Thdrt ΤῊ] Ambrst Aug) alic}- 
for της ποίμνης, avtns D'F [flor] sah eth Chr, Thl Ambrst Aug{has both readgs]. 

8. for Aadw, Acyw DF f. rec ins ovx: bef καὶ o vouos (omg ov bef λεγει), with 
KLP rel sah Dial, Chr, Thdrt [Cyr-p, Damase]: simly, but εἰ instead of ουχι, F(an sz 
lex hee dicit lat) [arm]: ecce etiam lex hec dixit Syr: txt ABCDX [vulg syr copt] 
Orig, Mcion-e, Epiph,, an et lex hee non dicit vulg. (17 def.) 

9. γεγραπται yap, omg ev Tw μωυσεως vouw, D'(om yap D*[-gr]) F Orig, Hil,: txt 
ABCKLPR rel [vulg eth arm] Orig, [Dial, Euthal-ms Cyr,] Aug). rec (for 

 Knuwoes) φιμωσεις (see 1 Tim v.18 and Lxx), with AB?CD?*KLPR rel Orig, Dial, 


Cyr[-p, Euthal-ms Damase] Thdrt,: txt B'D!F Chri Thdrt,. 


των βοων DF (vss[? ]). 


operandi,’ so also Tertull., Ambrose, al., 
omitting μή, and against the usage of ép- 
γάζεσθαι, see reff.) ἢ 7—12 ] Exam- 
ples from common life, of the reasonable- 
ness of the workman being sustained by 
his work. 7.| from the analogies of 
human conduct. (1) The soldier. 

ἰδίοις dwviors | with pay furnished out of 
his own resources,—the dativus modalis, 
see Winer, edn. 6, § 31. 7. oTpa- 
τεύομαι, of the soldier, who serves in 
the army: otpatevw. of the general, or 
the nation, that leads, or undertakes, the 
war. So Thucyd. iii. 101, of the states 
which joined the Peloponnesians, οὗτοι καὶ 
ξυνεστράτευον πάντες : but Xen. Cyr. viii. 
4. 29, of the wife of Tigranes, ἀνδρείως 
ξυνεστρατεύετο τῷ ἀνδρί. See Kiihner, ii. 
18 (§ 398). (2) The husbandman. 

τὸν καρπ. αὖτ. οὐκ ἐσθ.) τὸν καρπόν, as 
Meyer observes, is simply objective: he 
does eat the fruit, though it may be only 
part of it. (3) The shepherd. Here it 
is ἐκ τοῦ γάλ., perhaps on account of the 
inappropriateness of τὸ γάλα .. .. ἐσθίει, 
and also of τὸ γάλα πίνει, milk being for 
the most part made into other articles of 
food, which sustain the shepherd partly 
directly, partly by their sale. 8.| Am 
I speaking these things merely sccord- 


ins περι bef 


ing to human judgment of what is right? 
Or (see note, ver. 6) does the law too not 
say these things? 9.] (It does say 
them): for in the law of Moses it is 
written, Thou shalt not (on the fut. with 
an imperative meaning, ‘Thou shalt not,’ 
i.e. “ This I expect of thee, that thou wilt 
not,’ common to all civilized languages, 
see Winer, edn. 6, § 43. 5. c; Kiihner, 
§ 446. 2) muzzle (the reading φιμώσεις 
probably came in from the similar place, 
1 Tim. v. 18, and LXX. The verb κημόω 
occurs, with its substantive κημός, in Xen. 
de re equestri, v. 3, ἀεὶ ὅποι ἂν ἀχαλίνω- 
τον ἄγῃ, κημοῦν Set 6 γὰρ κημὸς ἀναπνεῖν 
μὲν οὐ κωλύει, δάκνειν δὲ οὐκ εᾷ) AN OX 
while treading out the corn (in the sense 
=‘ the ox that treadeth out :’ but strictly 
that would require τὸν β. τὸν ἀλοῶντα)--- 
““ἀλοᾷν dicuntur boves, quum grana ex 
aristis exterunt pedibus, qui mos Orientis, 
sed et Gracie, ut ex Theophrasto et aliis 
discimus. Hic triturandi mos in Asia ho- 
dieque retinetur. Solent enim illarum re- 
gionum incole, postquam demesse fruges 
sunt, non domum eas ex agris, more nostra, 
granis nondum excussis, in horrea conyel- 
lere: sed in aream quandam sub dio com- 
portare: deinde, sparsis in aream manipulis 
frugum, boves et bubalos immittunt, qui 


TX. 


544. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 

’ ΄ “ , τ a) \ 3 / “ , /. a ’ 
vActsxxi.22 ἡ πάντως λέγει ; δι’ ἡμᾶς γὰρ ἐγράφη, ὅτι * ὀφείλει * ἐπ 
TOM es. τς € - a ς A ee ee , 
wen. vii 820 ἐλ τίδι ὁ Υ ἀροτριῶν Y ἀροτριᾶν, καὶ ὁ ' ἀλοῶν * ἐπ᾿ ἐλπίδι 
e as ᾿ lal ΄ A “- Ν \ b] / 
yhere bis. ἤ τοῦ ὃ μετέχειν. 1} εἰ ἡμεῖς ὑμῖν ta” πνευματικὰ © ἐσπεί- 

“ Luke xvii. 7 > σι . \ 
only. Dent. payer, ἃ μέγα εἰ ἡμεῖς ὑμῶν τὰ ὃ σαρκικὰ * θερισομεν ; 
Xi1l. . 
Ζ ἈΞ). xiv. 9 reff. a here bis. ch. x. 17, 21, 30. Heb. ii. 14. v. 13. viii. 13 only. Prov.i.18. Esdr. 
τ. 40 al. Ὁ Rom. xv. 27 (reff.). c = Mark iv. 14 al. fr. ἃ =2 Cor. xi, 


15 only. Gen. xly. 28. Isa. xlix. 6. e Matt. xxv. 24,26 ||. Johniv. 36. 2Cor.ix.6. Ps. cxxv. 5. 


10. rec em ελπιδι bef οφειλει o apotpiwy (appy connected with the next var read,— 
fo throw the 1st em ελπιδι more into emphasis at the beginning, as the 2nd is at the end 
of the sentence), with D?{-gr] ΚΤ Ν ὁ rel [Syr] Chr Thdrt,/-ms,] ΤῺ] Ce (Orig-int, ] : 
o ew ελπ. ap. op. D'[-gr]: οφειλει o ep cAr. ap. οφειλει ΕἾ -gr]: in spe qui arat debet 
arare F-lat, so also D3(and lat): txt ABCPX! m 17 Orig, Dial, Eus, Cyr[-p Euthal-ms ] 
Damase, debet in spe qui arat arare vulg Aug, Pel Bede. ree (for ew ελπ. Tov 
μετέχειν) THs ελπιδος αὐτου μετεχεῖιν em ελπιδι, With D*3KLN3 rel Chr, Thdrt Damase 
Thl He: rns eAmdos αὐτου μετεχειν D![and lat] F[-gr(and G-lat)]: txt ABCPR!17 
(vulg [ F-lat]) syrr (copt) sah (zth) Orig,[-¢,-int, Euthal-ms] Eus, Cyr, Aug,. (Meyer's 
account seems to be the right one, that, it being overlooked that adoav must be supplied 
aft adowy, μετεχειν was supposed to be infin aft οφειλει, and so του altered to αὐτου; then 
the sense bettered by insg rns ελπιδος and transposing the original ex ελπιδι to the end.) 

11. ins ov bef μεγα D}(and lat). θερισωμεν CDF LP ὁ τὰ latt Thdrt [lat-ff] : 


txt ΑΒΚΝ rel Chr, Cyr, Damase ΤῊ] (ec. 


vel pedibus caleantes (see Micah iv. 13), vel 
curruum quoddam genus trahentes super 
frumenta, ex aristis eliciunt grana.” Ro- 
senmiiller. Is it for ΟΧῈΝ (generic) that 
God is taking care? We must not, as or- 
dinarily, supply μόνον, only for oxen, and 
thus rationalize the sentence: the question 
imports, ‘In giving this command, are the 
oxen, or those for whom the law was given, 
its objects?’ And to such a question there 
can be but one answer. Every duty of 
humanity has for its ultimate ground, not 
the mere welfare of the animal concerned, 
but its welfare ἔῃ that system of which MAN 
is the head: and therefore man’s welfare. 
The good done to man’s immortal spirit by 
acts of humanity and justice, infinitely out- 
weighs the mere physical comfort of a brute 
which perishes. So Philo (de victimas 
offerentibus, § 1, vol. ii. p. 251) rightly 
explains the spirit of the law: οὐ yap ὑπὲρ 
τῶν ἀλόγων ὃ νόμος, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν νοῦν 
kK. λόγον ἐχόντων' &ste οὐ τῶν θυομένων 
φροντίς ἐστιν, ἵνα μηδεμίαν ἔχοι λώβην, 
ἀλλὰ τῶν θυόντων, ἵνα περὶ μηδὲν πάθος 
κηραίνωσι. 10.] Or (the other alter- 
native being rejected) on OUR account (δι᾽ 
ἡμᾶς, emphatic—not on account of men 
generally, but as Estius, “ propter nos 
evangelii ministros :” cf. the ἡμεῖς of vv. 
11,12, with which this ἡμᾶς is inseparably 
allied) altogether (τὸ πάντως προϑθείς, 
ἵνα μὴ συγχωρήσῃ μηδ᾽ ὅτιοῦν ἀντ- 
εἰπεῖν τῷ ἀκροατῇ. Chrys. p. 183) does it 
(6 νόμος : or perhaps 6 θεός, but better the 
former, as above, τῷ θεῷ being only in- 
cidentally introduced as the confessed 
Author of the law, and 6 νόμος remaining 
the subject of the sentence) say (this)? 
(on our account) : foron our account it (viz. 
ov κημώσεις K.T.A., not, that which follows, 


q. esset γέγραπται) was written: because 
(argumentative, as the ground of ἐγράφη, --- 
not, as in some of my earlier editions, con- 
taining the purpose of ἐγράφη, expressed 
in its practical result) the plougher (not 
literal but spiritual, see below) ought to 
plough in hope, and the thresher (to 
thresh, see var. readd.) in hope of par- 
taking (of the crop). The words used in 
this sentence are evidently spiritual, and. 
not literal. They are inseparably connected 
with δ ἡμᾶς which precedes them: and 
according to the common explanation of 
them as referring toa mere maxim of agri- 
cultural life, would have no force whatever. 
But spiritually taken, all coheres. “The 
command (not to muzzle, &c.) was written 
on account of us (Christian teachers) be- 
cause we ploughers (in the γεώργιον θεοῦ, 
ch. ili. 9) ought to plough in hope,—and 
we threshers (answering to the βοῦς 
ἀλοῶν) ought to work in hope of (as the 
ox) having a share.” So Chrys. and 
Theophyl.: τουτέστιν, 6 διδάσκαλος ὀφεί- 
λει ἀροτριᾷν, καὶ κοπιᾷν ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι ἀμοιβῆς 
κ. ἀντιμισθίας. So also Meyer and De 
Wette: but by far the greater part of 
interpreters (also Stanley) take it literally ; 
understanding ἡμᾶς of mankind in general, 
and 6 ἀροτριῶν and ὁ ἀλοῶν of labourers in 
agriculture. No minute distinction must 
be sought between the ἀροτριῶν and the 
ἀλοῶν. The former is perhaps mentioned 
on account of the process answering to the 
breaking up the fallow ground of Heathen- 
ism :—the latter on account of its occur- 
rence in the precept. 11.] The ἡμεῖς 
(both times strongly emphatic:—we need 
sorely some means of marking in our Eng- 
lish Bibles, for ordinary readers, which 


words have the emphasis) is categoric, but. 


ABCD® 


KLPN @ 
beefg 
hklm 
ΠΟΙ͂ 
47 





11—14. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


545 


¢ / A 5 ~ / , ra 
12 εἰ ἄλλοι τῆς ἴ ὑμῶν 8 ἐξουσίας ὃ μετέχουσιν, οὐ μᾶλλον f posn., see 


Cor. xii. 19 
reff. and note. 


ς al . > ’ > h » »ϑ -“ > 7 7 3 \ 
ἡμεῖς ; ἀλλ οὐκ " ἐχρησάμεθα TH ἐξουσίᾳ ταύτῃ, ἀλλα τε gon. obi., 


7 . , “4 / 7 - lad ~ 
πάντα ἱ στέγομεν, ἵνα μὴ Twa 1 ἐγκοπὴν * δῶμεν τῷ εὐαγ- 
/ y 7° W1ppeloz τ Ss pee MIS. ἫΝ 0, 2 
yediw τοῦ χριστοῦ. οὐκ ἰοἴδατε ὅτι οἱ τὰ ™" ἱερὰ "9 ἐργα- 


Matt. x. 1. 
John xvii. 2, 
Rom. ix. 21, 
Sir. x. 4. 
Xvii. 2. 


h ch. vii. 21 reff. 


ζό ἃ] ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἐσθί | τῷ PO (Q) ich. xiii 
ὄμενοι [τὰ] ἐκ ἱεροῦ ἐσθίουσιν, οἱ τῷ P θυσιαστηρίῳ τἀν τι. τ. 


4 παρεδρεύοντες τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ * 


1 Ὁ 5 onli 
5 on . Sir. 
συμμερίζονται; 13. οὕτως δ only. Si 


7 bere only τ. {(-πτειν, Rom. xv. 22.) = 2 Cor. vi. 3. lch. vi. 2, ἄς. m adj., 2 Tim. 
iii, 15only. Josh. vi.7.  __ n here only. o = Jer. xxxvii. (xxx.) 9. (ἐργασία, 
1 Chron. vi. 43. ix. 13. xxviii. 13.) p ch. x. 18 reff. q here only. Proy. i. 21 


only. (evmapedpos, ch. vii. 35.) 


r here only t. 


12. ree etovoias bef ὑμων, with KL rel vulg Chr, Thdrt [Cyr, Damasc]: txt 


ABCDFPR m 17. 47 arm Chr,. 


for rav., αὐτὴ F[-gr |. 


for ov, ουχι &3. 
rec eykorny bef τινα, with D[-gr] F[-gr] KLP_rel syr 


ov κεχρήμεθα A. 


Chr, Thdrt [Cyr, Damasc]: txt ABCR 17 vulg D-lat [Euthal-ms] Tert Ambrst 


[Augatic |: om τινὰ F-lat G-lat sah arm Clem, Orig-int,. 


εκκοπηὴν D'LR ab! fg 


k o Orig[-c,; Chr-ms, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc] :* συνεκ. m. 
13. rec om τα (bef ex), with AC D?(-3-gr] KLP rel syrr arm [Chr, Thdrt Damasc] : 
ins B D}{-gr] FX 46 coptt, que de sacrario sunt vulg G-lat coptt [Augatic |. (F-lat omits 


sacrario and reads que desunt [ Aug has templo for sacr.].) 


rec προςεδρευοντες 


(see ch vii. 35), with K LN? rel Chr, Thdrt Thl He: txt ABCD F{apai5p., so Euthal- 
ms] PX! 17. 47 Eus, Damasc. [m! repeats mposedp. bef συμμερ.] 


in fact applies to Paul alone. The secon- 
dary emphasis is on ὑμῖν... ὑμῶν. It is 
one of those elaborately antithetical sen- 
tences which the great Apostle wields so 
powerfully in argument. The ἡμεῖς--- 
ἡμεῖς, being identical, stand out in so 
much the stronger relief against the triple 
antithesis, ὑμῖν, πνευματικά, ἐσπείραμεν, 
—and ὑμῶν, σαρκικά, θερίσωμεν. If 
we read the subjunctive, for the usage 
after εἰ, see Winer, edn. 6, § 41. Ὁ. 2, end; 
ch. xiv.5; 1 Thess. v.10; Κα πον, ὃ 818 
A. 1. The usage is common in Homer, Od. 
a. 204, al. fr..—doubtful in Herod. ii. 13; 
viii. 49, 118,—and hardly ever found in 
Attic writers. See Soph. Gd. Tyr. 198, 
εἴ τι νὺξ ἀφῇ, and (Ed. Col. 1442, εἴ σου 
στερηθῶ. πνευμ.. and σαρικ. (see Rom. 
xv. 27) need no explanation. The first are 
so called as belonging to the spirit of man 
(De W. and Meyer, as coming from the 
Spirit of God; but it is better to keep 
the antithesis exact and perspicuous), the 
second as serving for the nourishment of 
the flesh. 12.] ἄλλοι does not neces- 
sarily point at the false teachers; others 
may have exercised this power. ὑμῶν 
is the objective genitive: power over you, 
—see reff. The second ἀλλά is not in 
apposition with the first, but in opposition 
to the idea implied in ἐχρ. τῇ ἐξ. ταύτῃ. 
Meyer compares Hom. Il. a. 24 f., ἀλλ 
οὐκ ᾿Ατρείδῃ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι ἥνδανε θυμῷ, 
᾿Αλλὰ κακῶς ἀφίει. στέγομεν] The 
word was commonly used, as may be seen 
in Wetst., of vessels containing, holding 
without breaking, that which was put 
into them; thence of concealing or cover- 
ing, as a secret; and also of enduring or 
bearing up against. In this last sense 
Vot. II. 


Diod. Sic. ili. 34, uses it literally of ice, 
στέγοντος τοῦ κρυστάλλου διαβάσεις στρα- 
τοπέδων κ. ἁμαξῶν ἐφόδους, --- πᾶ (xi. 25, 
Wetst. but ?) of a besieged fort, οὐ μήνγε 
τὴν ὁρμὴν... ἔστεγεν . .. τὸ... τεῖχος, 
«ὦν. ἀλλὰ ὑπείκειν ἠναγκάζετο. So also 
Zksch. Sept. ec. Theb. 216, πύργον στέγειν 
εὔχεσθε πολεμίων δόρυ. These last usages 
are very near akin to this of our text,— 
We endure all things: viz. labour, pri- 
vations, hardships. The ἐγκοπαί (hin- 
drances—so Diod. Sic. i. 32, speaks of the 
Nile as being πολλάκις διὰ τὰς ἐγκοπὰς 
avakA@uevos) would arise from his being 
charged with covetousness and self-seek- 
ing, which his zndependence of them would 
entirely prevent. 13, 14.] Analogy of 
the maintenance of the Jewish priesthood 
Jrom the sacred offerings, with this right 
of the Christian teacher, as ordained by 
Christ. Meyer rightly remarks, that ot 
τὰ ἱερὰ ἐργαζόμενοι can only mean the 
priests, not including the Levites: and 
therefore that both clauses apply to the 
same persons. ἐργάζεσθαι, ἔρδειν, 
ῥέζειν, are technical words for the offer- 
ing of sacrifice. See reff. to LXX. 

ἱεροῦ here, as θυσιαστηρίου is parallel with 
it below, is probably not ‘the sacrifice,’ 
‘the holy thing, but the temple—‘ the 
holy building.’ Similarly Jos. B. J. v. 13. 
6, makes the Zealots say, δεῖ... τοὺς τῷ 
ναῷ στρατευομένους ἐκ τοῦ ναοῦ τρέφε- 
σθαι. παρεδρ.] So Jos. contra Apion. 
i. 7, speaks of the priests as τῇ θεραπείᾳ 
τοῦ θεοῦ προςεδρεύοντας. On the prac- 
tice referred to, see Num. xviii. 8 #.; Deut. 
xviii. 1 ff. No other priesthood but the 
Jewish can have been in the mind of the 
Apostle. The Jew knew of no θυσιαστῆ- 


Nw 


546 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. TX. 
sconstr. dat, Καὶ ὁ κύριος "ἡ διέταξεν τοῖς TO εὐαγγέλιον ' καταγγέλ.- 
Acts ait λουσιν, ἐκ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου " ζῆν. 15 ἐγὼ δὲ ov " κέχρημαι 
Tikevieds οὐδενὶ τούτων" οὐκ ἔγραψα δὲ ταῦτα ἵνα οὕτως γένηται 
Inf shee wéy ἐμοί *YKadov yap μοι ἡμᾶλλον ἀποθανεῖν ἢ τὸ 
nan 5 καύχημά μου **iva τὶς ὃ κενώσει. 16 ἐὰν γὰρ “ evay- 


5 reff. 
u = Matt. iv. 


/ 7 ‘A ΄ 
τ Matt. iv, γελίζωμαι, οὐκ ἔστιν μοι καύχημα: avayKn yap μοι 
1 + (1ro 


wees ee , b] Ν >’ \ > / 
petal viii. 8) ἃ ἐπίκειται" ef Oval yap μοι f εστιν EAV 7) . εὐωγγελίσωμαι. 
4 ser has a w Matt. xvii. 12. Luke xxii. 37. xxiii. 31. John xiv. 30. x = ch. vii. 1, 8,26. Jonah 


z Rom. iv. 2 reff. Prov. xvii. 6. 
c absol., Rom. xv. 20 reff. 
e Paul, here only. epp., Jude 11 
Hos. ix. 12. 


iv. 3. y Mark ix. 42. constr., Acts xx. 39. 

a arrang. of words, 2 Cor. ii. 4 reff. b Rom. iv. 14 reff. 
d Acts xxvii. 20 reff. κρατερὴ δ᾽ ἐπικείσετ᾽ ἀνάγκη, Hom. Il. ¢. 458. 
only. gospp. (but not John) and Rey. passim. f here only. 

15. rec ovderr expnoauny τουτων, with Καὶ rel Thdrt Thl (ἔς : οὐδεν τουτων ἐχρησα- 
μὴν ¢ [Chr]: ove expnoauny ovderr τ. R* 23: ovder ov κεχρημαι τ. 80: ουδενι κεχρημαι 
τ. D? L{sie (Tischdf)]: txt ABCD!3FPN! m 17 [Euthal-ms] Damase. οὐδεὶς 
B D'[and lat] 8! 17 sah Tert Ambrst-ed[and mss]: ovders μὴ A: τις F 26: wa τις ov 
un 109: wa τις C D?-3[-gr] KLPR? rel vulg(and F-lat) Chr[atie Bas,] Thdrt Damase 
Th! Ge Jer, Augfaticy. rec kevwon, With K rel Chr[aic Bas, Euthal-ms Damasc] 
Thdrt: txt ABCDFLPR® k 17. 47). 

16. evayyeArCoua: LP f k Damase: evayyedrowuailevangelizavero| DF [vulg 
Augaiic |- for καυχημα, xapis gratia DF &}(txt X-corr'!) Ambrst-ms. rec 
ovat δὲ (clumsy alteration, not seeing that yap explains avayxn), with Καὶ δ rel syrr 
wth arm Chr, Thdrt [Damasc]: txt ABCDFPN! 17 latt coptt Orig,-int,; Ath, Chr, 
Cyr, { Euthal-ms Augaic] Ambrst Jer. for 2nd εστιν, εσται (alteration, to apply 
it better to the last day) F Ambrst: est aut erit G-lat: om 119. rec ευαγγελιζω- 
μαι (from -Cwua above), with AKN rel Orig, Ath, (Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc] : 
evangelizem D-lat G-lat(2nd altern): -¢oua: LP f m [Cyr-p,]: txt BCDF Chr,: 
evangelizavero vulg(and F-lat) G-lat(1st altern) [Orig-int, Aug, predicavero evange- 


lium Ambrst]. 


ριον but one: and he certainly would not 
have proposed heathen sacrificial customs, 
even in connexion with those appointed by 
God, as a precedent for Christian usage: 
besides that the idea is inconsistent with 
οὕτως καί : see below. 14.] So also 
(i.e. in analogy with that His other com- 
mand) did the Lord (Christ; the Author 
by His Spirit of the O. T. as well as the 
New) command (viz. Matt. x. 10; Luke 
x. 7, 8) to those who are preaching the 
gospel, to live of (be maintained by. 
Themistius (Kypke) has ζῆν ἐξ epyacias) 
the gospel. Observe, that here the Apos- 
tle is establishing an analogy between the 
rights of the sacrificing priests of the law, 
and of the preachers of the gospel. Had 
those preachers been likewise sacrificing 
priests, is it possible that all allusion to 
them in such a character should have been 
here omitted? But as all such allusion zs 
omitted, we may fairly infer that no such 
character of the Christian minister was 
then known. As Bengel remarks on ver. 
13: ‘Si missa esset sacrificium, plane 
Paulus versu sequente apodosin hue ac- 
commodasset.’ 15.] οὐδενὶ τούτων is 
best explained of the different forms of 
efovota,—not, with Chrys. al., τῶν πολλῶν 
παραδειγμάτων ---πολλῶν γάρ μοι παρεχόν- 
των ἐξουσίαν, τοῦ στρατιώτου, τοῦ γε- 
ὠργοῦ; τοῦ ποιμένος, τῶν ἀποστόλων, τοῦ 


νόμου, τῶν παρ᾽ ἡμῶν εἰς ὑμᾶς γενομένων, 
τῶν παρ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰς τοὺς ἄλλους, τῶν ἱερέων, 
τοῦ προςτάγματος τοῦ χριστοῦ, οὐδενὶ τού- 
των ἐπείσθην εἰς τὸ καταλῦσαι τὸν ἐμαυτοῦ 
νόμον, καὶ λαβεῖν. Hom.xxii.p.193. True, 
that each of these examples pointed to ἃ 
form of ἐξουσία, and none of these forms 
had he made use of. See ref. on ch. vii. 21. 

ἔγραψα is the epistolary aorist—I 
wrote (write) not these things however, 
that it may be thus (viz. after the ex- 
amples which I have alleged) done to me 
(in my case, see reff.) :—for it were good 
(reff.) for me rather to die (or, better 
Jor me to die, see ref. Mark) than that 
any one should make void (the remarkable 
reading of the great MSs. appears to have 
arisen from the unnatural look of the 
future with ἵνα. It can only be explained 
by supposing an aposiopesis ; the Apostle 
breaking off at #, and exclaiming with 
fervour, τὸ καύχημά μου οὐδεὶς κενώσει) 
my (matter of) boasting. To understand 
ἀποθανεῖν as Chrys., Theophyl., c., Es- 
tius, Billroth, al., ἀποθ. λιμῷ, seems quite 
unnecessary. Further on, Chrys. himself 
expresses the true sense: οὕτω καὶ ζωῆς 
αὐτῷ γλυκύτερον hy τὸ γινόμενον :—and 





ABCDF 
KLPx 
abcef 
ghkIlm 
π 17. 
47 


Calvin, “tantum Evangelii promovendi . 


facultatem nimirum proprie vite prse- 
ferebat.” 16 ff.] The reason why 
he made so much of this materies glori- 


dtva... 
ABCDF 
KLPR 
abcde 
fghkl 
nmno 
17. 47 


15—19. 


17 ? \ g Gy aX A / h θὲ ” = ’ 
εὐ yap “exw τοῦτο “πράσσω, ™ μισθὸν. ἔχω" ᾿ εἰ 

Η - / / 

‘axwv, * οἰκονομίαν | πεπίστευμαι. 

ὁ "μισθός, ἵνα ° εὐαγγελιζόμενος ™ ἀδάπανον "θήσω τὸ 
» , ,’ \ \ A / 

εὐαγγέλιον, εἰς TO μὴ “καταχρήσασθαι τῇ ἐξουσίᾳ μου 

ΓΟ > / εἰ / \ “᾿ ’ 
ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ ; 19 Ρ ἐλεύθερος γὰρ wv ἐκ πάντων, 


9. Col. i. 25... 1 Tim. i. 4 only. L.P. 
m here only +. 

KXxli. 12. Wisd. x. 21. 
ΡΥ. ἐκ, here only. w. απο, Rom. vii. 3. 


18. rec (for 156 wov) μοι, with DFLPN? 
Augtalicy: txt A B(Tischdf 
coptt [Chr, Euthal-ms] Cyr, Ambrst Jer, 
erit mihi D'F. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTYS A. 


Isa. xxii. 19, 21 only. 
ἢ constr., Matt. xxii. 44 , (from Ps. cix. 1). 


rel syr Chr[atic Euthal-ms? 
LN. T. Vat(expr), not N. T. 


547 


\ eee 
δὲ g Rom. viii. 20 
only. Exod. 
xxi. 13 only. 


΄ δ᾽ ΄ 
18 τις ουὖυν μου ἐστιν h = Matt. v. 12, 


i here only. 
Job xiy. 17 
only. 

k Luke xvi: 2, 
3,4. Eph. 

i. 10. iii. 2, 
1 = Rom. iii. 2 reff. 

(from Gen. xvii. 5). Gen. 

Ep. Jer. 28 only. 3 Mace. vy. 22. 


Rom. iv. 17 
oO ch, vii. 31 only f. 


Damasc] Thdrt 
edd 7, 8]) ΟΚΝῚ n 17 vulg Syr 


Pel Bede.—eorai[eori D3-gr(and E)] μοι 
rec aft To ευαγγελιον ins του χριστοῦ (see ver 12), with D?3PFKLP 


rel syrr Thdrt Jer: om ABCD!N a 17 vulg(not F-lat) D-lat coptt xth arm Chr, 


Cyr, [Euthal-ms] Ambrst Augratic 1 Pel Bede. 


ev(but marked for erasure) 
(not G). at end add μου D!{-gr]. 


andi: viz. that his mission itself gave 
him no advantage this way, being an office 
entrusted to him, and for which he was 
solemnly accountable: but in this thing 
only had he an advantage so as to be able 
to boast of it, that he preached the gospel 
without charge. οὐαὶ yap—explains 
the ἀνάγκη. On οὐαί ἐστιν, see ref. Hos. 
17.) For (illustration and confirma- 
tion of οὐαὶ yap κ.τ.λ. above) if lam doing 
this (preaching) of mine own accord (asa 
voluntary undertaking, which in Paul’s case 
was not so, as Chrys., τὸ ἑκὼν x. ἄκων ἐπὶ 
τοῦ ἐγκεχειρίσθαι καὶ μὴ ἐγκεχειρίσθαι 
λαμβάνων: not, as Εἰ. V., al, willingly, 
for this was so), I have a reward (i. e. if 
of mine own will I took up the ministry, 
it might be conceivable that a μισθός 
might be due to me. That this was not 
the case, and never could be, is evident, and 
the μισθός therefore only hypothetical) : 
but if involuntarily (which was the case, 
see Acts ix. 15; xxii. 14; xxvi. 16), with 
8. STEWARDSHIP (oix. emphatic) have I 
been entrusted (and therefore from the 
nature of things, in this respect I have 
no μισθός for merely doing what is my’ 
bounden duty, see Luke xvii. 710: but 
an ovat, if I fail in it. Chrys. observes 
well: οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν, εἰ δὲ ἄκων, οὐκ ἔχω 
μισθόν, ἀλλ᾽ οἷκ. πεπίστ. δεικνὺς ὅτι καὶ 
οὕτως ἔχει μισθόν, ἀλλὰ τοιοῦτον, οἷον ὃ τὸ 
ἐπιταχθὲν ἐξανύσας, οὐχ οἷον ἐκεῖνος ὃ ἐκ 
τῶν ἑαυτοῦ φιλοτιμησάμενος κ. ὑπερβὰς τὸ 
ἐπίταγμα. p. 194). The above interpre- 
tation, which is in the main that of Chrys., 
Theophyl., Eeum. (altern.) al., Meyer, and 
De Wette, is the only one which seems to 
me to satisfy, easily and grammatically, all 
the requirements of the sentence, and at 
the same time to suit the logical structure 
of the context. The other Commentators 
80 tn omnia alia, and adopt various forced 
and arbitrary constructions of the verse. 
18.] Ordinarily, and even by De 


τη εξ. δὲ! : τὴν εξουσιαν DIFP, 


κατάχρασθαι A 17 [ Orig-c, ]. 
for 2nd μου, μοι F[-gr] 


Wette, thusarranged and rendered: ‘ What 
then is my reward? (It is), that in 
preaching Imake the gospel to be without 
cost, that I use not my power in the 
gospel. But this, though perhaps philo- 
logically allowable (against Meyer,—see 
John xvii. 3,—aitn ἐστὶν ἣ αἰώνιος ζωή, 
va χινιώσικωσιε «τειν also John xv. 8; 
1 Johniv.17 (?)), is not true. His making 
the gospel to be without cost, was not his 
μισθός, but his καύχημα only: and these 
two are not identical. The καύχημα was 
present: the μισθός, future. Meyer’s 
rendering is equally at fault. He would 
make tis οὖν μού ἐστιν 6 μισθός; a question 
implying a negative answer—‘ What then 
is my reward? None: in order that I 
preach gratuitously, &c. But thus he 
severs otf (see below) the whole following 
context, vv. 19—23: and as it seems to 
me, stultifies the καύχημα, by robbing it 
altogether of the coming μισθός. I am 
persuaded that the following is the true 
rendering: What then is my reward (in 
prospect) that I (ἵνα, like ὅπως in classical 
Greek, with a fut. indic., points to the 
actual realization of the purpose, with 
more precision than when followed by the 
subjunctive. So Xen. Cyr. ii. 4. 31, Κῦρος, 
ὦ ᾿Αρμένιε, κελεύει of-w ποιεῖν σε, ὅπως 
ὡς τάχιστα ἔχων οἴσεις καὶ τὸν δασμὸν καὶ 
τὸ oTpaétevua,—Kiihner, Gramm. ii. 490, 
where see more examples) while preach- 
ing, render the gospel without cost (i.e. 
what reward have I in prospect that in- 
duces me to preach gratuitously) in order 
not to use (as carrying out my design not 
to use) [to the full] (katayp. see ref. 
and note: not, to abuse, as E. V.) my 
power in the gospel (= τῇ ἐξουσ. μου τῇ 
ἐν τῷ εὐαγγ., as often; ef. τοῖς κυρίοις. 
κατὰ σάρκα, Eph, vi. ὅ ; οἱ νεκροὶ ἐν χριστῷ, 
1 Thess. iv. 16, al. fr.) ? 19 ἢ. He 
now proceeds to answer the question, 
‘ What prospect of reward could induce 


N w 2 


548 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. rx. 
lal 4 “4 \ / , 
qgactsvi.e πᾶσιν ἐμαυτὸν ἃ ἐδούλωσα, Wa * τοὺς " πλείονας δ κερδήσω" 
reff. 20 \ 9 , A ᾽ ͵ - ᾽ a δ ᾽ 
εἰζακο νὴ. 48, 20 καὶ ἐγενόμην τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις ὡς ᾿Ιουδαῖος, ἵνα, ‘lov- 
sing.) Acts Y nt ᾽ 
ab Re Star , a ¢€ \ , e e \ ΄ \ 
xx 2 = Salous ὅ κερδήσω' τοῖς ‘UTO νομὸν ws ‘vTrO νόμον,. μὴ 
y. 6 al. Ρ \ ΄ \ \ , ᾿ 
Exod. xxiii. ὦν αὐτὸς "ὑπὸ νόμον, iva τοὺς ‘uo νόμον ὃ κερδήσω' 
2 -vat. ἄς. 
᾿ ς a ᾽ ΄ e / \ XN ” “ 
_ (om art. AB.) 21 τοῖς ἃ ἀνόμοις ὡς ἃ ἄνομος, μὴ ὧν ἃ ἄνομος θεοῦ 
iii. 15. ' ey aa , ‘ > 
τ θα, ἀλλ᾽ * ἔννομος χριστοῦ, ἵνα “ κερδάνω τοὺς “ ἀνόμους. 
Spee ie cy 99 
al. fr.t. Oo ~~ 


’ ; , cal w.2 θ au wD θ / ter \ w2 θ a 
ΠΑΡ ἐγενομὴν τοῖς “ ἀσῦθενεσιν “ ἀσθενης, wa τοὺς “ ἄσθενεις 
xxii. 3 Symm. 
-d0s, Phil. i. 21.) t Rom. vi. 14,15. Gal. iv. 4, 5, 21. 
only. Wisd. xvii. 2. {-μως, Rom. ii. 12.) v = here (Acts xix. 39) only +. 


u=here4times. Acts ii. 23 
w = Rom. νυ. 6. 


19. ins ev bef πασιν D!(and lat). 
20. om καὶ D}(and lat) τὰ coptt. om Ist ws F-gr 39. 67? (Clem) Orig, -int, ] 
Tert Sedul. (ws quasi G-marg.) [F-gr reads ἰουδαιος ιουδαιοις, G! tovdarors(-corr -os) 
ιουδαιοις, F-lat judeis jude@is. | rec OM μη wy avTos ὑπὸ νόμον (i. 6. from νομὸν to νομον, 
by oversight of copyist), with D3[-gr] K rel Syr copt eth Orig, Thdrt [Chraiie (Cyr) 
ΤῊ] ec (Mar-mere, (quoting Nest)) |: ins ABCD! FPR 17 latt syr sah goth arm Chr -txt, | 
Cyr, Damase Orig-int,[not ed Delarue }].—om from κερδησω to κερδησω L [ Kuthal-ms}. 
21. rec θεω and xpictw (confusion of vowels and not observing the constr : see note), 
with D3/-gr] KL rel sah [arm Cyr-p,] Thdrt: txt ABCD!IFPX ἃ m 17 latt syr copt 
{ goth] Orig,[-c,] Did, Chr, Cyr[-p. Euthal-ms] Isid, Damase Ath{-int, Ambrst-txt Aug, 
Mar-merc(quoting Nest) }. rec Kepdyow (from ver 20), with DK LN rel Orig,| -c, } 
Did, Chr, Thdrt [Cyr-p, Euthal-ms 1514; Damasc]: txt ABCFPR? [im] 17 (κερδανωμεν 
Clem,), and m Orig,[-c] in next verse.—rous avouous bef κερδ. D. rec om τοὺς 
(probably to suit ιουδαιους above), with FKLN$ rel Chr Thdrt [Euthal-ms_Isid 
Damase}: ins ABCDPN! 17 Orig, Did. 
22. att eyevouny ins δε και autem et F. 


ασθενουσιν DF, rec aft ασθενε- 


ABCDF 
KLPN 
abcde 
fghk 
mno 
17. 47 


σιν ins ws (to tally with the three former), with C D[-gr] FK LP83 rel [syrr coptt goth 


zeth arm] Orig,[-c] Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damasc] Thl: om ABR* vulg(not F-lat} 
D-lat Orig, (retaining the three former) Orig-int, Cypr, Ambr;aicj Ambrst Aug Bede. 


me to do this?’ [Yea (literally | 
For, q. ἃ. the reward must have been great 
and glorious in prospect) being free from 
(the power of) all men, I enslaved myself 
(when I made this determination: and have 
continued to do so) to all, that I might 
gain (not τοὺς πάντας, which he could not 
exactly say, but) the largest number (of 
any : that hereatter Paul’s converts might 
be found to be of πλείονες : see below on 
ver. 24). Beugel bas remarked on κερ- 
δήσω, ‘ congruit hoc verbum cum conside- 
ratione mercedis: but ‘ congruit’ is not 
enough: it is actually THE ANSWER to 
the question τίς μού ἐστιν ὃ μισθός; This 
‘lucrifecisse’ the greater number is dis- 
tinctly referred to by him elsewhere, as his 
reward in the day of the Lord: tis yap 
ἡμῶν ἐλπὶς ἢ χαρὰ ἢ στέφανος καυχή- 
σεως; ἢ οὐχὶ καὶ ὑμεῖς, ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ 
κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῇ αὐτοῦ παρου- 
cia; ὑμεῖς γάρ ἐστε ἡ δόξα ἡμῶν καὶ ἡ 
χαρά. 1 ‘Thess. ii. 19, 20. And it is for 
this reason that Wa... . κερδ. is three 
times repeated : and, as we shall presently 
see, that the similitude at the end of the 
chapter is chosen. 20—22.| Spe- 
cializes the foregoing assertion πᾶσιν ἐμ. 
ἐδυύλωσα, by enumerating various parties 
to whose weaknesses he had conformed 
himself, in order to gain them. 

20. τοῖς “Ipvd. ὡς “Iovd.| See examples, 


Acts xvi. 3; xxi. 26. οὐκ εἶπεν, Ἰουδαῖος, 
ἀλλ᾽ ὡς Ιουδαῖος, ἵνα δείξῃ ὅτι οἰκονομία Td 
πρᾶγμα ἦν, Theophyl. after Chrys. The 
Jews here are not Jewish converts, who 
would be already won in the sense of this 
passage. τοῖς ὑπὸ vopov....] These 
again are not Jewish converts (see above) ; 
nor proselytes, who would not be thus dis- 
tinguished from other Jews, but are much 
the same as ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, only to the number 
of these the Apostle did not belong, not 
being himself (αὐτός contrasts with ὡς 
above) under the law, whereas he was 
nationally a Jew. 21. τοῖς ἀνόμοις ὡς 
ἄν. The ἄνομοι are the Heathen: hardly, 
with Chrys., such as Cornelius, fearing God 
but not under the law. Paul became as a 
Heathen to the Heathen, e.g., when he 
discoursed at Athens (Acts xvii.) in their 
own manner, and with arguments drawn 
from their own poets. μὴ ὧν «.7.A. | 
not being (being conscious of not being, 
remembering well in the midst of my 
ἀνομία that I was not. This is implied by 
μή, which is subjective, giving the convic- 


tion of the subject, not merely the objective - 


Jact, as οὐκ ὥν would do) an outlaw from 
God (θεοῦ and χριστοῦ are genitives of de- 
pendence, as after κατήκοος, ἔνοχος, &e.) 
but a subject-of-the-law of Christ (the 
words seem inserted rather to put before 
the reader the true position of a Christian 


2U—24 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@OIOT®S A. 


919 


΄ A wn 7 7 , / 
Sxepdnow. * τοῖς *Taow γέγονα πάντα, ἵνα " πάντως x Rom. xi. 32 


\ 2 “ 
τινᾶς ὅ σώσω. 
MN > aA / 
Ἁσυγκοίνωνος αὑτοῦ γένωμαι. 


ἐν “ σταδίῳ τρέχοντες πάντες μὲν τρέχουσιν, εἷς δὲ 
\ a ¢ , 
λαμβάνει τὸ ἃ βραβεῖον ; οὕτως “ τρέχετε, iva 


Ὁ ch. vi. 2. ver. 13 al. 
ouly. Polyb. xviii. 29. 4 al. 


f — Rom. ix. 30. Phil. iii. 12. Exod. xv. 9. 


for γέγονα, eyevounv F Clem,. 


24 ὃ οὐκ ὃ οἴδατε 


ς — here {Luke xxiv. 13. John vi. 19. xi. 18. 
d Phil. iii. 14 only Τ. 


Q cf ‘ “Ὁ / “ ἘΣ 
23 πάντα δὲ ποιῶ διὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, ἵνα Υ λεῖα αχὶ. 33 


ez = Rom. mM, 


“ 
OTL Ob 


Rev. 1.9 
only. 

(-νεῖν, Eph. 
Vv. 18} 

Rev. xiv. 20. xxi. 16) 
e = Rom. ix. 16 reff. 


f καταλά- 


rec ins ta bef παντα (prob to suit τοις πασιν : but 


often when πανταὰ occurs, ta is insd bef it in some mss), with D?3KLP rel Orig,[-c, | 
Mae, Chr, Thdrt [Cyr-p, Damasc]: txt ABCD!FX Clem, Orig, Naz, Chr, Cyr| -jer, 


Euthal-ms]. 


for mavtTws Tivas, παντας (conformation to the foregoing clauses) DI 


latt lat-ff, τους παντας 17 Clem, Orig,(but wayta, [Mac,, παντας ἡ τινας Orig-c, ]). 
23. rec (for mayta) rovro, with KL rel syrr goth Thdrt Damasc Thl Cc: txt 


ABCDFPX τὰ 17 latt coptt ath arm Orig 


Ambrst Pel. 


iL-¢} Naz, Chr,(schol on 7) [Euthal-ms] 


24. aft βραβειον ins eyw Se Acyw υμιν ego autem dico vobis F. 


with regard to God’s law revealed by Christ, 
than merely with an apologetic view to 
keep his own character from suffering by 
the imputation of ἀνομία) that I might 
gain those who had no law. κερδανῶ 
(here only in N.T.) and κερδήσω are both 
found in the classics: see Matthiz, ὃ 239, 
and Lobeck on Phrynichus, p. 740. 22. | 
The ἀσθενεῖς here can hardly be the weak 
Christians of ch. villi. and Rom. xiy., who 
were already won, but as in ref., those 
who had not strength to believe and re- 
ceive the Gospel. This sentence then does 
not bring out a new form of condescen- 
sion, but recapitulates the preceding two 
classes, τοῖς ὑπὸ νόμον... .. τοῖς ἀνόμοις. 

τοῖς πᾶσιν. .. .] This sums up 
the above, and others not enumerated, in 
one general rule,—and the various occa- 
sions of his practising the condescension 
(avrists) in one general result (perfect). 
To all men I am become all things (i. e. 
to each according to his situation and pre- 
judices) that by all means (‘omnino:’ or 
perhaps as Meyer, in all ways: but I pre- 
fer the other) I may save some (τινάς 
is emphatic: some, out of each class in 
the πάντες. It is said, as is the following 
verse, in extreme humility, and distrust of 
even an Apostle’s confidence, to shew them 
the immense importance of the μισθός for 
which he thus denied and submitted him- 
self). 23.| But (q.d. ‘not only this 
of which I have spoken, but αἰ} all things 
I do on account of the gospel, that I may 
be a fellow-partaker (with others) of it 
(of the blessings promised in the gospel 
to be brought by the Lord at His coming). 

24 ff. | ‘This is my aim in all I do: 
but inasmuch as many run in a race, many 
reach the goal, but one only receives the 
prize,—I as an Apostle run my course, 
and you must so run yours, as each to 
Jabour not to be rejected at last, but to 
gain the glorious and incorruptible prize,’ 


This, as compared with the former con- 
text, seems to be the sense and connexion 
of the passage. He was anxious, as an 
Apostle, to labour more abundantly, more 
effectually than they all: and hence his 
condescension (συγκατάβασι5) to all men, 
and self-denial: accompanied with which 
was a humble self-distrust as to the great 
matter itself of his personal salvation, 
and an eager anxiety to secure it. These 
he proposes for their example likewise. 
24.| The allusion is primarily no 
doubt to the Isthmian games [‘ celebrated 
under the shadow of the huge Corinthian 
citadel’ (Stanley)]; but this must not be 
pressed too closely: the foot-race was far 
too common an element in athletic con- 
tests, for any accurate knowledge of its 
predominance in some and its insigni- 
ficance in others of the Grecian games to 
be here supposed. Still less must it be 
imagined that those games were to be 
celebrated in the year of the Epistle being 
written. The most that can with cer- 
tainty be said, is that he alludes to a 
contest which, from the neighbourhood of 
the Isthmian games, was well known to 
his readers. See Stanley’s note: who, in 
following out illustrations of this kind, 
writes with a vivid graphic power pecu- 
liarly his own. βραβεῖον] Wetst. 
quotes from the Schol. on Pindar, Olymp. 
1, λέγεται δὲ τὸ διδόμενον. γέρας τῷ 
νικήσαντι ἀθλητῇ ἀπὸ μὲν τῶν διδόντων 
αὐτὸ βραβευτῶν βραβεῖον, ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν 
ἀθλούντων ἄθλον, and from the Etymol., 
βραβεῖον λέγεται 6 παρὰ τῶν BpaBevTav 
διδόμενος στέφανος τῷ νικῶντι. 
οὕτως τρ. Thus (after this manner—viz. 
as they who run all, each endeavouring to 
be the one who shall receive the prize :— 
not, as the one who receives it (Meyer, De 
Wette),—for the others strive as earnestly 
as he: still less must we take ἵνα κατα- 
λάβητε for ws καταλαβεῖν, which is barely 


550 


pibuke ἘΠῚ 24. Ayre. 


John xviii. 
36. _Col. i. ἐκεῖνοι 


1 Tim. uA ‘10 
ὙΌΣ. vi, 
2 Tim. 15 5 
only +. Sir. 
iv. 28 al. 
Dan. vi. 14 Theod. 
Rom. i. 23 (reff.). 
iii. 15 reff. 
Rep. Lac. iv. 6. 
v. 11, 12. 


δὲ 1 ἄφθαρτον. 


m Luke xx. 25. 
o here only + 


= 


r Acts νυ. 40 reff. 


25. om ουν Καὶ Καὶ 6. 119 arm Clem, Iren{-int, ] : 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


me 
οἀδήλως, "οὕτως Ῥπυκτεύω " ὡς οὐκ 
h constr., Acts xx. 33 reff. 
Heb. xiii. 13 (James 11, 24 y. r.) only. 


(-Aos, ch. xiv. 8. 
q Acts xxii. 23. ch. xiv. 9. Eph. ii. 


IX. 


25 nr δὲ e g 3 h , ees , 

25 πᾶς δὲ ὁ 8 ἀγωνιζόμενος ὃ πάντα | ἐγκρατεύεται" 
9 Ν , / Lal 

kK μὲν οὖν ἵνα ᾿ φθαρτὸν στέφανον λάβωσιν, ἡμεῖς 

οθ > \ ΠῚ / n ec ’ n e > 

26 ἐγὼ "πὶ τοίνυν " οὕτως τρέχω "WS οὐκ 


ΜᾺ / 
4 ἀέρα * δέρων" 
i ch. vii. 9 (reff.) only + k ch. vi. 4 reff. 
Isa. ii. "10. v.13. n ch, 


p here only+. Xen. 


ees 1 Tim. vi. 17.) 
Rey, ix. 2. xvi. 17 only. Wisd. 


1 Thess. iv. 7. 


insd in svyr with an asterisk. 


(a at the beginning of αφθαρτον is written over the line by δ) 


allowable, and here would not suit the 
sense; the οὕτως being particularized 
presently by one point of the athletes’ 
preparation being specially alleged for 
their imitation) run (not καὶ ὑμεῖς τρέχετε, 
because the evident analogy between the 
race and the Christian conflict is taken 
for granted. If, as Dr. Peile imagines, a 
contrast had been intended, between the 
stadium where one only can receive the 
prize, and the Christian race where all 
may, it must have stood οὕτως δὲ ὑμεῖς 
τρέχετε, ὡς Kal (πάντας ἢ) καταλαβεῖν. 
But such contrast would destroy the 
sense), in order that ye may fully obtain 
(the prize of your calling, see Phil. ili. 14. 
On λαμβάνω and καταλαμβάνω see note, 
ch. vii. 31). 25.] The point in the 
οὕτως, the conduct of the athletes in 
regard of temperance, which he wishes to 
bring into especial prominence for their 
imitation :—as concerning the matter in 
hand,—his own abstinence from receiving 
the world’s pelf, in order to save himself 
and them that heard him. The δέ 
specifies, referring back to οὕτως. The 
emphasis is on πᾶς, thus shewing οὕτως 
to refer to the πάντες who τρέχουσιν. 

ἀγωνιζόμενος is more general than τρέχων, 
—q. ἃ. ‘ Every one who engages, not only 
in the race, but in any athletic contest, 
and thus strengthening the inference. The 
art. (6 ἄγων.) brings out the man as an 
enlisted and professed ἀγωνιζόμενος, and 
regards him in that capacity. Had it 
been πᾶς δὲ ἀγωνιζ., the sense would have 
been, ‘ Now every one, while contending,’ 
&c., making the discipline to be merely 
accidental to his contending —which would 
not suit the spiritual antitype, where we 
are enlisted for life. Examples of the 
practice of abstinence in athletes may be 
seen in Wetst. in loc. I will give but two 
(1) Hor. de Arte Poet. 412: “Qui studet 
optatam cursu contingere metam, Multa 
tulit fecitque puer, sudavit et alsit: Ab- 
stinuit venere et vino.” (2) Epict. Ὁ: 86: 
θέλεις OAT LA νικῆσαι; κἀγὼ νὴ τοὺς 
θεούς, κομψὸν γάρ ἐστιν. ἀλλὰ σκόπει καὶ 
τὰ καθηγούμενα καὶ τὰ ἀκόλουθα. καὶ οὕτως 
ἅπτου τῶν ἔργων. δεῖ σ᾽ εὐτακτεῖν, ἀναγ- 
κοτροφεῖν, ἀπέχεσθαι πεμμάτων, γυμνά- 


ζεσθαι πρὸς ἀνάγκην ἐν ὥρᾳ τεταγμένῃ, ἐν 
καύματι, ἐν ψύχει, μὴ ψυχρὸν πίνειν, μὴ 
οἶνον" ws ἔτυχεν ἁπλῶς, ὡς ἰατρῷ παρα- 
δεδωκέναι σαυτὸν τῷ ἐπιστάτῃ, εἶτα εἰς τὸν 
ἀγῶνα παρέρχεσθαι. ἐκεῖνοι ] 501]. 
ἐγκρατεύονται. ἐν οὖν, ‘immo 
vero ’ (reff.). The Schol. on Pind. 
Isthm. ὑπόθεσις, cited by Meyer, says: 
στέφυς δέ ἐστι τοῦ ἀγῶνος πίτυς, τὸ δὲ 
ἀνέκαθεν σέλινα καὶ αὐτοῦ ἦν ὁ στέφανος. 

ἡμεῖς δέ, scil. ἐγκρατευόμεθα ἵνα 
λάβωμεν στέφανον. He takes for granted 
the Christian’s temperance in all things, as 
his normal state. 26.] I then (ἐγώ 
emphatic—recalls the attention from the 
incidental exhortation, and reminiscence of 
the Christian state, to the main subject, 
his own abstinence from receiving, and its 
grounds. τοίνυν, as distinguished from 
other particles which imply restriction of 
what has been generally said to some par- 
ticular object, indicates the dropping of 
minute or collateral points, and return- 
ing to the great necessary features of the 
subject,—and this, as introducing some 
short and pithy determination or conclu- 
sion: see Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 348. 
E. g., vi. 3. 17, τούτων μὲν 
τοίνυν ἅλις εἴη, ἃ δὲ καιρὸς ἡμῖν εἰδέναι, 
ταῦτα, ἔφη, διηγοῦ) 80 run as (οὕτως---ὡς, 
see reff.) not uncertainly (reff.: cf. also 
Polyb. ili. 54. 5, τῆς χιόνος ἄδηλον ποιού- 
ons ἑκάστοις Thy erlBaow:—‘uncertainly,” 
i. e. without any sure grounds of con- 
tending or any fixed object for which to 
contend; both these are included, Chry- 
sostom rightly brings it into subordination 
to the main subject, the participation with 
idolaters :—ri δέ ἐστιν, οὐκ ἀδήλως ; πρὸς 
σκοπόν τινα βλέπων, φησίν, οὐκ εἰκῆ καὶ 
μάτην, καθάπερ ὑμεῖς, τί γὰρ ὑμῖν γίνεται 
πλέον amv τοῦ εἰς εἰδωλεῖα eistevat, καὶ 
τὴν τελειότητα δῆθεν ἐκείνην ἐπιδείκνυσθαι; 
οὐδέν. ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἐγὼ τοιοῦτος, ἀλλὰ πάντα 
ἅπερ ποιῶ, ὑπὲρ τῆς τῶν πλησίον σωτηρίας 
ποιῶ. κἂν τελειότητα ἐπιδείξωμαι, δι᾽ αὐ- 
τούς: κἂν συγκατάβασιν, δι᾽ αὐτούς: κἂν 
ὑπερβῶ Πέτρον ἐν τῷ μὴ λαμβάνειν, ἵνα 
μὴ σκανδαλισθῶσι' κἂν καταβῶ πλέον πάν- 
των, περιτεμνόμενος καὶ ξυρώμενος, ἵνα μὴ 
ὑποσκελισθῶσι. Hom. xxiii. p. 201); 5850 
fight I, as not striking the air (and not 





ABCDF 
KLPx 
abcde 
fghkl 
mno 
17, 47 


25—27. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOT®S A. ney 
27 ἀλλ᾽ "ὑπωπιάζξω μου TO σῶμα καὶ "δουλαγωγῶ, ΩΝ 
"μή ἅπως ἄλλοις κηρύξας αὐτὸς " ἀδόκιμος γένωμαι. (πίον, 


30.) there only +. Gen. xliii. 18 Symm. (Fischer, but not in Montf or Bahrdt. [Field believes 
it to be from a scholium ].) u ch. vili. 9 (Rom. xi. 21] al8. P. (exc. Acts xxvii. 29 v. r.) 
v Rom. i. 28 reff. 


27. αλλα Bm. uromie(w 1)ϑ(υπωπ-} 6 11 m)(Treg [and Tischdf: m Ser]) 46. 
113-marg Clem, Eus, Naz, Chr-ms, Thdrt,- ποπιαζω FKLP a bl ο f g? no Ephr, 
Naz, Bas-2-mss, Chr-ms Cyr, [Euthal-ms] Damasc;. (castigo vulg(and F-lat) G-lat(1st 
altern) Ambr[aiic Ambrst] Aug ; devidum facto D-lat G-lat(2nd altern) [spec ] Iren-int, 


Paulin,.) στομα F-gr. 


my adversary). The allusion is not to a 
σκιαμαχία or rehearsal of a fight with an 
imaginary adversary, as Chrys. (ἔχω yap 
ὃν πλήξω), Theophyl. al. m., but to a fight 
with a real adversary (viz. here, the body) 
in which the boxer vainly hits into the 
air, instead of striking his antagonist. So 
Kntellus in the pugilistic combat, Ain. v. 
446, ‘vires in ventum effudit,’ when Dares 
‘ictum venientem a vertice velox Previdit, 
celerique elapsus corpore cessit.? See ex- 
amples both of what is really meant, and of 
the σκιαμαχία, in Wetst. Obs., in both 
places ov« is used and not μή, as importing 
the matter of fact, and joined closely with 
the adverb in one case and the verb in the 
other. 27.] But I bruise my body 
(ὑπωπιάζω, lit. to strike heavily in the 
face so as to render black and blue,—‘bz- 
ώπια,--τὰ ὑπὸ τοὺς ὦπας τῶν πληγῶν 
ἴχνη, ut ait Pollux: sed latius dici sic 
ccepere ἀφ᾽ oiasdnmototy πληγῆς τραύματα, 
ut ait Scholiastes ad Aristoph. Acharn., 
Cicero Tusc. 2, ‘ Pugiles cestibus con- 
tusi,’ i. 6. ὑπωπιαζόμενοι." Grot. The 
body is the adversary, considered as the 
seat of the temptations of Satan, and espe- 
cially of that self-indulgence which led the 
Corinthians to forget their Christian com- 
bat, and sit at meat in the idol’s temple. 
The abuse of this expression to favour the 
absurd practice of the Flagellants, or to 
support ascetic views at all, need hardly be 
pointed out to the rational, much less to 
the Christian student. It is not even of 
fasting or prayer that he is here speaking, 
but as the context, vv. 19—23, shews, of 
breaking down the pride and obstinacy and 
self-seeking of the natural man by laying 
himself entirely out for his great work — 
the salvation of the greatest number: and 
that, denying himself “solatium” from 
without: “ My hands have been worn away 
(cf. χεῖρες αὗται, Acts xx. 34) with the 
black tent-cloths, my frame has been bowed 
down with this servile labour (cf. ἐλεύθερος 

. ἐδούλωσα, ver. 19). Stanley) and 
enslave it (‘etiam δουλαγωγεῖν a pyctis 
desumptum est; nam qui vicerat, victum 
(vinctum ?) trahebat adversarium quasi 
servum.’ Grot. But this seems to want 
confirmation. I can find no account of 
such a practice in any of the ordinary 


[Steph δουλαγαγω (not C). |} 


sources of information. Certainly Dares 
is not made the slave of Entellus in Aun. 
v.: and Virgil is generally accurate in such 
matters. I had rather give a more general 
meaning: that viz. of the necessary sub- 
jection, for the time, of the worsted to 
the prevailing combatant), lest perchance 
having proclaimed (κηρ. absolute [ answer- 
ing to our use of preach]: as in Asch. 
Eum. 566, κήρυσσε, κῆρυξ, καὶ στρατὸν 
κατειργάθου (Peile). The subject of the 
proclamation might be the laws of the 
combat, or the names of the victors (An. 
v. 245), each by one in the capacity of 
herald: probably here the former only, as 
answering to the preaching of the Apostles, 
The nature of the case shews, that the 
Christian herald differs from the agonistic 
herald, in being himself ὦ combatant as 
well, which the other was not: and that 
this is so, is no objection to thus under- 
standing κηρύξας. “This introduces in- 
deed a new complication into the meta- 
phor: but it is rendered less violent by the 
fact, that. . . . sometimes the victor in the 
games was also selected as the herald to 
announce his success. So it was a few 
years after the date of this Epistle, in the 
case of Nero. Suet. Nero, c. 24.” Stan- 
ley) to others, I myself may prove re- 
jected (from the prize : not, as some Com- 
mentators, from the contest altogether, 
for he was already in zt). An examination 
of the victorious combatants took place 
after the contest, and if it could be proved 
that they had contended unlawfully, or 
unfairly, they were deprived of the prize 
and driven with disgrace from the games. 
Such a person was called ἐκκεκριμένος, 
and ἀποδεδοκιμασμένος, see Philo de Che- 
rub., ὃ 22, vol. i. p. 152. So the Apostle, 
if he bad proclaimed the laws of the 
combat to others, and not observed them 
himself, however successful he might ap- 
parently be, would be personally rejected 
as ἀδόκιμος in the great day. And this 
he says with a view to shew them the 
necessity of more self-denial, and less 
going to the extreme limit of their 
Christian liberty; as Chrys. εἰ yap ἐμοὶ 
τὸ κηρῦξαι, τὸ διδάξαι, τὸ μυρίους mpos- 
αγαγεῖν οὐκ ἀρκεῖ εἰς σωτηρίαν, εἰ μὴ καὶ 
τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμαυτὸν παρασχοίμην ἄληπτα, 


552 ΠΡῸΣ KOPIN@OIOTS A. ἊΣ 


X. τυροῦ θέλω γὰρ ὑμᾶς * ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, ὅτι οἱ 


w Rom. xi. 25 
reff. 


x Acts v.30 X qrarépes * ἡμῶν πάντες Υ ὑπὸ THY νεφέλην Y ἦσαν καὶ πάν- .. μων 
"Rete iv, 13 τες 28a τῆς θαλάσσης * διῆλθον, 2 καὶ πάντες * εἰς τὸν ABCDF 

δαὶ ἣν a. Μωυσῆν 5 ἐβαπτίσαντο ἐν τῇ νεφέλῃ καὶ ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ, seam 
er: Ἔ a 3 καὶ πάντες TO αὐτὸ ἢ βρῶμα ° πνευματικὸν ἔφαγον, * Kat ες ; πὰ 
a Acts viii 


b Rom. xiv. 15 reff. Rom. i. 11. ch. ii. 13. xii, 1. xiv. 


‘al. ) only, exc. 1 Pet. ii. 5 bis Ὁ. 


c Paul (here 3ce. 


Crap. X. 1. rec (for yap) δε (the connexion not being perceived or wrong word sup- 
plied aft omn at beg of lection), with KLX® rel syrr Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damasc] : 
a goth arm: txt ABCDFPN! 17 latt coptt Clem, Orig, Mcion-e, Did, [Bas,] Cyr, 

ren-int, Cypr. 

2. δ. euecOaae ACDFR 17 Dial, Bas, Did, Chr, Cyr[-p] Thdrtaiq Thl: txt BKLP 
rel Orig, Chr, ‘Thdrt, Damase (ec. (Notwithstanding the strong manuscript evidence, 
the passive appears “to have been a corrn to the more usual expression in the case 
of Christian baptism.) transp ved. and θαλ. F. 

3. om αὑτὸ A Cl(appy) 46 eth [Did, Chr, Promiss,]: om τὸ αὐτὸ RI, 
πνευματικὸν bef βρωμα BC?2PR! 93 [Cyr, Euthal-ms}]: πνευματικὸν εφαγον bef βρωμα 
A 17. 137 Mcion-e: txt (ΟἹ ?) DF KLN$ rel [latt syrr copt goth arm] Orig,|-int,] Dial, 


Chr, Thdrt [(Did,) Damasc] Iren-int. 


πολλῷ μᾶλλον ὑμῖν. p. 202. Χ. 1-- 
22.) He proceeds, in close connexion with 
the warnings which have just preceded, 
to set before them the great danger of 
commerce with idolatry, and enforces this 
by the example of the rebellions and 
rejections of God’s ancient people, who 
were under a dispensation analogous to 
and typical of ours (1—11); and by the 
close resemblance of our sacrament of the 
Lord’s Supper,—their eating of meats 
sacrificed,—and the same act among the 
heathen, in regard of the UNION in each 
case of the partakers in one act of parti- 
cipation. So that THEY COULD NOT EAT 
THE IDOL’S FEASTS WITHOUT PARTAKING 
OF IDOLATRY = VIRTUALLY ABJURING 
CHRIST (vv. 15—22). 1.1 γάρ 
joins to the preceding. He had been 
inculeating the necessity of self- -subduing 
(ch. ix. 2427), and now enforces it in 
the particular departments of abstaining 
from fornication, idolatry, &e., by the 
example of the Jews of old. ov θέλω 
. , see reff. vi wat. ἡμῶν] He 
uses this expression, not merely speaking 
for himself and his Jewish converts, but 
regarding the Christian church as a con- 
tinuation of the Jewish, and the believer 
as the true descendant of Abraham. 
πάντες... πάντες... πάντες, each time 
with strong emphasis, as opposed to τοῖς 
πλείοσιν, ver. 5. Ax had these privileges, 
as all of you have their counterparts under 
the Gospel: but most of them failed from 
rebellion and unbelief. ὑπὸ τὴν ved. 
ἦσαν] The pillar of cloud, the abode of 
the divine Presence, went before them, 
and was to them a defence: hence it is 
sometimes treated of as covering the camp, 
e. g. Ps. civ. 39, διεπέτασε νεφέλην εἰς 
σκέπημ αὐτοῖς : and thus they would be 


under it. So also Wisd. x. 17, xix. 7,— 
ἡ τὴν παρεμβολὴν σκιάζυυσα νεφέλη. See 
Exod. xiii. 21, xiv. 20. 2.] εἰς 


τ. Movo. ἐβαπτ., received baptism (lit. 
baptized themselves: middle, not passive, 
see var. read.) to Moses; entered by the 
act of such immersion into a solemn cove- 
nant with God, and became His chureh 
under the law as given by Moses, God’s 
servant,—just as we Christians by our 
baptism are bound in a solemn covenant 
with God, and enter His Church under the 
Gospel as brought in by Christ, God’s 
eternal Son; see Heb. iii. 5, 6. Others 
(Syr., Beza) explain it ‘per Mosen,’ or 
(Calv., al.) ‘auspiciis Mosis,’ which εἰς 
will not bear,—not to mention that the 
formula βαπτίζω eis was already fixed in 
meaning, see reff. ἐν τῇ ν. Kal ἐν τῇ 
θ.1] The cloud and the sea were both 
aqueous; and this point of comparison 
being obtained, serves the Apostle to indi- 
cate the outward symbols of their initia- 
tion into the church under the govern- 
ment of Moses as the servant of God, and 
to complete the analogy with our baptism. 
The allegory is obviously not to be pressed 
minutely: for neither did they enter the 
cloud, nor were they wetted by the waters 
of the sea; but they passed under both, 
as the baptized passes under the water, 
and it was said of them, Exod. xiv. 31, 
“Then the people feared the Lord, and 
believed the Lord and his servant Moses.” 
To understand, as Olsh., the sea and 
cloud, of water and the Spirit respec- 
tively, is certainly carrying the allegory too 
far : not to mention that thus the baptisin 
by the Spirit would precede that by water. 

3.] They had what answered to the 
one Christian sacrament, Baptism: now the 
Apostle shews that they were not without a 








1—4, ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. 553 
πάντες TO αὐτὸ “ πνευματικὸν ἔπιον ἃ πόμα" ἔπινον γὰρ d Heb. ix. 10 


only. Ps. 
ci. 9 only. 
Dan. i. 16 
Theod. 
Ezek. xxxvii. 11, 


a lal / 
ἐκ ° πνευματικῆς ἀκολουθούσης πέτρας, ἡ πέτρα δὲ" ἦν ὁ 


e = Matt. xxvi. 26, xiii. 87. John xy.1. Gen. xli. 26,27. Exod. xii. 11. 


4, om avto A 46 eth Orig,{(ins,-int,) Chr, ]. rec πόμα bef πνευματικὸν emov 
(to conform with the πτύων with DEKL rel latt syrr [copt goth arm] Orig,-int, 
Dial, Chr, Thdrt [Damasc] Iren-int, [Aug,]: txt ΑΒΟΡΝ 17. 137 Orig,!-int, Did, 
Euthal-ms Mcion- in- |Epiph, Jer Cas [π|2] 137 Orig, [14,7 : ἐπιαν 1)}). 
rec δε bef πετρα (not observing the emphasis), with ACD2KLP rel Mcion[-e,] Orig, 


Kus, Chr [atic Did, Cyr, 
omg the 4 ἣ preceding, F, 


symbolic correspondence to the other, the 
Lord’s Supper. The two elements in this 
Christian sacrament were anticipated in 
their case by the manna and the miraculous 
stream from the rock: these elements, in 
their case, as well as ours, symbolizing THE 
Bopy anp Bioop oF CuRist. The whole 
passage is a standing testimony, inciden- 
tally, but most providentially, given by 
the great Apostle to the zmportance of the 
Christian sacraments, as necessary to 
membership of Christ, and not mere signs 
or remembrances : and an inspired protest 
against those who, whether as individuals 
or sects, would lower their dignity, or deny 
their necessity. βρῶμα πνευματικὸν 
«.T.A. |] The manna is thus called, from its 
᾿ being no mere physical production, but 
miraculously given by God—the work of 
His Spirit. Thus Isaac is called, Gal. iv. 
29,6 κατὰ πνεῦμα γεννηθείς, in opposition 
to Ishmael, 6 κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθείς. Jose- 
phus calls the manna θεῖον βρῶμα καὶ παρά- 
dofov, Antt. iii. 1. 6: and in Ps. Ixxvii. 24, 
it is said ἄρτον οὐρανοῦ ἔδωκεν avrois. 

We can scarcely avoid recognizing in these 
words a tacit reference to our Lord’s dis- 
course, or at all events to the substance of 
it,—John vi. 31—58. ‘‘ For the sense of 
πνευματικός, as ‘typical,’ ‘seen in the 
light of the spirit,’ cf. Rev. xi. 8, ἥτις καλεῖ- 
ται πνευματικῶς Σόδομα. Stanley. 

4.] It is hardly possible here, without doing 
violence to the words and construction, 
to deny that the Apostle has adopted the 
tradition current among the.Jews, that the 
rock followed the Israelites in their jour- 
neyings, and gave forth water all the way. 
Thus Rabbi Solomon on Num. xx. 2: “ Per 
omnes quadraginta annos erat iis puteus ” 
(Lightf.): and Schéttgen cites from the 
Bammidbar Rabba, ‘Quomodo compa- 
ratus fuit ille puteus (de quo Num. xxi. 
16)? Resp. Fuit sicut petra. sicut alveus 
apum, et globosus, et volutavit se, et ivit 
cum ipsis in itineribus ipsorum. Cum 
vexilla castra ponerent, et tabernaculum 
staret, illa petra venit, et consedit in atrio 
tentorii. Tunc venerunt Principes, et juxta 


illum steterunt, dicentes, ‘ Ascende, putee, ~ 


See 


ἄς. (Num. xxi. 17) et ascendit.” 
The 


other testimonies in Schottgen- 


juthal-ms Damasc] Thdrt: txt BD! Orig, Eusg. ἄπονος. δε, 


only ways of escaping this inference are, 
(1) by setting aside the natural sense alto- 
gether, as Chrys. (οὐ yap 7 τῆς πέτρας φύσις 
τὸ ὕδωρ Nohlet,.... ἄλλ᾽ ἑτέρα Tis πέτρα 
πνευματικὴ τὸ πᾶν εἰργάζετο, τουτέστιν 
ὃ χριστός, ὃ παρὼν αὐτοῖς πανταχοῦ, καὶ 
πάντα θαυματουργῶν" διὰ γὰρ τοῦτο εἶπεν, 
ἀκολουθούσης. p- 203), Theophyl.,—or (2) 
by taking πέτρα = τὸ ἐκ τῆς πέτρας ὕδωρ, 
as Erasm., Beza, Grot., Estius, Lightf. 
—and so Calvin, who says: ‘ Quomodo, 
inquiunt, rupes que suo loco fixa stetit, 
vomitata esset Israelitas? Quasi vero 
non palam sit sub petree voce notari aque 
fluxum, qui nunquam populum deseruit.” 
But against both of these we have the plain 
assertion, representing matter of physical 
fact, ἔπινον ἐκ πνευματικῆς ἀκολουθούσης 
πέτρας, they drank from a (or, after ἃ 
preposition, the) [spiritual, or | miraculous 
rock which followed them: and 1 cannot 
consent to depart from what appears to me 
the only admissible sense of these words. 
How extensively the traditionary reliques 
of unrecorded Jewish history were adopted 
by apostolic men under the inspiration of 
the Holy Spirit, the apology of Stephen 
may bear witness. ἡ πέτρα δὲ ἦν ὃ 
χριστός) But (distinction between what 
they saw in the rock and what we see in 
it: they drank from it and knew not its 
dignity: but the Rock was Christ. In 
these words there appear: to be three 
allusions: (1) to the ideas of the Jews 
themselves : so the Targum on Isa. xvi. 1: 

“Afferent dona Messi Israelitarum, qui 
robustus erit, propterea quod in deserto 
fuit RUPES ECCLESIA ZIONIS:” so also in 
Wisd. x. li. ff., the σοφία θεοῦ (see note on 
John i. 1) is said to have been present in 
Moses, to have led them through the 
wilderness, &c. That the Mrssrau, the 
ANGEL OF THE COVENANT, was present 
with the church of the Fathers, and that 
His upholding power was manifested in 
miraculous interferences for their welfare, 
was a truth acknowledged no less by the 
Jew than by the Christian. (2) To the 
Srequent use of this appellation, A Rock, 
for the God of Israel. See, tnter alia, 
Deut. xxxii. 4, 15, 18, 30, 31, 37; 1 Sam. 
i. 2; 2 Sam. xxii. 2, and passim ; xxiii. 3, 


5 


54 


, ? Ψ φ 
fMatt.iii7 χρίστος᾽ ὅ ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἴ 


Ι ΜΚΟΙ͂,. ἐς Σ θ : 
2 Cor. xii. 10. 

(2 Thess, 1. KNOG EV oO εος, 

12.) Jer. xiv. 


< 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


κατεστρώθησαν 


X. 


ἐν ὃ τοῖς ὃ πλείοσιν αὐτῶν £ nvdd- 


γὰρ ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ. 


6 “ δὲ i / ς -“ k ’ Aa ] ᾿] Ν x 3 
12 TAUTG O€ 'τύποι ἡμῶν “ ἐγενηθησαν, ‘ELS TO μὴ εἰναι 


g ch. ix. 19 con m2 θ \ a θὰ ᾽ a n: bv 
et , ἡμᾶς ᾿ ἐπιθυμητὰς κακῶν, καθὼς κἀκεῖνοι " ἐπεθύμησαν. 
7 ΑΝ ‘ > / / - 

ms 7 μηδὲ 9 εἰδωλολάτραι γίνεσθε, καθώς τινες αὐτῶν, ὥςπερ 


— Rom. v. 
k plur., ver. 11 reff., but see note. 


141. 
34 (only 3). n absol., Rom. vi. 7 reff. 


1 Rom. iv. 11 reff. 


m here only. Num. xi. 
och. v. 10, 11 reff. 


5. (ηυδοκησεν, so ABIC Clem, Mcion-e, Chr, [ Euthal-ms }.) 


7. εἰδωλολατρας γινεσθαι Fc k 3. 116-22 


καθως ins ka Ὁ} -5 1} Syr. 


arm, éffici aut efficiamini G-lat. aft 


ins εἰ bef avtwy A [vulg D-lat (not Iren-int) ]. 


rec (for wsmep) ws, with CD!KP ἃ Καὶ Mcion-e, [Kuthal-ms]: καθως 17 Mcion-e,: txt 
ΑΒ ΒΝ rel Chr, Thdrt Damase Thl.—om καθως tives autwy wstep F. 


&c.; Psalms passim, and especially Ixxviii. 
20, compared with ver. 35: see also Rom. 
ix. 33; 1 Pet.ii.8. Hence it became more 
natural to apply the term directly to Christ, 
as the ever-present God of Israel. (3) To 
the sacramental import of the water which 
flowed from the rock, which is the point 
here immediately in the Apostle’s mind. 
As well in sacramental import as in up- 
holding physical agency, that rock was 
Christ. The miraculous (spiritual) food 
was (sacramentally) the flesh of Christ: 
the miraculous (spiritual) drink was the 
blood of Christ: so that the Jews’ miracu- 
lous supplies of food and drink were sacra- 
mentally significant of the Body and 
Blood of Christ, in kind analogous to the 
two great parts of the Christian Supper of 
the Lord. In the contents pretixed to 
the chapters in the E. V., we read as the 
import of these verses, “ Te sacraments of 
the Jews are types of ours,” which though 
perhaps correctly meant, is liable to be 
erroneously understood ; inasmuch as no 
sacramental ordinance can be a type of 
another, but all alike, though in different 
degrees of approximation, and by different 
representations, types of H1M, who is the 
fountain of all grace. The difference be- 
tween their case and ours, is generally, 
that they were unconscious of the sacra- 
mental import, whereas we are conscious of 
it: “they knew not that I healed them,” 
Hos. xi. 3: and in this particular case, 
that Christ has come to us “not by water 
only, but by water and blood,” 1 John v. 
6: His Dearu having invested our sacra- 
mental ordinance with another and more 
deeply significant character. To enter 
more minutely into the import of the 
words, ‘the rock was Christ,’ would be 
waste of time and labour. The above 
reasons abundantly justify the assertion, 
without either pressing the verb ἦν beyond 
its ordinary acceptation, or presuming to 
fix on the Apostle a definiteness of meaning 
which his argument does not require. 
See in Meyer’s note an example of the 
proceeding which I blame. 5. | How- 


beit with the more part of them (in fact 
the exceptions were Joshua and Caleb only) 
God was not well pleased. κατεστρ. 
yap ...] The very words of the LXX, see 
ref. 6.] Now (δέ transitional; the 
coutrast being, between the events them- 
selves, and their application to us) these 
things happened as figures (not ‘ types’ 
as we now use the word, meaning by type 
and antitype, the material representation, 
and the ultimate spiritual reality,—but 
Sigures, as one imperfect ceremonial polity 
may figure forth a higher spiritual polity, 
but still this latter may not itself be the 
ultimate antitype) of us (the spiritual 
Israel as distinguished from the literal),— 
in order that we might not be (God’s 
purpose in the τύποι : of course an ulterior 
purpose, for they had their own immediate 
purpose as regards the literal Israel) 
lusters [ the use of the substantive forcibly 
depicts the habit] after evil things (gene- 
rvally: no special reference yet to the 
Corinthian feasters, as Grot. supposes. So 
Theophyl. rightly: καθολικῶς περὶ πάσης 
κακίας λέγει, ἐπειδὴ καὶ πᾶσα κακία ἐξ 
ἐπιθυμίας. εἶτα καὶ κατ᾽ εἶδος τίθησι τὰς 
κακίας. Similarly Chrys.) as they also 
(καί, i.e. supposing us to be like them) 
lusted. The construction (ταῦτα. .. 
ἐγενήθησαν) may be a verb substantive 
attracted into the plur. (or sing.) by the 
predicate,—one often found: so Herod. i. 
93, ἡ μὲν meplodos,..... εἰσὶ στάδιοι ἕξ: 
and il. 15, αἱ Θῆβαι Αἴγυπτος ἐκαλέετο : 
so in Latin, Ter. Andr. iii. 3. 28, ‘ Aman- 
tium ire amoris integratio est:’ see many 
other examples in Kiihner, ὃ 429: or, 
which is perhaps better, as in ver. 11, 
where see note. The rendering, ‘ Now 
in these things they were figures of us’ 
(I know not by whom suggested, but I 
find it in Dr. Peile’s notes on the Epistles), 
is inconsistent both with the arrangement 
of the words,—in which ταῦτα has the 
primary emphasis,—and with ἐγενήθησαν, 
which should be ἦσαν. 7: Now, 
the special instances of warning follow, 
coupled to the general by μηδέ in this 





ὅ---9. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 555 


γέγραπται Ῥ᾽ ὠκάθισεν ὁ λαὸς φαγεῖν καὶ πεῖν, καὶ 4 ἀν- P Exov. xxxii. 
3 6 


- abs., Acts 


, / \ / , o 
éotnoay " παίζειν. 8 μηδὲ ὃ πορνεύωμεν, καθώς τινες ad- Vi! 
A ’ , \ ͵ A 7 -“ Acts ix. 6 
τῶν " ἐπόρνευσαν καὶ ἔπεσαν [ἐν] μιᾷ ἡμέρᾳ εἰκοσιτρεῖς * al. fr. 
7 ᾿ 3 ᾿ ᾿ ae : r here only. 
χιλιάδες. 9 μηδὲ ' ἐκπειράζωμεν τὸν κύριον, καθώς τινες 1. zie 
ἶ 2 Kings vi. 5 


| Chron. Jer. xxxviii.(xxxi.) 4. Hom. Od. θ. 251. sch. vi. 18 reff. Num. xxv. 1—6. 


t Luke iy. 12 || Mt. (from Deut. vi. 16). x. 25 (John viii. 4] only. Ps. Ixxvii. 18. 


(πειν, so B1(Tischdf) D!F: my δὲ.) aveotn F[-gr]. 

8. exmopvevwuey DIF, εξεπυρνευσαν (see LXX) D!F 67! Chr,[txt,]. (επε- 
σαν, so ABCD! FPN 1 m 17 Chr-ms, Thdrt Damasc.) om ev BD!FN!? Tren[-int, j. 

9. ἐεκπειρασωμεν F [-Couey KP: πειραζωμεν 17 Epiph,(txt,) J. rec (for κυριον) 
χριστον (see note), with DF KL rel latt syrr copt-wilk sah Thdrt Mcion,(Epiph says: 
ὁ δὲ Μαρκίων ἀντὶ τοῦ κύριον χριστὸν ἐποίησεν) Chr; Ec ΤῊ] Iren-int, (citing “Seniores”) 
Ambr Ambrst Aug, Pel: θεον A 2 [Euthal-ms]: txt ΒΟΡΝ 17 syr-mg copt-ms eth 
arm [Syn-ep-ant] Epiph, Chr, Thdrt Damasc, Sedul Cassiod, rec aft καθὼς ins 
και, with D3[-gr] KL rel Syr Chr, Thdrt: om ABCD'FPX a τὰ ἢ 17 [vulg syr coptt 


arm Syn-ep-ant Chr; Euthal-ms Damasc,] Iren-int, [Ambrst']. 


negative sentence, as so often by καί in an 
affirmative one. Notice, that all four of 
these were brought about by the ἐπιθυμεῖν 
κακῶν, not distinct from it. This first 
instance is singularly appropriate. The 
Israelites are recorded to have sat down 
and eaten and drunken at the idol feast 
of the golden calf in Horeb: the very 
temptation to which the Corinthians were 
too apt to yield. And as the Israelites 
were actually idolaters, doing this as an 
act of worship to the image: so the Co- 
rinthians were in danger of becoming such, 
and the Apostle therefore puts the case in 
the strongest way, neither be (become) 
ye idolaters. παίζειν, pry, ‘ choreas 
agere,’ ‘saltare accinentibus tympanis vel 
cantoribus :’ see reff., where the same word 
(or its cognate pmiv) occurs in the Heb. 
The dance was an accompaniment of the 
idol feast : see Hor. ii. 12. 19: ‘ Quam nec 
ferre pedem dedecuit choris.... sacro 
Diane celebris die.’ 8.] Another 
prominent point in the sins of the Corin- 
thian church. εἰκοσιτρεῖς χ.] The 
number was twenty-four thousand, Num. 
xxv. 9, and is probably set down here from 
memory. The subtilties of Commentators 
in order to escape the. inference, are dis- 
creditable alike to themselves and the 
cause of sacred Truth. Of the principal 
ancient Commentators, Chrysostom and 
Theophyl. do not notice the discrepancy : 
(Ecum. notices it, and says that some 
ancient copies εἰκοσιτέσσαρας ἔθεσαν here 
(so m tol syr-txt arm), but passes it with- 
out comment. Although the sin of 
Baal-peor was strictly speaking idolatry, 
yet the form which it exhibited was that 
of fornication, as incident to idolatrous 
feasting, see Num. xxv. 1,2. Thus it be- 
comes even more directly applicable to the 
case of the Corinthians. 9.] ἐκπειρ. 
—tempt beyond endurance, ‘ tempt tho- 


roughly.’ Similarly ἐξαρνεῖσθαι, ‘to per- 
sist in denying,’ al., as Suidas, 7 yap é 
πρόθεσις, ἐπίτασιν δηλοῖ. See Musgr. on 
Eurip. Iph. Taur. 249, and cf. ἐκπληρόω, 
Acts xiii. 32. So also in Latin, ‘oro’ and 
‘exoro,’ &e. τὸν κύριον) There may 
be two views taken of the internal evidence’ 
concerning the reading here. On the 
one hand it may be said that χριστόν 
being the original reading, it was variously 
altered to κύριον or θεόν by those who 
found a difficulty in supposing that the 
Jews of old tempted Christ, or even by 
those who wished to obliterate this asser- 
tion of His pre-existence: and so De 
Wette, al. On the other it may be said, 
that κύριον being the original, it was 
variously explained in the margin χριστόν 
and θεόν, as is often the case: and so 
Meyer. On comparing these, it seems to 
me that the latter alternative is the more 
probable. The inference that tives αὐτῶν 
ἐπείρασαν requires τὸν χριστόν as an ob- 
ject, is not a necessary one, and hardly 
likely to have produced the alteration, 
closely connected as τ. yp. is with the verb 
in the first person. I have therefore with 
Meyer adopted the reading κύριον. The 
tempting of the Lord was,—as on the other 
oceasions alluded to Num. xiv. 22, where it. 
is said that they tempted God ten times,— 
the daring Him, in trying His patience by 
rebellious conduct and sin. Ct. the similar 
use of πειράζω Acts v. 9; xv. 10. And he 
warns the Corinthians, that they should not 
in like manner provoke God by their sins 
and their partaking with idols. Chrys., 
Theophyl., and (ἔς, understand the temp- 
tation of God to be the seeking for signs: 
Theodoret, to be ἐμ danger arising from 
those who spoke with different tongues, 
ἐπείραζον δὲ κ. of ταῖς διαφόροις κεχρη- 
μένοι γλώτταις, κατὰ φιλοτιμίαν μᾶλλον ἢ. 
χρείαν ταύτας ἐπ᾽, ἐκκλησίας mpospepovTese 


556 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTYS A. > Β 


b] A u ’ ’ \ ἊΨ \ “ Vv vv , / 

u=Actsv.9. αὐτῶν "ἐπείρασαν καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ὄφεων ἀπώλοντο. 

ΧΡ, ἀπε; Ἢ , 7 ἥν; νἷα, , 

ui-9. Exov. 10 μηδὲ Weyoyyutete, καθώς τινες αὐτῶν “ ἐγόγγυσαν καὶ 
v Mark xvi. 18. 9 ΄ πω ὡς a x? 6 a 1] a δὲ , 

Luke x. i9al, ἀπώλοντο UTO τοῦ ~ ὁλοθρευτοῦ. ταῦτα δὲ [πάντα] 

NUM. XXi1. 0. γι ’ 7 , \ 

Υ τυπικῶς Φ συνέβαινον ἐκείνοις, ἐγράφη δὲ ὃ πρὸς ὃ 

> 


w here bis. 


Matt. xx. 11. iFOY- 


Luke v. 30. θ , ς aA 5 ἃ Ἁ , A ς a d 4 

John vi. 41, eo LAV ἡμῶν, εἰς ους Ta τέλη των αἰώνων “ ΚατΤΉήνΤΉηκεν. 

ee bch = 12 o c e 5 an re , g Br , \ f ͵ 

only. Exop. 1% 

pals. ἄθεον, ἀν μὰς σα 0 οκων * éoTaval, ETETM μὴ * πεσῇ. 

(Stayoy. B). Nem. xiv. 29. x here onlyt. (-evewv, Heo. xi. 28, from Exod. xii. 23. -ευσις, 
Josh. xvii. 13 A.) y here only +. z Acts ili. 10 reff. plur., ver.6. Luke xxiv. 11. John 
xix. 31. Jamesii.19. Rev. i. 19. iii. 2. Ps. exlv. 10. a = ch. vii. 35 reff. b Eph. vi. 


4. Tit. iii. 10 only+. Judith viii. 27 (23) Ald. compl. (-τησις, ABN). Wisd. xvi. 6 only. (-θετεῖν, Acts xx. 31.) 
c here only. see Matt. xiii. 39. xxviii. 20. Heb. ix. 26. d Acts xxvi. 7 reff. e ch. iii. i8 reff. 
f Rom. xiv. 4 (reff.). g = Acts xiii. 40 reff. 
om autwy &! [αὐτὸν L Syn-ep-ant]. εξεπειρασαν CD1FPN a m 17 [Syn-ep-ant 
Euthal-ms Damase, (txt,) ]. απωλλυντο BR [Cyr,-p]. (A is doubtful.) 

10. for γογγυζετε, γογγυζωμεν D F-gr δὲ 17 copt arm Orig,[-c] Chr,(txtn1.) Aug). 
rec aft καθως ins και, with KL rel Chr[y1.(but mss vary) }: on ΒΟ ΕΝ ad m 17 latt 
syrr coptt [arm] Orig[-c,-int,] Eus [Bas, Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc, } lren-int,.— 
καθαπερ BI’X 93 Orig[-c, Bas, ]. απωλλυντο A. ολεθρευτου D!: ολεθρου F-gr. 

11. om παντα (as ver 6) AB 17 sah Mcion-e,-t, Orig,[-int,] Dial, Hip, Cyr-jer, 
Cyr[-p, Bas, Chr, Iren-int-2-mss,] Pac,: ins CKLP rel [vulg D-lat syrr copt arm 
Chr, Euthal-ms Damasc} Thdrt, [Ἢ] Ge [Orig-int; ] Iren-int, Jer, and, but παντα δε 
ταυτα, D[-gr} FX ἃ eth Orig,{-int,] Chr, Iren-int-ms, Aug). rec τύποι (as 
ver 6), with DFL rel syr-txt coptt [Dial, Nyss, Chr,] Thdrt,(h. 1. expressly : avr: του 
ws τύποι, and elsw expl tavta τυπικως εκεινοις gvveBn): txt ABCKPR d17. 47! syr-mg 
Mcion-e, Orig, Hip, Eus, Mac, Cyr-jer, Chr, Cyrsepe[-p: i figura latt Iren-int-from- 
Sen, Orig-int, Ambrst Augatic: figuraliter Orig-ints }. συνεβαινεν (see note) 
BCKPR d 17. 47 Mcion-e, Orig, Dial, Hip, Cyr-jer,(eyevero,) Chr-2-mss, [ Bas, Nyss, 


Cyr, Euthal-ms]: txt ADFL rel Dial, Chr, Thdrt, [Damasc}. 
rec κατηντησεν (alteration of the perf into the aor, so common with 


[ Epiph, ]. 


for προς, εἰς δὲ! 


the copyists), with ACD3KL rel Orthod Orig, Dial, Epiph, Chr, [Cyr-ms,-p] Thdrt, 
«σαν P Hip, [Damase]: txt BD!FX Hip, Orig,[-c,] Bas, Cyrs[-p Euthal-ms]. 


ὑπὸ τῶν ὄφεων, by the (well- 
known) serpents. The art. is so often 
omitted after a preposition, that wherever 
it is expressed, we may be sure there was 
a reason for it. 10.1 γογγύζετε has 
been by Estius, Grot., al., and De Wette, 
understood of murmuring against their 
teachers, as the Israelites against Moses 
and Aaron, Num. xiv. 2; xvi. 41. But 
not to mention that this was in fact mur- 
muring against God, such a reference 
would require something more specific 
than the mere word γογγύζετε. The 
warning is substantially the same as the 
last, but regards more the spirit, and its 
index the tongue. Theophyl.: αἰνίττεται 
δὲ αὐτοὺς καὶ διὰ τούτου, ὅτι ἐν τοῖς πει- 
ρασμοῖς οὐκ ἔφερον γενναίως, ἀλλ᾽ ἐγόγ- 
γυῶν λέγοντες Πότε ἥξει τὰ ἀγαθά, καὶ 
ἕως πότε αἱ κακώσεις ; similarly Chrys. 
The destruction referred to must be that 
related Num. xvi. 41 ff. when the pesti- 
lence (which though it is not so specified 
there, was administered on another occa- 
sion by a destroying angel, 2 Sam. xxiv. 
16, 17, see ulso Exod. xii. 23) took off 
14,700 of the people. The punishment of 
the unbelieving congregation in Num. xiv., 
to which this is commonly referred, does 
not seem to answer to the expression 
ἀπώλοντο ὑπὸ τ. ὀλοθρευτοῦ, nor to the 
τινες, seeing that all except Joshua and 


Caleb were involved in it. a2. | 
τυπικῶς, see var. readd., by way of 
figure. Meyer cites from the Rabbis, 
‘Quidquid evenit patribus, signum filiis.’ 
- The plural συνέβαινον expresses the 
plurality of events separately happening : 
the singular ἐγράφη, their union in the 
common record of Scripture. Similarly 
2 Pet. iii. 10, στοιχεῖα... λυθήσονται.... 


τὰ ἐν αὐτῇ ἔργα κατακαήσεται. See reff. 
and Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 58. 8. ἃ. δέ con- 


veys a slight opposition to συνέβαινον ἐκεί- 
vols. τὰ τέλη τ. αἰών. = ἡ συν- 
τέλεια τοῦ αἰῶνος of rett. Matt., and τὸ 
ἔσχατον τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων of Heb. i. 1, 
where see note: the ends of the ages of 
this world’s lifetime. So Chrys.: οὐδὲν 
ἄλλο λέγει ἢ ὅτι ἐφέστηκε λοιπὸν Td δι- 
καστήριον τὸ φοβερόν. The form vov- 
θεσία belongs to later Greek. The classi- 
cal word is νουθέτησις or νουθετία : see 
Lobeck on Phrynichus, p. 512. 
κατήντ.] have reached. The ages are 
treated as occupying space, and their extent 
as just coincident with our own time. See 
a similar figure in ch. xiv. 36. 12. ] 
ἑστάναι, viz. in his place as a member of 
Christ’s church, to be recognized by him at 
His coming for one of His. ‘To such an one 
the exampie of the Israelites is a warning 
to take heed that he fall not, as they did 
from their place in God’s church. 








10—16. 


a - \ 
13.) πειρασμὸς ὑμᾶς οὐκ ‘eihypev εἰ μὴ 
] XN δὲ e θ , ἃ > IAA, ¢ a m 67 n - \ 
πιστὸς δὲ ὁ θεός, ὃς οὐκ ἐάσει ὑμᾶς ™ πειρασθῆναι " ὑπὲρ 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


557 


ki θ f . 

αν βρώπινος h Luke xxii. 
28. Acts xx. 
19 al. 
iv. 34. 
= Luke v. 26. 


Deut. 


ἃ Ἃς / \ an aA \ Ἁ / i 
ὃ δύνασθε, ἀλλὰ ποιήσει σὺν τῷ " πειρασμῷ καὶ τὴν ° ἔκ- τι 1δ' Exod. 


a τ a , 2 je Belo 
βασιν Ῥ τοῦ δύνασθαι 4 ὑπενεγκεῖν. 15 τ διόπερ, " ἀγαπητοί κ Acts xvii, 25 
re 


, \ n ? / 
μου, * φεύγετε ἀπὸ τῆς “ εἰδωλολατρείας. 


τ Wee "1 -- ch. i. 9 τε 
ως “ φρονί- 


m ch. vii. ὃ reff, 
n = ch. iv. 6. 
2 


, / ¢ A “ 1@ ΣᾺ 7 a re 
- κρίνατε ὑμεῖς ὃ φημι. TO ποτήριον T Cor. xii. 6. 
pols λέγω p { 5 ae 4 i OP ble o Heb. xiii. 7 
only+. Wisd. ii. 17. viii. 8. xi. l4 only. ἢ ἐκβ. εκ τ. πολεμουν, Polyb. iii. 7. 2. p Matt. 
xiii. 3. Acts iii. 2. xviii. 10. xxvi. 18. Rom. xi. 8,10. Ps. cxlix. 7, 9. q 2 Tim. iii. 
1}. 1 Pet. ii. 19 only. Jobii. 10. Ps. liv. 12. Prov. vi. 33. r ch. viii. 13 (xiv. 13 v. r.) only. 


tch. vi. 18 reff. 
v = Acts xvii. 22. 


s Acts xv. 20 reff. 
ver. 7.) 
xiv.,17. 


13. for οὐκ etAndev, ov kataAaByn F; non apprehendat latt. 


DF. πειρασθηναι bet vuas Β [τη]. 
υπενεγκειν Β' Ααρΐ «(ὑχῦ Jatiq). 


2 Cor. vi. 13. 
x attr., Matt. xxi. 42 (from Ps. cxvii. 22) al. 


uGal. ν. 20, Col. iii.5. 1 Pet.iv.3only+. (-rpys, 


w Matt. vii. 24. chriv. 10 al. Prov. 


for εασει, αφησει 
ins ov bef δυνασθε F 123? D-lat, adding 


rec ins vuas bef υπενεγκειν, with Κι επεν.] 8% 


rel Thdrt, Damasc Thl-ed Cc: aft, D%[but erased]: om ABCDIFLPR?! n 17. 47 
farm Orig, ] Mac, Bas, Chr-comm,-and-2-inss, Cyrsepe Thdrt, Thl-mss. 


15. aft Ppovimos ins υμιν D α (coptt). 
D'[-gr]. υμας N}(txt N-corr?), 


13.] There are two ways of understanding 
the former part of this verse. Chrys., 
Theophyl., Grot., Est., Bengel, Olsh., De 
Wette, al., take it as a continuation, and 
urging of the warning of the verse pre- 
ceding, by the consideration that no 
temptation had yet befallen them but 
such as was ἀνθρώπινος, ‘within the power 
of human endurance : but ‘ major tentatio 
imminet,’ Beng. :—while Calvin, al., and 
Meyer regard it as a consolation, tending 
to shew them that βλεπέτω μὴ πέσῃ is 
within the limits of their power, seeing 
that their temptation to sin was nothing 
extraordinary or unheard of, but only 
‘according to man ;’ and they might trust 
to God’s loving care, that no temptation 
should ever befall them which should sur- 
pass their power to resist. This latter 
seems to me beyond doubt the correct 
view. For (1) in the parallel which they 
bring for the former sense, Heb. xii. 4, 
οὔπω is distinctly expressed,—and would 
have been here also, had it been intended. 
Besides, in that case, οὔπω, as having the 
primary emphasis, would have been pre- 
Jixed, as in Heb. xii. 4: οὔπω πειρασμὸς 
ὑμᾶς εἴληφεν .... Then again (2) this 
restricts the sense of πειρασμός to persecu- 
tion, which it here does not mean, but 
solicitation to sin, in accordance with the 
whole context. εἴληφεν ---Πδ5 taken 
you, not ἔλαβεν, ‘took you,’ shews that the 
temptation was still soliciting them. 
ἀνθρώπινος) not, as Piscator, al., and 
Olsh., originating with man, as opposed to 
other temptations originating with the 
devil, or even with God’s Providence: but, 
as Chrys.: fupetpos,—opposed to ὑπὲρ ὃ 
δύνασθε, adapted to man. πιστός} He 
has entered into a covenant with you b 
calling you: if He suffered temptation 
beyond your power to overcome you, He 
would be violating that covenant. Com- 





for κρινατε vets o φημι, κρινετε ουν φημι 


pare 1 Thess. v. 24, πιστὸς 6 καλῶν ὑμᾶς, 
ds Kal ποιήσει. ὅς = ὅτι οὗτος. 
ποιήσει. .. καὶ τὴν ἔκβ.] Then God 
makes the temptation too: arranges it in 
His Providence, and in His mercy will 
ever set open a door for escape. τὴν 
ἔκβ. the [way to] escape, i.e. which 
belongs to the particular temptation: τὴν 
ἀπαλλαγὴν τοῦ πειρασμοῦ, Theophyl. 
τοῦ δύν.} in order that you may be able 
to bear (it): obs., not, ‘will remove the 
temptation τ᾿ but, ‘will make an escape 
simultaneously with the temptation, to 
encourage you to bear up against it.’ 
14.) Conclusion from the above 
warning examples: IDOLATRY IS BY ALL 
MEANS TO BE SHUNNED; not tampered 
with, but fled from. φεύγετε ἀπό 
(<fugiendo discedite a,’ Meyer) expressing 
even more strongly than the accus. with 
φεύγω, the entire avoidance. This verse 
of itself would by inference forbid the 
Corinthians having any share in the idol 
feasts; but he proceeds to ground such 
prohibition on further special considera- 
tions. 15—22.] By the analogy of 
the Christian participation in the Lord’s 
Supper, and the Jewish participation in 
the feasts after sacrifices, joined to the 
fact that the heathens sacrifice to devils, 
he shews that the partaker in the idol 
feast is a PARTAKER WITH DEVILS; which 
none can be, and yet be a Christian. 
15.] An appeal to their own sense 
of what is congruous and possible,—as in- 
troducing what is to follow. ὡς ex- 
presses an assumption on the Apostle’s part, 
that they are φρόνιμοι. De W. compares 
Plato, Alcib. i. 104, ὧς ἀκουσομένῳ λέγω. 
λέγω and φημί both refer to what 
follows, vv. 16—21. ὑμεῖς is em- 
phatic—be YE the judges of what I am 
saying. 16.| The analogy of the 
Lord's Supper, which, in both its parts, 


558 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


Χ. 


y ’ / ἃ Zz ’ a > ᾿ a / a b Ὡ 
yGalii,u. 7 εὐλογίας Ὁ 2 εὐλογούμεν, οὐχὶ * κοινωνία του " αίματος 


James iii. 10. 

Rev. v. 12, 

13. vii. 12. 

Gen. xxviii. 4. 
z Matt. xxvi. 

26 i) Mk. 

Luke ix. 16. 
iv. 30. ch. 
. 1 Kings ix. 13. 

14. 1 Pet.i.2. 1Johmi.7 al. 

e Rom. v. 15 reff. f Rom. xi. 32 reff. 


16. for evAoyias, ευχαριστιας F 71. 80. 213 Syr. 
κοινωνιας N'(marked for correction by N-corr?). 


A b lal ᾽ . x \ v ἃ c a > \ a F 

τοῦ "χριστοῦ ἐστιν ; τον ἄρτον ὃν © KAwWMEV, OVXL * κοί- 
n 7 an a ev Yi 

νωνία τοῦ ἃ σώματος τοῦ 4 χριστοῦ ἐστιν ; 17 ὅτι εἷς ἄρτος, ὅ 

ἃ a Ὕ Je | ae δι \ f ΄ ? τοῖν, 

ἕν σώμα ὃ οἱ " πολλοὶ ἐσμεν" οι yap πάντες EK τοῦ ἐνὸς 


a 2 σον. vi. 14 reff. 
e Acts ii. 46 reff. 


Ὁ (ch. xi. 25,27.) Eph. ii. 13. Heb. ix. (12) 
d Rom. vii. 4. (ch. xi. 24, 27, 29.) 


ἡυλογουμεν D'[-gr]. 
Ist eorw bef τ. am. τ. xp. 


(transposn to avoid the harshness of ἐστιν at the end) ABP Syr coptt [arm(Tischdf) } 
Cyr,[-p] Aug,: txt CDFKLX rel latt syr goth Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damase] Ambrst. 
2nd εστιν bef τ. σωμ. τ. xp. A Syr copt Cyr, Aug, (see above): om sah: txt 


BCDFKLPNX rel [latt syr goth Chr, Euthal-ms Cyr-p, Thdrt Damase}. 


for 2nd 


χρίιστου, κυριου D!F 21 latt goth (Dial,) Thdrt Ambrst Aug, (goth Thdrt Ambrst syr- 


mg κυρίου before): αὐτου n. 


17. aft aprov ins και Tov (evos) ποτηριου DF vulg-sixt(with demid harl tol, not aw) 


[goth] Ambrst Pel. (om evos D[-gr]}.) 


is a participation in Christ. The stress 
throughout to ver. 20, is on κοινωνία, and 
κοινωνοί. τὸ ποτήριον is the accus., 
by attr. corresponding to τὸν ἄρτον. 

τὸ π. τῆς EVA.| 1. 6. ὃ εὐλογοῦντες κατα- 
σκευάζομεν ((6.), as explained imme- 
diately by ὃ evAoyovuer,—over which we 
speak a blessing, the Christian form of 
the Jewish 7273 Dia, the cup in the Pass- 
over over which thanks were offered after 
the feast,—in blessing of which cup, our 
Lord instituted this part of the ordinance : 
see Lightfoot in loc.,and note on the history 
in Matt. xxvi. The rendering of Olsh., al., 
the cup which brings a blessing, is wrong, 
as being against this analogy. ὃ εὐλο- 
γοῦμεν) which we bless, i.e. consecrate 
with a prayer of thanksgiving: not, as 
Erasmus, Beza, ‘ quod cum gratiarum ac- 
tione sumimus’” (περὶ οὗ εὐχαριστοῦμεν). 
Observe, the first. person plural is the same 
throughout: the blessing of the cup, and 
the breaking of the bread, the acts of con- 
secration, were not the acts of the minister, 
as by any authority peculiar to himself, 
but only as the representative of the oi 
πάντες, the whole Christian congregation 
(and so even Estius, but evading the legi- 
timate inference). The figment of sacer- 
dotal consecration of the elements by trans- 
mitted power, is as alien from the apostolic 
writings as it is from the spirit of the 
Gospel. κοινωνία] the participation 
(i. 6. that whereby the act of participation 
takes place) of the Blood of Christ? The 
strong literal sense must here be held fast, 
as constituting the very kernei of the 
Apostle’s argument. The wine is the 
Blood, the bread is the Body, of Christ. 
(In what sense the Blood and the Body, 
does not belong to the present argument.) 
We receive into us, make by assimilation 
parts of ourselves, that wine, that bread: 
we become therefore, by participation of 
that Bread, one Bread, i.e. ONE Bopy: 


hence the close and literal participation in 
and with Christ. If we are to render this 
ἐστιν, represents or symbolizes, the argu- 
ment is made void. On the other hand it 
is painful to allude to, though necessary to 
reprobate, the caricature of this real union 
with Christ which is found in the gross 
materialism of transubstantiation. See 
further on ch. xi. 26, 27. ὃν κλῶμεν] 
probably already the δγεαζίηρ of the bread 
in the communion was part of the act of 
consecration, and done after the example 
of our Lord in its institution. See ch. 
xi. 24; Acts ii. 42, xx. 7, 11. For the 
rest, see ahove. 17.] Because we, the 
(assembled) many, are one bread (by the 
assimilation of that one bread partaken ; 
not ‘ one loaf’), one Body (by the κοινωνία 
of the Body of Christ, of which that bread 
is the vehicle); for the whole of us par- 
take of that one bread. Meyer and De 
Wette and many other Commentators take 
εἷς ἄρτος alone, ‘there is one bread ;’? and 
impugn the interpretation given above by 
saying that it is evidently not so, because 
the following clause uses ἄρτος in its literal 
sense. But it is for that very reason, that 
I adhere to the interpretation given. By 
partaking of that bread, we become, not 
figuratively but literally, one bread: it 
passes into the substance of our bodies, 
and there is in every one who partakes, a 
portion of himself which is that bread. 
The dread which was before, is now ἡμεῖς. 
But that loaf, broken and blessed, is the 
medium of κοινωνία of the Body of Christ ; 
we then, being that one bread, are one 
Body; for we all partake of that one 
bread. So that,there is no logical inver- 
sion, and no arguing (Meyer) from the 
effect to the cause. The argument is a 
very simple and direct one ;—the bread is 
the Body of Christ; we partake of the 
bread: therefore we partake of the Body 
of Christ. Of these propositions, the con- 





17—19. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 559 
ἄρτου ἐμετέχομεν. 18 " βλέπετε τὸν ᾿Ισραὴλ ἱ κατὰ ' σάρκα" ὁ εἰν. ix. 10,12 
» € 2 a! » / k \ na | 4 heh. i. 26. 
οὐχ οἱ ἐσθίοντες τὰς θυσίας, * κοινωνοὶ τοῦ | θυσιαστηρίου " Pri: ii 2 
Tener 19 ΟΣ “ m “7 , Ὅς ay τ Noo i Rom. i. 3 reff. 
εἰσίν ; 19 τί οὖν φημι ; ὅτι ™ εἰδωλόθυτόν " τί ἐστιν, ἢ OTE κ Matt, xxii. 
ow. or. 1. 


Mu Pet. ve 1.) 1554: 29; 
τ = Acts v.36. ch. it. 7. 


7.0 Heb. x71as- 
m ch. viii. 1 reff. 


1 ch. ix. 13 bis. Rom. xi. 3 (from 3 Kings xix. 10) al. 
Gal. ii. 6. vi. 3,15. Demosth. 582. 27. 


18. rec ovxt, with BD3K LPR? rel Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damasc]: txt ACD!FPR! 17 
Chr,. εσθοντες D!. 

19. rec transp εἰδωλοθυτον and εἰδωλον, with KL rel syrr goth Chr, Thdrt [Damase]: 
ἰδωλοθυτον twice ΕἾ -οΥ ] ; but G-lat has over the 1st zdolis immolatum sit, and over 
the 2nd idolum aut idolothitum : εἰδωλοθυτον, omg from τι ἐστιν to τὲ ἐστιν, ΑΟἸΝῚ 
(omg τι also) Epiph,: εἰδωλον, omg the other clause by homeotel, 17.71: txt BC?DP 
X-corr! m vulg(and F-lat) coptt eth arm [Euthal-ms| Ambrst Aug, Pel Bede. (The 
veceived reading seems to have been adopted as the most natural order on the re- 


insertion of the omitted clause. 


For the remarks of Epiph and Aug, see Tischdf.) 
ἐστιν bef τι (twice) D![only 1st D!-gr] F latt. 


for ἡ ott, ovx ott DE 


spec] (Tert,) Ambrst Aug-mss,. (for lst ὅτι, ovx ot: [k] Chr[-4]-mss,. 
Ρ 1 1 1 


clusion is implied in the form of a question 
in ver. 16: the minor stated in the latter 
clause of ver. 17; its connexion with the 
major producing the conclusion given in 
the former clause 67: .... ἐσμέν. The 
major itself, τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ σῶμά μου, 
is suppressed, as axiomatic. The above 
remarks shew also the untenableness of the 
rendering of Calv., Beza, Bengel, al.,— 
“ because there is one bread (antecedent), 
we being many are one body” (conse- 
quent): for this would parenthesize ver. 
17, and take it altogether out of the argu- 
ment, giving it a sense which, as occurring 
here, would be vapid—“obiter hoc dicit, 
αὖ intelligant Corinthii, externa quoque 
professione colendam esse illam unitatem 
que nobis est cum Christo,” Calv. Meyer 
objects to rendering ἐκ τοῦ ἑνὸς ἄρτου 
μετέχομεν, we partake of that one bread: 
saying rightly that μετέχω is always found 
with a gen. or an acc., never with ἐκ. He 
would render, for we all, by means of that 
one bread, partake (viz. in the one Body: 
so μετέχ. is absol. ver. 30). This is ex- 
ceedingly harsh, besides as it seems to me 
(see above) confusing the whole argument : 
and we may safely say would not have 
been thus expressed by the Apostle, leaving 
the most important words to be supplied 
from the context,—but would have been 
οἱ yap πάντες ἐν τῷ ἑνὶ ἄρτῳ τοῦ ἑνὸς 
σώματος μετέχομεν. The usage of ἐκ, 
too, would, though perhaps barely allow- 
able, be very harsh, especially when it is 
remembered that the ἄρτος is not (by the 
hypothesis) the ultimate, but only the me- 
diate object of participation. None of the 
examples given in Bernhardy, Syntax, 
p. 230, which Meyer quotes for his sense 
of ἐκ, seem to justify it. They apply 
mostly to the subjective source, ἐκ mpo- 
voias, or the circumstances originating, 
ὡς ἐκ TovTwy,—not to the medial instru- 
ment, which it appears to me would re- 
quire διά. (In a subsequent edn. Mever 


seems to have slightly modified his view, 
rendering, for from the one bread we all 
receive a portion.) 18.] Another 
example of κοινωνία, from the Jewish feasts 
after sacrifice. τ. Iop. κατὰ σάρκα] 
(= τ. Ἰσρ. τὸν κατὰ σάρκα: so we have 
τοῖς κυρίοις κατὰ σάρκα, Eph. vi. 5), the 
actual material Israel, as distinguished 
from 6 Ἶσρ. κατὰ πνεῦμα, see Rom. 11. 29; 
Gal. iv. 29; and ὁ Ἴσρ. τοῦ θεοῦ, Gal. vi. 16. 

ot ἐσθ. τ. θυσ.7 viz. those parts of 
the sacrifices which were not offered; see 
on ch. viii. 1. The parts to be offered are 
specified, Levit. 111. 3; the practice of eat- 
ing the remainder of the meat sanctioned 
and regulated, ib. vii. 15—18. κοι- 
νωνοὶ τοῦ θυσ.] partakers with the altar 
(in a strict and peculiar sense,—the altar 
having part of the animal, the partaker 
another part; and by the fact of the 
religious consecration of the offered part, 
this connexion becomes a religious con- 
nexion. The question has been raised, and 
with reason, why the Apostle did not say 
κοινωνοὶ τοῦ θεοῦ Meyer answers,—be- 
cause the Jew was already in covenant 
with God,and the Apostle wished to express 
a closer connexion, brought about by the 
sacrifice in question:—De Wette,— because 
he was unwilling to ascribe so much to the 
mere act of sacrifice, see Heb. x. 1 ff. : and 
to this latter view I incline, because, as De 
W. remarks, θεοῦ would have suited the 
analogy better than θυσιαστηρίου, but Paul 
avoids it, and evidently is reluctant to 
use it. But to carry this view further, 
and suppose with Riickert that he would 
not concede to the Ἶσρ. κατὰ σάρκα any 
κοινωνία θεοῦ, is (Meyer) contradicted by 
Rom. ix. 4, 5. Still the inference lies 
open, to which our Saviour’s saying points, 
Matt. xxiii. 20, 21. The altar is Gon’s 
altar). 19, 20.] The inference from 
the preceding analogies would naturally be, 
that Paul was then representing the idols 
us being in reality what the heathen sup- 


560 


\ ἴω “4 
καὶ ov θεῷ θύουσιν, 


vi. 16. 
1 Thess. i. 9 
al. Num. 
xxv. 2. 
absol., Acts 
xiv. 13. 
Exod. xxiii. 
18. w. dat., 
Acts xiv. 18. 
q Devt. xxxii. 
17. Paul, here (4 times) and 1 Tim. iv. 1 only. 
r ch. xi. 27. ; s = Rom. xi. 9. 
v Rom. x. 19 (from Deut. xxxii. 21). xi. 11, 14 only. 


ᾳ δαιμονίων γίνεσθαι. 


Ὁ 


20. for αλλ οτι a, a δε Ὁ: αλλα α F[sed que] latt. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


Ps. Ixxvil. 20. 


X. 


‘ 
t 


ο εἴδωλόν "ti ἐστιν; 39 ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἃ Ρ θύουσιν 4 δαιμονίοις 
οὐ θέλω δὲ ὑμᾶς * κοινωνοὺς τῶν 
51] οὐ δύνασθε ' ποτήριον * κυρίου 
πίνειν καὶ ποτήριον 4 δαιμονίων, οὐ δύνασθε " τραπέζης 
κυρίου ὃ μετέχειν καὶ * τραπέζης “' δαιμονίων. 539 " ἢ ἡ παρα- 
ἕηλοῦμεν τόν κύριον ; μὴ “ ἰσχυρότεροι αὐτοῦ ἐσμεν ; 


gospp. passim. Acts xvi. 18. James ii. 19. Rey. ix. 20. xvi. 14 only. 


t see Isa. Ixy. 1l. τ = thrx’.22. 


w ch. i. 20 reff. 


rec (for θυουσιν, twice) 


Over (occasioned by the insn of εθνη below), with KL rel Chr, Thdrt Damase: txt ABC 


DFPX m 17 Mcion-e,{ 1st ; om 2nd] Eus, [Euthal-ms(1st θυσουσιν) }. 


rec aft 


Ist θυ. ins τα εθνη, with ACKPR rel vulg(and F-lat) G-lat syrr coptt goth ath arm 
Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damasc] Orig-int, Aug,: aft ov, L: om BD F[-gr] Mcion-e, 


Eus, Tert, Ambrst Aug,(expr,) Aug-cit(qui sacrificant). 


rec 2nd θυ. bef και ov 


θεω, with DFKL rel [syrr coptt goth Chr Thdrt Damase Augaic]: txt ABCPR m 


17 [arm(Tischdf)] Eus, [Euthal-ms] Orig-int, Aug. 


for γινεσθαι, εἰναι I’, 


(omg των) D'5[and lat} F goth. 


posed them to be—and the eater of meats 
offered to them, as partaking with the idol. 
This objection he meets,—but with the 
introduction of a new fact to their con- 
sideration—that the things which the hea- 
then sacrifice, they sacrifice really to devils. 

19.] τί οὖν φημι; What am I then 
assuming ? so Xen. Anab. i. 14. 4, τί οὖν 
κελεύω ποιῆσαι; ὅτι εἰδωλόθ. τί 
ἐστιν] that a thing sacrificed to an 
idol is any (real) thing (so sacrificed) ? 
(i.e. has any real existence as a thing 
sacrificed? The accentuation τι ἔστιν ; 
would come nearer to the sense of ch. 
villi. 4, ὅτι οὐδὲν εἴδωλον ἐν κόσμῳ,--- 
‘that there is any (such thing as an) 
offering to an idol?’ and in a matter 
so ambiguous it is impossible to decide 
between the two) or that an idol is 
any thing (real? e.g. that Jupiter ἐδ 
Jupiter in the sense of a living power) ? 
—(Not so :—this ellipsis of the negative, 
taken up by ἀλλά, is found in classical 
Greek: e.g. Xen. Mem. i. 2. 2, πῶς οὖν 
αὐτὸς ὧν τοιοῦτος ἄλλους ἂν ἀσεβεῖς 
2. ἐποίησεν; ἄλλ᾽ ἔπαυσε μὲν τούτων 
πολλούς; ἀρετῆς ποιήσας ἐπιθυμεῖν, Ke. 
See Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 37.) But 
(I say) that the things which they 
(i.e. the Gentiles) sacrifice, they sacri- 
fice to devils, and not to God (δαιμ., not 
‘false-gods, nor in the sense in which 
it is used in the mouth of idolaters them- 
selves, Acts xvii. 18, and Xen. Mem. i. 
1. 1, deities (see Stanley’s note, in which 
this idea is ingeniously combined with 
the Christian sense given below),—but, 
as always in LXX and N. T. when used 
by worshippers of the true God, ‘ DEVILS,’ 
‘evil spirits.’ The words are from Deut. 
(ref.), see also Ps. χον. 5 (Baruch iv. 7, 
θύσαντες δαιμονίοις x. ov θεῷ). Heathen- 
dom being under the dominion of Satan 


δαιμονιων bef Kowwvous 


(ὁ ἄρχων τοῦ κόσμου τούτου), he and his 
angels are in fact the powers honoured 
and worshipped by the heathen, how- 
ever little they may be aware of it): 
but (the inference being suppressed ‘and 
ye therefore by partaking in their sacri- 
fices would be partakers with devils: 
but’) I would not have you become par- 
takers with devils (τῶν generic). 

21.| Reason of the ov 0éX\w,—sententionsly 
expressed without “γάρ. ov δύνασθε 
applies of course to the real spiritual 
participation of the table of the Lord 
so as to profit by it: to moral possi- 
bility. The ποτήριον δαιμονίων is said 
as corresponding to the cup of which 
mention has been already made, not as 
Grot., al., and De Wette fancy, referring 
to the libation at an idol feast. 

τράπεζα is said by Pollux vi. 12 (Suicer) 
to be used in the sense of τὰ σιτία τὰ 
ἐπ᾿ αὐτῶν τῶν τραπεζῶν τιθέμενα. Com- 
pare the description in Herod. iii. 18, 
of the Ἡλίου tpdme(a,—Polyb. iv. 35. 4, 
ὥςτε περὶ τὸν βωμὸν k. Thy τράπεζαν τῆς 
θεοῦ κατασφαγῆναι τοὺς ᾿Εφόρους ἅπαντας, 
—and ref. Isa. From this passage pro- 
bably, the τράπεζα κυρίου became an ex- 
pression éurrent in all ages of the Christian 
Church: see Suicer in voc. 22.) Or 
are we provoking (is it our wish to pro- 
voke, that He may assert His power) the 
Lord (Christ) to jealousy (by dividing our 
participation between Him and devils) ?— 
see ref. Deut., which evidently is before 
the Apostle’s mind: — are we stronger than 
He (are we then such, that we can afford 
to defy His power to punish)? 

23—XI. 1.] Now that he has fully 
handled the whole question of partaking in 
idol feasts, and prepared the way for 
specific directions as about a matter no 
longer to be supposed indifferent, he pro- 


e νασθε 





20—27. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOT®S A. 561 


x ch. vi. 12 
(reff.). 

y Acts ix. 31 
reff 


¢ y ᾽ ΄ ΄ 4 
23 Lavra " ἔξεστιν, ἀλλ᾽ ov πάντα * συμφέρει' πάντα 


> ΄ > “ Ν 4 Ν e n 

x ἔξεστιν, ἀλλ᾽ ov πάντα Υ οἰκοδομεῖ. 2+ μηδεὶς 5 τὸ ἑαυτοῦ ¥ ASE 
\ \ A - an / z see Matt, xvi. 

δ ζητείτω, ἀλλὰ 5 τὸ ὃ τοῦ. ἑτέρου. 55 πᾶν TO ἐν “ μακέλ- © 23. 


a ver. 33. 
d ΄ 2 $ SS “ Ν , ch. xiii. 5. 
Aw 4arwrovpevoy ἐσθίετε μηδὲν “ ἀνακρίνοντες διὰ τὴν sh, x15. | 
f ‘5 96 g T a 7 \ e a \ oh 2 Phil. 11. 21. 
OvVVEL nol’ > τοῦ κυρίου yap 1) γὴ Kat TO πλήρωμα Neh. ii. 10 
eer 27. <i} i Ad Ὁ, νὰ - Ἐ.5.57 \ , Rom. ii. 1 
αυτής. ει τις καλεῖ υμας TOV ATTLOTMV και θέλετε reff. 
c here only +. 
΄ θ ie ey | θέ A os 3 Bi δὲ ἃ epp., here 
TTOPEVET al, Τα TO TapaTtt E€MEVOV υμιν εσσιέετε μή εν only. Matt. 
x.29 al. Gen. 
xli. 56. e — Acts iv. 9 reff. {35 ὉΠ’ Ville 7... COM 1. Le. g Psa. xxiii. 
M. Xx. 12. h = Mark vit. 20." Ps. xcv. 11: i = Matt. xxii. 3,&c. Johnii.2al. Esth. 
v. 12. k = ch. vi. 6 reff. 1 = Mark vi. 41. Acts xvi. 34 4]. Gen. xliii. 31, 32. 


23. rec (twice) ins μοι bef εξεστ. (from ch vi. 12), with C3(1st time) HK L (Ponce ]) 
‘3 rel (eth Ist time, demid goth, 2nd) syrr Chr, [ Bas, Euthal-ms Damasce (1st) ] Thdrt 
Orig-int, [Ambrst]: txt ABC! DN'(F 17, once) am(with fuld harl! lux tol) copt [sah] 
Clem, [Orig] Iren-int, | Ambr,] Tert, Cypr,.—om 2nd clause ( passing from παντα to 
mavra) F: om Ist cl. P17. 

24. for to (twice), ta A 47 Antch, (Tert,). rec aft erepou ins εκαστος (supple- 
mentary : perhaps, as Mey, a reminiscence of Phil ii. 4), with D?°KL rel syrr goth 
Chr, [Bas, Antch, Damase] Thdrt: om ABCD!IFHPRN 17 latt coptt 2th arm Clem 


{ Euthal-ms Ambr, Ambrst ]. 
25. διακρινοντες P [Thdrt, ]. 


26. rec yap bef κυριου (transposn to more usual order, not observing the emphasis), 
with AHKLP rel Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damasc]: txt BCDFN a 17. 

27. rec aft εἰ ins δὲ (for connexion ; but thus perplexing the sense), with CD3HKL 
rel (Syr) syr sah goth Thdrt, Damase Thl (ic: [δέ si eth:] om ABD!FPR® latt copt 


arm Antch Chr, [Euthal-ms| Thdrt, Jac-nisib, Ambrst Aug. ° 
ets δειπνον D}[and lat] F fuld! Ambrst Pel Bede. 


coptt. 


ceeds to give those directions, accompany- 
ing them with their reasons, as regards 
mutual offence or edification. 23. | 
He recurs to the plea of ch. vi. 12 ;—re- 
asserts his modification of it, with a view, 
after what has passed since, to shew its 
reasonableness, and to introduce the fol- 
lowing directions. οἰκοδομεῖ] viz. the 
Christian body: tend to build up the 
whole, or the individual parts, of that 
spiritual temple, God’s οἰκοδομή. 

24.| Further following out of οἰκοδομεῖ. 
This ought to be our object: the bringing 
on one another to perfection, not the 
pleasing ourselves, see Rom. xv. 2, 8. In 
the second clause, ἕκαστος must be sup- 
plied from μηδείς (hence it has found its 
way into the rec.) : so Plato, Rep. ii. p. 366 
Ὁ. οὐδεὶς ἑκὼν δίκαιος, GAN... . ψέγει 
τὸ ἄδικον,---ἰἶ. 6. ἕκαστος ψέγει. See Bern- 
hardy, Syntax, p. 458. 25.] The key 
to understanding this and the following 
verse is, to remember that συνείδησις is 
used in each case of the conscience of the 
person spoken of,i.e.in the two first cases, 
that of the reader,—in the third, as ex- 
plained by the Apostle, that of the weak 
brother: see there. Every thing which 
is being sold (offered for sale) in the 
flesh-market (μάκελλον is adopted from 
the Latin. It was also used by the Rabbis, 
in the form ppo. ‘See Stanley, and ex- 
amples in Wetst.), eat, making no enquiry 
(whether it is meat offered to idols or not), 

Vot, II. 


aft ἀπιστων ins 
παντα τα παρατιθεμενα A 


on account of your conscience (to be joined 
with ἐσθίετε μηδ. ἀνακ., not with ἀνακρί- 
vovtes only,—as is shewn by the parallel 
below, ver. 28,—where the reason given is 
joined to ἐσθίετε). The meaning being,— 
‘eat without enquiry, that your conscience 
may not be offended.’ If you made enquiry, 
and heard in reply, that the meat had been 
offered to idols, your conscience would be 
offended, and you would eat διὰ mpos- 
κόμματος to yourselves. De Wette, al., 
understand τὴν συν., all through, of the 
conscience of another, and apply to all the 
explanation of ver. 29. But as Meyer 
well observes, no reader could possibly 
refer τὴν συνείδ. to any one but himself, 
no other person having been mentioned, 
until ver. 28, where ἐκεῖνον τὸν μηνύ- 
σαντα is introduced, and τὴν συνείδησιν 
is to be referred (but even then not with- 
out special explanation given) to the new 
subject. 26.] The principle on which 
such an eating ought to rest: that all is 
Gopn’s, and for our use: and where no 
subjective scruple is cast in, ad/ to be freely 
partaken of : see 1 Tim. iv. 4. 27.) 
The same maxim applied to their conduct 
at ὦ banquet given by a heathen. A mis- 
cellaneous banquet, and not a sacrificial 
feast, is meant. At such, there might be 
meat which had been offered to idols. 
Grot. says well οὔ θέλετε. πορεύεσθαι, 
“ Admonet tacite, melius forte facturos, si 
non eant: ire tamen non prohibet :. supra, 


Oo 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. Χ, 38---88. 


562 


e ? / ὃ \ \ f ὃ ῶ 28 34 δέ ς ry 
mere only+, ©avakplvovtes διὰ τὴν * συνείδησιν ἐὰν δέ Tis ὑμῖν 
n Luke xx. 91, = , a \ 

John xi-57. εἴπῃ Τοῦτο ™iepoOutov ἐστιν, μὴ ἐσθίετε Ov ἐκεῖνον τὸν 
29 f συνείδησιν δὲ ° λέγω 


Acts xxiii. 


\ , 
svonlyt. π μῃνύσαντα καὶ τὴν f συνείδησιν. 


vi, Ἐν Iv « a εἶ Ν “- , ., 
37 only οὐχὶ τὴν P ἑαυτοῦ, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἢ τοῦ ἑτέρου. “ ἵνα Ti ya 
4 ΞΞΘΝΟΣ φ Y , 
reff. e y 5 θ ’ , ἐῶν. op “po f 5 , ᾿ 
p 2nd pers., 7) ελευ ερια μου KPLVETAL UTO a Ὡς συνειθήσεως ; .. 
2 Cor. vii. 11 > , / a 
reff 30 εἰ ἐγὼ " χάριτι ἃ μετέχω, τί Y βλασφημοῦμαι © ὑπὲρ οὗ 
q Paul, here = > , ” A 
only. Matt. ἀγὼ * εὐχαριστῶ; 51} εἴτε οὖν ἐσθίετε εἴτε πίνετε εἴτε τὶ 
46. Luke xiii.7. Acts iv. 36. vii. 26 only. Gen. iv. 6. r=. Gal. ii. 4. v..1, 13 al. s -. Job xix. 
27 BN ΑἸὰ [Ὁ] t = Rom. vi. 17 reff. dat., Rom. iv, 19, see note. u ch. ix. 10, 12 reff. 
v = Rom. iii. 8 reff. w ellips., ch. vii. 1 al. x = Rom. xiv. 6. i. 8 al. absol., ch. xi. 24 reff. 
y so ch. iii. 22 reff. 


28. om υμιν F latt goth Tert, Aug,[ins, ]. rec (for sepo08.) ειἰδωλοθυτον (see 
notes), with CDFKLP rel syr copt goth arm Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damase Tert, |: 
immolaticium D-lat F-lat [Ambrst] (in ver 19 simulacro immolatum D-lat, idolis 
émmolatum F-lat vulg [Aug,]): txt ABHN sah Eus (Clem) Orig [de saerificio Syr 
(victima idoli ver 19) }. om εκεινον τὸν μηνυσαντα Kat F. aft καὶ ins δια 
D Syr syr-w-ob. rec at end ins του yap κυριου ἡ yn Kat To TANpwua αὐτὴ» (re- 

etition from ver 26: see also on ver 31), with H?KL rel syr goth Chr, { Euthal-ms] 
hdrt Phot ΤῊ] @e: om ABCDFH!PN 17 latt Syr coptt 2th arm Damase Ambrst 
Aug, Pel Bede. ; 

29. for ovx:, ov D! 17. epavtov H m: σεαυτου D!: tuam latt [(Syr) syr coptt 
Ambrst Aug]. for aAAns, απιστου F[-gr] D-lat G-lat goth Ambr Jer Sedul 
Primas (txt Ambrst Aug, Pel Bede). 

30. rec aft εἰ ins δὲ (supplementary, but disturbing the sense), with (ic : om ABCD 
FKLPX rel [latt syrr coptt goth zth-pl(om vv. 29, 30 eth-rom) arm] Clem, Cyr, [Chr, 


Euthal-ms Damase Aug; |. 


cap. v.10.” On διὰ τ. cvvetd.,see above, 
ver. 25. 28.| Who is the person sup- 
posed to say this ? not, as Grot., al., think, 
the host, of whom tts could hardly be said, 
but it would stand ἐὰν δὲ ὑμῖν εἴπῃ : nor, 
as Chrys., Theophyl., al., and De Wette, 
—some heathen guest, by whom De W. 
imagines it said maliciously, or to put the 
Christian to the proof,—for his συνείδησις 
would hardly be so much taken into ac- 
count in the matter; but, as Neander, Pfl. 
u. Leit. p. 399, and Meyer,—some weak 
Christian, wishing to warn his brother. 
ἱερόθωτον is apparently placed advisedly, to 
yepresent what would be said at a heathen’s 
table. De W. supposes it on this very 
account to be a correction: but surely this 
is giving a corrector credit for more fine- 
ness of discrimination than they ordinarily 
shew. Much more probable is it, that the 
unusual and apparently incorrect ἱερόθυτον 
should give place to the ordinary and more 
exact term. Sv ἐκ. τ. pyy....| On 
account of the man who informed you, 
and (καί specifying the particular point or 
points to which the more general preceding 
clause applies: as, τῶνδε εἵνεκα, καὶ γῆς 
ἱμέρῳ... καὶ μάλιστα τῷ χρηστηρίῳ πί- 
guvos ἐών, καὶ τίσασθαι θέλων... .. . - 
Herod.i.73. See Hartung, Partikellehre, 
i, 145) conscience: i.e. to spare the in- 
former being wounded in his conscience. 
29. Explanation of the last διὰ τὴν 
συνείδησιν, as meaning not your own, but 
that of the informer. True to his inter- 
pretation (see above), De W. supposes τοῦ 


ἑτέρου not to refer to τὸν μηνύσαντα, but 
to ‘ your weak Christian brother ;’ but then 
how very harsh and clumsy are the various 
references to understood persons ;—and 
how simple, on the other interpretation, is 
the reference in each case of τὴν συν. to the 
subject of the clause. ἵνα τί γάρ] 
For why is my freedom judged by a 
conscience not mine own ?—i.e. ‘ Why 
should I be so treated (hazard by my 
actions such treatment) that the exercise 
of my Christian freedom, eating as I do 
and giving thanks, should become matter 
of condemnation to another, who conscien- 
tiously disapproves of it?’ If (no copula) 
I partake thankfully ([not, as E. V., ‘ by 
grace’| dat. of the manner, cf. Soph. 
Antig. 616, σοφίᾳ yap ἔκ του κλεινὸν ἔπος 
πέφανται,--- πὰ Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 101), 
why am I to be spoken ill of for that 
for which I give thanks? These words 
have been misunderstood. It has been 
generally supposed that the Apostle is 
impressing a duty, not to give occasion 
for the condemnation of their liberty by 
another’s conscience. But the ground on 
which he is kere arguing, is the unfitness, 
absurdity, injustice to oneself and the 
cause of God, ver. 31, of so acting as to 
be condemned for that in which a man not 
only allows himself, but for which he gives 
thanks to God. The sentiment is the same 
as in Rom. xiv. 16, μὴ βλασφημείσθω 
ὑμῶν τὸ ἀγαθόν. The emphasis is each 
time on ἐγώ. 31—XI.1.] General 
conclusion of this part of the Epistle, 








ΧΙ. 1—3. 


ΠΡῸΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


563 


ποιεῖτε, πάντα 5 εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ ποιεῖτε. 3% 5 ἀπρόςκοποι : Rom. iii. 7. 


/ \¢ ~ na 
καὶ lovdaio γίνεσθε καὶ EAXnow καὶ τῇ " ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ 
Bie trp dieu imax χά ΤΥ ἡ ὁ ζητῶ 

cou’ 355 καθὼς Kay ἄντα πᾶσιν ἃ ἀρέσκω, μὴ "“ ζητῶν 


ρ τ, ἡ. 

Eph, i. 6 al. 
a Acts xxiv. 16 

Phil. i. 10 

only +. P. 

Sir. xxxv. 


τὸ ἐμαυτοῦ ‘ σύμφορον, ἀλλὰ TO ὅ τῶν ὃ πολλῶν, ἵνα σω- (=) 2 


ch. 1. 2 reff, 


66 XI 1 h 7 ΄ θ θὰ > \ an Ι : 
ὦσιν. . μιμήται μου γινεσ €, KAUWS Kay@w χρίιστου. c Acts xx. 35 
217K ὦ δὲ ὑμᾶς ὅτι “πάντα μου * μέμνησθ } ἃ Rom. vii. 8 
παιν μ a μ μεμνησῦε, Kat 4 Kor 


] 


καθὼς ' παρέδωκα 


5 οθέλω δὲ ὑμᾶς " εἰδέναι ὅτι παντὸς ἀνδρὸς ἡ κεφαλὴ 


reff. h ch. iv. 16 reff. 
k —2Tim.i.4. Heb. xiii. 3. 

xv.3. 2Pet.ii. 21. Jude ὃ. 

xxxix. (xxxii.) 4. xli. (xxxiv.) 2 only. 

iii. 6, 14. x. 23f. o Col. ii. 1. 


31. 1st ποιειτε bef τι D[-gr] F[-gr]. 


ver. 24. 


e a X ΄ 
ὑμῖν τὰς '' παραδόσεις ™ κατέχετε. fon vie 95 


ec only +. Eccl, 
QO ii. 3Symm. 
g = Rom. v.15 


i Luke xvi. 8. Rom. xv. 11. vv. 17, 22 only. w. ὅτι, Eccles. viii. 15. 
Prov. xxxi. (xxiv.) 7. 
m = Matt. xv. 2. 


} = Luke i. 2. Acts xvi. 4. ver.,23. ch. 
Gal. i. 14. 2 Thess. ii. 15, iii. 6 al.f~ Jer. 
n = Luke viii. 15. ch. xv. 2. 1 Thess..v. 21. Heb 


om 2nd ποιειτε F [spee | Ambrst- 


at end add του yap κυριου ἡ yn τε (as in ver 28) (5. 
32. rec γίνεσθε bef καὶ ιουδαιοις, with DKL[P]&* rel [Bas, Chr, Thdrt Damasc, 
Orig-int, ]: yiv. ἰουδ. te F[-gr: estote Jud@is vulg F-lat syrr coptt Hil, Ambrst |: 


txt ABCN! m 17 Orig, Did, Cyr[-p, Euthal-ms]. 


av marked for erasure ]. 


om tov F: αὐτου G[but 


33. for παντα πασιν, πασιν Kata παντα [omnibus omnia] F [D-lat Orig-int, Tert, 


Cypr, Ambrst Augaiic]: πα σιν] παντα Di -gr goth]. 


rec συμφερον (more usual), 


with DFK LPN? rel Orig,[-c,] Petr, [ Bas, Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc]: txt ABCR!. 


om 2nd το F. 


CuapP. XI. 2. rec aft υμας ins adeAgoi(addition at beginning of a new section), with 
DFKL rel [latt syrr(add μου) goth eth-pl] Thdrt [Damase Ambrst]: om ABCPR. a 


coptt zth-rom arm Ath, Cyr-jer, Bas, Chr, [Ors, Euthal-ms] Thl-comm. 


P [Cyr-jer, j. om καὶ A! 0 57. 


πάντοτε 


ins πανταχου bef παρεδωκα F D-lat Ambrst. 


(in F, ubique is not written in the Latin column but inserted over the Greek 


word.) 
Ambrst. 
κατεχετε C eth Ath, Chry. 


3. om Ist δὲ F(and G-lat, not F-lat) syr Ambrst. 


—enforced by the example of himself. 

31.] This εἴτε οὖν. . . ., passing 
from the special to the general, is not with- 
out reference to the last verse, in which 
the hypothesis is, that the Christian and 
thankful act of the believer is marred by 
the condemnatory judgment of his weak 
brother. All such hindrances to God’s 
glory they are to avoid; and in all things, 
eating or drinking, or any other particular 
of conduct (τι, any thing, the stress being 
on 7rotette,—Whether ye eat or drink, or 
do any thing; not as E. V. whatever ye 
ἐο,---ὁτιοῦν), the glory of God is to be 
the aim, self-regard being set aside: and 
so,— 82.] all offence is to be avoided 
(it being understood that this refers to 
ἀδιάφορα, for in other things, both Jews 
and Greeks must be offended, see ch. i. 23), 
whether to Jews or Heathens (both these 
out of the Church), or to the Church of 
God (their own brethren). 33. | His 
own course of conduct :—As I in all things 
(accus. of that on which the subject acts, 
or over which the quality predicated ex- 
tends, as in ἀλγῷ τὴν κεφαλήν; ---80 τοῦ 
πάντ᾽ εὐδαίμονος ὄλβου, Soph. (Βα. Tyr. 
1197. See Kiihner, ii. 222. 4) please (‘am 
pleasing :’ as Meyer well remarks, not the 


παραδεδωκα XN: παραδωκα F. 
aft παραδοσεις ins μου D'F latt [Ambrst Pel]. 


om υμιν F(and G-lat, not F-lat) 
ins ovtws bef 


om Ist o B'D'F. 


result, but the practiee on Paul’s part; 
for πᾶσιν ἀρέσκειν τὸν συμβουλεύοντα K. 
τὰ κοινὰ πράττοντα ἀδύνατον, Demosth. 
1481. 4). ἐμαυτοῦ and τῶν πολλῶν are 
opposed: see ver. 24. ἵνα σωθ., his 
great aim and end ;—so eh. ix. 22. 
ΧΙ. 1.] κἀγώ, scil. μιμητὴς γέγονα, 
pare on the sense, Phil. ii. 4, 5. 
XI. 2—84.] REPROOFS AND DIBEC- 
TIONS REGARDING CERTAIN DISORDERS 
WHICH HAD ARISEN IN THEIR ASSEM- 
BLIES: viz. (1) THE NOT VEILING OF 
THEIR WOMEN IN PUBLIC PRAYER (Vv. 
2—16): (2) THE ABUSE OF THE ἀγάπαι 
(17—34). 2—16.] The law of sub- 
jection of the woman to the man (2— 
12), and natural decency itself (18--- 16), 
teach that women should be veiled in 
public religious assemblies. 2.1 δέ, 
implying a distinction from the spirit of 
the last passage, which was one of blame, 
and exhortation toimitate him. He praises 
them for the degree in which they did this 
already, and expresses it by the slighter 
word μέμνησθε. πάντα, see above, 
on ch. x. 33. And ye keep (continue 
to believe and practise) the traditions 
(apostolic maxims of faith and practice, 
delivered either orally or in writing, 


Com- 


002 


564 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOT® A. 


ΧΙ. 


4 \ « 
p abso, Matt. χριστός ἐστιν, κεφαλὴ δὲ γυναικὸς ὁ ἀνήρ, κεφαλὴ δὲ 
vi. 5, ἄς. 


q- Acts xix. — 
6. ch. xiii. 9. xiv. 1, ἄς. 


[om 2nd δε P.] 


r (Mark xiv. 3 rec.) and ellips., Esth. vi. 12. 


τοῦ χριστοῦ ὁ θεός. * πᾶς ἀνὴρ Ρ προςευχόμενος ἢ 4 προ- 
φητεύων ' κατὰ " κεφαλῆς ἔχων " καταισχύνει τὴν κεφαλὴν 


s = ch, i. 27. ver. 22. 


rec om του (bef xpiorov), with CFKLP rel Orig, Eus, Chr, 


[Cyr-p,] Thdrt Damase Thi, (ἔς : ins ABDN m 17 Clem Eus, Chr, [Euthal-ms] ΤῊ], 


C)- 


2 Thess. ii. 15), according as (according 
to the words in which) I delivered (them) 
to you. This was their general practice : 
the eaceptions to it, or departures at all 
events from the spirit of those παραδόσεις, 
now follow. 8.1 “It appears, that 
the Christian women at Corinth claimed 
for their sex an equality with the other, 
taking occasion by the doctrine of Chris- 
tian freedom and abolition of sexual dis- 
tinctions in Christ (Gal. iii. 28). The 
gospel unquestionably did much for the 
emancipation of women, who in the East 
and among the Ionian Greeks (not among 
the Dorians and the Romans) were kept 
in unworthy dependence. Still this was 
effected in a quiet and gradual manner ; 
whereas in Corinth they seem to have 
tuken up the cause of female independence 
somewhat too eagerly. ‘The women over- 
stepped the bounds of their sex, in coming 
forward to pray and to prophesy in the 
assembled church with uncovered heads. 
Both of these the Apostle disapproved,— 
as well their coming forward to pray and 
to prophesy, as their removing the veil: 
here however he blames the latter practice 
only, and reserves the former till ch. xiv. 
34. In order to confine the women to 
their true limits, he reminds them of their 
subjection to the man, to whom again he 
ussigns his place in the spiritual order of 
creation, and traces this precedence up to 
God Himself.” De Wette. παντὸς 
ἀνδρός} ‘of every Christian man’ (as 
Chrys., al., Meyer, De W.), certainly, — 
and for such the Apostle was writing: but 
not only of every Christian man: the 
Headship of Christ is over all things to 
His Church, Eph. i. 22, and thus He is 
Head of every man. The word κεφαλή 
in each case means the head next above. 
This must be borne in mind, for Christ is 
THE HeaD of the Christian woman, as 
well as of the Christian man. God is the 
Head of Christ, not only according to His 
human Nature: the Son is, in his Sonship, 
necessarily subordinate to the Father : see 
ch. iii. 23, note, and ch. xv. 28. From 
'χριστός, the order descends first: then, in 
order to complete the whole, ascends up 
to God, Observe that though (Gal. 
iti, 28) the distinction of the sexes is 
‘abolished in Christ, as far as the offer of 
and standing in grace is concerned, yet 


for practical purposes, and for order and 
seemliness, it subsists and must be ob- 
served. 4.| The case of the man here 
treated, was regarded by the ancient Com- 
mentators, Chrys., Theodoret, Theophyl., 
(Εο., and Grot., Mosh., al., as an actually 
occurring one among the Corinthians :— 
but by recent ones, since Storr and Bengel, 
as hypothetically put, to bring out that 
other abuse which really had occurred. 
Had it been real, more would have been 
said on it below: but from ver. 5 onwards, 
attention is confined to the woman. 

προςευχ. praying in public: προφ. 
discoursing in the spirit; see on ch. 
xii. 10. κατὰ κεφ. ἔχων] scil. τι. 
‘The Jews when praying in public put over 
their heads a veil, called the Tallith, to 
shew their reverence before God and their 
unworthiness to look on Him: Lightf., 
Hor. Heb. in loc. Grotius’s note on the 
Greek and Roman customs is important: 
—‘ Apud Grzcos mos fuit sacra facere 
capite aperto. Legendum enim apud 
Macrob. i. Saturn. 8, Zllie Greco ritu 
capite aperto res divina fit, apparet ex 
loco ejusdem libri c. 10, ubi itidem dé 
Saturno agitur, et sacrum ei fieri dicitur 
aperto capite ritu peregrino; et ex loco 
ili. 6, ubi Varronem ait dicere, Greeci hoc 
esse moris, aperto capite sacrificare. amapa- 
καλύπτῳ κεφαλῇ ait de ejusdem Saturni 
sacris agens Plutarchus in Romanis quies- 
tionibus. Lucem facere id dici solitum 
Festus testatur. Eodem modo, id est 
aperto capite, etiam Herculi in ara maxima 
sacrum fieri solere testatur, praeter Macro- 
bium dicto libro iii. 6, Dion. Hal. lib. i., 
nimirum quia id sacrum institutem erat 
ab Evandro homine Greco. Sed Aineas (?) 
contrarium morem in Italiam intulit 
sacra faciendi velato capite, ne quod malum 
omen oculis aut auribus obveniret: ut 
Virg. nos docet Mn. iii. et ad eum Servius, 
et in Breviario Aurelius Victor: sed et 
Plutarchus in Romanis questionibus. Et 
ejus moris etiam Plautus meminit in 
comeediis quibusdam: ut sdlet admiscere 
Romana Grecis. Paulus Grecis Corinthiis 
scribens Grecum prefert morem, et causas 
adfert quales ferebat negotii natura. Ex 
Pauli prescripto perpetuo bune morem 
tenuere Christiani veteres. Tertul. Apo- 
logetico: ‘Illue suspicientes Christiani 
wianibus expansis, quia innocui:. capite 


ABCDE 
KLPR 
abcd: 
fghk 
mno 
17. 47 


4—7, 


nw : - ‘ / A 
αὐτοῦ. ὅ πᾶσα δὲ γυνὴ Ῥ προςευχομένη ἢ 
᾿ἀκατακαλύπτῳ τῇ κεφαλῇ " καταισ ύνει τὴν κεφαλὴν 

Ἤν TN ' ” Χ' ω ” 
’ n < , ’ Ν ᾽ A ’ , > 
αὐτῆς" “ev γάρ ἐστιν " καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τῇ " ἐξυρημένῃ. ὃ εἰ 
Ν » Ww / / \ x / θ ᾽ δὲ 
γὰρ οὐ "' κατακαλύπτεται γυνή, καὶ " κειράσθω' εἰ δὲ 
ΣΝ x See NaS ye , θ Ἀν χσθ w 
Ὶ αἰσχρὸν γυναικὶ τὸ * κείρασθαι ἢ ξυρᾶσθαι, “' κατακα- 
μοφειλει λυπτέσθω. Ἷ ἀνὴρ μὲν γὰρ οὐκ * ὀφείλει * κατακαλύπτε- 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΊΟΥΣ Α. 


565 


4 προφητεύουσα ι ver. 13 onl 
Li on Levit. xiii 45 
A Ald. compl. 
(there also 


ἃ ch. xii. (9) 11 
only. constr., 


here only. 
n- : see 1 Pet.v.9 
\ ͵ aN \ A ς 7 ς © : > 
.xara- σθαι τὴν κεφαλήν, ὃ εἰκὼν καὶ ° δόξα θεοῦ 4 ὑπάρχων" ἡ v here bis. ας 
καλ. τὴν only. Num. vi. 9. w here (3ce) only, Gen. xxxvill. 15 al. x here bis. Acts Vill. 
a 32. xviii. 18 only. 2 Kings xiv. 26. : y ch. xiv. 35. Eph. v.12. Tit.i. Jl only. P. Gen. ἘΠ. 
ABCDF 3, ἄς. only. z constr., Phil. i. 21. _. ἃ = Acts xvii. 29. Rom. xv. 1. b Rom. 
KLPR viii. 29 reff. GEN, 1, 26, 27. c = Ps. xviii. 1. d Acts viii. 16 reff. 
acde f 
ghklm _ 5. for πασα de, και π. A Syr eth: om de P. om τη D'F. rec for αὐτῆς, 


9 17 47. cavrns (see note), with BD#KL rel Orig,: txt ACD!FLPN a Ὁ] d g* h o 17 Chr, Thdrt 


[ Euthal-ms Damasc ]. 
6. aft κειρασθω ins ἡ ξυρασθω B. 


7. rec om 7 (conforming to the preceding and following), with CD*KLRX, rel Chr, 


nudo, quia non erubescimus: denique sine 
monitore, quia de pectore oramus,’ &c, 
Nihil hue pertinet mos Septentrionis in re- 
verentie signum caput velandi, qui quan- 
quam per Germanicas nationes late manavit, 
et Judzis tamen et Grecis, et veteri Italie 
fuit incognitus.” καταισχ. τ. κεφ. 
αὐτοῦ] dishonours his Head, i.e. Christ: 
not, his own head literally,—except in so 
far as the literal and metaphorical senses 
are both included,—the (literal) head of 
the man being regarded as the representa- 
tive of his spiritual Head. See this brought 


‘ out in Stanley’s note: for the head of the 





man in this respect of honouring or dis- 
honouring, has been, ver. 3, explained to 
be Curist. Him he dishonours, by 
appearing veiled before men, thus recog- 
nizing subjection to them in an assembly 
which ought to be conformed to Christian 
order. 5.] The case of the woman is 
just the converse. She, if she uncovers 
herself (on the manner of covering, see 
below ver. 15, note) in such an assembly, 
dishonours her head (the man; not, as 
Meyer and many others, literally, her own 
head (but see above): of this kind of dis- 
honour there is no mention at all in our 
passage, and ver. 3 has expressly guarded 
us against making the mistake) by appa- 
rently casting off his headship: and if this 
is to be so, the Apostle proceeds, why not 
go further and cut off ber hair, which of 
itself is a token of this subjection? But 
if this be acknowledged to be shameful (it 
was a punishment of adulteresses, see 
Wetst. in loc. and Tacit. Germ. 19), let 
the further decency of the additional 
covering be conceded likewise. The 
reading ἑαυτῆς may have arisen from 
fancying that her own head is meant. 

ἕν... ἐστιν κ- τὸ αὐτό] she: not it, τὸ 
ἀκατακάλυπτον εἶναι. The neut. is used 
because the identity is generic, not indivi- 
dual: cf. Eur. Med. 928,-- γυνὴ δὲ θῆλυ 


κἀπὶ δακρύοις ἔφυ, and other examples in 
Kihner, ii. 45 (§ 421). 6.] the ar- 
gument see above. ov Kat.,—is to be 
unveiled, the pres. indicating the normal 
habit. καὶ κειρ.») let her atso, besides 
being unveiled, &c. κείρ. ἢ Eup. ] 
‘plus est radi quam tonderi,’ Grot. 
7—9.] A second reason for the same,— 
from the dependence of the man on God 
only, but of the woman on the man. 
7.1 yap refers back to and gives a reason 
for κατακαλυπτέσθω, the difference be- 
tween the sexes being assumed,—that one 
should be and the other should not be 
veiled. The emphasis is accordingly on 
ἀνήρ. οὐκ ὀφείλει, should not, 
ought not: see reff. εἰκὼν θεοῦ, ref. 
Gen. This the man is, having been created 
first,—directly, and in a special manner : 
the woman indirectly, only through the 
man. x. δόξα θ.] And the (repre- 
sentative of the) glory of God: on account 
of his superiority and godlike attributes 
among other created beings. This is ob- 
viously the point here brought out, as in 
Ps. viii. 6: not, that he is set to shew 
forth God’s glory (εἰς γὰρ δόξαν θεοῦ 
ὀφείλει ὁ ἀνὴρ ὑποτετάχθαι τῷ θεῷ, Phot. 
in cum.), however true that may be: nor, 
as Estius, from Augustine, ‘quia in illo 
Deus gloriatur:’ nor is δόξα the repre- 
sentative of the Heb. nn, Gen. i. 26 
(ὁμοίωσι5), as Riickert, al., suppose, be- 
cause the LXX have rendered nym, Num. 
xii. 8; Ps. xvii. 15, by δόξα : for, as Meyer 
observes, in so well-known a passage as 
Gen. i. 26, the Apostle could hardly fait 
to have used the LXX word ὁμοίωσις. 
Man is God’s glory: He has put in 
him His Majesty, and he represents God on 
earth: woman is man’s glory : taken (ver. 
8) from the man, shining (to follow out 
Grotius’s similitude, “minus aliquid vero, 
ut luna lumen minus sole ”’) not with light 
direct from God, but with light derived 


γυνὴ δὲ “ δόξα ἀνδρός ἐστιν. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ Α: 


ΧΙ, 


8 ’ , 3 9 x » 
οὐ γὰρ ἐστιν ἀνὴρ ἐκ 


Tar’? σπυναικός, ἀλλὰ γυνὴ ἐξ ἀνδρός" 9 καὶ γὰρ οὐκ " ἐκτίσθη 


f = as ordi- 
narily; e.g. 
Matt. x. 1 
αἷς ἕν; 

g see note, 


[Euthal-ms] Damase: ins ABD'FPN? Isid, Thdrt. 
10. ἡ γυνὴ bef οφειλει H m 17. 


8. om ver K. 


from man, “τὸ θῆλυ, ἄῤῥεν ἀτελές, phi- 
losophis. Imperat materfamilias sue fa- 
miliw, sed viri nomine.” Grot. This of 
course is true only as regards her place 
in creation, and her providential subor- 
dination, not in respect of the dependence 
of every woman’s individual soul directly 
on God, not on man, for supplies of grace 
and preparations for glory. ‘The Apostle 
omits εἰκών, because anthropologically the 
woman is not the image of the man, on 
account of the difference of the sexes: and 
also perhaps because thus he would seem 
to deny to the woman the being created in 
the divine image, which she is as well as 
the man, Gen. i. 26, 27. The former 
reason appears the more probable: and so 
De W. and Meyer. “It may be observed 
that, whereas in Genesis the general 
character of man under the Hebrew name 
answering to ἄνθρωπος is the only one 
brought forward, here it is merged in the 
word ἀνήρ, which only expresses his rela- 
tion to the woman.” Stanley. 8.1 yap 
gives the reason of the former assertion 
γυνὴ δόξα avdpdés,—viz. that the man is not 
(emphasis on ἐστιν, which prevents the x 
having a figurative sense, of dependence : 
—‘takes not his being,’ in the fact of his 
original creation. The propagation of the 
species is not here in view) out of the 
woman, but the woman out of the man 
(compare Gen. ii. 23, κληθήσεται γυνή, ὅτι 
ἐκ Tov ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς ἐλήφθη). 

9.7 For also (parallel with ver. 8—another 
reason: not subordinate to it, as Meyer, 
who renders é« in ver. 8, ‘dependent on,’ 
and regards this verse as giving the reason) 
the man was not created (emphasis on 
ἐκτίσθη, as before on ἐστιν) on account of 
the woman, &c In this verse, besides 
the manner of creation, ἐκ τοῦ ἀνδρός, the 
occasion of creation, διὰ τὸν ἄνδρα, is in- 
sisted on; see Gen. ii. 18 ff. 10. | 
διὰ τοῦτο, on account. of what has just 
been said, by which the subordination of 
the woman has been proved :—refers to vv. 
7—9, not as Meyer, to ver. 9 only: for vv. 
8, 9, give two parallel reasons for γυνὴ 
δόξα ἀνδρός, the inference from which pro- 
position has not yet been given, but now 
follows, with ὀφείλει answering to οὐκ 
ὀφείλει above. dd. 4H y. ἐξουσίαν ἔχ. 
ἐπὶ τῆς κεφ. The woman ought to have 
power (the sign of power or subjection ; 


ἀνὴρ διὰ τὴν γυναῖκα, ἀλλὰ γυνὴ διὰ τὸν ἄνδρα. 


n ᾿ ¢ ¥ , na r eee 
τοῦτο " ὀφείλει ἡ γυνὴ ἴ ἐξουσίαν § ἔχειν ὃ ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς ABCDF 
HKLPR 
acdef 
ghklm 
ο 17. 47 


ins του bef avdpos F. 


shewn by the context to mean a veil). So 
Diodor. Sic. i. 47: εἰκόνα... .. εἴκοσι πη- 
χῶν, μονόλιθον, ἔχουσαν τρεῖς βασιλείας 
ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῇ», ἃς διασημαίνειν ὅτι καὶ 
θυγάτηρ καὶ γυνὴ καὶ μήτηρ βασιλέως 
ὕπηρξε, where βασίλειαι evidently are 
crowns, the tokens of kingdom. And as 
there from the context it is plain that they 
indicated participation in the glory of the 
kingdoms, so here it is as evident from the 
context that the token of ἐξουσία indi- 
cates being uxder power: and such token 
is the covering. So Chrys. (τὸ καλύπτε- 
σθαι, ὑποταγῆς κ. egovolas), Theodoret, 
Theophyl. (τὸ τοῦ ἐξουσιάζεσθαι σύμβο- 
λον), (ἔσαπι., Beza, Grot., Est., Bengel, 
Wolf, al., Billroth, Riickert, Olsh., Meyer, 
De Wette. To enumerate the various 
renderings would be impossible. Some of 
the principal are, (1) a sign of power to 
pray and prophesy in public, bestowed on 
her by her husband. So Schrader, iv. 158: 
but this would be quite irrelevant to thecon- 
text. (2) Some suppose ἐξουσίαν actually 
to mean a veil, because the Heb. TN, ‘a 
veil,’ comes from the root 111, ‘ subjecit.’ 
So Hammond, Le Clere, al. But (see 
Lexx.) ‘ subjecit’ is not the primary, only 
a tropical meaning: the primary meaning, 
‘extendit, deduxit,’ is much more likely to 
have given rise to the substantive. It is 
certainly a curious coincidence that the 
Heb. terms should be thus allied,—and 
that alliance may have been present to 
the Apostle’s thoughts: but this does not 
shew that he used ἐξουσία for a veil. 
(3) Kypke would put a comma after éfouc., 
and render ‘ propterea mulier potestati 
obnowia est, ita ut velamen (see ver. 4) 
in capite habeat.’? But the sense of ὀφεί- 
Ae Tt would require (see Lexx.) ὑπακοήν, 
not ἐξουσίαν. (4) Pott renders, ‘ mulie- 
rem oportet servare jus (sive potestatem) 
in caput suum, sc. eo, quod illud velo 
obtegat.’ But this, though philologically 
allowable (see Rev. xi. 6; xx. 6; xiv. 18; 
and with ἐπάνω, Luke xix. 17), is entirely 
against the context, in which the woman 
has no power over her own head, and oz 
that very account is to be covered. (5) 
Hagenbach (in the Stud. und Krit. 1828, 
p- 401) supposes ἐξουσία here to mean her 
origin, e€-ovola from ἐξ-εἶμι, aS παρ-οὐσία 
from map-eiuc:—to shew that she (ver. 
8) ἐστιν ἐξ ἀνδρός. But apart from other 


10 διὰ Η ανηρ 


= atic « 


7 
whe 


ἡ 








8-- 11. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


567 


διὰ τοὺς " ἀγγέλους. 11] ἱπλὴν οὔτε γυνὴ χωρὶς ἀνδρὸς b =: ordi- 


exxxvii. l. 
ν. 33. 


narily; so Ps. 


i -- Matt. Luke passim (not Mark, John, nor Luke in Acts). Paul, Eph. 
Phil. i. 18. iii. 16. iv. 14 only. Rev. ii. 25. Lam. iii. 3. 


11. rec avnp xwpts yur. ουτε γυνὴ xwpis avd. (appy more natural order), with D2[-gr] 


objections to this, it must thus be, τὴν ἐξ. 
or τὴν ἐξ. αὐτῆς. Other renderings and 
conjectures may be seen in Meyer’s note, 
from which the above is mainly taken: 
and in Stanley’s. διὰ τοὺς ἀγγέλους] 
On account of the angels: i.e. because in 
the Christian assemblies the holy angels of 
God are present, and delighting in the due 
order and subordination of the ranks of 
God’s servants,—-and by a violation of that 
order we should be giving offence to them. 
See ref. So Chrys. (οὐκ οἶδας ὅτι μετ᾽ ay- 
γέλων ἕστηκας ; μετ᾽ ἐκείνων ἄδεις, μετ᾽ 
ἐκείνων ὑμνεῖς, καὶ ἕστηκας γελῶν ; cited by 
Hammond, but from what work of Chrys. 
1 have not been able to find. In his com- 
mentary on this passage he is not clear, but 
seems to take this view,—ei yap Tov ἀνδρὸς 
καταφρονεῖς, φησί, τοὺς ἀγγέλους αἰδέσθητι, 
Hom. xxvi. p. 294. In the Hom. on the 
Ascension, vol. ii. pt. ii. p. 443 (Migne), he 
says, εἰ βούλει ἰδεῖν K. μάρτυρας K. ἀγγέλους 
ἄνοιξον THs πίστεως τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς, κ. ὄψει 
τὸ θέατρον ἐκεῖνο" εἰ γὰρ πῶς 6 ἀὴρ ἀγγέλων 
᾿ ἐμπέπλησται, πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἢ ἐκκλησία 
....67t γὰρ ἅπας 6 ἀὴρ ἀγγέλων ἐμπέ- 
πλήησται, ἄκουσον τί φησιν 6 ἀπόστολος, 
ἐντρέπων τὰς γυναῖκας ὥςτε ἔχειν κάλυμμα 
ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆπ᾽ ““ὀφείλουσιν k.T.A.”), 
Grot. (whose note see in Pool), Estius, 
Wolf, Riickert, Meyer, De Wette. (1) 
Others, with a modification of this render- 
ing, take τοὺς ἀγγέλους as the guardian 
angels, appointed, one to take charge of 
each Christian. So Theophyl. (τὸ ava- 
κεκαλύφθαι ἀναισχυντίαν ἐμφαίνει" ἣν καὶ 
οἱ τοῖς πιστοῖς παρεπόμενοι ἄγγελοι βδε- 
λύσσονται), Jerome (not Aug. de Trin. xii. 
7, as Meyer, see below), Theodoret. But, 
though such angels certainly do minister 
to the heirs of salvation,—see Matt. xviii. 
10, and note,—there does not appear to be 
any immediate allusion to them here. (2) 
Others again understand ‘ bad angels,’ who 
might themselves be lustfully excited; so 
Tertull. de Virg. Vel. 7, vol. ii. p. 899, 
“ propter angelos: scilicet quos legimus a 
Deo et ceelo excidisse ob concupiscentiam 
foeminarum.”’ See also cont. Marcion. v. 
8, p. 488.—or might tempt men so to be, 
—Schottgen, Mosh., al.,—or might injure 
the unveiled themselves: so, after Rab- 
binical notions, Wetst. But of ἄγγελοι, 
absol., never means any thing in the N. T. 
except the holy angels of God. See, in 
Stanley’s note, a modification of this view, 
which is consistent with that meaning. 
(3) Clem. Alex. fragm. ix. ὕποτυπ. lib. iii. 
(p. 1004 P.) says, ἀγγέλους φησὶ τοὺς 


δικαίους, Kk. evapérous. (4) Beza, the 
Christian prophets, ‘in ccetu loquentes 
ut Dei nuncios et legatos.” (5) Ambrose, 
the presidents of the assemblies. (6) 
Lightf., the axgeli or nuntii desponsatio- 
mum, persons deputed to bring about be- 
trothals. (7) Rosenm., Schrader, and many 
others,—eaxploratores vel speculatores : 
“‘ Poterat nempe nove consuetudinis notitia 
per ἀπίστους speculatores in publicum ema- 
nare, christianasque uxores tum Judzis, 
de isto mulierum habitu pessime existiman- 
tibus, tum Grecis quoque in suspicionem 
rei christiane probrosissimam adducere.” 
Rosenm. Against all these ingenious 
interpretations is the plain sense of οἱ &y- 
γελοι (Matt. xiii. 49. Mark i. 13. Luke 
xvi. 22. chap. xiii. 1. Col. ii. 18. Heb. i. 
4, 5, 7, 13, al.), which appears to me irre- 
fragable. But still a question remains, 
Wuy should the Apostle have here named 
the angels, and adduced them as furnish- 
ing a reason for women being veiled in the 
Christian assemblies? Bengel has given 
an acute, but not I believe the correct 
answer : “mulier se tegat propter angelos, 
i.e. quia etiam angeli teguntur. Sicut 
ad Deum se habent angeli: sic ad virum 
se habet mulier. Dei facies patet: velan- 
tur angeli: Esa. vi. 2. Viri facies patet : 
velatur mulier.” Surely this lies too far 
off for any reader to supply without fur- 
ther specification. Aug. de Trin. xii. 7 
(10), vol. viii. p. 1004, gives an ingenious 
reason: “Grata est enim sanctis angelis 
sacrata et pia significatio. Nam Deus non 
ad tempus videt, nec aliquid novi fit in 
Kjus visione atque scientia, cum aliquid 
temporaliter aut transitorie geritur, sicut 
inde afficiuntur sensus vel carnales anima- 
lium et hominum, vel etiam ccelestes an- 
gelorum.” (He makes no mention,—see 
above,—of guardian angels.) I believe 
the account given above to be the true 
one, and the reason of adducing it to be, 
that the Apostle has before his mind the 
order of the universal church, and prefers 
when speaking of the assemblies of Chris- 
tians, to adduce those beings who, as not 
entering into the gradation which he has 
here described, are conceived as spectators 
of the whole, delighted with the decency 
and order of the servants of God. Stan- 
ley thinks the most natural explanation of 
the reference to be, that the Apostle was 
led to it by a train of association familiar 
to his readers, but lost to us: and compares 
the intimations of a similar familiarity on 
their part with the subjects of which he 


568 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. AY. 
7 “ον \ \ ᾽ i 12 Μ“' \ e \ 
krers. Οὔτε ἀνὴρ χωρὶς γυναικὸς ἐν κυρίῳ 15 ὥςπερ γὰρ ἡ γυνὴ ABCDF 
Lh. viii. 6. Ὰ Ε : a » ; 
Rom. xi. 36. Κ ἐς τοῦ ἀνδρός, οὕτως καὶ ὁ ἀνὴρ διὰ τῆς γυναικός, τὰ Séacdef 
43 gre ae ΄, 15" a κ᾿ ae ae ee “yar ; , ghkim 
1, Pai. /wavtTa!éx τοῦ θεοῦ. 15 ἐν ὑμῖν αὐτοῖς ™ κρίνατε" ™ πρέπον 017. 47 
n Matt. iii 15 2 ; Ἢ a ; 
TA oe ἐστὶν γυναῖκα ὃ ἀκατακάλυπτον τῷ θεῷ προςεύχεσθαι ; 
x r ΄ \ ΄ a / 3: τῷ \ >: 
(-wet, Eph. 14 οὐδὲ ἡ Ρ φύσις αὐτὴ διδάσκει ὑμᾶς OTL ἀνὴρ μὲν ἐὰν 
ii. 10. Tit. ii. lal Lal » - ‘ \ ~ , 
1. Heb. 0. 4 κομᾷ, " ἀτιμία αὐτῷ ἐστιν, 15 γυνὴ δὲ ἐὰν 4 κομᾷ, δόξα 
vii. 26 only. 


Ps. lxiv. 1.) 
constr., here 
only. o ver. ὃ. » 
bis only +. r Rom. i. 26 reff. 
u Heb. i. 12 (from Ps. ci. 26) only. 


Exod. xxii. 27. Job xxvi.6. Ps. ciii. 6. 


“Ὁ εἰ / ΄ 
αὐτῇ ἐστιν; ὅτι ἡ " κόμη ἵ ἀντὶ ἃ περιβολαίου δέδοται 


p = Rom. i. 26 (reff.). ii. 27. xi. 21, 24. see James iii. 7. 


here 


q 
s here only. Num. vi. 5. t = Luke xi. 11. 


KL rel vulg syrr Chr, Thdrt Pel: txt ABC D!3[and lat] FHP ἃ m 17 coptt eth arm 
Clem, Bas-sel Damasce Sing-cler, Ambrst Aug). 


12. om 6 F(not G) 17[om 7 also}. 
e contra Tischdf]. 


for δια, εκ Καὶ [f]. 


om της H [ Montf: 


13. for ev ὑμιν αὑτοῖς, vues αυὐτοι D vulg(not tol [vos autem am}) lat-ff. 
mposevx. bef τω 6. DF [latt syrr coptt eth arm(Tischdf) }. 

14. rec ins ἡ bef ovde (addition to mark the interrogation), with D3KL rel syr-mg 
sah: om ABCD!FHPR 17. 47 latt syrr copt arm [ Euthal-ms | Ambr, Ambrst. 
rec αὐτὴ bet ἡ φυσις, with D?KL rel Chr, Thdrt: om avrn F[-gr] arm[?] Tert,: txt 


ABCD!3HPX ἃ m 17 [Euthal-ms} Damasc,. 


erasure) copt. for eav, av D}. 


aft μεν ins yap N!(but marked for 


15. avtn δεδοται CHP ἃ ἃ m vulg(with F-lat) syr Damasc, Ambr: om avty D ΕἾ -gr] 
KLefh1 [47] Chr, Thdrt Ee Tert.: δεδοται αὐτὴ ABN c g Κο 17 G-lat Syr coptt 


zeth arm [ Euthal-ms]. 


was treating in 2 Thess. ii. 5—7. 

11,1 Yet is neither sex insulated and inde- 
pendent of the other in the Christian life. 
ἐν κυρίῳ is not the predicate (as Grot., 
&c.),—‘ neque viri exclusis mulieribus .. . 
participes sunt beneficiorum per Christum 
partorum : nor does it mean according 
to the ordinance of God, as Chrys., Beza, 
Olsh.,—for the phrase ἐν κυρίῳ is well 


known as applying to the Christian state, " 


in the Lord. See 6. σ΄. Rom. xvi. 2, 8, 11, 
12 (bis), &e. 12.) And in this, the 
Christian life accords with the original 
ordinance of God. For (proof of ver. 11) 
as the woman is (was taken, Gen. ii. 21 f.) 
out of the man, so the man is (is born, 
in the propagation of the human race) 
by means of the woman; but all things 
(both man and woman and all things else: 
a general maxim, see 2 Cor. v. 18) are of 
(as their source, —thus uniting in one great 
head both sexes and all creation) God. 
They are dependent on one another, but 
both on Him: the Christian life therefore, 
which unites them in Christ, is agreeable to 
God’s ordinance. 13. | Appeal to their 
own sense of propriety : ct. ch. x. 15. 

ἐν ὑμῖν avr. | Each man within himself, in 
his own judgment. 14.] ἡ φύσις 
αὐτή, nature herself: i.e. the mere fuct 
of one sex being by nature unveiled, i.e. 
having short hair,—the other, veiled, i. 6. 
having long hair. This plainly declares 
that man was intended to be uncovered,— 
woman, covered. When therefore we deal 
with the proprieties of the artificial state, 
of clothing the body, we must be regulated 


by nature’s suggestion: that which she 
has indicated to be left uncovered, wé 
must so leave: that which she has covered, 
when we clothe the body, we must cover 
likewise. This is the argument. φύσις 
is not sense of natural propriety, but 
NATURE,—the law of creation. 

konpa | So Eustathius, Il. y. p. 288, in 
Wetst., κόμην δὲ ἔχειν, καὶ εὔκομον εἶναι, 
γυναικώτερόν ἐστιν. διὸ καὶ ὁ Πάρις ὀνειδί- 
ζεται ὧς κόμην ἔχων. On φύσις and κομᾷ 
Pool observes, ‘locus est vexatissimus 
doctorum sententiis ; and gives a note of 
four folio columns; and Bengel has a long 
discussion on the lawfulness of wigs. 

The Apostle (see above) makes no allusion 
to the customs of nations in the matter, 
nor is even the mention of them relevant(: 
he is speaking of the dictates of nature 
herself. ] 15.] See on ver. 14: com- 
pare Milton, Par. Lost, iv. 304 ff. 
περιβόλαιον, properly a wrapper, or en- 
veloping garment: see reff., and Eurip. 
Herc. fur. 549, and in a metaphorical 
sense, 1269. “In this passage,” says 
Stanley, “the Apostle would refer to the 
‘peplum,’ which the Greciaa women used 
ordinarily as a shawl, but on public oeca- 
sions as a hood also, especially at funerals 
and marriages.” See a woodcut in Smith’s 
Dict. of Antt. art. ‘peplum.’ 16.] 
Cuts off the subject, already abundantly 
decided, with a settlement of any possible 
difference, by appeal to universal apostolic 
and ecclesiastic custom. But if any man 
seems to be contentious (i. e. ‘ if any arises 
who appears to dispute the matter, who 


ee 








12—18. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 569 
a , al , “-“ Sf af 
[avr]: 16 εἰ δέ τις " δοκεῖ © φιλόνεικος εἶναι, ἡμεῖς τοιαὕτην ¥ = Luke xxi. 
7, e rad al 5 τᾶν =. 
Heov Η. ἢ συνήθειαν οὐκ ἔχομεν, οὐδὲ ai γ ἐκκλησίαι τοῦ * θεοῦ. og aif 
ABCDF i ἘΞ ΝΠ ἡ , > b2 a er » c .2.. W here only. 
KLPR 7 Touro δὲ παραγγέλλω OUK ~ ETTALWWY, OTL Οὐκ “ELS Ezek. iii.7 
acdef , ἃ ε 9 Meee? i ae ξ r 18 a only. (-Kta, 
ghklm-T0 ὃ κρεῖσσον ἀλλὰ " εἰς τὸ ὃ ἧσσον ‘ συνέρχεσθε. βρῶ Se 
. τκεῖν, 
Bat 34 Prov. x. 12.) x John xviii. 39. ch. viii. 7 v. τ. only+. Prov. xvii. 9 Symm. [or -θης]. (-θης, 
2 Macc. iii. 31.) y plur., Rom. xvi. 16 reff. z ch. i. 2 reff. a Acts i. 4 reff. 
b ver. 2. ς see Rom. xiii. 4 reff. d ch, vii. 9 reff. e = here (2 Cor. xii. 15) 


only}. (Isa. xxiii. 8.) 


f= Acts i. 6 reff. 


g (Rom. iii. 2.} 


17. rec παραγγελλων ovr επαινω (see vv. 2 and 22), with C3(appy) D3(and lat) F[-gr] 
KLPX rel copt [sah-mnt] Chr, Thdrt !Sedul]: -Aw οὐκ -yw D'{-gr] 137 sah[-woide 


Euthal-ms]: 
Bede. 
[ Euthal-ms ].) 


seems not satisfied with the reasons I have 
given, but is still disputatious ;’—this is 
the only admissible sense of δοκεῖ in this 
construction: see reff. :—for the meaning, 
‘if it pleases any one, &c. would require 
τινι δοκεῖ : and ‘if any one thinks that he 
may, &c. would not agree with φιλονεικεῖν, 
which is in itself wrong). ἡμεῖς] 
declarative: let him know that... .; so, 
εἰ δὲ κατακαυχᾶσαι, ov σὺ τὴν ῥίζαν βαστά- 
ζεις, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ ῥίζα σέ, Rom. xi. 18. We,— 
the Apostles and their immediate company, 
—including the women who assembled in 
prayer and supplication with them at their 
various stations, see Acts xvi. 138. 

τοιαύτην συνήθειαν] The best modern 
Commentators, e. g. Meyer and De Wette, 
agree with Chrys. in understanding this, 
τοιαύτ. συνήθ., ὥςτε φιλονεικεῖν κ. ἐρίζειν 
k. ἀντιτάττεσθαι. Ὁ. 285. Andso Ambrose, 
Beza, Calvin, Estius, Calov., al. Βαῦ surely 
it would be very unlikely, that after so 
long a treatment of a particular subject, 
the Apostle should wind up all by merely 
a censure of a fault common to their be- 
haviour on this and all the other matters 
of dispute. Such a rendering seems to me 
almost to stultify the conclusion :—‘ If 
any will dispute about it still, remember 
that it is neither our practice, nor that of 
the Churches, to dispute.’ It would seem 
to me, but for the weighty names on the 
other side, hardly to admit of a question, 
that the συνήθεια alludes to the practice 
(see ref. John) of women praying uncovered. 
So Theodoret, Grot., Michaelis, Rosenm., 
Billroth, Olsh., al., and Theophyl. altern. 
He thus cuts off all further disputation 
on the matter by appealing to universal 
Christian usage: and to make the appeal 
more solemn, adds τοῦ θεοῦ to αἱ éxxA.,— 
the assemblies which are held in honour 
of and for prayer to God, and are His 
own Churches. Obs. at ἐκκλησίαι, not ἣ 
ἐκκλησία. The plurality of independent 
testimonies to the absence of the custom, 
is that on which the stress is laid. This 
appeal, ‘to THE CHURCHES,’ was much 
heard again at the Reformation: but has 


«λων οὐκ -vwy Bd: txt AC! 17 latt syrr eth[appy ] arm Ambrst Aug Pel 
(κρεισσον, so ABCD!FPR 17 [Damasc].) 
(nooo, so ABCD'® [Euthal-ms]: ἐλαττον F Thdrt: ἴσον 17.) 


(adda, so ABCD! ml 


since been too much forgotten. See, on 
the influence of this passage on the Chris- 
tian church, the general remarks of Stan- 
ley, edn. 2, pp. 198—200. 17—34. ] 
Correction of abuses regarding the Agape 
and the partaking of the Supper of the 
Lord. 17.] Refers back to what has 
been said since ver. 2, and forms a transi- 
tion to what is yet to be said. But this 
(viz. what has gone before, respecting 
the veiling of women; not, as Chrys., 
Theophyl., Grot., Bengel, al., that which 
follows: see below) I command you (not 
‘announce to you,’ nor ‘declare to you 
Jrom report, which are senses of παραγγ. 
unknown to the N. T., where it only means 
‘to command, —‘to deliver by way of 
precept: see reff., and ch. vii. 10; 1 Thess. 
iv. 11; 2 Thess. iii. 4, 6, 10, 12. This 
mukes it hardly possible to refer τοῦτο to 
what follows ; for if so, some definite com- 
mand should immediately succeed) not 
praising (refers to the ἐπαινῶ of ver. 2, 
and excepts what has been said since from 
that category); because you come together 
not for the better (so that edification 
results) but for the worse (so that propriety 
is violated, and the result is to the hinder- 
ing of the faith). These last words ὅτι 
... ouvepx. are introduced with a mani- 
fest view to include move than the subject 
hitherto treated, and to prepare the way 
for other abuses of their assemblies to be 
noticed. 18.] mp@tov—where is the 
second particular founda, nswering to this 
mpe@tov? Ordinarily, it is assumed that 
the σχίσματα are the first abuse, the dis- 
orders.in the Agape (beginning with ver. 
20), the second. But I am convinced, 
with Meyer, that this view is wrong. For 
(1) neither special blame, nor correction of 
abuse, is conveyed in vv. 18, 19: nor is it 
so much as intimated, on the ordinary 
hypothesis, what the character of these 
σχίσματα was. And (2) the words of ver. 
22, ἐπαινέσω ὑμᾶς ἐν τούτῳ ; οὐκ ἐπαινῶ, 
plainly refer back to ver. 17, and shew that 
the whole is continuous. Again (3) the 
οὖν of ver. 20, as so frequently,—see ch. 


570 


= ch. v. 3. 
2 Cor. ix. l. 

i w. acc. and 
inf., John xii. 
18 only. 

j ch. i. 10 reff. 

k Acts viii. 16 


1=here only, Thucyd. ii. 64. iv. 30. = ἐκ μέρους, ch. xiii. 9, ἄς. 


reff. ] ) 
al. fr. Job xxix, 24. n = Acts iv. 12 reff. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


ΧΙ. 


gh ,δ hee f 0 Cc oa ’ ’ oi ἂς , 

τον & μὲν " γὰρ ᾿ συνερχομένων ὑμῶν ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ ' ἀκούω 

Ἰσχίσματα ἐν ὑμῖν " ὑπάρχειν, καὶ | μέρος τι ™ πιστεύω. 
“- \ e a 

19" δεῖ γὰρ καὶ ° αἱρέσεις ἐν ὑμῖν εἶναι, iva [καὶ] ot  80- “ 


m = Matt. xxiv. 23,26 


o Acts νυ. 17 retf. p Rom. xiv. 18 reff. 


18. rec ins τη bef exxAnota (the meaning being mistaken: see note), with g h 47 


farm(Treg)] Thl @e: om ABCDFKLPR rel Chr, [Euthal-ms] Damase. 


υπ- 


apxew bef ev ὑμιν D3F vulg-ed arm: om ev ὑμὶν am(with demid fuld harl [tol }) 


Orig[-int,] Ambrst Bede. 


19. om Ist ev usw D'F latt Orig-int, [(Tert,;) Cypr. Ambrst Aug, | (not Orig, [Chr, 
Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc] Jer, Primas): ins aft εἰναι D3[-gr coptt | Archel,. 
aft wa ins kat B D)(and lat) m 17 vulg sah Ambrst Pel Bede: om AC D8(-gr] FKLP® 
rel syrr copt [arm] Orig,[-int,] Epiph, Chr; [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase Cypr, 


[(Tert,) Jer,]: «at wa καὶ ml. 


viii. 4, and Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 22, 
—resumes the subject broken off by καὶ 
μέρος . - - γέν. ἐν ὑμῖν. The σχίσματα 
before the Apostle’s mind are, specifically, 
those occurring at the Agapz#,—but on the 
mention of them, he breaks off to shew 
that such divisions were to be no matters 
of surprise, but were ordained to test 
them,—and in ver. 20 he returns with the 
very words, συνερχομένων ὑμῶν,---ἴο the 
immediate matter in hand, and treats it at 
length. See more on vv. 21 ff. But the 
question still remains, where is the second 
point, answering to this mpérov? Again 
with Meyer (and Macknight) I answer,— 
at ch. xii. 1. The ABUSE OF SPIRITUAL 
eirts, which alse created disorder in their 
assemblies, ch. xiv. 23 al., and concerning 
which he concludes, xiv. 40, πάντα εὐσχη- 
μόνως K. κατὰ τάξιν γινέσθω, ---γὰϑ the 
other point before his mind, when he 
wrote this πρῶτον. That he takes no 
notice in ch. xii. 1, by any ἔπειτα δέ or the 
like, of what has gone before, will be no 
objection to the above view to any one 
but the merest tiro in our Apostle’s style. 
There is a trajection of the ἀκούω, 
which, in the sense, precedes cuvepx., ὅσ. 
ἐν ἐκκλ. in assembly; not local, 

as E. V., ‘in the church, but = ἐπὶ τὸ 
αὐτό, ver. 20. [In ver. 16, where the 
word is used of distinct bodies of Chris- 
tians, it was not possible to keep the word 
assemblies, but it should be done whenever 
the sense admits it, and it suits the matter 
in hand]. σχίσματα] of what sort, 
is specified below ; viz. that he does not 
here refer to the party dissensions of ch. 
i. 10, nor could he say of them μέρος τι 
πιστεύω, but strictly to σχίσματα which 
took place at their meetings together, viz. 
that each takes before other his own 
supper, ἄς. So Chrys.: οὐ λέγει, ἀκούω 
γὰρ μὴ κοινῇ ὑμᾶς συνδειπνεῖν" ἀκούω κατ᾽ 
ἰδίαν ὑμᾶς ἑστιᾶσθαι, καὶ μὴ μετὰ τῶν 
πενήτων" ἀλλ᾽ ὃ μάλιστα ἱκανὸν ἦν αὐτῶν 
διασεῖσαι τὴν διάνοιαν, τοῦτο τέθεικε, τὸ 
τοῦ σχίσματος ὄνομα, ὃ καὶ τούτου ἦν αἴτιον, 


Hom. xxvii. p. 241; and Theophyl., Gc., 
Est., Pise., Grot., which last remarks, 
‘Accidebat jam illis temporibus, quod 
nostris multo magis evenit, ut res in. 
stituta ad concorporandos fideles in vex- 
illum schismatis verteretur.’ κι μέρος 
τι πιστ.) Said in gentleness: q.d. “I 
am unwilling to believe ali I hear con- 
cerning the point, but some (hardly 
‘much,’ in great part,’ as Stanley: nor 
do his testimonies from Thucyd. i. 23; 
vii. 30, bear out this meaning. It might, 
of course, lie beneath the surface, but is 
not given by μέρος tt) I cannot help 
believing.” 19.] δεῖ, in the divine 
appointment, the ἵνα which follows ex- 
pressing God’s purpose thereby. Our 
Lord had said ἄνάγκη ἐλθεῖν τὰ σκάνδαλα, 
Matt. xviii. 7:—and Justin Martyr, 
Tryph. 35, p. 132, quotes among His say- 
ings prophetic of division in the church, 
ἔσονται σχίσματα κ. αἱρέσεις. From the 
pointed manner in which δεῖ γὰρ καὶ 
aipéoers .,. is said, I should be inclined 
to think that the Apostle tacitly referred 
to the same saying of our Lord: for there 
must be (not only dissensions, but) even 
heresies (not in the ecclesiastical or doc- 
trinal sense,—as Pelag., Est., Calv., Beza, 
—see reff., but indicating a further and 
more matured separation, where not only 
is there present dissension, as in the 
Agape, but a deliberate choice and main- 
tenance of party distinction. It does not 
appear, in spite of all that has been written 
in Germany on the supposed parties of ch. 
i. 10, that such separations had yet taken 
place among the Corinthians. Nor even 
in Clement’s Epistle, forty years after 
this, do we find any allusion to such, but 
only, as here, to a general spirit of dis- 
Sension and variance, see chaps. iii. and 
xlv., pp. 218, 257. Chrys. would refer 
aip. only to the Agap@: ov ταύτας λέγων 
Tas τῶν δογμάτων, ἀλλὰ τὰς τῶν σχισμά- 
τῶν τούτων, p. 242,—and so Theophyl., Ec. 
But this hardly justifies the climax, δεῖ yap 
καὶ aip.) among you, that the approved 


1922. 


q \ q , 3 e a 

κιμοι ἃ φανεροὶ 4 γένωνται ἐν ὑμῖν. 

€ lal rs , \ Ν ᾽ \ » ” t \ u »“ “ 

ὑμῶν "' ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ οὐκ ἔστιν " κυριακὸν ἃ δεῖπνον φαγεῖν' 
¢ \ A 

21 ἕκαστος yap τὸ ἴδιον ἃ δεῖπνον 


“ .,ἃ Ν lal 
φαγεῖν, καὶ * ὃς μὲν Y πεινᾷ, 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


ἃ \ ΄ 
Χ ὃς δὲ 2 μεθύει. 
Se 8 nie Dias » ἐσθί \ , Vere > 
οἰκίας " οὐκ ἔχετε " εἰς τὸ ἐσθίειν καὶ πίνειν ; “ ἢ τῆς d x. 


571 


20 f συνερχομένων οὖν « Mark vi.14. 
Luke viii. 17. 
Acts vii. 13. 
ch. iii. 13. . 
Υ ΄ xiv. 25. Phi . 
προλαμβάνει i 1h. Gen, 
Macc. 


Yéy TO 
ς \ \ 
22 8 wn ΕΝ 


ea xiv. 23. 
pe 1d 


KAnolas τοῦ 4 θεοῦ 5 καταφρονεῖτε, καὶ gaia UVETE TOUS t Rev. i. 10 
ῃ 


u John xiii. 2,4. xxi. 20 al. 
only t+. Wisd. xvii. 17 only. 
8. Acts xxvii. 44, 


xxv. 21) al. z Acts ii. 15 reff. 
iv. 11 reff. @—ehexe ae 
ii.4 al. Prov. xiii. 13. 


Dan. i. 16 (v. 1 Theod.) only. 
Rom. xiv. 5. 2 Cor. ii. 16 al. 


v Mark xiv. τ Gal. νι. 1 


w Acts ix. 3 reff. x == Matt. xiii. 
y Matt. iv. 2. Bon. xii. 20 (from Prov. 
a Rom. x. 18, 19. ch. ix. 4,5 only. P b Rom. 


d ch. i. 2 reff. e Matt. xviii. 10. Rom- 


f ch. i. 27, vv. 4, 5. 


om 2nd ev veiw C xth Orig,[ins Delarue from Philocal] Chr,[ins,] Epiph, Damasc- 


comm, Jer. 


20. om ovy D? (and lat) ΕἾ ποῦ F-lat] Chr, : 


G-lat): om D-lat : 

21. mposdauBave: A 46. 106-8-22?. 
(and F-lat) E-lat: 
[Ambrst Aug, ]. - 


jom non est vulg(and F-lat) [Ambrst]. 


es Tw (= το) 17, in manducandum G-lat : 


δε 17. for εστιν, ετι D'[-gr] F(and 
gaye: XR}. 

for ev τω, emt Tw D[-gr] F[-gr]: ad vulg 

in manducando D-lat 


22. for εἰς To eo 0. kK. πιν., φαγειν Kat we F. 


[8150] (i. 6. as well as the other party, 
who would become manifest by their very 
conduct) may be made manifest among 
you; viz. through a better and nobler 
spirit being shewn by them, than by the 
contentious and separatists. 20. ] 
The same subject—resumed from the 
συνερχ. of ver. 18: see notes on πρῶτον. 
When then ye come together (are as- 
sembling, pres. and perhaps here, where 
he deals with particulars, to be pressed,— 
as their intention in thus assembling is 
blamed) to one place (reff. Acts) it is not 
to eat (with any idea of eating (or, there 
is no eating]. But Meyer, Bengel, and 
many others, render οὐκ ἔστιν here, 
‘non licet, as in οὐκ ἔστιν εἰπεῖν and 
the like: De Wette, after Estius, al., as 
E. V., ‘this is not,’ “ cannot be called,’— 
‘id quod agitis, non est.’ But the greedi- 
ness which is blamed, seems to refer οὐκ 
ἔστιν to the συνέρχεσθαι, and φαγεῖν to 
the motive = ἵνα φαγῆτε) the Supper of 
the Lord (emphasis on seep as opposed 
to ἔδιον below). kup. δεῖπν.} ‘ the 
Supper instituted by the Lord.’ This 
was an inseparable adjunct, in the apostolic 
times, to their agapz or feasts of love. 
Chrys. on ver. 17, and Tertull. Apol. § 39, 
vol. i. pp. 474 ff., give an ample descrip- 
tion of these feasts, which were of the 
nature of ἔρανοι, or mutual contributions, 
where each who was able brought his own 
portion,—and the rich, additional portions 
for the poor. See Xen. Mem. iii. 14, in 
which the circumstances bear a remarkable 
similarity to those in the Corinthian 
church. Not before this feast, as Chrys. 
(μετὰ τὴν τῶν “μυστηρίων κοινωνίαν ἐπὶ 
κοινὴν πάντες ἤεσαν εὐωχίαν, p. 240), 
al.,—but during and after it, as shewn by 
the institution, by the custom at the Pass- 
over, by the context here, and by the rem- 


nants of the ancient custom and its abuse 
until forbidden by the council of Carthage, 
—the ancient Christians partook of the 
Supper of the Lord. The best account of 
this matter is to be found in the note in 
Pool’s Synopsis on Matt. xxvi. 26. It 
was necessary for the celebration of the 
Lord’s Supper that all should eat of the 
same bread and drink of the same cup; and 
in all probability, that a prayer should be 
offered, and words of consecration said, by 
the appointed ministers. Hence cessation 
of the feast itself, and solemn order and 
silence, would be necessitated even by the 
outward requirements of the ordinance. 
These could not be obtained, where each 
man was greedily devouring that which he 
had brought with him: where the extremes 
were seen, of one craving, and another being 
drunken. This being their practice, there 
could be [no possibility, and at the same 
time] no intention of celebrating the 
Lord’s Supper,—no [provision for it, nor | 
discernment of the solemnity of it. On 
the whole subject, see Stanley’s note. 

21.] mpod., as in Εἰ. V., takes before 
another, viz. during the feast (ἐν τῷ φ.", 
not, at home, before coming. Obviously 
the ἕκαστος must be limited to the rich : 
the poor had no ἔδιον δεῖπνον to take, and 
were the losers by the selfishness of the 
rich. πεινᾷ] One is craving (the 
poor), another is drunken (the rich. 
There is no need to soften the meaning of 
μεθύει : as Meyer says, ‘‘ Paul draws the 
picture in strong colours, and who can say 
that the reality was less strong ?’’). 

22.| For (a reason for the blame in the 
foregoing: this should not be: for) pie 
you no houses, to eat, &c.: meaning, ‘ 
home is the place to satiate the τς 
not the assembly of the brethren.’ Or 
do ye shew your contempt for (pres.) the 


572 ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. XI. 
a“ e lal ’ 4 
= Μακε iti. 8 μὴ ἔχοντας ; τί εἴπω ὑμῖν ; » ἐπαινέσω ὑμᾶς ἐν τούτῳ ; 
1. it. ὅθ. an . Ν lo / 
Nehviit, οὐκ ἢ ἐπαινῶ. 38 ἐγὼ yap ' παρέλαβον ἀπὸ τοῦ κυρίου 
h ver. 2. : , a ΄ a > A \ 
ἜΤ ἀτοὰν ὃ καὶ iqapédwxa ὑμῖν, ὅτε ὁ κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ 
ἃ... 
12 αἱ. ες / »- ” 24 δ᾽» , m "' > 
jer are. ἢ παρεδίδετο ἔλαβεν ἄρτον, 53 καὶ ' εὐχαριστήσας ἔκλα 
= - lv, x a ’ Ν al 
‘ont, oev καὶ εἶπεν Τοῦτο μου " ἐστὶν τὸ σῶμα τὸ “ὑπερ 
Gospp. tae n a ’ \ eae Sint . 
im. δ Ρ q 25 T ὥς 
Rem, gg ὑμῶν" τοῦτο ποιεῖτε Peis τὴν ἐμὴν “ ἀνάμνησιν. ὡς 
xxii. 1 


m Acts ii. 46 reff. n = |i Mt. Mk. L. Matt. 
Ezek. xxxvii. 11. o ellips., here 
q here bis. ||L. Heb. x.3only. Lev. xxiv. 7. 


9. 
Rom. i. (8 reff.) 21. ch. xiv. 17 al.+ Wisd. xviii. 2 only. 
xiii. 37. John xv. 1. ch. x. 4. Gen. xii. 26,27. Exod. xii. 11. 
only? p = Matt. vill. 34. Mark i. 4. xiv. 9. 
rjjL. Matt. xxi. 30. Luke xx. 381. Rom. viii. 26. Prov, xxvii. 15. 


rec υμιν bef εἰπω, with KL rel syr [arm-mss] Thdrt: om vuw P eth-pl arm-ed: txt 
ABCDFR m 17 vulg Syr coptt goth [ Bas, Cyr-p, | Damase lat-ff. for επαινεσω, 
eravw (conformation to the pres follg) BF latt lat-ff: txt AC D[-gr] KLPN rel vss 
Chr, [ Bas, Cyr, Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damasc. 

23. for amo, παρα D [ Bas-2-mss, ]- om tov DF. for κυριου, θεου F(with 
G-lat, but not F-lat). om τησους B 44, ev ἡ νυκτι taped. D!F, in qua nocte 
latt [Cypr Ambrst]. rec παρεδιδοτο, with B?LP rel Chr, Thdrt [Bas, Euthal-ms 
Damasce, |: txt AB'CDFKR® [17] Damasc[h,.]- ins tov bef aptov D'F. 

24, rec aft εἰπεν adds λαβετε φαγετε (interpoln from Matt xxvi. 26), with C3KLP 
rel syrr goth [ztk-pl] (Cyr-jer,) Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase ΤῊ] Gc, A. καὶ 9. 
vulg [demid harl tol] arm[-use] Ambrst; λάβετε (alone) eth[-rom]: om ABC'DFR 
17 am(with fuld al) coptt arm(ed-1805) Bas, Cyr, (Ath,) Cypr,. rec aft ὑπερ ὑυμων 
ins κλωμενον, with C3D3FKLPN3 rel syrr goth [Bas, Chr, Euthal-ms] Thdrty,(elsw, 
διδομενον ἡ κλωμενον κατα Tov amoot.) Damasc, ΤῊ] Cc; θρυπτομενον D!; διδομενον 
coptt; quod pro vobis tradetur vulg Cypr, Ambrst-ed: om ΑΒΟΙΝῚ 17. 67? [arm-zoh] 
Cyr, Ath, Fulg,. om τὴν F. 


congregation of God (θεοῦ to express, as 
Bengel, ‘ dignitatem ecclesiz.’ This con- 
tempt was expressed by their not sharing 
with the congregation the portion which 
they brought),—and put to shame those 
who have not (houses to eat and to drink 
in, and therefore come to the daily ἀγάπαι 
to be fed. There is no reason for rendering 
with the majority of Commentators τοὺς μὴ 
ἔχοντας, ‘the poor;’ the μὴ ἔχοντας has a 
distinct reference to the ἔχετε before. 
Meyer refers in support of the meaning, 
‘the poor,’ to Wetst. on 2 Cor. viii. 13, 
where nothing on the subject is found: 
De Wette, to Luke iii. 11, where the case 
is as here, the preceding ἔχων being re- 
ferred to. The meaning is allowable, 6. g. 
πρὸς γὰρ Tov ἔχονθ᾽ ὁ φθόνος ἕρπει, Soph. 
Aj. 157: πρὸς τῶν ἐχόντων, Φοῖβε, τὸν 
νόμον τίθης, Eurip. Alc. 57: πότε μὲν ἐπ᾽ 
ἦμαρ εἶχον, εἶτ᾽ οὐκ εἶχον ἄν, where how- 
ever it is qualified by ἐπ᾽ ἡμαργῖ What 
must I say to you? Shall I praise you 
in this matter? Ipraise you not. (See 
ver. 17.) 23—25.] To shew them 
the solemnity of the ordinance which they 
thus set at nought, he reminds them of 
the account which he had before given 
them, of its INSTITUTION BY THE LORD. 
Matt. xxvi. 26—29. Mark xiv. 22— 
25. LUKE xxii. 19, 20. 23.] For I 
(see ch. vii. 28; Phil. iv. 11) received 
from the Lord (dy special revelation, see 
Gal. i. 12. Meyer attempts to deny that 
this revelation was made to Paul himeelf, 


on the strength of ἀπό meaning ‘ indirect,” 
παρά ‘ direct’ reception from any one: but 
this distinction is fallacious: 6. g. 1 John 
i. 5, αὕτη ἐστὶν ἢ ἐπαγγελία ἣν ἀκηκό- 
αμεν ar αὐτοῦ. He supposes that it was 
made to Ananias or some other, and com- 
municated to Paul. But the sole reason 
for this somewhat clumsy hypothesis is the 
supposed force of the preposition, which 
has no existence. If the Apostle had re- 
ferred only to the Evangelic tradition or 
writings (9) he would not have used the first 
person singular, but παρελάβομεν. I may 
remark, that the similarity between this 
account of the Institution and that in 
Luke’s Gospel, is only what might be ex- 
pected on the supposition of a special 
revelation made to Paul, of which that 
Evangelist, being Paul's companion, in 
certain parts of his history availed him- 
self) that which I also delivered (in 
my apostolic testimony) to you, (viz.) 
that the Lord Jesus, &c. παρεδί- 
δετο)] the imperf.: He was being be- 
trayed. ‘ There is an appearance of fixed 
order, especially in these opening words, 
which indicates that this had already 
become a familiar formula.” Stanley. 

ἄρτον] not, as Meyer, ‘a loaf,’ 
but bread: cf. the common expression, 
φαγεῖν ἄρτον. 24.] On εὐχ. ἔκλα- 
σεν, see note, Matt. xxvi. 26. Meyer 
well remarks, that “the filling up of 7d 
ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν is to be sought in the foregoing 
ἔκλασεν." Hence the insertion of κλώμε-" 


ABCDF 
KLPR 
acdef 
ghklim 
o 17. 47 


23—27. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS a. 579 


΄ \ \ , \ Ν 9 ta) / a 
αὕτως καὶ TO ποτήριον μετὰ TO " δειπνῆσαι, λέγων Τοῦτο 5.1. Luke 
Xvi. 5. 


‘ “ Sail! rts 0 4 ep eat Bye Po gee Rey. iii. 20 
TO TOT? PLOV 7 = KQaLV?) (AU07KY ἐστιν εν Tw εμῳ alate’ only. Pine 
A A ¢e / \ iti. 1, 
τοῦτο ποιεῖτε, " ὁσάκις ἐὰν πίνητε, Ῥ εἰς THY ἐμὴν I ἀνάμνη- Tobit viii. 
ῷθν ε ΄ \ SEN 2 , \ ” A \ (not δὲ) only. 
σιν. οσωκις yap εαν ἐσθίητε TOV ἄρτον τοῦτον, KAL ὃ" 3 Cor. iis. 
.» vill. 
\ 4 , \ θ ΄ A ΄ Ww , (from Jer. 
TO TOTPLoV TLWNTE, TOV QAVaTOVY του KUpLoU καταγγελ- exw 
/ e 7 ἃ XN / (xxxi.] 31). 
λετε, ἡ ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθη. “1 ὥςτε ὃς ἂν ἐσθίῃ τὸν ἄρτον ἢ 1x15. 
\ A Pe ͵ > 1 , ua = ak ΕἸΣ. 
bevoxos TiV τὸ ἡ ποτήριον τοῦ Y κυρίου 5 ἀναξίως, * ἔνοχος ἔσται 35,35. % 19 
BE Zech. ix. 11. 
ABCDF v here bis. Rev. xi.6 only +. Xen. Mem. iii. 4. 3. w = Acts xiii. 5 reff. x conser Banat 
KLPN xi. 25. Gal. iii. 19 al. y che xc. zhere only+. 2 Macc. xiv. 42 only. (-cos, 
bed ch, vi. 2.) a = and constr., Mark iii. 29. xiv. 641) Mt. Heb. ii. 15. James ii, 10. (Matt. v. 
te 4 a 21, 22 (3ce]) only. (Deut. xix. 10.) 
m OM. 25. for euw αἰματι, αἰματι μου ACP m 17: txt BDFKLPX rel. homeotel in A, 


ogaxis here and at beg of next ver. rec (for eav) av, with DFKL rel Chr, Cyr{-p, 
Nest-in-Cyr,]: txt BCX 17 Orig, Thdrt Euthal-ms,. (om ogakis av πινητε PLappy] ad 
m (Bas, Euthal-ms, Damase, ].) 

26. om yap A (cf homeotel above) 238 goth eth arm. rec av, with DF KLP 
rel: txt ABCN a 17. for τουτον, τουτο XN}. rec aft ποτήριον ins τουτο (for 
uniformity), with [C%|D?-3K LPN rel tol syrr copt goth wth Chr, [Bas, Nest-in-Cyr, | 
Thdrt Damase, [Phot-c,] Cypr,: om ABC!D!FR! ¢ 17 latt sah arm Cyr, Damase, 
Cypr, Ambrst Pel. axp: BIN}. rec aft axpis ov ins av (to fill up the constr), 
with DK LP? [47(sic)] rel Thdrt : om ABCD!FN! 17 Bas! Chr-ms Cyr, Damase. 

27. αἰσθειηται and πινηται EF. rec aft τὸν aptov ins τουτον (supplementary, or 
as above), with KLP rel [vulg-clem] copt goth x#th arm-mss Chr, [Euthal-ms]: om 
ABCDEN ὁ 17 am(with demid fuld harl tol mar) [Syr] syr sah arm-ed Clem, Bas, 


Ps-Ath, Thdrt Damasc, Orig-int, Cypr, [Cassiod, ]. 


for ἡ, καὶ A 39. 46. 109 


Ject-1 syrr coptt eth Clem, Ps-Ath, Orig-int, Pel Cassiod,: txt BCDFKLPR rel latt 


syr-mg goth Chr [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damasc, Cypr, [Ambrst]. 


aft του κυριου 


αναξιως add tov κυριου 1)5[ -οΥ} LN e 47! syr goth. 


vor. τοῦτο trot... .| See note on 
Matt. ut supra. 25. |] See Luke xxii. 
20. ὡςαύτ. καὶ τὸ π.] “viz. ἔλα- 
Bev καὶ εὐχ. ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς. These last 
words are implied in ἔκλασεν above.” 


Meyer. ἢ Kav. ὃ. ἐστὶν ἐν τῷ ἐμῴ 
αἵμ.} is the new covenant in (ratified 


by the shedding of, and therefore stand- 
ing i, as its conditioning element) my 
blood: = ἐστὶν ἡ καιν. δ. ἡ ἐν τῷ ἐμῷ alu. 
The position of ἐστιν is no objection to this, 
nor the omission of the art. Meyer would 
render it, ‘is the N. C. by means of my 
blood :’ i.e. by virtue of its contents, which 
are my blood: and this solely on account 
of the position of ἐστιν. But the meaning 
is as harsh, as the rendering is unrequired. 

ὁσάκις ἐὰν wiv.| Not a general 
rule for all common meals of Christians ; 
but a precept that as often as that cup is 
drunk, it should be in remembrance of 
Him: on these last words is the emphasis: 
see below. 26.| yap gives an ex- 
planatory reason for εἰς τ. ἐμὴν ἀνάμν., 
viz. that the act of eating and drinking is a 
proclamation of the death of the Lord till 
His coming. ‘Yhe rendering of καταγγέλ- 
Aete imperative, as Theophyl.?, Luth., 
Grot., Rickert, is evidently wrong. The 
Apostle is substantiating the application 
of the Lord’s words by the acknowledged 
nature of the rite. It is a proclamation 
of His death : and thus is a remembrance 


of Him. It is so, by our making mention 
of in it, and seeing visibly before us and 
partaking of, His body broken, and His 
blood shed. ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ] The 
katayy. is addressed directly to the Corin- 
thians, not to them and all succeeding 
Christians; the Apostle regarding the 
coming of the Lord as near at hand, in 
his own time, see notes on 2 Cor. v. 1—10. 
Thdrt. remarks, μετὰ yap τὴν αὐτοῦ mapov- 
σίαν, οὐκέτι χρεία τῶν συμβόλων τοῦ 
σώματος, αὐτοῦ φαινομένου τοῦ σώμα- 
Tos’ διὰ τοῦτο εἶπεν, ἄχρις οὗ (ἂν) ἔλθῃ. 

The ἄν has been inserted from not 


being aware that its absence implies the 


certainty of the event. See examples in Lo- 
beck on Phrynichus, pp. 15, 16, note. 

21.) A consequence, from the nature of the 
ordinance being, to proclaim the death of 
the Lord: the guilt of the unworthy parti- 
cipation of either of the elements. ‘The 
death of the Lord was brought about by 
the breaking of His body and shedding 
His blood: this Death we proclaim in the 
ordinance by the bread broken—the wine 
poured out, of which we partake: whoever 
therefore shall either eat the bread or drink 
the cup of the Lord unworthily (see below 
ver. 29) shall be guilty of the Body and 
Blood of the Lord : i. e. “erimini et pene 
corporis et sanguinis Christi violati ob- 
noxius evit: Meyer. Such an one -pro- 
claims the death of Christ, and yet in an 


574 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. ΧΙ. 28—34. 


“ f \ fal ‘/ lol / 
neve ch.x 16. τοῦ ἢ σώματος Kal τοῦ " αἵματος τοῦ ὃ κυρίου. 


c ch. ui. 13 


9 
28 ὃ δοκιμα- ABCDF 


Ι ΄ δὲ a " θ « ΄ δὸ Jeni : a oo» KLPR 
eft, ζέτω δὲ “ἄνθρωπος ἑαυτὸν, Kal “οὕτως EK τοῦ APTOVavede- 
d reeds . 9 ͵ {ζει : ἢ, a / / - 29 td \ 5 θ 7, ἢ g hkl 
koe we ἐσθιέτω καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ποτηρίου πινέτω “5.0 yap ἐσθίων καὶ mo 17. 
reff. 47 


f — Rom. ii. 2, πίνων 
3 re 

g Acts xv. 9. 
James ii. 4. 


f “-“ e an bd θί \ , \ Β ὃ ‘ \ 
κριμαᾳ εαυτῷῳ εσσιξενι καὶ TTLVEL μὴ ιακρινων TO 
30 ὃ \ “ b aa \ > θ a ‘oh 9 δ 
σῶμα. ἰὼ τοῦτο ἐν υὑμίν πολλοὶ ἀσθενεῖς καὶ “ Appw- 
Job ll. 
h nd ae 14. Mark vi. 5,13. xvi. 18 only. 3 Kings xiv.5 A, Ald. ἄς, (see xii. 24 sq. B). 
only. (-τεῖν, 2 Kings xii. 15. ττημα, Sir. x. 10. -Tla, Ps. xl. 3.) 


recom Tov (bef aiuatos) (as unnecessary?), with a! dh k 47[sic] ΤῊ]: ins ABCDFKLPN 
rel Clem Ps-Ath, Bas, Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damasc}. dor kupiov, xpiatov A 
17 xth-rom Jer,. 

28. eavrov bet avOpwros CDFP latt goth Damasc: eavtov εκαστος 17, simly 4 Orig : 
txt ABKLN rel syrr (coptt) eth arm Clem, Orig, Cyr, [Bas, Thdrt Damasen.,].—ins 
o bef ανθρ. D'. aft eavr. ins πρωτον &3 [ Epiph, }. 

29. rec aft mivwy ins avatiws (gloss from ver 27), with C3DFKUPN? rel vulg syrr 
[copt goth «th-pl arm Bas, Chr,(aveé. τ. κυρ.4) Euthal-ms Thdrt Damase, Ambrst] : 
om ABC!N? 17 sah xth-rom. ree aft τὸ σωμα ins Tov Kupiov (gloss from ver 27), 
with C3 DFKLPN? rel [vulg-clem am? demid fuld? harl? tol syrr copt goth arm Bas, 
Euthal-ms Damase, | Chr, Thdrt Ambrst: om ABC!X? 17. 67? am}(with fuld! harl’) 


Mal.i.8. Sir. vii. 7 


sah eth. 


unworthy spirit—with no regard to that 
Death as his atonement, or a proof of 
Christ’s love: he proclaims that Death 
as an indifferent person: he therefore 
partakes of the guilt of it. Chrysostom 
strikingly says, σφαγὴν τὸ TMpayua ἀπέ- 
φηνεν, οὐκέτι θυσίαν, p. 247, But the 
idea ὡς καὶ αὐτὸς ἐκχέας Td αἷμα, Theophyl. 
(and Chrys., τί δήποτε ; ὅτι ἐξέχεεν αὐτό, 
καὶ σφαγ., &c., as above), is irrelevant 
here, see ver. 29. The Romanists absurd- 
ly enough defend by this # (the meaning 
of which i is not to be changed to kai, as is 
most unfairly done in our rE. V. ., and the 
completeness of the argument thereby 
destroyed ) their practice of communicating 
only in one kind. Translated into com- 
mon language, and applied to the ordinary 
sustenance of the body, their reasoning 
stands thus: ‘ Whoever eats to excess, o7 
drinks to excess, is guilty of sin: therefore 

eating, without drinking, will sustain life.’ 
“98. 1 The δέ implies an opposition to, 

and wish to escape from, the ἔνοχος ἔσται. 
δοκιμ. €avt.| prove himself— 
examine τὴν διάνοιαν ἑαυτοῦ, as Theodor.- 
mops., in loc.: ascertain by sufficient 
tests, what his state of feeling is with 
regard to the death of Christ, and how far 
this feeling is evinced in his daily life— 
which are the best guarantees for a worthy 
participation. καὶ οὕτως | i.e. ‘after 
examination of himself” The case in 
which the self-examination ends in an un- 
favourable verdict, does not come under 
consideration, because it is assumed that 
such a verdict will lead to repentance and 
amendment. 29.] For he who eats 
and drinks (scil. of the bread and of the 
cup: certainly not, as Meyer, ‘the mere 
eater and drinker, he who partakes as a 
mere act of eating and drinking,’ which is 


harsh to the last degree, and refuted by the 
parallel, ver. 27. ἀναξίως is spurious, see 
var. readd.) eats and drinks judgment to 
himself (i. 6. brings on himself judgment 
by eating and drinking. κρῖμα, as is 
evident by vv. 30—32, is not ‘damnation’ 
(κατάκριμα), as rendered in our Εἰ. V.,a mis- 
translation, which has done infinite mis- 
chief), not appreciating (dy udicans, Vulg. 

μὴ ἐξετάζων, μὴ ἐννοῶν ὡς χρή, τὸ μέγεθος 
τῶν προκειμένων, μὴ λογιζόμενος τὸν ὄγκον 
τῆς δωρεᾶς. Chrys. Hom. xxviii. p. 251) 
the Body (scil. of the Lord : here standing 
for the whole of that which is symbolized 
by the Bread and the Cup, the Body and 
Blood. The mystery of these, spiritually 
present in the elements, he, not being spi- 
ritual, does not appreciate : and therefore, 
as in ver. 27, falls under the divine judg- 
ment, as trifling with the death of Christ. 
The interpretation of Stanley, “not dis- 
cerning that the body of the Lord is in 
himself and in the Christian society, and 
that it is as the body of the Lord, or as 
a member of that body, that he partakes 
of the bread,” is surely somewhat far- 
fetched, after τοῦτό μου ἐστὶν τὸ σῶμα, 
ver. 24). 30.] Experimental proof 
of the κρῖμα ἑαυτῷ, from the present sick- 
nesses and frequent deaths. among the 
Corinthian _ believers. Meyer distin- 
guishes ἀσθενεῖς, weaklings, persons whose 
powers have failed spontaneously, from 
appworor, invalids, persons whose powers 
are enfeebled by sickness ; and cites Titt- 
mann, Synon. p. 76. ao. and app. 
refer to phy aiaah not (as Olsh., altern.) 
moral weaknesses. 31.] δέ contrasts 
with this state of sicknesses and deaths: 
it might be otherwise. This διεκρινόμεθα 
(parallel with δοκιμαζέτω before) should be 
rendered by the same word as διακρίνων, 


ΧΙ 


‘\ 
OTOL, καὶ peur es Κ ἱκανοί. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


31 εὐ δὲ ! 


578 


ἑαυτοὺς 8 διεκρί- al ch. vii. 39 


voped; οὐκ ἂν ™ ἐκρινόμεθα": 32 ™ κρινόμενοι δὲ ὑπὸ [τοῦ] κι: λον ἍΜ. 


κυρίου " παιδευόμεθα, ἵνα μὴ σὺν τῷ κόσμῳ ° κατακριθῶ- 


μεν. 
ἀλλήλους § ἐκδέχεσθε. 
ἵνα μὴ " εἰς δ 

ἔλθω Υ διατάξομαι. 


XII. 1 Περὶ δὲ τῶν * πνευματικῶν, ἀδελφοί, ὃ οὐ θέλω 
p = ch. ν. 8 reff. 


ii, J. Esth. ii. 1. 


s Acts xvii. 16 reff. t ver. 21. 
v ver. 17 reff. w ver. 29. 
1 reff. z = ch. x. 3, 4 reff. 


iv. 13. 


34 ef τις ‘ πεινᾷ, " ἐν ἃ οἴκῳ ἐσθιέτω, "16. 
κρῖμα 4 συνέρχησθε. 


| pes pers., Rom. 
vill. 23 reff. 
m = Acts xin. 


33 P ὥςτε, ἀδελφοί μου, 1 συνερχόμενοι * εἰς TO φαγεῖν 51. Rev: 


xviii. 8 al. 
n Luke xxiii. 
Heb. xii, 
7, 10.ekike He 
Ὶ Σ 1 *@ ὴ exc Rev. iii ‘ 
Ta δὲ λοιπὰ * ὡς ἂν εἰς. Rev. iii. 
ἃ 1} Prov. 
xix. 18. 
ο Matt. xxvii. 
3. ab viii. 
10.) Rom. 
q ver. 17. r ver. 22. 
Ὁ anarth., ch. xiv. 35. Deut. xi. 19. see Mark ii. 1, 
x = Rom. xv. 24. Phil. ii. 23. y = ch. xvi. 
a Rom. i. 13. xi. 25. ch. x.1. 2Cor.i.8, 1 Thess. 


31. rec (for δε) yap, with CK LPR? rel syrr coptt arm Chr[sxpe Bas, Cyr, Euthal-ms 


Damasc, | Thdrt Augtatic): 
F(not G). 
32. azo F, 


τουτω F’, simly latt lat- ff. 


txt ABDFN! 17 vulg goth eth Clem, Aug). 


εαυτον 


ins του bef κυριου BCX m 17 Clem, Damasc-txt: om ADFKLP re] 
Ces, Chr, [ Basaiie Cyr, Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase, ΤῺ] Cc. 


aft τω κοσμω ins 


34. rec aft εἰ ins de, with D*3[-gr] KLPX* rel demid syrr arm Clem, [ Chr, ] Thdrt 
Damasc Bede: om ABCD!FN! 17 latt coptt eth [Kuthal-ms] Cypr, Ambrst Pel. 


Kpiow Κ΄. διαταξωμαι ADF m 47. 


Cuap. XII. 1. ayvoew bef αδελφοι ov θ. v. D'[3(Tischdf)] F latt eth [Did, Ath-int, 


Ambrst |. 


before, the idea being the same. ‘ Appre- 
ciate,’ if etymologically understood, is the 
nearest to the meaning: in Latin dijudico, 
which the Vulg. has, is an excellent render- 
ing,—preserving also the ‘judico,’ so essen- 
tial to the following clause. In the E. V. 
‘If we would judge ourselves, we should 
not be judged,’ the tenses are wrong: it 
should be, ‘ If we had judged oursel ves, we 
should not have been judged :’ “no such 
punishments would have befallen us.’ 
Thus I wrote in some former editions : and 
so also Stanley. But this collocation of the 
(imperfect) tenses may be rendered either 
way. Donaldson, Gr. Gr., p. 204, renders 
εἴ τι εἶχεν, ἐδίδου ἄν, ‘si quid haberet, 
daret: and so we have it in Aischyl. 
Suppl. 244, καὶ τἄλλα πόλλ᾽ ἐπεικάσαι 
δίκαιον ἦν, εἰ μὴ παρόντι φθόγγος ἦν ὃ 
σημανῶν : Aschin. Ctes. p. 86, εἰ δ᾽ ἦν 
ἀναγκαῖον ῥηθῆναι, οὐ Δημοσθένους ἦν ὃ 
λόγος : and other places (Bernhardy, p. 
376). But as certainly, we find the other 
sense: e.g. Herod. iii. 25, of Cambyses, 
εἰ... ἀπῆγε ὀπίσω τὸν στρατὸν... ἦν 
ἂν σοφὸς ἀνήρ. So that the Εἰ. V. may 
here be kept, if thought desirable. In 
John v. 46, our translators have adopted 
the other rendering: ‘ Had ye believed 
Moses, ye would have believed me:’ but 
in ib. viii. 39, 42, have rendered as here. 
832.) But now that we are judged, 
it is by the Lord (emph.) that we are 
being chastised (to bring us to repent- 
ance), that we may not be (eternally) 
condemued with the (unbelieving) world. 


33.] General conclusion respecting 
this disorder. So then (‘que cum ita 
sint’), my brethren (milder persuasive : 
as has been the assumption of the first 
person, vv. 31, 32), when ye are coming 
together to eat, wait for one another 
(contrast to ἕκαστος ... . προλαμβάνει, 
ver. 21: as Theophyl.: οὐκ εἶπεν, ἀλλήλοις 
μετάδοτε, ἀλλ᾽, ἐκδέχεσθε" δεικνύων ὅτι 
κοινά εἰσι τὰ ἐκεῖσε eishepdueva. καὶ δεῖ 
ἀναμένειν τὴν κοινὴν συνέλευσιν). 34. | 
The ἀγάπαι were not meals to satiate the 
bodily appetites, but for a higher and 
holier purpose : let the hungry take off the 
edge of his hunger at home: see ver. 22. 

τὰ δὲ λοιπά] viz. things omitted 
(probably matters of detail) in the above 
directions. Perhaps they had asked him 
questions respecting the most convenient 
time or manner of celebration of the Lord’s 
supper : points on which primitive practice 
widely differed. ὡς ἂν ἔλθω, see reff, 
whenever I shall have come. ὡς ἄν, as 
ὅτ᾽ ἄν, implies uncertainty as to the event 
anticipated: see Kiihner, vol. 11. p. 535, 
§ 807. Carp. XII.—XIV.] ON THE 
ABUSE OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS:  espe- 
cially PROPHESYING, and SPEAKING WITH 
TONGUES. The second particular requir- 
ing correction in their assemblies, see ch. 
xi. 18, note, Chrys. well says: τοῦτο 
ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα ἐστὶν ἀσαφές" τὴν 
δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἣ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε 
καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμ- 
βαινόντων, νῦν δὲ οὐ γινομένων. Hom. 
xxix. p. 267. ΧΙ]. ON THE NATURE, 


576 


e la) > a 
beh. x. 19 reff. ὑμᾶς ὃ ἀγνοεῖν. 


ec Acts vill. 32 


reff: b Μ᾽ Ν c yA ¢ 
jt a, ἡ εἴδωλα τὰ “ ἄφωνα ὡς 
56. Acts ii. 
45. iv. 35. Gen. ii. 19. e Matt. xxvi. 57 al. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


Epp., here only. 


ΧΙ]. 


9 25 Ψ “ "6 ΟΣ \ Ἢ 
“οΙΟΟΤΕ OTL OTE: ὦ V?) TE, 7 pos Ta 


d 


av ἤγεσθε “ ἀπαγόμενοι. 3. διὸ 


Deut. xxviii. 37. 


2. rec om ote (either a mistake, or a corrn to help the constr: the same of the omn 
of ort), with F[-gr K-marg(Tischdf)] Ὁ ἃ 1 D-lat Syr copt Ambrst: om or: Καὶ in 
Thdrt{-ed Euthal-ms| Damase Aug,: txt ABC D[-gr] ΠΡῸΣ rel vulg G-lat syr (sal) 


arm [zth(olim cum) Bas, Did, Chr, Thdrt-ms Ath-int, Vig, Pel]. 
ἀμορφα F[-gr, ad simulacrorum formationes G-lat]. 


Tischdf)] m: ascendebatis Aug.) 


INTENT, AND WORTH OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS 
IN GENERAL. 1—3. | The foundation of 
all spiritual utterance is the confession of 
Jesus as the Lord: and without the Spirit, 
no such confession can be made. 1.1 
δέ transitional. Some have thought tha 

the Corinthians had referred this question 
to the Apostle’s decision: but from the 
ov θέλω ὑμ. ἀγνοεῖν, it rather looks as 
if, like the last, it had been an abuse 
which he had heard of, and of his own 
instance corrects. τ. πνευματικῶν | 
Most likely neuter, as ch. xiv. 1, spiritual 
gifts: so Chrys., Theophyl., @c., Beza, 
Calov., Est., al., De Wette, and Meyer: 
—not mase., as ch. xiv. 87: so Grot., 
Hammond, al., and Locke, who maintains 
that the subject of this section is not the 
things, but the persons, quoting ch. xiv. 
5. But surely the things are the main 
subject, enounced here, vv. 4—11, and 
treated of through the rest of the chapter ; 
the inspired persons being mentioned only 
incidentally to them. Others, as Storr, 
Billroth, Wieseler cited by Meyer, and De 
W., limit τὰ mv. to the speaking with 
tongues, which indeed is mainly treated 
of in the latter part of the section (see 
ch. xiv. 1): but here the gifts of the Spirit 
generally are the subject. ov θέλω 
up. ayv. | Theodor.-mops. cited by Meyer : 
θέλω ὑμᾶς Kal τῶν πνευματικῶν χαρι- 
σμάτων εἰδέναι τὴν τάξιν, ὥςτε βούλομαί 
τι καὶ περὶ τούτων εἰπεῖν. See reff. 

2.] Reason why they wanted instruction 
concerning spiritual gifts —because they 
once were heathen, and could not therefore 
have any experience in spiritual things. 
Thus Meyer, and so far rightly: but the 
stress of this reason lies in the words 
ἄφωνα and ὡς ἂν ἤγεσθε, which he has not 
sufficiently noticed :—Ye know (that) when 
ye were Gentiles (the construction is an 
anacoluthon, beginning with οἴδατε ὅτι, 
and then as if οἴδατε ὅτι had been merely a 
formula for ‘ye know,’ passing into the 
construction so common, that of placing ὅτε 
after stich verbs as μέμνημαι, οἶδα, ἀκούω, 
and the like, an ellipsis taking place of τοῦ 
χρόνου, as Lysias actually fills it up in one 
place, ἐκείνου τοῦ χρόνου μνησθέντας, ὅτε 


for αφωνα, 
(ἀνήγεσθε B® G[-corr(appy, 


. . . « in Poliuch. (περὶ δημεύσεως x.7.A.), 
p. 151, 34. Thus 1]. ξ. 71, ἤδεα μὲν yap 
ὅτε πρόφρων Δαναοῖσιν ἄμυνεν : Plato, 
Menon, p. 79, μέμνησαι ὅτ᾽ ἐγώ σοι ἄρτι 
ἀπεκρινάμην. See more examples in 
Kiihner’s Gr. Gramm. ii. 480) led about 
(Lor, carried away | aay. not necessarily, 
‘led wrong ;’ and the context seems rather 
to favour the idea of being ‘ ded at will,’ 
blindly transported hither and thither,— 
and so De W., and Estius, “ qualiter- 
cunque, temere, pro nutu ducentium, et 
huc illue illos cireumagentium, abductos 
fuisse”) to idols which were without 
utterance (‘the God in whom you now 
believe is a living and speaking God— 
speaking by his Spirit in every believer: 
how should you know any thing of such 
spiritual speech or gifts at all, who have 
been accustomed to dumb idois ?’), just as 
ye happened to be led (scil., on each occa- 
sion: the force of & being to indicate the 
indefiniteness, i. 6. in this case, the’ repe- 
tition of the act : so Xen. Anab. i. 5. 2: of 
μὲν ὄνοι, ἐπεί τις διώκοι (whenever any 
followed them) προδραμόντες ἂν εἱστή- 
κεισαν,---αὐα Eurip. Phen. 401: ποτὲ μὲν 
ἐς ἦμαρ εἶχον, εἶτ᾽ οὐκ εἶχον ἄν. See other 
examples in Kiihner, ii. 98, 94). These 
last words seem to me to imply the absence 
of all fixed principle in the oracles ot 
Heathendom, such as be is about to an- 
nounce as regulating and furnishing the 
criterion of the spiritual gifts of Christen- 
dom. This ὡς ἂν ἤγεσθε might take a 
man to contradictory oracles, the whole 
system being an imposture—their idols 
being void of all power of utterance, and 
they being therefore imposed on by the 
fictions of men, or evil spirits, who led 
them. Chrys., (c., Theophyl., make this 
refer to the difference between the heathen 
μάντις, who was possessed by an evil spirit, 
and therefore εἵλκετο ὑπὸ τοῦ πνεύματος 
δεδεμένος, οὐδὲν εἰδὼς ὧν λέγει, and the 
Christian προφήτηςκ,--- 10}. however is 
entirely unwarranted by the context. 

8.1 The neyative and positive 
eriteria of inspiration by the Spirit of 
God: viz. the rejection, or confession, of 
Jesus as the Lora. διό, ‘ because ye 


Oo «Ἀν 


so 


2.--6. ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ A. 17 


f 5 7 e A er ’ \ g ° δ Vd ~ A , εὐ πε 1 τὲ) 
γνωρίζω ὑμῖν ὃτι οὐδεὶς 8 ἐν δ πνεύματι θεοῦ λαλῶν λέγει Tee 


΄ aw ‘ 7 >, -“ ΄ Γ 
© Ανάθεμα ᾿Ιησοῦς: “αὶ οὐδεὶς δύναται εἰπεῖν Κύριος Ron in i, 
ἯΙ A > \ g ar ΄ LOS, 4. i§ , δὲ k pete: τ ὁ 
ησοῦς, εἰ μὴ ὅ ἐν ὅ πνεύματι ἁγίῳ. ιαιρέσεις δὲ δ χα- κἰιν 2. 
, \ \ » ‘ lal ν᾿ / = rc eye 
ρισμάτων εἰσίν, TO δὲ αὐτὸ πνεῦμα: ὅ καὶ | διαιρέσεις | διακο-  Eeee tz 
a 9... ἢ ΝΥ ar sie ἃ ΄ K€ \ i § , m2 10al. Mic. 
νιῶν εἰσίν, καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς κύριος" ὃ καὶ | διαιρέσεις ™ ἐνεργη- i.e 
om, 1%. 


reff. i here (3ce) only. 1 Chron. xxvi.1. 2 Chron. viii. 14. Ezra vi. 18. (-pecy, ver. 11.) 
k = Rom. (vy. 15. vi. 23. xi. 29) xii. 6 al. 1 Acts i. 17. vic lal: m ver. 10 only ft. 


3. om θεου P. om λαλων D F[-gr Hil, Victorin, 1. (insd by F-lat [vulg spec, 
Ambrst ] Augatic-) rec τἥσουν (corrn to bring it into government by λέγει, whereas 
it is an oratio directa), with D[G|KLP rel harl syr-mg-gr sah Orig, Chr, Thdrt 
Damase Novat, Hil-ed,: moov F 17? vulg [spec Ath-int, Did-int, Hil-ms Ambrst]: 
txt ABCN 17! syrr(appy) copt eth arm Cyr-p, { Euthal-ms]. rec Kuplov τησουν 
(see above), with 1) F[-gr] KLP rel syr [copt] arm Ath,[-int, Bas,(and mss,) Dial-trin, 
Kpiph,] Mae, Chr, Thdrt [Damase] Orig-int, Did-int, [Ambrsezpe Ambrst Aug,]: txt 


ABCR 17 vulg(and F-lat) Syr sah eth Orig,[-int,(but mss vary)] Did-gr, Bas, Cyr, 


9 


Epiph, Gennad {Euthal-ms Ambr, Aug, Tich, ]. 


4. tor δε, 5 B (Orig, Eus,]. 
5. fom 1st και P. | 


for καὶ ο, o δε 17. 41. 73. 115-9 vulg D-lat [F-lat spec] Syr 


arm Ens, Ath,{(but mss vary)-int, Bas, Chr,] Epiph, Cyr Iren-int{-mss,] Orig-int, 
[ Hil,(txt,)]}: om o A!{(corrd eadem manu, appy) kj: txt is cited by Orig, Thdrt, 


Damase Ce Iren-int-mss Aug. 


have been hitherto in ignorance of the 
matter. ἐν mv. θεοῦ ἐν amv. ay. 
The Spirit of God, or the Holy Ghost, is 
the Power pervading the speaker, the 
Element in which he speaks. SoSchéttgen, 
on Matt. xxii. 43, quotes from the Rabbis, 
‘ David saw wT mI, in the Holy Spirit.’ 
λαλῶν λέγει) On the difference of 
meaning between λαλῶ, ‘ to discourse,’ ‘ to 
speak, and λέγω, ‘to say,’ the former of 
the act of utterance absolutely, the latter 
having for its object that which is uttered, 
see note on John viii. 25. In all the 
seeming exceptions to this, λαλῶ may be 
justified as keeping its own meaning of 
‘to discourse :’ we may safely deny that 
it is ever ‘to say’ simply. ἀνάθ. 
Ἴησ.} Jesus (not Christ, the Name of 
office, itself in some measure the object of 


Juith,— but Jesus, the personal Name,— 


the historical Person whose life was matter 
of fact: the curse, and the confession, are 
in this way far deeper) is accursed (see 
ref. Rom. note). So «vp. Ἴησ., Jesus is 
Lord (all that is implied in κύριος, being 
here also implied: and we must not forget 
that it is the LXX verbum solenne for the 
Heb. JEHOVAH). By these last words the 
influence of the Holy Spirit is widened by 
the Apostle from the supernatural gifts to 
which perhaps it had been improperly con- 
fined, to the faith and confession of every 
Christian. It is remarkable that in 
1 John iv. 1,2, where a test to try the spirits 
is given, the human side of this confession 
is brought out,—Inoobv χριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ 
€AnaAvééra,—John having to deal with 
tliose who denied the reality of the Incarna- 
tion. Or also, as Bengel: “ Paulus prebet 
criterium veri contra gentes: Johannes, 
Vor. Li. 


contra falsos prophetas.” 4—6.] But 
(as contrasted to this absolute unity, in 
ground and principle, of all spiritual influ- 
ence) there are varieties (in reff. 2 Chron. 
and Ezra, used of the courses or divisions of 
the priests) of gifts (χαρίσματα = eminent 
endowments of individuals, in and by which 
the Spirit indwelling in them manifested 
Himself,—the gavépwots τοῦ πνεύματος 
in each man ;—and these either directly 
bestowed by the Holy Ghost Himself, as 
in the case of healing, miracles, tongues, 
and prophesying, or previously granted 
them by God in their unconverted state, 
and now inspired, hallowed, and poten- 
tiated for the work of building up the 
church,—as in the case of teaching, exlor- 
tation, knowledge. Ofall these gifts, fuith 
working by love was the necessary sub- 
stratum and condition. See Neander, 
Pi. ἃ. Leit. pp. 232 ff.), but the same 
Spirit (as their Bestower,—see the sense 
filled up in ver. 11): 5.] and there 
are varieties of ministries (appointed 
services in the church, in which as their 
channels of manifestation the χαρίσματα 
would work), and the same Lord (Christ, 
the Lord of the church, whose it is to 
appoint all ministrations in it. These 
διακονίαι must not be narrowed to the eccle- 
siastical orders, but kept commensurate 
in extent with the gifts which are to find 
scope by their means, see vv. 7—10): and 
varieties of operations (effects of divine 
ἐνέργειαι : not to be limited to miraculous 
effects, but understood again commensu- 
rately with the gifts of whose working 
they are the results), and the same Gop. 
Who works all of them in all persons («IL 
the χαρίσματα in all who are gifted). Thus 
Pp p 


978 ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@OIOTS A. Are 


΄ » / Ng Bs ON θ Ν = n 2 - 9 a op / 3 
nver.1l. Rom. LATMV εἰσιν, Καὶ O AUTOS VEOS O ἐνεργῶν Ta TAVT@ ἐν ABCDF 


vii. 5 reff. a Spas \ 7 , a ΄ 
o=ch.vil6 Ρ πᾷσιν. Ἷ ἑκάστῳ δὲ δίδοται ἡ 4 φανέρωσις τοῦ πνεύματος 
. xv. 25 = \ , e ‘ \ al ’ 
Povh 23. Ἰ πρὸς TO Sauudépov. 8'w μὲν yap διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος δί- 


: . ἊΝ / \ , , 
a2Cor.iv.2 Sota" λόγος YY σοφίας, ᾿ ἄλλῳ δὲ " λόγος τ᾿ γνώσεως ¥ κατὰ 


only t. 
r= ch. vi. 5. vii. 35. x. 11 al. s Acts xx. 20 reff. t usage, here only. see Matt. mit. 4 Ὁ Mk. ch. 
iii. 4. ver. 28. u = and constr., Acts xiii. 26 reff. v = ch. ii. 6 ἃ]. w Prov. xxx. 
(xxiv.) 3. x = 2Cor. σι. 6al. y = καθὼς B., ver. 11. 


6. rec ο δε avtos (corrn to express contrast, It can hardly have been altered to και 
Ὁ to conform to the precedg clause, the first remaining τὸ δε), with AK LPR rel Jatt syrr 
sah arm Eus, Epiph, Cyr, [Ath,-int, Did, Bas, Chr, Orig-int,] Iren-int, Hil; [Ambrst 
AUgalic ], deus hic idem est copt; o avtos δε DE: txt BC m Orig, [ Euthal-ms }. 
rec ins εστι bef eos, with KLN?3 rel (syr) Orig, Thdrt Damase ; aft evepyev B [Cyr- 
ms-p,]; ins χριστὸς bef devs ὁ: om ACDFPN! in 17 latt (Syr) sah arm Eus, Ath,{-int, 


Did, Epiph, Euthal-ms] Bas, Chr, ΤῊ] Iren-int Orig-int Hil, 


8. homeotel aAAw to aAAw next ver Kk. 


we have Gop THE FaTHER, the First 
Source and Operator of all spiritual influ- 
ence in all: Gop THE Son, the Ordainer 
in His Church of all ministries by which 
this influence may be legitimately brought 
out for edification : Gop rHE Hoty Guost, 
dwelling and working in the church, and 
effectuating in each man such measure 
of His gifts as He sees fit. 7—11.] 
These operations specified in their variety, 
but again asserted to be the work of one 
and the same Spirit. 7.1 To each 
individual, however (the emphasis on 
ἑκάστῳ, as shewing the character of what 
is to follow, viz. individual distinction of 
gifts. δέ again contrasted with the 6 
αὐτός of the last verse ; though the work- 
ings of One God, One Lord, One Spirit, 
they are bestowed variously on each man), 
is given the manifestation of the Spirit 
(not, as Meyer, al., the means of mani- 
Sesting the Spirit which dwells in him 
(gen. obj.): but, as De W., the mani- 
JSestation by which the Spirit acts (gen. 
subj.); it is a general term including 
χαρίσματα, διακονίαι, and ἐνεργήματα) with 
a view to profit (with the profit of the 
whole body as the aim: see reff.). 

8—10.] It has been disputed, whether or 
not any studied arrangement of the gifts 
of the Spirit is here found. The most 
recent and best advocates of the two views 
are Meyer and De Wette. Meyer gives 
the following arrangement: grounding it 
mainly on what he believes to be the 
intentional use of ἑτέρῳ δέ as distinguished 
from ἄλλῳ δέ, and pointing out a new 
category :—I. gifts having reference to 
intellectual power : (1) λόγος σοφίας. (2) 
λόγος γνώσεως. 11. (ἑτέρῳ δέν) gifts, whose 
condition is an exalted faith (glaubens- 
heroigémus) : (1) faith itself. (2) practical 
workings of the same, viz. (a) ἰάματα. 
(Ὁ) δυνάμεις. (3) oral working of the 
same, viz. προφητεία. (4) critical working 
of the same, the διάκρισις πνευμάτων. ILL. 
gifts having reference to the γλῶσσαι: (1) 


om ta Di, 


speaking with tongues : (2) interpretation 
of tongues. To this De Wette objects, 
(1) that ᾧ μέν, ἑτέρῳ δέ, ἑτέρῳ δέ, do not 
stand with any reference to one another, 
but ἑτέρῳ δέ 1s in each ease opposed to the 
ἄλλῳ δέ which immediately precedes it,and 
followed by an ἄλλῳ δέ similarly opposed 
to it: therefore neither can the one be- 
token the genus, nor the other the species. 
(2) If any thing could be relied on as mark- 
ing a division, it would be the repeated 
κατὰ τὸ αὐτὸ πν., ἐν τῷ αὖτ. πν., and the 
concluding πάντα δὲ ταῦτα ver. 11: but 
even thus we get no satisfactory partition, 
for in ver. 10 dissimilar gifts are classed 
together. (3) We must not look for a 
classification, for the catalogue is incom- 
plete, see ver. 28. (4) The classification 
given is objectionable. Speaking with 
tongues is plainly more nearly allied to 
προφητεία than mpo¢. to gifts of healing: 
and the two, tongues and prophesying, are 
subsequently treated of together. Besides 
which, Kling (Stud. u. Krit. 1839, p. 482) 
rightly remarks, that both διάκρισις mv. 
and ἑρμηνεία yA. have reference to the 
understanding. I am inclined to think 
that De W.’s objections are valid, as applied 
to a rigorous arrangement like Meyer’s ; 
but that at the same time there is a sort 
of arrangement, brought about not so 
much designedly, as by the falling together 
of similiar terms,—Adyos σοφ., λόγος yv.,— 
γένῃ γλωσσῶν, épu. γλωσσῶν. Unques- 
tionably, any arrangement must be at 
fault, which proceeding on psychological 
grounds, classes together the speaking with 
tongues and the interpretation of tongues : 
the working of miracles, and the discern- 
ment of spirits. I believe too that Meyer’s 
distinction between ἑτέρῳ δέ and ἄλλῳ δέ 
is imaginary: see Matt. xvi. 14; Heb. 
x1. 35, 36. 8.] yap appeals to matter 


of fact, as the ground of the assertion in. 


ver. 7, both as to the δίδοται and as to the 
πρὸς τὸ συιιφέρον. ᾧ μὲν... . ἄλλῳ 
δέ, ἃ loose construction, as in ver. 38, 


KLPxa 
hedef 
ghkl 
ui o 17- 
47 


a 


— 


7—10. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOT®S A. 579 


x ’ \ a 9 t e ΄ δὲ ͵ 7 ? “ a , A 7 , 
τὸ αὐτὸ πνεῦμα, 9 ‘eTépw [δὲ] πίστις 5 ἐν τῷ " αὐτῷ * πνεύ- τνετ. 3. 
” \b / x ce? ΄, 22 nis ci τ ε ae σβτα His 
ματι, ἄλλῳ δὲ "χαρίσματα “ἰαμάτων *év τῷ “ἐνὶ “πνεύματι. ὃ rv 2 “0 
τ. er. 


10 ἄλλῳ δὲ 4 ἐνεργήματα “ δυνάμεων, ἄλλῳ δὲ f προφητεία, τὶ. ixxxi) 
‘ L 6 ™ 


” \ / , pF \: , 2 é NEES 
ἄλλῳ δὲ & διακρίσεις ἢ πνευμάτων, ἑτέρῳ δὲ | γένη * γλωσ- , Activ. 22.) 


6 = Acts viii. 13 reff. f = Rom. xii. 6. ch. xiii. 2 al. 

only. Job xxxvii. 16 only. (-κρίνειν, ch. vi. 5.) 
1. 3 Kings xxii. 21. i = Matt. xiii. 47. 
iv.6 al.) Gen. i. 11, ἄς. k Acts ii. 4 reff. 
9. om Ist δε BD! FN! [47] latt Syr [arm(ut sepe, Treg)] Clem, Orig,[-c,-int,] Eus, 
{ Did-int, Hil, Ambrst Auguic|: ins AC D? 3[-gr | LPN3 rel syr coptt Orig, Eus, Cs, 
Cyr-jer, Chr, Thdrt, (Did,{-int,]) Damase Th], Hil, Aug). om 2nd δε DF latt 
Syr [arm] Eus, [Hil,]. rec for ev, avtw (conformation to foregoing), with 
C3 D[-gr] F[-gr] ΚΙἼΡΝ rel (syrr) copt Clem [Cyr-jer, Bas-ed, |] Chr, Thdrt { Hil-ms, | : 
txt AB a 17 vulg(and F-lat, but over F-gr eodem is written) D-lat Did, [ Bas-mss, 
Eathal-ms Damase Hil,(and ms,) Ainbrsepe AUZsepe].—om ev Tw evs mv. ΟἹ Kus, Tert, 


g Rom. xiv. 1. Heb. ν. 14 
ἢ = ch. xiv. 32. 1Tim.iv.1. 1 John iv. 
Mark ix. 29 (|| Mt.]. ver. 28. ch. xiv. 10 only. (Acts 


Cassiod. 


10. om Ist δὲ D'F latt [arm] Clem, Hil,. 


Aug, al). δυνσμεως DF. 


evepyeta DF, operatio latt { Hil, } (not 


om δὲ (2nd, 3rd, and 4th) BDF latt Clem, | Tert, 


Ambrst ]: om 4th δὲ ΡΝ] Cas : ins ACK LN? rel syrr copt [Eus, Bas, Cyr-jer, Euthal- 


ms! Chr, Thdrt Damase. 
Orig[-c, | Bas, [Tert, Hil]. 


λόγος σοφίας. . . λόγος γνώσεως] 
What is the distinction? According to 
Neander, σοφία is the s&ill, which is able 
to reduce the whole practical Christian 
life into its due order in accordance with 
its foundation principles (see Pfl. u. Leit. 
p- 247) ;—yvoots, the theoretical insight 
‘into divine things: and similarly Olsh. 
and Billroth. But Bengel, al., take them 
conversely, yvao. for the practical, vod. 
tor the theoretical. Both, as De W. re- 
marks, have their grounds in usage: σοφία 
is practical Col. i. 9, as is γνῶσις Rom. 
xv. 14, but they are theoretical respectively 
in ch. i. 17 ff. and viii. 1. Estius explains 
λόγος σοφίας, ‘gratiam de iis que ad 
doctrinam religionis ac pietatis spectant 
disserendi ex causis supremis,’—as ch. ii. 
6 f.:—and Ady. γνώσεως, he says, “ gratia 
est disserendi de rebus Christiane re- 
ligionis, ex iis que sunt humane scientiz 
vel experientiz.” Meyer says, “ σοφία is 
the higher Christian wisdom (see on ch. 
ii. 6) in and of itself ;—so that discourse 
which expresses its truths, makes them 
clear, applies them, &c. is λόγος σοφίας. 
But this does not necessarily imply the 
speculative penetration of these truths,— 
the philosophical treatment of them by 
deeper and more scientific investigation, in 
other words, γνῶσις : and discourse which 
aims at this is λόγος γνώσεως." This last 
view is most in accordance with the sub- 
sequently recognized meaning of γνῶσις 
and γνωστικός, and with the Apostle’s own 
use of σοφία in the passage referred to, ch. 
ii. 6. κατὰ τ. av. mv.] according to 
the disposition (see ver. 11) of the same 
Spirit. 9.] πίστις, as Chrys.: πίστιν 
ov ταύτην λέγων Thy τῶν δογμάτων, ἀλλὰ 
τὴν τῶν σημείων, περὶ ἣς φησιν Ἐὰν ἔχητε 
πίστιν ὡς κόκκυν σιν. κιτιλ. (Matt. xvii. 


-in the Spirit. 


διακρισις C(?) DIF PN 17 latt Syr [sah-mnt arm] Clem 
om 5th δε D! latt [Tert, Hilaiic (not Jer,) ]. 


20)" καὶ of ἀπόστολοι δὲ περὶ αὐτῆς ἠξίουν 
λέγοντες ΠρόΞςθες ἡμῖν πίστιν (Luke xvii. 
ὅ). αὕτη γὰρ μήτηρ τῶν σημείων ἐστίν. 
Hom. xxix. p. 263. This seems to be 
the meaning here; a faith, enabling a 
man to place himself beyond the region 
of mere moral certainty, in the actuai 
realization of things believed, in a high 
and unusual manner. ἐν τ. QUT. TY. | 
in, i.e. by and through, as the effective 
cause and the medium. χαρίσματα 
ἰαμάτων] gifts of (miraculous) healings ; 
plur., to-indicate the ditferent kinds of 
diseases, requiring different sorts of heal- 
ing. év, see above. 10. évepy. 
Suv.] operations of miraculous powers 
(in general). προφητεία) speaking 
Meyer gives an excellent 
definition of it: “discourse flowing from 
the revelation and impulse of the Holy 
Spirit, which, not being attached to any 
particular office in the church, but im- 
provised,—disclosed the depths of the 
human heart and of the divine counsel, 
and thus was exceedingly effectual for the 
enlightening, exhortation, and consolation 
of believers, and the winning of unbelievers. 
The prophet differs from the speaker with 
tongues....in that he speaks with the 
understanding, not ecstatically : from the 
διδάσκαλος, thus: —6é μὲν προφητεύων 
πάντα ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματος φθέγγεται" ὃ δὲ 
διδάσκων ἐστὶν ὅπου καὶ ἐξ οἰκείας δια- 
λέγεται, as Chrys. on ver. 28.” (Hom. 
Xxxii. p. 286.) διακρίσεις mv. | dis- 
cernings of spirits: i.e. the power of 
distinguishing between the operation of 
the Spirit of God and the evil spirit, or 
the unassisted human spirit: see 1 John 
iv. 1, and compare mposéxovtes πνεύμασιν 
πλάνοις, 1 Tim.iv.1. The exercise of this 
power is alluded to ch. xiv. 29. γένη 


ΡΡ ἃ 


> r 
580 ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. pH i 
- δ / - -" la x -" 
teh.ziv.26 σῶν, ἄλλῳ δὲ |! ἑρμηνεία " γλωσσῶν: |) πάντα δὲ ταῦτα 
only+. Sir. m2 A \ na ‘ ἊΝ Ἢ γν a 0 § a Ρ ING 
tat xlvii. evepyel TO “εν Καὶ TO αὐτὸ Treva, αιρουν Lola 
oOo . 
΄ ΄ \ 4 ζ / \ A 
(-evew, Heb. ἑκάστῳ 3 καθὼς *BovreTar. 13 "καθάπερ yap τὸ σῶμα 
= ‘ f bf \ , Ν v ͵ \ \ , - 
τεὐτῆς, ἢ. ἕμ ἐστιν, καὶ * μέλη πολλὰ ἔχει, πάντα δὲ τὰ ' μέλη τοῦ 
mver.6. Rom. , a ol ve ’ rn “ ν. Κ 
vii 5 τῇ. σώματος, πολλὰ ὄντα, ἕν ἐστιν σῶμα, οὕτως καὶ ὁ χρι- 
n ch. xi. 5 only. . 2 x 5 » ¥ a 
Ξ ΣΧ: 13 Ν Ν u 2 \ γ a 
Ι ike αν, r στος. καὶ γὰρ " ἐν ἑνὶ πνεύματι ἡμεῖς πάντες εἰς ἕν 
7. . a ᾿] / ΕΣ ’ - ” ad Μ 
only: 5" σῶμα YY ἐβαπτίσθημεν, εἴτε ᾿Ιουδαῖοι εἴτε “EAAnvEs, © εἴτε 
(-ρεσις, vv. ᾿ a ’ 7, ΄, A r y 
45,6)’ να δοῦλοι " εἴτε "" ἐλεύθεροι, καὶ πάντες ἕν πνεῦμα ἡ ἐποτίσθη- 
γ. 
2 a Swe: iv. 34only. Xen. Cyr. vi. 2. 34. q = Mark iv. 33. Acts xi. 29. Num. xxvi. 54, rof 
God, Heb. vi. 17. Jamesi.18. 2 Pet. iii. 9only. 1 Kings ii. 25. s Rom. iv. 6 reff. t Rom. vi. 
13 reff. u Matt. iii. 11. Acts i. 5. xi. 16. v Acts viii. 16 reff. w Eph. vi. δ, 


Col. iii. 11. 
2 Thess. ii. 15. 


x as above (w). Gal. iii. 28. 


x. 38. Luke xii. 47, Heb. vi. 9. 


om adAw δε epunvera γλωσσων (homeotel) BK dk [ Eus, ]. 
Tischdf (ed 7 [and 87) says “cf xii. 30; wiv. 5, 13, 27, 28”) A D'(adds 


sioned by 5? 


Rey. vi. 15. xiii. 16. xix. 18. 
Rev. xvi. 9: 


y Rom. xii. 20 reff. acc., see Mark 


y 
Ps. Ixviii. 21. Winer, edn. 6, $ 32. δ. 


διερμηνεια (mistake occa- 


yevn): txt CD3FKLPN rel Clem Cas Cyr-jer Chr (Bas, Kuthal-ms] Thdrt Damase. 
11. ταυτα δε παντα DF latt copt (Just, Did,(txt,) Ath,(txt,) Cyr, Chr,(txt,) Thdrt, ] 


Orig, Hil, [Ambrst]. 


om to (bef év) D'F arm Orig, Chr, [Sevrn-in-Chr, ]. 


om ida (D!)F latt Syr [arm Bas,] (Orig,) Epiph, Orig-int, Did-int, Hil, [Jersepe 


Ambrst ].—for S:aipouv 1510, διερουμενα D} 


12. om yap K a eth arm; d has it in red. 


F[-gr] Hip, Hil Tich,. 


for και μελη, wean Se D}(and lat) 


rec exer bef πολλα, with DFKL rel latt syrr goth Chr, 
Thdrt, [Damasc] Hil Ambrst: txt ΑΒΟΡΝ m 17 Hip, Thdrt, Jer,. 
X. ins ex bef του σωμ. D}(and lat) goth Hil Ambrst Tich. 


_ BeAnNAX(sic) 
rec aft σωματος 


ins tov evos (gloss), with D3 rel [sah-mnt] goth Chr, Thdrt, Damase (ce Hil [Ambrst 


Tich] 


13. om ev F[-gr]. 


: om ABCFKLPR! ἃ vulg syrr copt eth arm [Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrty., Jer, 
Augatic }. (17 def [but there is not room for the addn ].) 


for xp., κυριος C. 


rec ins εἰς bef ἐν mvevua (appy to conform to the first 


member of the sentence), with D3KL rel vulg(and F-lat) Thdrt, Vig: om (A)BCD!FPX 
ἃ 17. 47 am(with demid [fuld] harl tol) D-lat syrr copt goth zth arm Ps-Ign, Ath, 


Did, Chr, [Euthai-ms Ambrst Aug, ]. 


for πνευμα εποτισθημεν, σωμα ἐσμεν A: 


for πνευμα, πομα ἃ ἔ gl syr-mg-gr: πν. εφωτισθημεν L. 21. 39. 116. 


γλωσσῶν kinds of tongues, i.e. the power 
of uttering, in ecstasy, as the mouthpiece 
of the Spirit, prayer and praise in languages 
unknown to the utterer,—or even in a 
spiritual language unknown to man. See 
this subject dealt with in the note on 
Acts ii. 4, and ch. xiv. 2 ff. ἑρμηνεία 
γλωσσῶν] the power of giving a meaning 
to what was thus ecstatically spoken. 
This was not always resident in the speaker 
himself: see ch. xiv. 13. 11.] The 
Spirit is the universal worker in men of 
all these powers, and that according to 
His own pleasure: see above on vv. 4—6. 

ἰδίᾳ, ‘seorsim, respectively, or 
‘severally, as E. V. This unity of the 
source of all spiritual gifts, in the midst 
of their variety, he presses as against those 
who valued some and undervalued others, 
or who depreciated them all. 12—30. | 
As the many members of the body com- 
pose an organic whole, and all belong to 
the body, none being needless, none to be 
despised ; so also those who are variously 
gifted by the Spirit compose a spiritual 
organic whole, the mystical body of Christ. 
First, however, vv. 12, 18, this likeness of 
the mystical Christ to a bedy is enounced, 
and justified by the facts of our Baplism. 


12.] The organic unity of the various 
members in one body. is predicated also of 
CHRIST, i.e. the Church as united in 
Him, see ch. vi. 15. The γάρ confirms 
the preceding ἕν x. τὸ αὐτὸ πνεῦμα, by an 
analogy. By the repetition,—7d σῶμα, 
.++.T00 σώματος ..., σῶμα, the unity 
of the members as an organic whole is 
more strongly set forth. 13.] This 
shewn from our being baptized into one 
body, and receiving one Spirit. For in 
(see on ver. 9) one Spirit also (the empha- 
sis on ἑνὶ πν., to which words καί belongs) 
we all were baptized into one Body, 
whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves 
or freemen; and we all were made to 
drink of one Spirit (or, ‘a// watered by 
one Spirit,’ viz. the water of baptism, 
here taken as identical with the Spirit 
whose influence accompanied it). So (un- 
derstanding the whole verse of baptism) 
Chrys., Theophyl., Ee., Rickert, Meyer, 
De Wette. Luther, Beza, Calv., Estius, 
Grot., al., refer the latter half to the Lord’s 
Supper: and this is mentioned by Chrys. 
and Theophyl. :—-Billroth and Olsh. to the 
abiding influence of the Spirit in strength- 
ening and refreshing. But the aor. émro- 
τίσθημεν, referring to a fact gone by, is 





11---91. 


μεν. 


15 ὟΝ ” e \ ¢/ ᾽ 3.9% , > Z ay Aha ἐν A 
ὃ ἐὰν εἴπῃ ὁ ποὺς “Ott οὐκ εἰμὶ χείρ, οὐκ * εἰμὶ " ἐκ TOU 
y ? \ a) > » > a 
σώματος, οὐ "παρὰ τοῦτο οὐκ “ἔστιν “ἐκ τοῦ σώματος ; 2%. 
᾿ \ \ " Ὁ \ 
16 καὶ ἐὰν εἴπῃ TO” ods"Ore οὐκ εἰμὶ ὀφθαλμός, οὐκ * εἰμὶ >= here bis 
᾽ lal , > \ la) » A 
2 ἐκ TOU σώματος, οὐ ὃ Tapa τοῦτο οὐκ * ἔστιν ὅ ἐκ τοῦ σώ- 
ἄπο ὧν Ν a ’ , lal 
patos; 17 εἰ ὅλον TO σῶμα ὀφθαλμός, ° ποῦ ἡ “ ἀκοή; εἰ 
e ’ ΄ a e v lal Ν \ 
ὅλον ἃ ἀκοή, “ ποῦ ἡ “ ὄσφρησις ; 18! νῦν δὲ ὁ θεὸς 8 ἔθετο 
\ Xr. h ἃ h “ > “ 3’ A 4 i 0 \ 10 , 
τὰ μέλη, " ἕν " ἕκαστον αὐτῶν ἐν τῷ σώματι | καθὼς ἠθέλη- 


σεν. 


90 f poy δὲ πολλὰ μὲν μέλη, ἕν δὲ σῶμα. 


reff. 
e here only t. 
h Acts xvil. 27 reff. 


15. for ἐστιν, εἰμι(ῦ) N'(but corrd). 
16. om και D'[and lat]. 


i ver. il reff. 


9 \ 4 ‘ ἃ , = A 
19 εἰ δὲ ἦν [ἢ τὰ] " πάντα ἕν μέλος, ° ποῦ TO σῶμα; 


c ellips., Rom. iii. 27. ch. i. 20. 
f = Luke xi. 39 al. 


om ott P (Chr-ms ]. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. 55] 


κ ι \ A , - Q 
14. καὶ yap τὸ σῶμα οὐκ ἔστιν ἕν * μέλος, ἀλλὰ πολλά. 2 of things, — 


here 4 times 
only. of; ers., 
Matt. xxvi. 
73. Johni. 
Acts xxi. 
8al. Obad. 11. 


only. Polyb. 
BEM, hen ἐο. 
παρὰ τί νῦν 
σφαλεί- 
σαν. 
Demosth. 
545: 22, 
ταῦτα πέ- 
πονθεν... 
παρὰ τὴν 
πενίαν. 
Winer, eda 
» 7, \ iner, - 
21 οὐ δύναται δὲ , 63498. 
Ὁ Rom. xi. 8 
d = 2 Pet. ii. 8. Xen. Mem. i. 4. 6. 
g = Acts xx. 28. ver. 28, Gen. xvii. 5. 
k ver. 6. : 


17. ins ὁ bef οφθαλμος D!. 


18. rec νυνι, with CD?3KLPR rel Chr, {Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase Gic: txt ΑΒ} 


1 Thi, 


[ins εἰς bef ev εκαστον K. | 


19. om τα BF 17: ins ACDKLPR rel [Chr Euthal-ms Thdrt, Damasc]. 


20. νυνι FP 32. 47. 67. 80. 114 Chr, 'Thl. 


[arm] Aug». 


om wey B D}(and lat) 73. 114 goth 


21. om δε (as being in the way? but it brings out a contrast to the unity just in- 
sisted on) ACFP d m 17. 47 fuld(and demid) Syr copt [eth arm] (Orig) Bas (‘Thdrt,) 
{Euthal-ms Aug,] Jer: ins BDKLN rel vulg syr goth Chr, Thdrt Damasc Thi (ec 


Ambrst Aug, Pel. 


fatal to both these latter interpretations : 
besides that it would be harsh to under- 
stand even εἰς ἕν mv. ἐποτίσθ. (see var. 
readd.) and impossible to understand ἕν πν. 
ἐποτ., of the cup in the Lord’s Supper. 

14. Analogy. by which this mul- 
tiplicity in unity is justified : it is even so 
in the natural body,—which, though one, 
consists of many members. The object of 
the continuation of the simile seems to be, 
to convince them that their various gifts 
had been bestowed by God on them as 
members of the Christian body, and that 
they must not, because they did not happen 
to possess the gifts of another, consider 
themselves excluded from the body,—in 
which the weaker as well as the stronger, 
the less comely as well as the more comely 
members were necessary. The student 
will remember the fable spoken by Mene- 
nius Agrippa to the mutinous plebs in 
Livy ii. 32. The passage is also illustrated 
by Seneca de Ira, ii. 31, ‘Quid si nocere 
velint manus pedibus, manibus oculi? Ut 
omnia inter se membra consentiunt, quia 
singula servari totius interest: ita homines 
singulis parcent, quia ad celum geniti 
sumus: salva autem esse societas nisi 
amore et custodia partium non potest :’—— 
and by Mare. Antonin. ii. 1, where in his 
morning meditations on the duty of re- 
pressing anger through the day, he says, 
γεγόναμεν yap πρὸς συνεργίαν, ὡς πόδες, 
ὡς χεῖρες, ὡς βλέφαρα, ὡς οἱ στοῖχοι τῶν 
ἄνω καὶ τῶν κάτω ὀδόντων" τὸ οὖν ἂντι- 


πράσσειν ἀλλήλοις, παρὰ φύσιν. See also 
id. vii. 13: Clem. ad Cor. ὁ, xxxvil. p. 
284: and other examples in Wetstein. 
15.] The ὅτι is rightly rendered in Εἰ. V. 
because. ov παρὰ τ. «.7.A. | These 
words [may be taken, here and in the 
next verse, “ ἐξ is not therefore not of the 
body.” But they] are best taken as a 
question, appealing to the sense of the 
reader : they thus have more of the vigour 
of the Apostle’s style. mapa, see reff. 
ἐκ τ. o., belonging to the body us 
an aggregate ; so εἷς ἐκ τῶν δώδεκα,---ἦσαν 
ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων. The double negation 
strengthens,—see Winer, edn. 6, § 55. 9 b 
(he takes the two, ¢ this. case, as de- 
stroying one another (9), see ib. a). 
17. The necessity of the members to one 
another, and tothe body. Understand ἦν 
in each clause, which is indeed expressed 
in ver. 19. 18.] νῦν δέ, but as the 
case really stands: see Hartung, Parti- 
kellehre, ii. 25. τὰ μέλη, generally,— 
ἐν ἕκαστον αὐτῶν, severally. καθὼς 
Ader. answers to καθὼς βούλεται, ver. 11. 
19.] The same ‘reductio ad absur- 
dum’ which has been made in the concrete 
twice in ver. 17, is now made in the ab- 
stract: if the whole were one member, 
where would be the body (which by its 
very idea μέλη ἔχει πολλά: see vv. 12, 
14) ? 20.] Brings out the fact ἐπ 
contrast to ver. 19, as ver. 18 in contrast 
to ver. 17. 21. 26.1] And the spiri- 
tual gifts are also necessary to one an- 


582 


1 Matt. vi. 8. 
Luke v. 31 |). 
Prov. xvui. 2. 


o — (1) Matt. 
xVii, 25 al. 
(2) ch.iv.9 al. 

p Acts ii. 30 reff. 

q Acts xiii. 46 


s Esth. i. 20. 

t Mark xii. 40. 
Luke xil. 4+. 
Dan. iv. 33 
(26) Theod. 

Ὁ = here (Matt. 
xxi. 33 || Mk. 
XxVvii. 28 
" Mk., 48 
Mk. J.) only. 
(Ruth ili. 3.) | τὰ ΠΡ ἐν 
(-Beats, μεριμνῶσιν Ta μέλη. 

1 Pet. iii. 3.) 

x Acts xiii. 50 retf. (-μόνως, ch. xiv. 40.) 

39 only. ach. i. 7 reff. 


only+. 1 Kings xxii. 8 Symm.([? or Incert.} 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. 


XTi. 


᾽ ’ ’ a A r / 9 ; δ 
ὁ ὀφθαλμὸς εἰπεῖν τῇ χειρὶ ᾿ Χρείαν cov οὐκ ‘eyo ἢ 
΄ Ἁ al 4 ’ ΄ al ,’ ” 
π πάλιν ἡ κεφαλὴ τοῖς ποσὶν ' Χρείαν ὑμῶν οὐκ | ἔχω. 
22 ἀλλὰ " πολλῷ " μᾶλλον τὰ ὃ δοκοῦντα μέλη τοῦ σώματος 
’ θ / Ρ e ͵ 4 ’ af : 93 \ A ο ὃ - 
ἀσθενέστερα ? ὑπάρχειν 4 ἀναγκαῖά ἐστιν, *° καὶ ἃ ° δοκοῦ- 
, 3 ἴω ῇ / A 
μεν ' ἀτιμότερα εἶναι TOD σώματος, τούτοις ὃ τιμὴν ‘ περισ- - 
\ Ν / e an -ἰ 
. σοτέραν δ περιτίθεμεν, καὶ Ta‘ ἀσχήμονα ἡμῶν “ εὐσχημο- 
, / f 
σύνην ' περισσοτέραν EXEL. 


94 » 4 δὲ Χ > 7 ΄ -“ > 
~“* τὰ O€ * εὐσχήμονα ἡμῶν οὐ 


ν / » » Ν e ‘\ Ζ Υ̓ ἈΝ “ “Ὁ 
ἡ) χρείαν δ ἔχει" ἀλλὰ O θεὸς * συνεκέρασεν τὸ σῶμα, τῷ 
, / \ ΄ Oe 1 A F 
ἃ ὑστερουμένῳ ἱ περισσοτέραν δοὺς τιμήν, 58 ἵνα μὴ ἢ 
b , ’ A > \ \ ee, ς \ > ΄ 
σχίσμα ἐν τῷ σώματι, ἀλλὰ τὸ avTO ὑπὲρ ἀλληλων 
Fs ΄ ἃ , 
26 καὶ εἴτε πάσχει Ev μέλος, ἃ συν- 
vhere only. Deut. xxiv. 1. (-μονεῖν, ch. vii. 36. -μοσύνη, Rom. i. 27.) 
y abs., Acts ii. 45 reff. 


Ὁ ch. i. 10 reff. 
ch. x. 11 reff. constr. acc., ch. vii. 32, &c. reff. w. ὑπέρ, here only. Ps. xxavii. 18. 


w here only +. Polyb. x. 18. 7, 
z Heb. iv. 2only+. 2 Mace. xv. 
c Matt. vi. 23 al. fr. 2 Kings vii. 10. plur., 
d Rom. vii. 17 


rec om 6 (absorbed in the οφθαλμος follg 2), with K eho [arm Thdrt,]: ins ABCDF 
LPN rel Orig, Bas, Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase Thl-comm Ce. 
23. ins μελη bef tov σωματος D ΕἾ -» Ὁ] lat-ff[not Aug,]; bet eva: 17 [vulg F-lat 


Damasc }. 
24. aft exe: ins τιμης D F-gr Syr. 
συνεκερασεν bef o θεος A. 


om To XN}. 


(adda, so ABCDLN be g m 0.) 
rec voTepouvtt (appy corrn to more 


usual N. T. expression), with DFKILX* rel Orig, Dial, Chr, [Euthal-ms Antch, | 


Thdrt Thl Ge: txt ABCR! 17 Melet,(in Epiph) Damasce. 


τιμὴν, τι περισσοτερον δους B(see table). 


for περισσοτεραν Sous 


25. σχίσματα D![-gr] F[-gr] LX rel fuldarm Bas, Antch, Damase ΤῊ] Ang, Sedul: txt 
ABCD?K f hl mo 17 vulg(and F-lat) D-lat syrr copt Orig, [Chr, Thdrt 2c] Ambrst 


Aug). 


for To avto, Ta avta D}{-gr] F/-gr] arm Orig,. 


μεριμνα DF Thli-marg. 


26. for Ist εἰτε, εἰ τι BF latt syr arm Ambrst Pel Cassiod Bede: txt AC D[-gr] KLX 
rel [Syr(ué quando) copt Bas, Euthal-ms] Chr, Thdrt Damase ΤῺ] (ec [Cypr,(si) 


Augsepe (quia si) ]. 


other. This is spoken in reproof of the 
highly endowed, who imagined they could 
do without those less gifted than them- 
selves, as the preceding to those of small 
endowment, who were discontented with 
their gifts. 22, 23.] Nay, the rela- 
tion between the members is so entirely 
different from this, that the very dis- 
paragement, conventionally, of any mem- 
ber, is the reason why more care should be 
taken of it. I understand by the τὰ δο- 
κοῦντα μέλη τοῦ σώματος ἀσθενέστερα 
ὑπάρχειν, those members which in each 
man’s case appear to be inheritors of 
disease, or to have incurred weakness. 
By this very fact, their necessity to him 
is bronght out much more than that of 
the others. 23.] So also in the case 
of the parts ἃ δοκοῦμεν ἀτιμότερα εἶναι---- 
on which usage has set the stamp of dis- 
honour. Perhaps he alludes (as distin- 
guished from τὰ ἀσχήμ. below) to those 
limbs which we conceal from sight in 
accordance with custom, but in the ex- 
posure of which there would be no ab- 
solute indecency. So Chrys., καλῶς εἶπε 
τὰ δοκοῦντα, καὶ ἃ δοκοῦμεν (but I should 
draw a distinction between the two, in 


om Ist ἐν A (Orig). 


accordance with the above explanation of 
ἀσθενέστ., and render τὰ δοκοῦντα, which 
appear to be [of themselves], and ἃ δο- 
κοῦμεν, Which we think [conventionally |: 
notice also ὑπάρχειν and εἶναι, on which 
see Acts xvi. 20, note) δεικνὺς ὅτι οὐ τῆς 
φύσεως τῶν πραγμάτων, ἀλλὰ τῆς τῶν 
πολλῶν ὑπονοίας 7 ψῆφος. Hom. xxxi. p. 
278. τιμ. περισσ. περιτίθ. | viz. by 
clothing (garments of honour, as the 
Targ. of Onkelos on Gen. iii. 21) : honour- 
ing them more than the face, the noblest 
part, which we do not clothe. καὶ 
τὰ aox.| Here there is no ἃ δοκοῦμεν, 
and no ambiguity. Chrys. (ibid.) says: 
. ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως πλείονος ἀπολαύει τιμῆς" Kal 
οἱ σφόδρα πένητες, κἂν τὸ λοιπὸν γυμνὸν 
ἔχωσι σῶμα, οὐκ ἂν ἀνάσχοιντο ἐκεῖνα τὰ 
μέλη δεῖξαι γυμνά. 24.] The comely 
parts are in some measure neglected, not 
needing to be covered or adorned: but 
(opposed to χρείαν ἔχει) God (at the 
creation) tempered the body together 
(compounded it of members on a principle 
of mutual compensation),— to the deficient 
part giving more abundant honour, 
25.] that there be no disunion (see ver. 
21) in the body, but that the members 





IIPO> KOPINOIOTS A. 583 


πάσχει πάντα τὰ μέλη" εἴτε ὃ δοξάζεται [ἕν] μέλος, f συγ- « = here only. 


; , \ a oF ¢ - ὃ kas a ~ \ Oa θεὰς 
χαίρει WAVTA τὰ MEAN. υμεις OE ἐστέ OWUA χρίστου Καὶ 6) prit.ii. 13, 
, WEY ee \ - e \ “ἢ 18 only. 
μέλη 84 ἐκ ἃ μέρους. “8 καὶ ods μὲν * ἔθετο ὁ θεὸς ἐν TH LP. ‘Gen, 
" y τῇ - : " » Σ xxi. 6 only. 
: ἐκκλησίᾳ πρωτον ἀποστολους, δεύτερον yan Tpopntas, g = oh vii. 5 
, »” , ν h ch. xiii. 9 bis, 
τρίτον ™ διδασκώλους, ἔπειτα Ῥ δυνάμεις, ἔπειτα χαρίσματα ᾿ 0, ΤΣ only. 


(see Rom. 


4 ἰαμάτων, * ἀντιλήμψεις, ὃ κυβερνήσεις, Ῥ γένη Ργλωσσῶν. *. reff. 
μ ) ᾿ ’ 2 Ὗ * 1 Kings xxiii. 
26.) i — ver. 8 al. see note. k = ver. 18. labsol., Acts 
xii. 1. Eph. i. 22 al. m Acts xiii. 1. Eph. iy. 11. n Acts xi. 27 reff: 
01 Tim. ii. 7. 2 Tim. i. 11. p = ver. 10. ἢ q ver. 9 (reff.). r here 
only. Ps. xxi. 19. Sir. xi. 12. 2 Mace. viii. 19. (-λαμβάνεσθαι, Acts xx. 35.) s here 


only. Prov.i. 5. xi. 14. (xx. 18 F compl.[? 21 Ald.j: Prov. xx. 14—22 is omd in ABN.) xxiv. 6 only. 


om 2nd ἐν ABR}. 

27. σωμα bet ἐστε F[not F-lat] Ambr/ txt, ]. for pepous, μελους (perhaps error: 
perhaps, as Mey, εκ wep. was not understood) D\(and lat) vulg [F-lat] syr(uep. mg) 
arm Orig, Eus, Epiph, Thdrt, Procl, [Sevrn-c, Ambrst] (om ex με. Hil, Aug,): txt is 
supported by Orig,(and int.) Eus, Chr, [Bas, Euthal-ms] Thdrt, Damase ΤῊ] Cc. 

28. ins [καὶ bef τριτ. m Orig,(om,-int,) : add] de D![-gr]. rec for 2nd επειτα, 
eta (corrn as more usual, foilg ἐπειτὰ : the omn may be accounted for by a desire to 
throw all into one catalogue), with KL rel Thdrt ΤῊ] Hc: om Ὁ F{-gr] Hil, Ambr, : 


txt ΑΒΟΝ a 17 Bas, Cyr-jer, Chr, [Euthal-ms] Damase. 


the line N-corr’). : 


may have the same care (viz. that for 
mutual well-being) for one another. The 
verb is plur., on account of the personifi- 
cation of the individuai members (Meyer). 
26. καί, and accordingly, in mat- 
ter of fact: we see that God’s temperament 
of the body has not failed of its purpose, 
for the members sympathize most inti- 
mately with one another. πάσχει 
... συνπάσχει] καὶ γὰρ τῇ πτέρνῃ πολ- 
λάκις προΞξπαγείσης ἀκάνθης, ὅλον τὸ σῶμα 
αἰσθάνεται καὶ μεριμνᾷ᾽ καὶ νῶτος κάμπτε- 
ται, καὶ γαστὴρ καὶ μηροὶ συστέλλονται, 
καὶ χεῖρες καθάπερ δορυφόροι κ. ὑπηρέται 
προσιόντες ἀνέλκουσι τὸ παγέν, καὶ κεφαλὴ 
ἐπικύπτει, καὶ ὀφθαλμοὶ μετὰ πολλῆς ὁρῶτι 
THs φροντίδος. Chrys. p. 282. δοξά- 
ἵεται... συγχαίρει] Chrys. again with 
equal beauty instances, στεφανοῦται 7 
κεφαλή, καὶ ἅπας ὃ ἄνθρωπος δοξάζεται" 
λέγει τὸ στόμα, καὶ γελῶσιν ὀφθαλμοὶ καὶ 
εὐφραίνονται (ibid.). But perhaps the 
analogy requires that we should rather 
understand δοξ. of those things which 
physically refresh or benefit the member, 
e. g. anointing or nourishment. 
27.| Application of all that has been said 
of the physical body, to the Corinthians 
as the mystical body of Christ: and to 
indiwiduals among them, as members in 
particular, i.e. each according to his al- 
lotted part in the body. Each church is 
said to be the body of Christ, as each is 
said to be the temple of God (see ch. iii. 
16, note) : not that there are many bodies 
or many temples ; but that each church is 
an image of the whole aggregate,—a 
microcosm, having ‘the same character- 
istics. Chrys. would understand ἐκ μέρους 
— ὅτι ἡ ἐκκλησία H map ὑμῖν μέρος ἐστὶ τῆς 
πανταχοῦ κειμένης ἐκκλησίας, καὶ τοῦ σώ- 


om yevy X}(ins above 


ματος τοῦ διὰ πασῶν συνισταμένου τῶν ἐκ- 
κλησιῶν (Hom. xxxil. p. 285): but this, 
though true, does not appear to have been 
here before the Apostle,—only the whole 
Corinthian church as the body of Christ, 
and its individual components as members, 
each in his appointed place. 28. | 
The divine disposition of the members 
in the spiritual body. os μέν was 
apparently intended to be followed by ois 
(or &AAovs) δέ, but meanwhile another 
arrangement, πρῶτον, δεύτ., τρίτ., occurs 
to the Apostle, and ots μέν is left uncor- 
rected, standing alone. See Eph. iv. 11, 
where τοὺς μέν is followed by τοὺς δέ, 
regularly. ἐν τῇ ἐκκλ. in the (uni- 
versal) church, a sense more frequently 
found in the Epistle to the Ephesians, than 
in any other part of St. Paul’s writings. 
amp. ἀποστόλους] Not merely the 
Twelve are thus designated, but they and 
others who bore the same name and had 
equal power, e.g. Paul himself, and Barna- 
bas, and James the Lord’s brother: see also 
note on Rom. xvi. 7. apo. | See 
above, on ver. 10. διδασκάλους | See 
reff. : those who had the gift of expound- 
ing and unfolding doctrine and applying it 
to practice,—the λόγος σοφίας and the 
λύγος γνώσεως. δυνάμεις] He here 
passes to the abstract nouns from the con- 
crete,—perhaps because no definite class of 
persons was endowed with each of the 
following, but they were promiscuously 
granted to all orders in the church : more 
probably, however, without any assignable 
reason; as in Rom. xii. 6—8, he passes 
from the abstract to the concrete. 
ἀντιλήμψεις | i.e. ἀντέχεσθαι τῶι ἀσθενῶν 
and the like, as Chrys. forming one depart- 
ment of the διακονίαι of ver. 5: as do also 


584 


+ Acts ii. 4. 
κ. 46. xix. 6. 
ch. xiv. 2 ἄς. 

au Luke xxiv. 
27. Acts ix. 
36. ch xiv. 5, 
13, 27 only τ. 
2 Macc. i. 56 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOT®S A. 


29 μὴ πάντες ἀπόστολοι; μὴ πάντες ™ προφῆται; μὴ 
πάντες ™ διδάσκαλοι; μὴ πάντες ἢ δυνάμεις ; °° μὴ πάντες 
ᾳ χαρίσματα ἔχουσιν “ ἰαμάτων ; μὴ πάντες "γλώσσαις 
ἐλαλοῦσιν ; μὴ πάντες  διερμηνεύουσιν ; 


XIII. 1 éav παῖς 


only. 

(-νευτής, ιν ΤΊ δ NeW 4 δὺν Ὲ , 4 eZ 

Papeete τς Ζηλοῦτε δὲ τὰ “ χαρίσματα τὰ μείζονα: καὶ ἔτι 
τ 7 καθ᾽ Y ὑπερβολὴν * ὁδὸν ὑμῖν δείκνυμι. 

nis rae w ver. 4 reff. x = ch. xii. 13. xiv. 3. 


Xch.iv. 17. 1 Kings xii. 23. see Acts xiii. 10 reff. 


31. om Ist τα F [2nd τα is written above the line]. 


y Kom. vii. 13 reff. 


rec for μειζονα, κΚρειττονα, 


with DFKL rel (-σσονα DF Kc) latt copt(appy) arm Orig,[-int, ] Sevrn-e, Chr, Damase, 
Phot, Thl(ov« εἶπε τὰ μείζονα ἀλλὰ τὰ κρείττονα) [Ambr, Ambrst]: txt ABCN in 17. 


73 am eth Orig, Thdor-cat, [Cyr, Euthal-ms ] Thdrt-comm Damase, Jers. 
for ετι, cette D': ετει[ ἃ : exter] F. 


και F old-lat Syr. 


κυβερνήσεις, a higher department, that of 
the presbyters or bishops—the direction of 
the various churches. γένη γλωσσών] 
εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα, καὶ πῶς 
πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν ; 
Chrys. p. 287. There certainly seems to be 
intention in placing this /as¢in rank: but I 
ain persuaded that we must not, with Meyer, 
seek for a classified arrangement: here, as 
above, vv. 7—11, it seems rather suggestive 
than logical: the xap. ἰαμ. naturally sug- 
gesting the avr:Ajuvers,—and those again, 
the assistances to carry out the work of the 
church, as naturally bringing in the κυβερ- 
νήσεις, the government and guidance of it. 
29, 30.) The application of the 
questions already asked vv. 17—19. 
29. δυνάμεις ποῦ, as Meyer, al., accusa- 
tive, governed by €xovaw—which involves 
a departure from the parallelism, besides 
the harshness of construction :—but nom- 
native, in apposition with πάντες. ‘The 
Apostle has above placed the concrete, 
ἀπόστολοι, προφῆται, διδάσκαλοι, in appo- 
sition with δυνάμεις and χαρίσμ. ἰαμ., and 
now proceeds with the same arrangement 
till he comes to χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων, which 
being too palpably unpredicable of persons, 
gives rise to the change of construction, — 
μὴ πάντες Xap. ἔχουσιν ἰαμάτων; In the 
last two questions, he departs from the 
order of the last verse, and takes in again 
one particular from the former catalogue, 
ver. 10. Meyer compares Hom. Il. ν. 
726—734. See Stanley’s note and excur- 
sus. 31.] But (he has been shewing 
that all gifts have their value: and that 
all are set in the church by God: some 
however are more valuable than others) do 
ye aim at the greater gifts (uel¢. is ex- 
plained ch, xiv.5). This exhortation is not 
inconsistent with ver. 11: but, as we look 
for the divine blessing on tillage and care- 
ful culture, so we may look for the aid of 
the Spirit on carefully cultivated powers of 
the understanding and speech ;—and we 
may notice that the greater gifts, those of 
προφητεία and διδασκαλία, consisted in the 


Ou 


deck. bef υμιν ΕἾ -gr], 


inspired exercise of the conscious faculties, 
in which culture and diligence would he 
useful accessories. ‘‘ Spiritus dat, ut vult 
(ver. 11): sed fideles tamen libere aliud 
pre alio possunt sequi et exercere, 6. xiv. 
26.” Bengel. Compare also xiv. 39. There 
is thus no need to explain away ζηλοῦτε, 
as Grot. (“ agite cum Deo precibus ut ac- 
cipiatis’’) and others: or to depart from 
the known usage of χαρίσματα, aud explain 
it to mean fuith, hope, and love,as Morus, 
or the fruits of love, as Billroth. καὶ 
ἔτι) And moreover : besides exhorting you 
to emulate the greatest gifts. 

καθ᾽ ὑπ. ὁδ.] An eminently excellent 
way, viz. of emulating the greatest gifts : 
—so Theophyl. : καὶ μετὰ τούτων (τυῦτο 
γὰρ δηλοῖ τὸ καὶ ἔτι), ἐὰν ὅλως ζηλωταὶ 
ὑπάρχητε χαρισμάτων, δείξω ὑμῖν μίαν 
ὁδὸν καθ᾽ ὑπερβολήν, τουτέστιν, ὑπερέχου- 
σαν, ἥτις φέρει ἐπὶ πάντα τὰ χαρίσματα. 
τὴν ἀγάπην δὲ λέγει. καθ᾽ ὑπερβ.] 
must not be joined with the verb,—‘ est 
adhue via quam vobis diligentissime de- 
monstro’ (Pagnini’s version, and some 
mentioned by Kstius): see reff. and cf. 7 
μάλιστα ἀναγνώρισις, Arist. Poet. ii. 6,— 
μάλα στρατηγόν, Xen. Hell. vi. 2. 39,— 
εὖ πρᾶξις, Asch. Agam. 262,--- σφόδρα 
γυναικῶν, Plato, Legg. i. p. 639 ©, and 
other examples in Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 
338. The explanation of Estius and 
Billroth, that the way which he is about 
to shew them is ‘ multo excellentiorem iis 
donis de quibus hactenus egit’ (Est.), is 
clearly wrong : the opening verses of ch. 
xiii. shewing, that he does not draw a com- 
parison between love and gifts, but only 
shews that it is the only way, in which 
gifts can be made effectual in the highest 
sense. See also on ch. xiv. 1. 

Cuap. XILI. 1—13.] Toe PANEGYRIC OF 
Love ; as the principle without which all 
gifts are worthless (1—3) : its attributes 
(4—7) : its eternity (8—12) : its superior 
dignity to the other great Christian graces 
(18). Meyer quotes from Valcknaer, Ὁ. 
299: “Sunt figure oratorie, que hoc 


ABCDFP 


KLNa 


bedef 


gh kal 
mo 17, 
47 





wlE 2. 


Ameren TOV 
ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ EXO, 
λον ᾿ἀλαλάξον. 


xxi. 25 v.r.) only. Jer. xxvii. (1.} 42. 
f Mark v. 38 only. Josh. vi. 20. 
h Matt. xiii. 11. cl. xv. 51. Dan, ii. 18 al. 
k Acts xiv. 9 reff. 


Cuap. XIII. 1. homecotel in &! from un exw to un exw next ver: 


X-corr!. 
E-lat G-lat spec) { Ambrst }. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINGIOTS ‘A. 


’ “ “ 
ἡ ἀνθρώπων ἐὑλαλῷ καὶ τῶν 
D we c λκὸ 

γέγονα “ χαλκὸς 
" κἂν ἔχω Cn ey εἰδῶ τὰ 


" μυστήρια πάντα καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν ' γνῶσιν, κἂν 


(-χος, Acts ii. 2.) 
g = Rom. xii. 6. ch. xii. 10. xiv. 22 al. 


985 


δὰ : aso 80 ch. iv. 9. 
ὠγγέλων, * 2 Cor. xii. 

d ’ “ Ὰ e , B 
χων 1 κυμ α- eerie vi. 8 

\ \| Mt. xii. 41. 
Rey. xviii. 12 
only. Gen. 
iv. 22. 

d here {Luke 

e here only. 1 Chron. xiii. 8. 
(Rev. i. 3.) see Sir. xxiv. 33. 

i= ch. viii, 1. xii. 8 al. Prov. xxx. (xxiv.) 3. 


K ἔχω πᾶσαν 


supplied by 


for γεγονα, ἕν εἰμι D! F(addg #), (in) unum sum ut old-lat(viz, D-lat 
[χαλικος F. | 


αλαλαζων AD ἃ [17]. 


2. rec (for κἂν) καὶ eay (twice in this ver and twice in next), with DF K(1st και αν) 
L(&) rel(om 2nd cay exw 47 [Bas,]) Chr, (Bas, Ephr, (Kuthal-ms Ist and 2nd) | Thdrt, 
Ist (4th και av) B, 4th 17: txt AC [Cyr, ], 2nd and διὰ B [Clem], lst 2nd and 3rd 17. 


for εἰδω, ovda (= oda) F: 


caput illuminant, omnes sua sponte nate 
in animo heroico, flagrante amore Christi 
et huic amori divino omnia ‘postponente.” 
“It may,” he adds, “ without impro- 
priety be called ‘a Psalm of Love :’”’—the 
nvr vo of the New Test. (see Ps. xlv. 
title). “On each side of this chapter the 
tumult of argument and remonstrance still 
rages: but within it, all is calm: the sen- 
tences move in almost rhythmical melody: 
the imagery unfolds itself in almost dra- 
matic propriety : the language arranges it- 
self with almost rhetorical accuracy. We 
can imagine how the Apostle’s amanucnsis 
must have paused to look up in his master’s 
face at the sudden change of his style of 
dictation, and seen his countenance lighted 
up as it had been the face of an angel, as 
the sublime vision of divine perfection 
passed before him.” Stanley. 1] 
ἐὰν λαλῶ supposes a case which never 
has been exemplified: even if I can speak, 
or as kK. V. though I speak. So Isocr. 
Areop. p. 142,--- ἀλλ᾽ ἐὰν μὲν κατορθώσωσι 
περί τινας πράξεις, ἢ διὰ τύχην, ἢ δι 
ἀνδρὸς ἀρετήν, μικρὸν διαλιπόντες πάλιν 
εἰς τὰς αὐτὰς ἀπορίας κατέστησαν. See 
Matthie, ὃ 529. 1. ταῖς γλώσσαις τ. 
ἀνθρ. κ. τ. ayy.) ὅρα πόθεν ἄρχεται" πρῶτον 
ἀπὸ τοῦ θαυμαστοῦ δοκοῦντος εἶναι παρ᾽ 
αὑτοῖς καὶ μεγάλου, τῶν γλωσσῶν. Chrys. 
p- 289. It is hardly possible to un- 
derstand γλῶσσαι here of any thing but 
articulate forms of speech: i.e. languages. 
Meyer and De W., who deny that the 
speaking with tongues was ever in an 
articulate language, vehemently impugn 
such a rendering here. But their own ren- 
dering is to me undistinguishable from it, 
as far as the sense is concerned: ‘ tongues 
speaking in all possible ways,’ surely, in 
the common acceptation of words, must 
mean, tongues speaking all possible lan- 
guages, and the use of the word indif- 
ferently for the tongue and a tongue (a 
language), when this very gift is spoken of, 
6. 5. Acts ii. 4, compared with 11, and here 
as compared with ch. xii, 30, is one of the 


ἰδῶ AD! 17. 


47). 


strongest proofs that λαλεῖν γλώσσαις; is to 
speak in languages: see note on Acts 1]. 4. 
Of men (generic) and of angels (ge- 
neric): i.e. ‘of ald men and all angels,’ 
whatever those tongues may be. 
ἀγάπην) Love fo all, in its most general 
sense, as throughout the chapter: no dis- 
tinction being here drawn between love to 
man and to God, but the general principle 
dealt with, from which both spring. The 
‘Caritas’ of the Latin versions has oc- 
casioned the rendering ‘ charity’ in most 
modern versions. Of this word Stanley 
remarks, “the limitation of its meaning 
on the one hand to mere almsgiving, or on 
the other to mere toleration, has so much 
narrowed its sense, that the simpler term 
‘Love,’ though too general exactly to meet 
the case, is now the best equivalent.” 
γέγονα) Iam become; the case supposed 
is regarded as present : ‘if 7 can speak . 
I am become.’ χαλκ. ἠχ-] Brass, of 
any kind, struck and yielding a sound: i.e. 
ἀναίσθητόν τι κ. ἄψυχον. Chrys. No 
particular musical instrument seems to be 
meant. κύμβαλον] κύμβαλα ἦν πλα- 
Téa κ. μεγάλα χάλκεα, Jos. Antt. vii. 12. 3. 
The Heb. name is most expressive, Ὁ ΒΝ. 
There appear to have been two sorts, men- 
tioned in Ps. cl. 5, pow yoy and aAYnn’s, 
rendered by the LXX, κυμβάλοις εὐήχοις 
—and κ. ἀλαλαγμοῦ, as here. Winer 
thinks the former answered to our cas- 


ins ta bef παντα Ε΄. 


tagnettes, the latter to our cymbals. The 
larger kind would be here meant. See 
Winer, Realw. art. ‘ Becken.’ ἀλα- 


λάζον] see Ps. cl. cited above. 2.] 
τὰ μυστήρ. πάντα are all the secrets of 
the divine counsel,—see Rom. xi. 25 (note) ; 
xvi. 25,—and reff. The knowledge of these 
would be the perfection of the gift of pro- 
phecy. The verb belongs to both μυστ. 
and γνῶσιν. The full construction would 
be εἰδῶ μυστ. and ἔχω γνῶσιν. πᾶσαν 
τὴν πίστιν hardly, as Stanley, implies “αὐ 
the faith in the world, but rather, ‘all 
the faith required to,’ &c.: or perhaps the 
art. conveys. the allusion to our Lurd’s 


586 ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. XIII. 


7 Isa. liv. 10 


Ν k / ae ] v Im θ Ξ , 4 δὲ \ oy 
τιν “TLATLY WSTE § OPN MEULOTAVELY, AYATHV OE μὴ ἔχω, 


m -avetr, here ἢ > / » 3 “Δ 0 , ΄ \ Ρ ΄ Γ᾽ , 
only+. (Luxe " οὐθέν εἰμι. Kav °Wwuicw Tavta τὰ ὃ urTapyovTa 
xvi. 4. Acts > = 

“»} xX -“ \ a ΄ JA ΄ 
aos =. OE ey a Ὁ παραδῶ TO σῶμά μου ἵνα καυθήσωμαι, 
only. Judg. ? ΄ δὲ ν + Oe s 2 -: a Aciteye ͵ τὰ 
Pisa Ald. ὠγώπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω, οὐδεν * ὠφελοῦμαι. ἢ ὠγαητη ™ μα- 
compl. ~ uv , ε ᾽ ΄ > ow A ς > ΄ 
neh-sil® κροθυμεῖ, “Y χρηστεύεται, ἡ ἀγάπη οὐ " ζηλοῖ, [ἡ ἀγάπη) 

o Rom. xii. 20 ἊΝ ΄ > y = 5 9 ΡΣ ᾿ = 
only. constr., OU TTEPTTEPEVETAL, OU φυσιοῦται, OUK ασχήμονει, ov 
here only. 

Num. x1. 4, 


a “ \ a © a ’ b ΄ > ς ͵ d A 
Num ζητεῖ τὰ ὃ ἑαυτῆς, ov ὃ παροξύνεται, ov “ λογίζεται “TO 


p — Matt. xix. 21. χχῖν. 41. Heb. x. 33 ἃ]. Gen. xii. ὃ. = Acts xv. 26. Dan. iii. 28 (95). 
s Mark v. 26. Matt. xvi. 26. Prov. x.2 t Matt. xviii. 26,29. Luke xviii.7. 1 Thess. v. 14. Heb. vi. 
15. James ν. 7 bis,8. 2 Pet. iii. 9only. Prov. xix. 11. {(-μια. Rom. ix. 22. -μως, Acts xxvi. 3.) u see 


Rom. ii. 4. 2 Cor. vi. 6. 
x here only t. see note. 

i. 27. -μων, οἷν. xii. 23.) 

c = Rom. iv. 8, from Ps. xxxi. 2. 
μεθισταναι BDF X-corr! m 17 Clem [Cyr,] Thl: txt ACKL rel Orig, Chr, [ Bas, Ephr, 
Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damasc, (Ke. elz οὐδεν, with Di Kfe sil} Clem, Meth, Mac, 
Chr, [Bas, Cyr,] Thdrv: txt ABCD3LX Clem, Eph, Bas,[-wss; Euthal-ms} Mac, 
Damasc, Thl-comm (Ke. for εἰμι, ὠφελουμαι A Ainbry. 

3. elz ψωμιζω (corrn, the force of the aor not being perceived), with ΚΓ 6 sil]: txt 
ABCDELX® rel. παραδωσω FI’. καυθησομαι DFL b? cdf hk 47 [ Bas, 
Cyr, Euthal-ms] Max-conf, : καυχήσωμαι ABN 17 copt-ims xth{-rom]} Ephr, Jer,(from 
gr-inss asserts apud Grecos ipsos ipsa exemplaria diversa esse, but thinks, οὐ 
similitudinem καυθησωμαι et καυχησωμαι apud Latinos errorem inolevisse) : txt CK 
rel Orig{-e, Ephr,] Chr, Thdrt [Cyr,: simly latt syrr copt-wilk goth eth arm Tert, 
Cypr, Rebapt, Ambrst Augsepe} Jac-nisib. ουθεν AN 17. 73 Bas-ms,: txt 
BCDFKL rel Chr, [Ephr, Bas, Cyr, Euthal-ms] Thdrt. 

4. om 3rd ἡ ayarn Β al7-9.55.73-4. 118-22! lect-17 vulg[F-lat ]copt arm Clem, Ephr, 
Chr, { Bas, Cyr, ΤῊΙ Orig-int, Tert, Cypr, Ambr Ambrst. meptopeveta A Ephry. 


v here only +. (not found elsewhere. Lexx.) w Acts vii. 9 reff. 
y ch. 1v. 6 reff. z ch. vii. 36 only. Deut. xxv. 3. (-“oovrvy. Rom. 
ach. x. 24. Phil. 11. 21. Ὁ Acts xvii. 16 only (reff.). 

d Rom. ii. 9 reff. 


5. for τα eauTns, To un εαυτης B Clem,| txt, }. 


saying, Matt. xvii. 20; xxi. 21: ‘all that 
faith,’ so as, &e. 8.1 The double 
accus. after ψωμίζω is found in the reff. to 
LXX: but here the accus. of the person 
is omitted, and left to be supplied from the 
context: If I bestow in food all my sub- 
stance. See the quotation from Coleridge 
in Stanley’s note. παραδ. TO σώμ. 
μ- ἵνα καυθ. So ref. Dan., καὶ παρέδωκαν 
τὰ σώματα αὐτῶν εἰς ἐμπυρισμόν, LXX. 
πῦρ, Theod.: see also 2 Mace. vii. 37. 
He evidently means in self-sacrifice: for 
country, or friends. Both the deeds men- 
tioned in this verse are such as ordinarily 
are held to be the fruits of love, but they 
may be done without it, and if so, are 
worthless. Stanley prefers καυχήσωμαι--- 
and Lachmann has edited it. The objec- 
tions to it seem to me to be, (1) It leaves 
παραδῶ standing in a very vague and un- 
detined meaning—* deliver, to what?” 
(2) It introduces an irrelevant and con- 
fusing element, a boastful motive, into a 
set of hypotheses which put forward merely 
an act or set of acts on the one side, and 
the absence of love on the other: and in- 
deed, worse still, (3) it makes an hypo- 
thesis which would reduce the self-sacri- 
fice to nothing, and would imply the 
absence of love; and so would render 
ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω unnecessary..— 
4. 7. The blessed attributes of love. 

4.} μακροϑυμεῖ is the negative 


side, xpnoreverat the positive, of a loving 
temper: the former, the withholding of 


anger; the latter, the exercise of kind- 
ness. ov ζηλοῖ, ‘ knows neither envy 


nor jealousy: both are included under 
the more general sense of ζῆλος. 

meptrepevetat | ‘I'he word occurs in Cicero 
ad Attic. i. 14: ‘Di boni! quomodo ézep- 
περευσάμην novo auditori Pompeio!’ and 
Mare. Antonin. v. 5: ἀρεσκεύεσθαι, καὶ 
meftepeverOat, x. τοσαῦτα ῥιπτάζεσθαι TH 
ψυχῇ. Among the examples in Wetst. of 
mepmepos and περπέρεια, is a good defini- 
tion from Basil: τί ἐστι τὸ περπερεύεσθαι; 
πᾶν ὃ μὴ διὰ χρείαν, ἀλλὰ διὰ καλλω- 
πισμὸν περιλαμβάνεται περπερείας ἔχει 
κατηγορίαν. And the Etymol. Mag.,— 
ἀντὶ τοῦ, ματαιοῦται, ἄτακτεῖ, κατεπαί- 
ρεται μετὰ βλακείας ἐπαιρόμενος. ‘The 
nearest English expression would perhaps 
be displays not itself. See Wetst. 

φυσ., see, for a contrast, ch. viii. 1. 

5.| οὐκ ἀσχημονεῖ seems to be general, 
without particular reference to the disor- 
ders in publie speaking with tongues. τὰ 
ἑαυτῆς — Love is so personified, as here to 
be identified with the man possessing the 
grace, who does not seek τὰ ἑαυτοῦ : see 
ch. x. 38. ov λογίζ. τὸ κακόν] 
imputeth not (the) evil: οὐδὲν πονηρὸν οὐ 
μόνον οὐ κατασκευάζει ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ ὑποπτεύει 
κατὰ τοῦ φιλουμένου, Chrys. Hom. xxxiii, 
p- 304: and so Theod., Theophyl., Estius, 


λογι- 
ὄεται..Ῥ 
ABCDF 
KLIPS 
abcde 
fghk 
lin o17. 
47 





2. yAwo- 
σαι ', 
ABDEFK 
RiP Sab 
οὐ ον 
hklm 
0 17. 47 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 587 


2—9, 


Γσυγχαίρει δὲ τῇ ¢ constr., Matt, 


d ΄ 6 Ss e , 3 \ A 9 / 
κακόν, ὃ ov “ χαίρει ἐπὶ TH ἀδικίᾳ, 
- é xviii. 13. 


> / [σὲ 7 , / 
8 ἀληθείᾳ, ἴ πάντα "στέγει, πάντα ἱπιστεύει, πάντα ‘ke; 
ἊΝ ! , k £ , Seite > of IOs ] eh. ἘΥΝ 17. 
€ πίζξει, πάντα “ UTOMEVEL. ἡ ἀγάπη οὐδέποτε | πίπτει. 2 Cor. vii. 15. 


Prov. xxiv. 


m εἴτε δὲ " προφητεῖαι, ὴ καταργηθήσονται: τ εἴτε P ——— Pa Όρτο ἈΗΟ 
=C 
4 παύσονται" " γνῶσις, “ καταργηθήσεται. 9 ἐκ δ ΦΣ μειο i 


= εἴτε 2 Thess. it. 
"μέρους γὰρ γινώσκομεν καὶ 1 ἐκ 1 μέρους ὁ προφητεύομεν" 1 18, 2 Tim. 


12. Rom. i. 


hch. ix. 19. 1 Thess. iii. 1,5 only +. Sir. viii. 17 orly. iacc., Acts xiii. 41 reff. “hone - 
2 Tim. ii. 10. Heb. x. 32. x1i.2,3. Jamesi.12. Wisd. xvi. 22. 1 — Luke xvi. 17. 1 Kings iii. 
19. εκπ., = Jamesi. 11. see note, and Acts xii. 7. Rom. ix. 6. m so ch. xiv. 7. xv. 11. 2 Cor. 
Vili. 23. n ver. 2 (reff.). : Ὁ. ch. i. 28 reff. 2 Cor. iii. 14. p Acts 
ii. 4 reff. q absol., Acts xx.1. Exod. ix. 33, 34. rch. xii. 27 reff. sch. xi. 4, 5 reff. 
6. om Ist τη F. 7. B! repeats marta στεγει. 
8. om 7 B. rec exmimre:, with C3 DF K LPR3 rel Clem, Orig; Mac, Chr, ΕΡΡΕΥ; 


Bas, Cyr, Euthal-ms] Thdrt, Damase ΤῊ] ec [Tert, Cypr,]: txt ΑΒΟΙ͂ΝῚ 17. 47! 
Nys, Orig- int, Ambrst Augsepe- om de C'D'FKP latt copt arm Did, [Ambrst] : ins 
ABC? D+ “3 - er] LN rel syr goth [Chr, Thdrt Damase Aug, }. pinyin καταργηθη- 
σεται B: προφητεια καταργηθησονται( sic) A. γνωσεις (Or ois) καταργηθησονται 
(to conform to the preceding clauses) A D?{[-gr] ΕΓ -οΥ] δὲ 17. 47 (Tert): γν. παυσεται P. 
9. for yap, δε (perhaps because this sentence was regarded not as rendering a reason 
Sor the last, but as another assertion of the imperfection of knowledge and prophecy) KL 
rel Phot(in He: δὲ ἀντὶ τοῦ γάρ. αἰτία yap ἐστι τοῦ διὰ τὶ μέλλουσι καταργ. K. Tava.) 
is om 67? goth eth[-rom] Orig, Eus, Melet, [Epiph,] Chr,: txt ABDF[P JX m (17, 
e sil) 47[sic] latt [syrr copt sth- -pl arm] Orig, [Did, Eus, Ath, Damasc] Thdrt 


Iren-int, Hil, [Ambrst]. 


Rickert, Meyer: and this is better and 
more accordant with the sense of λογίζε- 
ται, than the more general rendering 
‘thinketh no evil.’ And we must not over- 
look the article, which seems here to have 
the force of implying that the evil actually 
exists, ‘the evil’ which is,—but Love does 
not impute it. So Theodoret, συγγινώσκει 
τοῖς ἐπταισμένοις, οὐκ ἐπὶ κακῷ σκόπῳ 
ταῦτα γεγενῆσθαι ὑπολαμβάνων. 
θ. οὐ χ. ἐπὶ τῇ ἀδ.) rejoices not at (the) 
iniquity, i.e. at its commission by others, 
—as is the habit of the unloving world. 
συγχαίρει τῇ ad. ] Most Commenta- 
tors, as the E. V., altogether overlook 
the force of the verb and the altered 
construction, and render, ‘rejoiceth in 
the truth: others, who respect the verb, 
make τῇ ἄληθ.Ξ- τοῖς εὐδοκιμοῦσι (Chrys.), 
those to whom, as in 3 John 12, μεμαρ- 
τύρηται ὑπ᾽ αὐτῆς τῆς ἀληθείας. But 
Meyer’s rendering is the only one which 
preserves the force of both words: re- 
Joices with the Truth, ἡ ἀλήθ. being 
personified, and meaning especially the 
spread among men (as opposed to ἀδικία) 
of the Truth of the Gospel, and indeed 
of the truth in general,—in opposition 
to those who (ref. Rom.) τὴν ἀλήθειαν 
ev ἀδικίᾳ Katéxovot,—who (ref. 2 Tim.) 
ἀνθίστανται τῇ ἀληθείᾳ. 7. πάντα.-- 
i.e. all things which can be borne with a 
good conscience. So Bengel, of all four: 
‘ videlicet, que tegenda vel credenda, quee 
speranda et sufferenda sunt.’ στέγει] 
bears: see note, ch. ix. 195. Hammond, 
Estius, Bengel (above),—‘ covers: but 
the variation in sense from ch. ix. is need- 


less. πιστ.Ἴ viz. without suspicion 
of another. ᾿ἐλπίζ. viz., even against 
hope—hoping what is good of another, 
even when others have ceased to do so. 
trop. | viz. persecutions and dis- 
tresses inflicted by others, rather than 
shew an unloving spirit to them. 
8—12.|] The eternal abiding of Love, 
when other graces have passed away. 
8. πίπτει] The exact word is that of the 
E. V., faileth : so Theod.: οὐ διασφάλλεται, 
GAN ἀεὶ μένει βεβαία κ. ἀσάλευτος kK. 
ἀκίνητος, ἐς ἀεὶ διαμένουσα. τοῦτο γὰρ διὰ 
τῶν ἐπαγομένων ἐδίδαξεν. Of the two 
readings, we may illustrate πίπτει by 
Plato, Phileb., p. 22 E, ἀλλὰ μήν, ὦ 
Σώκρατες, ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ νῦν μὲν ἡδονή σοι 
πεπτωκέναι καθαπερεὶ πληγεῖσα ὑπὸ τῶν 
νῦν δὴ λόγων : and Polyb. x. 33. 4, κἄν 
ποτε πέσῃ τὰ cage “in case the whole plan 
should fail: id. 1. 35. 5: and ἐκπίπτει 
by Plato, Gorg. Η 517, εἰ οὗτοι ῥήτορες 
ἦσαν, οὔτε τῇ ἀληθινῇ ῥητορικῇ ἐχρῶντο 
(ov γὰρ ἂν ἐξέπεσον) οὔτε τῇ κολακικῆ : 
where Heindorf,—‘proprie usurpatur de 
actoribus, cithareedis, aliisque, qui a spec- 
tatoribus exploduntur et exsibilantur:’ 
and by the celebrated passage in Demos- 
thenes περὶ ore. p. 915,---ἐτριταγωνίστεις, 
ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐθεώρουν. ἐξέπιπτες, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐσύριτ- 
tov: where also, by the way, ἔπιπτες is ἃ 
various reading. By εἴτε, εἴτε, εἴτε, 
the general idea, χαρίσματα, is split into 
its species—be there prophesyings,—be 
there (speakings in) tongues,—be there 
knowledge. Chrys., al., understand 
the two first futures, katapy., Tava, of. 
the time when, the faith being every 


XIII. 10—15. 


588 ΠΡῸΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. 
“ OY Μ \ ΄ . Ἵ t 
t=cnii6 19 ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ ᾿᾿ τέλειον, TO "ἐκ * μέρους ° καταργη- ABDPK 
xiv.20. Rom. 3 2 é ᾿: 2 ς - LPR 
αὐ! ἢ. James Oygetrar. ll ὅτε ἤμην “νήπιος, ἐλάλουν ὡς ‘VvNTLOS, cdetg 
i. 4 bis. τ ¢ hklm | 
1Johniv. 18 w 9» , e , ΄ ’ , e 5 , Pes , . 
Ps cxxaviit. “ ἐὠρόνουν ὡς " νήπιος, * ἐλογιζόμην ws " νήπιος" OTE γέ- 017.47 | 
gos . and ry) ο ) Y wr si) we ΄ Ai 19 - 
δ λεῖα, passim. aes: ml ἡ τὸ ' ΚαΤΉργηκα : Ta oe νηπίου. : βλέπομεν 
aul, δὶ. 1. 9." ὦ / ΄ 2 
in zonly. Yap ἄρτι Ou 5 ἐφόπτρου ἐν ὃ αἰνύγματι, τότε δὲ ἢ πρόςωπον | 
Neh. ii. 15. } 
ἤμεθα, Matt. xxiii. 30 bis. Acts xxvii. 31. Eph. ii. 3. v ch. iii. 1] reff. Gal. iv. 1, 3. w absol., | 
here only. Isa. xliv. 18. x = Rom. ii. 3. y Rom, vui. ὃ reff. z James 1. 23 ' 
only τ. Wisd. vii. 306. Sir. xii. 11 only. a here only. Num. xii. 8. Sir. xxxix. 3. b Gen. 
xxxii. 30. see 2 John 12, 3John 14. Num. xn. 8. . 


10. rec ins tote bef to ex μεροὺυς ( for emphasis and precision), with D?3[-gr] KL 
rel syrr Orig, Mvlet, Chr, Thdrt: om ABD'FPR 17. 47 latt copt goth eth arm Orig, 
(- int,) Eus, ‘Ath, (Cyr -Po uthal- -ms Max, } Damasce Iren-int. cor σγηθ οί αν bef a 
εκ μερους DI3E latt Syr goth Orig-int, [Ambrst ] Jer. τα ἐκ μ. F{-gr| Iren-int,. 

11. aft 1st ore ins δὲ D'[- gr | fuld. rec ws νηπίος bef the verb (3 times), with 
D F[-gr(and G-lat) | KL? rel fuld syrr goth arm Orig[-c, Bas, Euthal-ms] Epiph, Chr, 
Thdrt, ΤῊ] He [(‘Tert,) oe Ist time, m [Orig-int, |: txt ABN 17 vulg (F-lat | 
copt eth Clem; Orig” Ὁ]: int, Bas, Nys, (Did,) Thdrt, Damase Jer, Aug). rec att 
2nd ore ins δε, ih 3, -gr] FK LVS ral [ Εγαϊας clem fuld demid } syrr copt eth arm Orig 
[-¢,-int Jatiq Meth Epiph, Chr, [ Bas, Kuthal- ms] Thdrt [ Damase Ambrst] Tert,: om 
ABD ‘(and lat) &! am(with harl! tol) goth Orig ,-int, | Did, Hil,. for ἡ ϑδας eye- 
νομὴν B Orig{ -c}). Ta Tov νηπιου bef κατηργηκα VD FY - gr (aud G-lat) | syr goth [arm 
(Tischdf) Epiph,| Bas Orig-int,{ (txt,-c,-int,) ‘ert, Hil, Ambrst ]. (not F- -lat Aug, sane) 

12. [βλεπωμεν P 42: -ποιμεν m. |} om ‘yap "DIFP latt goth arm Clem, [Thdot, | 


Tert Cypr Ambrst. ins ὡς bef δι esomrpov D-gr b g o Syr syr-w-ast arm Clem, 
ins καὶ bef ev αινίγματι LP f 63. 109-73 


Thdrt, [ Orig-int,(oMsepe) | Tert,. 
Gaud, }. 


Origeepel -inteepe | Hil, Gaud, [om Orig,-int, Hil, G 


where dispersed, these gifts should be xo 
longer needed. But unquestionably the 
-time alluded to is that of the coming of 
the Lord; see ver. 12, and this applies to 
all these, not to the last (γνῶσις) only. 
The two first, προφ. and yA@oo., shall be 
absolutely superseded : γνῶσις, rela/ively : 
the imperfect, by the perfect. 9, 10. | 
Reason given ;—that our knowledge, and 
our prophesying (utterance of divine 
things) are but partial, embracing but a 
part: but when that which is perfect 
(entire—universal) shall have come, this 
partial shall be abolished—superseded. 
See Eph. iv. 11—13, where the same idea 
is otherwise expressed. 11.] Ana- 
logical illustration of ver. 10. νήπιος 
and τέλειος are used in contrast ch. ii. 6 
—iii. 1; xiv. 20. acraes ἐφρόνουν, 
ἐλογιζόμην-Ἰ spoke, I | thought) (felt, 
was minded), I [reasoned (or}] judged). 
There can hardly be an allusion, as 
Theophyl., Gic., Bengel, Olsh., al., think, 
to the three gifts, of tongues (ἐλάλ.), pro- 
phecy (ἐφρόν., which suits but very lamely), 
and knowledge (ἐλογιζ.). ὅτε yey. 
x.7.A.| Now that Iam become a man, I 
have brought to an end the ways of a 
child: not, as E. V, ‘when I became a 
man, I put away ....,’ as if it were done 
on a set day, and as if yéy. and κατήργ. 
were aorists. For this use of ὅτε, cf. 
Demosth. Olynth. 1, init. ὅτε τοίνυν 
ταῦθ᾽ οὕτως ἔχει, προτήκει προθύμως ἐθέ- 
Aew ἀκούειν: see Kiihner, ὃ 813. 2. 

12.) Contrast between our present 


sight and knowledge,—and those in the 
future perfect state. γάρ justities the 
analogy of the former verse: for it is just 
so with us. ἄρτι, in our present con- 
dition, until the Lord’s coming. δι᾿ 
ἐςόπτρου. through a mirror: i.e. as 
Billroth, Meyer, and De W.—accorucing to 
the popular illusion, which regards the 
object, really seen behind the mirror, as 
seen through it. We must think, not of 
our mirrors of glass, but of the imperfectly- 
reflecting metallic mirrors of the ancients. 
The idea of the lapis specularis, placed in 
windows, being meant, adopted by Schétt- 
gen from Rabbinical usage (e. g. ‘omnes 
prophetz viderunt per specular obscurum, 
et Moses doctor noster vidit per specular 
lucidum’ (Wetst.) : and see numerous ex- 
amples in his Hor. Hebr. i. 646 ff.), and 
tollowed by many Commentators, is incon- 
sistent with the usage of ἔξοπτρον, which 
(Meyer) is always a MIRROR (Pind. Nem. 
vii. 20: Anacr. xi. 2 ; xx. 5. Lucian, Amor. 
xliv. 48: see also reff.): the window of 
lapis specularis being 8tortpa (Strabo, 
xii. 2, p. 540). ἐν αἰνίγματι} There 
is a reference to ref. Num., στόμα κατὰ 
στόμα λαλήσω αὐτῷ ἐν εἴδει, καὶ ov δι 
αἰνιγμάτων. Many take the words adverbi- 
ally,—*enigmatically’ (so K. V., ‘darkly’ 
[and so we are almost obliged to do in an 
English version]): but this cannot be 
[the strict rendering], because αἴνιγμα is 
objective, not subjective: ‘a dark hint 
given by words. 1 agree with Meyer, 
notwithstanding De Wette’s strony objec- 





way. I, 2. 


ΡΟΣ KOPINOIOT® A. 


589 


"πρὸς ὑπρύςωπον' ἄρτι γινώσκω ἴ ἐκ * μέρους, τότε δὲ c -- ποκα. 1. 35. 


c2 , d θὰ \ ο 2 ’ θ 

ἐπιγνώσομαι “ καθὼς καὶ ° ἐπεγνώσθην. 
f / / 3 \ > J / Ἁ / “ p 8 / δὲ 
μένει πίστις ἐλπὶς ἀγάπη, τὰ τρία ταῦτα' ὃ μείζων ὃὲ 


f 
τούτων ἡ ἀγάπη. 


XIV. 1" Διώκετε τὴν ἀγάπην, ' ζηλοῦτε δὲ τὰ * πνευ- 


Matt. xi. 27 

δὲ bis. Jer. v. 

5. (absol., 
Acts ix. 30 
only.) 

ἃ ch. xii. ΤΣ 
reff. 

e Rom. vi. 22. 
vii. 6,17 al. 
Job xxx. 1,9. 
- Heb. xiii. 


13 & νυνὶ 


aA , e Ν wn f 
ματικά, μᾶλλον δὲ ἵνα ἱπροφητεύητε. * 0 yap ™ λαλῶν _ 1: See note 


31. xiv. 5. comparat., Matt. xiii. 32. 
i= ch. xii. 31. ver. 39 only. Sir. li. 18. 
m ch. xii. 30 reff. 


n2nd rote, τε is written over the line by X-corr!. 


D-lat G-lat tol Cypr,. 


Luke ix. 46. ch. xv. 19. 


g = chi. xil. 
h = Rom. ix. 80 reff. Ps. xxxiii. 14. 
k=ch, x. 3,4 reff. lch. xi. 4, 5 reff. 


ins eyw bef επεγνωσθην F[-gr] 


13. for νυνι δε wever, wever Se F(utver)[(not F-lat) D-lat] Clem, Hil, [Ambrst Aug, ]. 


tions, in believing ἐν αἰνίγματι to mean ‘in 
a dark discourse, viz. the revealed word, 
which is dark, by comparison with our 
future perfect knowledge. So also Luther : 
in einem dunfeln Wort. Thus, as M. ob- 
serves, ἐν will denote, as ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ, 
Matt. vi. 4, the local department, in which 
the βλέπειν takes place. τότε — ὅταν 
ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον, ver. 10: ‘at the Lord’s 
coming, and after.’ πρόςωπ. πρὸς 
apdswr.| Face towards face, i. 6. by 
immediate intuition: so Heb. in reff. 

I shall thoroughly know even as I was 
(during this life: he places himself zn that 
state, and uses the aor. as of a thing gone 
by) thoroughly known. In this life we 
are known by God, rather than know 
Him: see Gal. iv. 9; ch. viii. 3, note,— and 
cf. Philo de Cherub. 32, vol. i. p. 159, viv 
ὅτε ζῶμεν, κρατούμεθα μᾶλλον ἢ ἄρχομεν, 
kK. γνωριζόμεθα μᾶλλον ἢ γνωρίζομεν. The 
sense of this aor. ἐπεγνώσθην must not be 
forced, as in E. V., to a present, or toa 
future, as by some Commentators. 

13.] Superiority of Love to the other great 
Christian graces. Some gifts shall pass 
away—- but these three great graces shall 
remain for ever—¥AITH, HOPE, LOVE. 
This is necessarily the meaning,—and not 
that love alone shall abide for ever, and 
the other two merely during the present 
state. For (1) νυνὶ δέ is not ‘but now,’ 
i.e. in this present state, as opposed to 
what has just been said ver. 12,—but 
‘rebus sic stantibus, ‘que cum ita εἰπέ, 
—and the inference from it just the 
contrary of that implied in the other 
rendering: viz. that since tongues, pro- 
phesyings, knowledge, will all pass away, 
we have left bué THESE THREE. (2) From 
the position of μένει, it has a strong 
emphasis, and carries the weight of the 
clause, as opposed to the previously-men- 
tioned things which καταργηθήσεται. (3) 
From τὰ τρία ταῦτα, a pre-eminence is 
obviously pointed out for fazth, hope, and 
dove, distinct from aught which has gone 
before. This being the plain sense of the 
words, how can faith and hope be said to 
endure to eternity, when faith will be lost 


in sight, and hope in fruition ? With hope, 
there is but little difficulty : but one place 
has inscribed over its portals, “ Lasciate 
ogni speranza, voi ch’ entrate.” New glo- 
ries, new treasures of knowledge and of 
love, will ever raise, and nourish, blessed 
hopes of yet more and higher,—hopes which 
no disappointment wil) blight. But how 
can faith abide,—faith, which is the evi- 
dence of things not seen,— where all things 
once believed are seen? In the form of 
holy confidence and trust, faith will abide 
even there. The stay of all conscious 
created being, human or angelic, is depen- 
dence on God ; and where the faith which 
comes by hearing is out of the question, 
the faith which consists in trusting will be 
the only faith possible. Thus Hope will 
remain, as anticipation certain to be ful- 
filled: Faith will remain, as trust, entire 
and undoubting :—the anchor of the soul, 
even where no tempest comes. See this 
expanded and further vindicated in my 
Quebec Chapel Sermons, Vol. i. Serm. 
viii. μείζων τ. The greater of 
these,—not ‘ greater than these.’ “ The 
greater,” as De Wette beautifully remarks, 
“because it contains in itself the root of 
the other two: we believe only one whom’ 
we love,—we hope only that which we 
love.” And thus the forms of Faith and 
Hope which will there for ever subsist, will 
be sustained in, and overshadowed by, the 
all-pervading superior element of eternal 
Love. 

Cuap. XIV. 1—25.] Demonstration of 
THE SUPERIORITY OF THE GIFT OF PRO- 
PHECY OVER THAT OF SPEAKING WITH 
TONGUES. 1.1 Transition from the 
parenthetical matter of the last chapter to 
the subject about to be resumed. Pursue 
after Love (let it be your great aim,—im- 
portant and enduring as that grace has 
been shewn to be): meantime however 
(during that pursuit; making that the 
first thing, take up this as a second) strive 
for spiritual gifts [see note on ch. xii. 1], 
but more (more than πν. in general: i.e. 
more for this than for others[; chiefly }) 
that ye may prophesy (sc. (ζηλοῦτε, ἵνα .. + 


ΠΡΟΣ KOOP! 


590 
n = Mark iv. 33. 


Acts xvil. 16. 
p ch. xiii. 2 reff. 
q = Rom. xiv. 
19 reff. 
r = Rom. xii. 
8 reff. 
s here only τ. 
Wisd. xix. 
12 only. 
(-θιον, 
Phil. 1. te 
-«θεῖσθαι, 
1 Thess. ii. 


- 


= Acts ix. 31 6x 


reff. 
Ὁ = ch. xii. 31. 
xiii. 13. v ch. xv. 2. -1 Tim. v. 19 only. 


Cuar. XIV. 2. yAwooats D-gr F-gr b 0 G?-lat arm Chr, [Ambr, ]. 
ανθρωπους ΕἾ -gr] (so in ver 3). 


il. 7 digest). 


NOIOT® A, 


XIV. 


5 θέλω δὲ πᾶντας 


ὑμᾶς " λαλεῖν "' γλώσσαις, μᾶλλον δὲ ἵνα | προφητεύητε" 
ἃ μείζων δὲ 0! προφητεύων ἢ ὁ ™ λαλῶν γλώσσαις, ἣ ἐκτὸς 
Yet μὴ " διερμηνεύη, ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία ἃ οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ. 
νῦν δέ, ἀδελφοί, ἐὰν ἔλθω πρὸς ὑμᾶς '"' γλώσσαις λαλῶν, 


w ch, xii. 30 reff. x ch. xii. 18 al. 


ovx & (see Acts 
om τω (bef θεω) (for conformity 


with avép. Ὁ) BDIFPR! 1 Chr-comm, : ins AD3KLN3 rel Thdrt Damase ΤῊ] Ce. 


ουθις καὶ. 


for πνευματι, πνευμα F-gr D-lat G{-lat] am? with(fuld flor) Pel Vig Bede. 


3. for o δε, εἰ yapo F-gr G[-lat]; nam qui vulg(and F-lat) D-lat [qui enim Aimbrst }). 


4. for λαλων, λαλει F(G adds aut λαλων). 


γλωσσαις D 46 arm Mac). aft 


exxAnovay ins θεον F-gr G{-lat] vulg-ed [harl(appy) ](not am demid fuld tol F lat) Pel. 


5. vuas bef παντας A Ambrst. 
k!. 


yAwoous bef AaAevy A am Chr, ΤῊ] : om Aadew 
for wa mpopntevnte, προφητευειν D!{-gr F-lat] vulg Jer, Pel. 


rec (for 


δε aft μειζων) yap, with DFKLN? rel [syrr eth arm] Chr, Thdrt [Damase] Jer, Ambrst: 


txt ABP! 39 copt [ Euthal-ms ]. 


add eorw F. 


diepunvever (the later mss 


confound εἰ and ἡ to a very great extent: see the original collations passim) Labe 
dfghk1lo 47 Chr, ΤῊ] : διερμηνευων I)'[-gr], ἢ 0 διερμηνευων F-gr(and G[-lat]). 


6. rec vum, with D3KL rel Chr, Thl Qe: 


as the aim of your ¢7A0s). 2— 20. ] 
Prophecy edifies the BRETHREN more than 
speaking with tongues. 2.| For he 
that speaks in a tongue, speaks not to 
men but to God; for no one understands 
him (so ἀκούω in reff. and Athen. ix. p. 
382, ἔλεγεν ῥήματα ἃ οὐδὲ εἷς ἤκουσεν 
ἄν, i.e. as ἃ general rule, the assembly do 
not understand him; some, who have the 
gift of interpretation of tongues, may,— 
but they are the exception), but | opposed 
to οὐδεὶς yap ἀκούει) in the spirit (in his 
spirit, as opposed to in his understanding: 
his spirit is the organ of the Holy Ghost, 
but his understanding is unfruitful, see vv. 
14, 15) he speaks mysteries (things which 
are hidden from the hearers, and sometimes 
also from himself) : 3.] but (on the 
other hand) he who prophesies, speaks 
to men edification (genus) and (species) ex- 
hortation and (species) consolation. See 
the definition of prophecy given on ch. xii. 
10: and Stanley’s excursus introductory to 
this chapter. παραμυθία occurs Plato, 
Axioch. p. 865,---ἀσθενῆ τὴν ψυχήν, πάνυ 
ἐνδεᾶ παραμυθίας : and lian, V. Η. xii. 
1, fin., παρεμυθήσατο ᾿Αρταξέρξην, κ. τὸ 
τῆς λύπης ἰάσατο πάθος, εἴξαντος τοῦ βασ. 
τῇ κηδεμονίᾳ, kK. τῇ παραμυθίᾳ πεισθέντος 
συνετῶς. 4.| ἕαυτ. oi. does not 
necessarily involve his understanding what 
he speaks: the exercise of the gift in ac- 
cordance with the prompting of the Spirit 
may be regarded as an οἰκοδομή: the in- 
teusity of the feeling of prayer or praise in 


txt ABD'FPN Chr-ms [Euthal-ms] Thdrt 


which he utters the words is edifying to 
him, though the words themselves are un- 
intelligible. This view is necessary on ac- 
count of what. is said in ver. 5, that if he 
can interpret, he can edify not only himself 
but the church. ἐκκλησίαν | [i. 6. the 
assembled Christians: see note on ch. xi. 
18] not, as Meyer, a congregation, but 
= τὴν ἐκκλησίαν : the art. being often 
omitted when a noun in government has 
an emphatic place before the verb: ac- 
cordingly in ver. 5, it is 7 ἐκκλ. which is 
edified. 5.] He shews that it is from 
no antipathy to or jealousy of the gift of 
tongues that he thus speaks: but (force 
of the δέ) that he wished them ali to 
speak with tongues, but rather that they 
should prophesy. The distinetion between 
the ace. and inf. after θέλω, as the simple 
direct object of the wish, and ἵνα with the 
subj., as its higher and ulterior object, 
has been lost in the E. V. The second δέ 
is opposed to the subordinate Aaa. yA., as 
in ver. 1 to τὰ πνευματικά. μείζων 
δέ] δέ is transitional. μείζων) see 
retf.,—superior in usefulness, and there- 
fore in dignity. ἐκτὸς εἰ μή is a 
mixture of two constructions, ἐκτὸς εἰ, and 
εἰ μή. It is not a Hebraism, as Grot. 
supposes; Wetst. gives examples from 
Demosth., Aristides, Lucian, Sextus Empis+ 
ricus: and from Thom. Mag., φαμέν, ἐκτὸς 
εἰ μὴ τόδε, Kal ἐκτὸς εἰ τόδε. διερμη- 
vevy | viz. 6 λαλῶν γλώσσῃ, not Tis, as 
suggested by Flatt. On the subj. with εἰς 


ἢ γλώσσῃ οὐκ ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ, ἀλλὰ [τῷ] θεῷ' οὐδεὶς ABDFK 
γὰρ " ἀκούει, ° πνεύματι δὲ λαλεῖ Ρ μυστήρια" ὃ ὁ δὲ | προ- 
φητεύων ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ 4 οἰκοδομὴν καὶ "παράκλησιν 
καὶ "παραμυθίαν. 4 ὁ "λαλῶν ™ γλώσσῃ ἑαυτὸν "οἰκοδομεῖ, 
ὁ δὲ |! προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν * οἰκοδομεῖ. 


LPNab 
ecdefe@ 


bhkim 
0 17. 47 





3—8. 


TL ὑμᾶς ὠφελήσω, ἐὰν μὴ ὑμῖν λαλήσω ἢ Y ἐν 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


591 


? «ἢ ae 
z aT οκαλὺ- y ch. ii. 7, 13. 
Matt. xiii. 3, 


vn > Υ̓ DY a oss ὃ 
wer ἢ " ἐν δ᾿ γνώσει ἢ Y ἐν ὁ προφητείᾳ ἢ Y ἐν ” διδαχῇ ; * 76 δς 


7° 6uws τὰ ἄψυχα φωνὴν " διδόντα, ἴ εἴτε 8 αὐλὸς ΄ εἴτε 
U d\ j \ val ie \ A a 

" κιθάρα, ἐὰν ἱ διαστολὴν τοῖς * φθόγγοις μὴ ° δῷ, πῶς 
θ , x ] > / x \ m θ ’ Es 8 \ 

γνωσθήσεται τὸ 'avAovpevov ἢ TO ™ κιθαριζόμενον ; 8 καὶ 
ὟΝ ῇ \ A 

yap ἐὰν " ἄδηλον °dovnv “ σάλπιγξ ° δῷ, Tis » Tapa- 


42. Gal. iii. 15 only. 2 Mace. xv. 5. 


only. 1 Kings x. Fal. (-λητής, Matt. ix. 23.) 
i Kom. x. 12 reff. 
I Matt. xi. i7 || L. only +. 


i d here only t. 
xxiv. 29. Isa. xiii. 10. ἠχὼ διδοῦσα θόρυβον, Eur. Hec. 1093. 


m Rey. xiv. 2 only. 


7. Gal. ii. 2. 
Rey. i. 1 f. 
(1 Kings xx. 
30. Sir. xi. 
27 al.) 
ach, xu. 2 
(reff.). 
b Acts ii. 42 
reff. 
ce John xii. 
Wisd. xiii. 17. xiv. 29 only. e = Matt. 
f ch. xiii. 8 reff. g here 
h Rey. v. 8. xiv. 2. xv.2only. Gen. iv. 21 2]. 
k Rom. x. 18 only, from Ps. xviii. 4. Wisd. xix. 18 only. 
Isa. xxili. 16. n = here (Luke x. 44) only. (Ps. 


1. 6 (8].) 2 Macc. vii. 34 only. Polyb. viii. 3. 2, ἄδηλοι ἐλπίδες, and al. (-Aws, ch. ix. 26. -λότης, 


1 Tim, vi. 17.) 
. 2 Cor. ix. 2,3 only. 


o Matt. xxiv. 31. 
Jer, xil. ὃ. 


Damase. [for vuas] υμιν P. 


Rey. i. 10. viii. 18, 


Exod. xix. 16, 19, p Acts 


om Ist 4# δὲ ¢ 17 [D-lat] syr copt [Th] ]. 


om last ev D'[-gr] F[-gr] ΝῚ Ὁ tol harl?. (am [demid] D-lat om 2nd εν : am harl? 


[demid tol] F-lat D-lat om 3rd.) 

7. μη bef διαστολὴν τ. φθογγ. D'F. 
arm Ambrst. 
Chr, [Euthal-ms] (ce. 


giving a sense not distinguishable from the 
ind., see Winer, edn. 6, § 41. ὁ. 2 end, and 
Herm., on Soph. Ant. 706. 6.] Hxam- 
ple of the unprofitableness of speaking with 
tongues without interpreting,—expressed 
in the first person as of himself. γῦν 
δέ] ‘quod cum ita sit’—viz. that there is 
no edification without interpretation. 

ἐὰν ἔλθω] Chrys. understands the first 
person to imply ‘not even Z myself should 
profit you,’ &e. But then αὐτὸς ἐγώ or 
some expression similarly emphatic would 
have been used. The second ἐάν is pa- 
rallel to the first, not dependent on ὠφε- 
λήσω. It is the negative side of the sup- 
position, as ἐὰν ἔλθω «.7.A. was the affirma- 
tive. On this double apodosis Hermann 
remarks, Soph. Aj. 827,—‘ Est enim hee 
verborum complexio ex eo genere, cujus 
jam apud Homerum exempla inveniuntur, 
quod duplicem habet apodosin, alteram 
prainissai, sequeutem alteram : que ratio 
ibi maxime apta est, ubi in magno animi 
motu, quasi non satis sit id quod preemissum 
est, aliud infertur secunda apodosi, quod 
gravius sit et fortius.’ ἢ ἐν atrox..... ] 
It seems best here, with Estius, to under- 
stand ‘duo juga, ut conjugata sint reve- 
latio et prophetia, ac rursus conjugata 
scientia et doctrina.’ So also Meyer, who 
observes that the ground of προφητεία is 
ἀποκάλυψις, and that of διδαχή, γνῶσις: 
the former being a direct speaking in the 
Spirit, and the latter a laying forth by the 
aid of the Spirit of knowledge acquired. 
Thus ἐν, as referred to amok. and γνώσ. 
denotes the internal element :—as referred 
to mpop. and 6:5, the external element, of 
the spiritual activity. 7—11.] In- 
stances to shew that unintelligible discourse 
profits nothing. And first,—7—9.] from 
musical instruments. 7.) ὅμως occurs 


for τοις φθογγοις, φθογγου B tol D-lat 


διδω D3LP rel Thdrt Damase Thl: δωτε K: txt ABD!(F 8 ἢ 
γνωσθη (for -θησεται) D'F [scietur latt]. 
8. σαλπ. bef pwynv APN ἃ 17.119 coptt Orig). 


dey D', 


here and in the two other places where 
it is used in the N.T. (reff.) at the begin- 
ning of the sentence, out of its logical order, 
which would be before ἐὰν διαστολὴν . ., 
thus: Things without life which yield 
sound, whether flute or harp, yet, if they 
do not, &c. The renderings, ‘ even things 
without life’ (E. V.), or ‘things which, 
though without life, yet givesound’ (Winer, 
edn. 6, ὃ 61. 5. f}, are inadinissible,—the 
former because of the usage of ὅμιως, the 
latter because no such idea as any surprise 
at a thing without life yielding sound is 
here in place. φων. διδ.} so δίδου 
φωνάν Pind. Nem. v. 98. ἐὰν Siac. | 
If they (the ἄψυχα ¢. δ.) shall not have 
yielded a distinction (of musical inter- 
vals) in their tones, how shall be known 
that which is being played on the flute 
or that which is being played on the 
harp (i. 6. what tune is played in either 
case: the art. being repeated to shew that 
two distinct instances are contemplated, 
not necessarily ‘ one tune, either piped, or 
harped’ = τὸ αὐλούμενον ἢ κιθαριζό- 
μενον ;)? The observation of Meyer, that 
this example is decisive against forezgn 
languages being spoken in the exercise of 
this gift, is shewn to be irrelevant by the 
next example, from which the contrary 
might be argued—the ἄδηλος φωνή of the 
trumpet being exactly analogous to an 
unknown language, not to an inarticulate 
sound. But the fact is that all such 
inferences, from pressing analogies close, 
are insecure. 8. ἄδηλον, uncertain, 
in its meaning : for a particular succession 
of notes of the trumpet then, as now, gave 
the signals for attack, and retreat, and the 
various evolutions ofan army. The giving 
the signal for battle with the trumpet is 
called by Dio Cassius τὸ πολεμικὰν Bogy, 


592 


q arrangt. of 
words, 2 Cor. 
ii. 4 reff. 

r here only $. 
Ps. Ixxx. 3 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@OIOTS A. 


reff, 10 ᾿ top ἃ,» γ} Dae = 3 2 \ 
ie ae τοσαῦτα, ‘eu ' τύχοι, ἃ γενη φωνῶν εἰσιν ἐν κόσμῳ, καὶ 


only. Philo 
de Mut. 
Nom. 26, vol. 
i Ρ 600, 
μουσικὰ μὲν ἀλλα ὸ 
yap, e ἐμοὶ * PapPapos. 
τύχοι, Ke Μ Β ρβ ρ 
ραμματικα. . -- 
εἰ τύχοι. Wetst.) see ch. xvi. 6. 
viii. 32 reff.) 


w = here only. 


οὐδὲν ἡ ἄφωνον: 1 ἐὰν οὖν μὴ εἰδῶ τὴν κ᾿ δύναμιν τῆς 
φωνῆς, ἔσομαι τῷ λαλοῦντι * βάρβαρος, καὶ ὁ λαλῶν ¥ ἐν 
12 οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐπεὶ * ζηλωταί ἐστε 
(Dion. Hal. iv. 19, μυρίων ἣ διςμυρ., εἰ τύχοι... 


. Galen. de usu part. vi., δέκα μέν, 
v = here only. (Act 
Dion. Hal., Antt. i. 68, τοῦ 7 μήπω γράμ- 


ἃ = ch. xii. 10 reff. 
Num. vi. 21. 


ματος εὑρημένου, τῷ ὃ δηλοῦν τ. ἐκείνου δύναμιν τ. παλαιούς. Dio Cass. lv. 3, τοιοῦτον γὰρ ἡ δύναμις 


τοῦ ὀνόματος τούτον δηλοῖ. 


παρασκευαΐεται A Orig,. 


9. for εὐσημον, evaxnuov D'[-gr] 21-37. 80. 


x Acts xxviii. 2, 4 reff. 


y~ Rom. xi. 25, τ Acts xxi. 20 reff. 


for dwre, δω L. [at eav μη 


... dwre K-marg notes, avti του" εαν μὴ διερμηνευοιτε. 


10. om τοσαυτα D! F(with G-lat). 


note), with KL rel Chr, Thdrt (ἔς : txt ABDFPX 47 Clem, Damase Th. 


rec (for εἰσι») ἐστιν (gramml corrn: see 
ins Tw 


bef koruw D'F b ο, hoc vulg-ed ([fuld demid &c] and F-lat, not am) Ambrst Bede. 

rec aft ovdev ins avrwy (addn for precision), with D3KLN% rel G-lat syrr Chr, Thdrt : 

om ABD'FPN! ἃ 17 vulg E-lat coptt arm Clem, [Euthal-ms] Damase Ambrst Bede. 
aft apwvoy ins ἐστιν D!F vulg [not E-lat: pref ο]. 


11. for εαν, εἰ P. 
vulg [ Ambrst ]). 


io AD'Lam 17: γινωσκω F(si ergo nesciero F-lat, and so 
om last clause (homeotel) L al. 


om ev DF latt syrr copt 


arm Clem Chrexpr(o ἐμοὶ Aad. βαρβ.) Damase [ Ambrst]. 


by lian τὸ παρορμητικὸν ἐμπνεῖν : see 
Wetst., where many examples are to be 
found. 9 Application of these 
instances. La τ. γλώσσης is most 
naturally understood physically, by means 
of your tungue, as answering to the 
utterance of the sound by the musical in- 
struments. But the technical rendering, 
by means of the tongue (in the sense of 
γλώσσῃ λαλεῖν), is allowable. ἔσεσθε 
. . . λαλ.] This periphrasis of the future 
implies, ye will be, so long as ye speak, 
speaking, ... On eis ἀέρα, see ref. : it 
implies the noa-reception by hearers of 
what is sail, 10, 11.] Another ex- 
ample of the unprofitableness ofan utter- 
ance not understood. 10.] εἰ τύχοι, 
if it should so happen, i. 6. peradventure: 
—it is commonly found with numerical 
nouns; but sometimes with hypothetical 
sentences in general, as in ch. xv. 37. See 
reff. and examples in Wetst. It will not 
bear the rendering ‘for example,’ though 
in meaning it nearly approaches it. It 
belongs here to τοσαῦτα, itself represent- 
ing some fixed number, but not assignable 
by the information which the writer pos- 
sesses, or not worth assigning. See similar 
expressions, Acts v. 8,—and 2 Sam. xii. 8 
in KE. V. γένη φωνῶν kinds of lan- 
guages: the more precise expression would 
be γένη φωνῆς, or φωναί: we can hardly 
say, with Meyer, that each language is a 
γένος φωνῶν. The use of φωνῶν, and not 
γλωσσῶν, is no doubt intentional, toe avoid 
confusion, γλῶσσα being for the most part 
used in this passage ina peculiar meaning: 


but no argument can be grounded on it 
as to the γλῶσσαι being languages or not. 

εἰσίν (plur.), because it is wished to 
distinguish them in their variety. ov- 
δέν, 5011. γένος. Bleek renders, ‘no ratio- 
nal animal is without speech ;’ and Grot., 
reading as the rec. αὐτῶν, understands it as 


‘referring to men: others supply €@vos to 


οὐδέν. Butthe common rendering is both 
simpler, and better sense: none of them 
is without signification, as Εἰ. V.: or, is 
inarticulate. 11.] οὖν, seeing that none 
is without meaning: for if any were, the 
imputations following would not be just. 
We assume that a tongue which we do not 
understand has a meaning, and that it is 
the way of expression of some foreign 
nation. BapBapos,—a foreigner, 
in the sense of one who is ignorant of the 
speech and habits of a people. So Ovid, 
Trist. v. 10,—* Barbarus hic ego sum, quia 
non intelligor ulli:’ and Herod. ii. 158,— 
βαρβάρους δὲ πάντας of Αἰγύπτιοι καλέ- 
ovat τοὺς μή σφισι ὁμογλώσσους. (Wetst.) 
The appellation always conveyed a certain 
contempt, and such is evidently intended 
here. So Ovid, in the next line,—‘ Et rident 
stolidi verba Latina Geta.’ ἐν ἐμοί, in 
my estimation: so Eurip. Hippol. 1335, 
σὺ δ᾽ ἔν τ᾽ ἐκείνῳ κἂν ἐμοὶ φαίνῃ Kaxds,— 
‘in his judgment and in mine:’ see Kihner, 
ii. 275. 12.| Application of the ana- 
logy, as in ver. 9, ‘The οὕτως is evidently 
meant as in ver. 9, but is rendered some- 
what difficult by the change of the con- 
struction into a direct exhortation. It is 
best therefore to suppose an ellipsis; and 


ATVs 


’ > ΄ ἐδ \ e A ὃ Ἢ a 
σκευάσεται εἰς πόλεμον; ϑοὕτως Kal ὑμεῖς διὰ τῆς 
γλώσσης “ ἐὰν μὴ "εὔσημον λόγον © δῶτε, πῶς γνωσθή- 
σεται τὸ λαλούμενον ; ἔσεσθε γὰρ εἰς ὃ" ἀέρα λαλοῦντες. 


ABDFK 
LPRab 
cdefg 
hkim 
υ 17. 47 


9---]4. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ Α. 593 


a f b Ἁ \ be , ὃ \ Lal νυ / ka 2. 
πνευμάτων, ὃ πρὸς τὴν "' οἰκοδομὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἕη- « -- οἱ. xii.10 
Τ' 


lal / 
τεῖτε, ἵνα ° περισσεύητε. 


& προςευχέσθω ὅ ἵνα ὃ" διερμηνεύῃ. 


13 διὸ ὁ f λαλῶν f γλώσσῃ b = Βοπι.χν. 2. 


c Rom. xiv. 19 


14 ἐὰν yap MposEevYO- eabdsol., Matt 
= sol., Matt. 
yee ee ΣΝ 


7 Ν ἡ “ ΄ ΄ φ Ν ra wage 
μαι γλώσσῃ, τὸ imvedud μου προςεύχεται, ὁ δὲ νοῦς , He, 


Matt. xxiv. 201} Mk. 


Mark xiv. 38. 
ch. xii. 30 reff. i 


12. πνευματικων P 23-mg 73 spec sah Ambr,. (G-lat has both.) 


xpopynreunte A 73 Ambrst. 


(ὅπως, Acts viii. 15.) 
i= Acts xvii. 16 reff. 


Phil. i. 9. Col. i. 9. iv. 3. 2 Thess. i.J1. iii, 1. 


for περισσευήτε, 


13. rec διόπερ, with KLN3 rel Chr, Thdrt Thl @e: txt ABDFPR! 17 Damasce. 
14. om yap B F[{-gr G-lat] sah arm: ins ADKLP® rel vulg(and F-lat) E-lat syrr 
copt Chr, Thdrt Damasc Th] Gc Orig-int, Ambrst Aug, Pel Sedul Bede. (17 def [but 


om appy, Tischdf Treg ].) 


give to οὕτως the pregnant meaning, after 
the lesson conveyed by this example. 
Meyer’s rendering, since in such a manner 
(i. e. so as to be barbarians to one another) 
we also are emulous, &c., is very harsh, be- 
sides making the second clause, standing as 
it does without a μᾶλλον or any disjunctive 
particle, mean (and I do not see that it 
will bear any other meaning), seek this 
BapBapopwria to the edifying of the 
Church. Thus likewise ye (i.e. after 
the example of people who would not wish 
to be barbarians to one another,—avoiding 
the absurdity just mentioned), emulous 
as ye are of spiritual gifts (reff.), seek 
them to the edifying of the church, that 
ye may abound: or perhaps (but I can 
tind no instance of ζητῶ ἵνα thus used: 
ch. iv. 2 is no case in point, see note there) 
as in E. V. ‘ seek that ye may excel 
(abound in them) ¢o the edifying of the 
church.’ 13.] Hortatory inference 
Srom the foregoing examples. There is 
some difficulty in the construction of 
this verse. προςευχ. ἵνα Stepp. is ren- 
dered by Chrys., Theodoret, ‘Theophyl., 
Erasm., Beza, Calv., Grot., Estius, Wetst., 
Bleek, Riickert, Olsh., al., ‘pray that he 
may interpret. But the next verse shews 
that this is untenable. For the act of 
προΞξεύχεσθαι γλώσσῃ is there introduced 
in strict logical connexion with this verse, 
so as to shew that the mposevyéo@w here 
inust have the same meaning as there, viz., 
that of praying in a tongue, openly in the 
church. Seeing this, Luther, Rosenm., al., 
render it, ‘let..... so pray, that he may 
interpret : i.e. ‘not pray, unless he can 
interpret.’ But this rendering of ἵνα is 
hardly allowable even where οὕτω is ex- 
pressed, see note on ch. ix. 24. The knot 
of the difficulty lies in the relation of ἵνα 
to verbs of this kind. It may be doubted 
whether in such expressions as mposevxeo- 
θαι ἵνα (see reff.), the conj. ever represents 
the mere purport of the prayer, as in our 
“to pray, that.” The idea of purpose is 
inseparably bound up in this particle, and 
can be traced wherever it is used. Thus 
mposevx. ἵνα seems always to convey the 
Vou. II. 





meaning, “to pray, in order that.” At 
the same time, prayer being a direct 
seeking of the fulfilment of the purpose 
on account of which we pray,—not, like 
many other actions, indirectly connected 
with it,—the purport and purpose become 
compounded in the expression. This 
will be illustrated by γρηγορεῖτε k. mpos- 
εύὐχεσθε, ἵνα μὴ εἰεξέλθητε εἰς πειρασμόν: 
where it is plain enough that ἵνα μή re- 
presents the ulterior object of γρηγορεῖτε, 
and, now that it is joined with γρηγορεῖτε, 
of προφξεύχεσθε: but had it been merely, 
mposevxerde ἵνα μὴ K.T.A., the above con- 
fusion would have occurred. Now this 
confusion it is, which makes the words 
mposevxécOw ἵνα διερμηνεύῃ so difficult. 
Obviously, the προξευχέσθω is not merely 
used to express a seeking by prayer of the 
gift of interpretation, on account of the 
sense in the next verse: but as plainly, 
there is in προφξευχέσθω a sense which 
passes on to ἵνα διερμηνεύῃ. The render- 
ing of Meyer and De Wette, ‘ pray, with a 
view to interpret (what he has spoken in a 
tongue),’ is unobjectionable, but does not 
give any reason for the choice of mposeu- 
χέσθω, any more than εὐχαριστείτω, or 
the like. I believe the true rendering to be 
pointed out by the distinction in the next 
verse. If a man prays in a tongue, his 
spirit prays, but his understanding is 
barren. This prayer of his spirit is, the 
intense direction of his will and affections 
to God, accompanied by the utterance of 
sounds to him unintelligible. ‘ Let then 
him who speaks with a tongue, pray, when 
he does pray, with an earnest striving (in 
this prayer of his spirit) after the gift of 
interpretation.’ 'The meaning might be 
more strictly given thus in English: where- 
fore let him who speaketh with a tongue, 
in his prayer (or, when praying), strive 
that he may interpret. 14. This 
verse has been explained above. It justifies 
the necessity of thus aiming at the gift of 
interpretation. τὸ mv. pov, not as in ver. 
32, and Chrys. (Hom. xxxv. p. 325) τὸ χά- 
ρισμα Td δοθέν μοι καὶ κινοῦν τὴν γλῶσσαν, 
—but as in reff., my (own) spirit, taking 


Qe 


594 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. XIV, 
nies kG ἧς ἐστιν. 15! ri οὖν ἐστιν 3 mposevEouat τῷ 
k Matt. αἱ, 9 μου “ ἄκαρπος ἐστιν. τί οὗ v3 “προςεύξομ ῷ 
| Mk. pa. . , , a he r na: ΄ 
vl Tit, πνεύματι, προςεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ" τὰ «ψαλῶ τῷ ἱπνεύ- 
Hl, . ἣν τε x \ Ξ 7 4 ᾿Ξ . , 
only, Jer ἢ, ματι, ψαλῶ δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ. 10 ἐπεὶ ἐὰν ™ εὐλογῇς | πνεύ- 
6. isd. XV. ς a . , - > ΄ - a 
fonly. 4 MATL, O 9 ἀναπληρῶν τὸν Ρ τόπον ποῦ “ ἰδιώτου πῶς ἐρεῖ 
‘ver. 26. rire ΕΑΝ Μὰ iS εὐ. ἘΠ Co) olen | pe , v2 ὃ) ΄ at 7 > 
here bls, τὸ τ ἀμὴν ' ἐπὶ τῇ σῇ " εὐχαριστίᾳ, " ἐπειδὴ TL λέγεις οὐκ 


Rom. xv. 9, ΄“ - > « 
from Ps. xvii. οἶδεν ; 17 σὺ μὲν γὰρ Y καλῶς " εὐχαριστεῖς, ἀλλ᾽ Yo Y ἕτε- 


49. Eph. v. i 2 , 
19. James ν. 13 only. n ch. x.'16 reff. o = here (Matt. xiii. 14. ch. xvi. 11. Gal. νὶ. 2. Phil, 


ii. 30. 1 Thess. ii. 16)-only$. (Gen. xxix. 28 al.) Jos. 'Β.. ν. 3. δ, , στρατιώτου τάξιν ἀναπληροῦν. Philo, 

Flace, 12, vol. ii. _p. 531, πρεσβευτοῦ τάξ. ἐκπλήσω. Tac. Ann. iv. 38, “locum principem impleam.” 
p = here only. Sir. xui..12. q Acts iv. 13.reff. τ #Cor.i. 20. s = Rev. v.14. Neh. 

ν. 13. viii. 6 al. t = Acts xi. 19. 2Cor. xii. 21. “Héb. viii. 1. u Acts xxiv. 3 reff, 
vy Acts xy. 24 reff. w ch. vii. 37 reff. «x abs.,ch. xi. 24 reff. y'Rom. ii. 1 reff. 


15. om τι ovy εστιν K. προξευξωμαι (twice) ADEP 47: ~wuerand -ξομαι NR: txt 
BKL rel Orig, Eus, (Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc: orabo latt Orig-int, Ambr 
Ambrst ] (566 note). om Ist δε FKP 35. 46. 109-14 latt Syr sah arm Orig.(om καὶ 
also,) [Euthal-ms] Damase Orig-int[sepe Ambrst]: ins ABDL& rel syr [copt] Orig, 
Eus, Chr, Thdrt ΤῺ] ec. om τω (bef:2nd mvevuatr) FP. om 2nd δε BF 46. 
109 latt Syr sah eth arm Orig,(where he has the 1st δε) Cees, [Ath,] Ps-Ath, Damase 
Thl Orig-int, [Ambrst].: ins ADKLPX rel-syr.coptOrig[{-c], Kus, Ath, Chr, [Euthai- 
ms] Thdrt ‘ic (homeotel in 47 νοι to νοι). 

16. rec evaoynons, with FKL rel:Chr, Thdrt Thl Gc; denediweris latt : txt ABDPR 
b! 17 [Euthal-ms] Damasc. rec ins tw bef πνευματι (to conform to last ver: 
but see note), with KL rel Chr, Thdrt: ev B(sic: see table) 1}}Ὁ ) 5: om AFR?! 17 


[ Euthal-ms ] Damase. om τὸ F. 


for επειδη, ere: B, ουκ οιδεν bef τι 


λεγεις F(not F-lat) E-lat G-lat [Ambrst].Jer, Aug,. 


17. αλλα Bl. 


himself as an example, :as above, wer. 6: “8 
use of the word familiar to our Apostle, and 
here necessary on account of 6 νοῦς pou 
following, ‘ When I :pray in a tongue, my 
higher being, my spirit, filled with the 
Holy Ghost, is inflamed with holy desires, 
and rapt in prayer: but my éutellectual 
part, having no matter before iton which 
its powers can be exercised, ‘bears no fruit 
to the edification of others (nor of myself’ 
but this is not expressed in ἄκαρπος ; "αἴ, 
the usage of καρπός by Paul,—Row. i. 13 ; 
vi. 21, 22; xv. 28; Gal. v. 22,:al.). 

15.] What then is (the case) (i.e. :as our 
‘What then?’ Cf. τί οὖν, Rom. iii. 9; 
vi. 15. ‘ What is my determination there- 
upon ?’)? I will pray (on the reading 
προςεύξωμαι; see note on Rom. v. 1) with 
the (ny) spirit: I will pray also with 
my mind (i.e. will interpret my prayer for 
the benefit of myself and the church), &e. 
This resolution, or expression of self-obliga- 
tion, evidently leads to the inference, by 
and by clearly expressed, ver. 28, that if he 
could not pray τῷ vot, he would keep 
silence. ψαλῶ | hence we gather that 
the two departments in which the gift of 
tongues wis exercised were prayer and 
praise. On the day of Pentecost it was 
confined to the latter of these. 16. | 
The discourse changes from the first person 
to the second, as De W. observes, because 
the hypothesis contains .an imputation of 
folly or error. ἐὰν εὐλ. if thou 
ehalt have blessed in spirit (no art. now: 
the dat. is uow merely of the manner in 


«οὐδοῦ, the element.; not of the specific 
instrument, as in the last verse), how shall 
he that fills (i. e. is in) the situation of a 
private man (ἰδιώτης, in speaking of any 
business or trade, signifies a lay person, i.e. 


one ‘unacquainted with it as his employ- 


ment. Thus in state matters, it is one out 
of office—Anpoobever ὄντι ἰδιώτῃ, Thue. iv. 


2; in philosophy, one uneducated and rude. 


—juets μὴν οἱ ἰδιῶται οὐ δεδοίκαμεν, ὑμεῖς 
δὲ οἱ φιλόσοφοι δειλιᾶτε, Diog. Laert. Aris- 
tipp. 11. 71, ἄο. &e. See examples in Wetst. 
So here it is,.one who has not the gift of 
speaking and interpreting. The word 
τόπον is not to be taken literally, as if the 
ἰδιῶται had any separate seats in the con- 
gregation: the expression, as in ref., is 
figurative) say the AMEN (the Amen always 
said: see Deut. xxvii. 15—26 Heb. and 
E. V. (UXX, γένοιτο) ; Neh. viii. 6. From 
the synagogue,—on which see Wetst., 
Schéttg..in loc., Winer, Realw., art. Syna-: 
gogen, and Philo, Fragm. vol. ii. p. 680— 
'συνεδρεύουσι . . . » οἱ μὲν πολλοὶ σιωπῇ, 
πλὴν εἴ τι προξεπιφημίσαι τοῖς ἀναγινω- 
σκομένοις νομίζεται,---ἰῦ passed into the 
Christian church; so Justin Mart. Apol. 
i. 65, p. 82, οὗ (scil. τοῦ mpoeatStos) συν- 
τελέσαντος τὰς εὐχὰς Kal THY εὐχαριστίαν, 
πᾶς ὃ παρὼν λαὺς πανευφημεῖ λέγων, ἀμήν. 
See Suicer, sub voc. and Stanley’s note’ 
here) to (at the end of) thy thanksgiving, 
since what thou sayest he knows not? 
This is, as Doddridge has remarked, deci- 
sive against the practice of praying and 
praising in an unknown tongue, as ridi- 


ABDFK 
LPRab 
cdefg 
hklm 
ο 17. 47 








ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 59 


Or 


pos οὐκ 5 οἰκοδομεῖται. 
« an nw 4 nw 7 Ὁ 4 
ὑμῶν μᾶλλον " γλώσσῃ ὃ λαλῶ" 19 ἀλλὰ ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ “ θέλω ὃ Rom |S τεῖ. 


c here only. 
2 Mace. xiv. 


, , a “Ν᾿ [9] 
πέντε λόγους τῷ νοΐ μου λαλῆσαι, ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους ἃ κατ- 3 
b) / , ὦ. ee 
ηχήσω, “ ἢ *wupiovs λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ. 70 ᾿Αδελφοί, 4 Acts xviii. 25 
nm lal Η / str., Matt. 
μὴ παιδία γίνεσθε ταῖς ὃ φρεσίν" ἀλλὰ TH ὃ κακίᾳ | νηπιά- “ Sri 


xvili. 8,9 
A \ lal U 
ζετε, ταῖς δὲ ὃ φρεσὶν ὃ τέλειοι γίνεσθε. 21 ἐν τῷ νόμῳ γέ- 


18 ἃ εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ, πάντων 2 Actsix. 31 
es ᾿ reff 


2. Gen. 


xxxviii. 26. f Matt. xviii. 24. ch. iv. 15 only. Esth. iii. 9. g here bis only. Prov. 
XViii. 2. h Rom. i. 29. ch. ν. 8. Eph. iv. 31 al. Ps. li. 3 (δ). i here only+. {(-πιος, 
ch. xiii. 11.) k = ch.ii.6. Heb. ν. 14 ἃ]: 1Chron. xxv. 8. 


18. rec aft τω θεω ins μου (addn from such places as chi. 4, Romi. 8 &e: 38 eth 
arm even further add περι), with KL rel [vulg-clem demid harl] Thdrt|-ed] Damase 
Ambrst Pel: om ABDFPR 17 E-lat G-lat am(with tol) syrr copt ath arm Chr, [ Euthal- 
ms] Thdrt-ms Jer, Sedul Bede, (om [tw] θεω F-lat.) ins ot: bef παντων F latt 
syrr copt lat-ff. γλωσση bef μαλλαον ΕἾ -gr(and G-lat)] : om μαλλον 411 D-lat Chr-ms. 
—omnium vestrum lingua loquor vulg(and F-lat). rec yAwooats, with BELP rel 
syrr copt eth Chr, Thdrt Orig-int,: txt ADF 17 latt arm Damase Ambrst Pel Bede. 

rec Aadwv (the bare present aft evx. was not understood, and thus some helped 
at with ort, some by turning Aadw into λαλων. Or λαλων was understoad to belong to 
evxapiotw, ‘I give thanks, speaking, &c.), with KU rel Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt 
Damase: om A; txt BDFPR ὁ 17 latt syrr copt arm Orig-int, lat-ff. 

19. (adda, so ABD: om N}.) rec δία Tov voos (see note. If tw νοι had come 
Srom ver 15, μου would prob have been amd), with ΚΤ, rel D-lat syr Mac, Chr, Thdrt 
Max-conf, Phot[-c,] Thl Gc: δια τον vouay (omg μου) Mcion-e,, per legem Ambrst-txt 
[ed-ven]; in lege Paulin,: txt AB D[-gr] (F)[P]8 m (17) vulg Syr copt [arm(omg 


ov) | Nys, Epiph, Damase [Amby, ].—7o v. μ. bet π. Aoy. 17,—AaAn o μεν (sic) bef τω 
ἊΝ 


Ve εἰς: 


20. wa ταις pp, τελ. γενῆσθε, omg δε, F D-lat Orig-int, Ambrst Aug Gaud, 


21. aft vouw ins τι &!(N3 disapproving). 


culously practised in the church of Rome. 
17.] καλῶς is not ironical, but con- 
cessive: it is not the act of thanksgiving 
an a tongue that the Apostle blames, for 
that is of itself good, being dictated by 
the Spirit : but the doing it not to the edi- 
fication of others. 6 ἕτερος, the ἰδιώ- 
7s spoken of before, 18, 19.] De- 
claration of his own feeling on the matter, 
highly endowed as he was with the gift. 
I thank God, I speak with a tongue (have 
the gift of speaking with tongues) more 
than you all. This juxtaposition of two 
clauses, between which ‘ that’ is to be sup- 
plied in the sense, is not unusual: βούλει 
σκοπῶμεν - ‘fac videas,—Eur. Hippol. 
567, ἐπίσχετ᾽, αὐδὴν τῶν ἔσωθεν ἐκμάθω. 
Hom. Od. B. 195, Τηλεμάχῳ δ᾽ ἐν πᾶσιν 
ἐγὼν ὑποθήσομαι αὐτός, Μητέρα ἣν ἐς 
πατρὸς ἄνωγέτω ἀπονέεσθαι. See Har- 
tung, Partikell. ii. p. 134. 19. ἐν ἐκ- 
κλησίᾳ, in (the) assembly, ‘in the congre- 
gation’ [this is the better rendering here, 
and wherever there is a chance of the 
word churoh being mistaken as meaning a 
building ],—not ‘in an assembly,’as Meyer, 
The art. is omitted after a preposition : so 
Middleton, ch. vi. § 1; the logical account 
of which is, that the prep. serves to cate- 
_ gorize the substantive following it, and 
so make it general instead of particular. 
θέλῳ.. .. ἥ, as βούλομαι, ἤ, 

Jl. α. 117: similarly ἐπιθυμέω, ζητέω,--- 


see Hartung, ii. p. 72, διὰ τοῦ νοός has 
probably been a correction, because λαλεῖν 
τῷ vot was found harsh, the understand- 
ing being only the indirect instrument. 

20.] With this exhortation he con- 
cludes this part of his argument, in which 
he reproves the folly of displaying and 
being anxious for a gift in which there was 
no edification. § ἀδελφοί suavem vim 
habet,’ Bengel. ταῖς φρεσίν, in your 
understandings, as this preference shews 
youto be. τῇ κακίᾳ -- dat. of reference, 
as regards vice : see Winer, edn. 6, § 31.6. 

21—25.] By a citation from the 
O, T. he takes occasion to shew that 
tongues are a sign to the unbelieving only: 
and that even for them they are profitless 
in comparison with prophecy. 21, ] 
ἐν τῷ νόμῳ, as John x. 34; xii. 845 xv. 25; 
—where the Psalms are thus quoted. The 
passage stands in the LXX : διὰ φαυλισμὸν 
χειλέων, διὰ γλώσσης ἑτέρας ὅτι λαλή- 
σουσι τῷ λαῷ TovTw...K. οὐις ἠθέλησαν 
ἀκούειν. The context is thus: The scoffers 
in Jerusalem (see ver. 14) are introduced 
as scorning the simplicity of the divine 
commands, which were line upon line, pre- 
cept upon precept, as if to children (vv. 9, 
10). Jehovah threatens them that, since , 
they would not hear these simple com- 
mands, He would speak to them by men 
of other tongues, viz. the Assyrians, their 
captors. Here as in many other cases, 


QQ2 


596 ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@OIOT® A. XIV. 


Ὅ > ] e » , δ τα m XN, n ΑΝ 

there only. γραπται Ὅτι ἐν | ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν ™ χείλεσιν ” ἑτέρων ABDFK 
(Isa. xxviii. ᾿ a A , LPNab 
1) Ps-cxi λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ, καὶ °ovd Ὁ οὕτως “ εἰςξακούσονται caefg 


ate wi 7, “ e a > a hklm 
mo Mit Rn μου, λέγει κύριος. 72 ὥςτε αἱ "γλῶσσαι " εἰς ᾿ σημεῖον ο 17. 47 


Isa. xxix. 13.) 


Rom, iii. 13. 
Heb. (xi. 12.) 
xiii. 15. 1 Pet. 
iii. 10 only. 
n= Acts ii. 4. > 


Sivek ’ ”~ ’ » δ᾿ al u » / e δὲ Vv 

εἰσὶν οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς " ἀπίστοις, ἡ O€  προ- 
’ > -“ ΠῚ » / > Ν a / 93 7% 

φητεία ov τοῖς " ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν. €av 


/ Ὁ ‘\ 
Exod. xxx.9. οὖν ¥* συνέλθῃ ἡ Y ἐκκλησία Υ ὅλη ™ ἐπὶ TO αὐτὸ καὶ πάντες 


ο-- ch.v.1 
reff. p = Rom. v. 12 reff. 
r Acts ii. 4 reff. 
u = ch. vi. 6 reff. 
y Rom. xvi. 23 reff. 


i. 43. 
t Rom. iv. 11 reff. 
x ch. xi. 20. Josh. ix. 2. 


for erepoyAwooos, eTepais yAwooas F lect-8 vulg copt goth Tert;. 


q Matt. vi.7. Lukei.13. Acts χ. 381. Heb. v.7only. Deut, 


$ 80 εἰς μαρτύριον, ἄς. Matt. viii. 4 al. fr. Jer. ix. 22. 
v ch. xiii. 2 reff. w = Actsi. 3 reff. 
z Acts i. 15 reff. 


rec ετεροις, 


with D[F]KLP rel [latt Syr(Zingua alia) syr copt goth 2th arm] Orig, Constt, Chr, 
[Cyr,] Damase ΤῊ] (ἔς [Tert, Ambrst]: txt ABN 17 [Cyr,-ms,-p]. (Meyer thinks the 


dat a mere mechanical corrn to suit the other datives.) 
e:sakovocerat F(not [F]-lat) 43. 113 lect-14. 


[not F-lat]. 


for ovd ovtws, ουδεπω F 


22. for (2nd) morevovow, motos F [vulg Ambr,. (G-lat has both.) ] 


23. om ουν F[-gr] 67? old-iat goth Ambr, Ambrst. 
oAn bef 7 εκκλησια DF latt goth [Syr goth Ambr, Ambrst ]. 


for συνελθη, ελθη BG). 
Tec TWavTes 


γλωσσαις λαλωσιν, with [D?-gr] KL [47(-ουσιν}] rel vulg(and F-lat) syrr arm Chr-txt, 
[yA. π. A.,] Thdrt Damase (He Vict-vit Bede: Aad. παν. yA. copt wth Ambrst: Aaa. 
ya. παν. D!-3[and lat] goth: txt AB F[-gr(and G-lat)] P® Bas, [Euthal-ms] ΤῊ]. 


the historical sense is not so much con- 
sidered, as the aptness of the expressions 
used for illustrating the matter in hand ; 
viz. that belief would not be produced in 
the unbelieving by speaking to them in 
strange tongues. The ὅτι answers in the 
LXX to, ‘for ;’ or ‘yea verily,’ as Louth. 
It forms part of the citation, not of the text. 

ἐν érep.] in (in the person of) 
men of other tongues: Heb. with another 
tongue ;—and it is placed second. The 
Apostle personifies it and gives it the pro- 
minence. ἐν x. €r.] in (as speaking 
in, using as the organ of speech) lips of 
others (strangers, see reff.): Heb. in (by) 
stammerers of lip: Louth, with a stam- 
mering lip. τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ] in Isa., 
the Israelites: here taken generally for 
the unbelieving world. οὐδ᾽ οὕτως 
εἰςακούσ.} This is the point of the pas- 
sage for St. Paul’s argument : see ver. 23: 
—‘for them, and not for us: but even 
for them, profitless in the main :’—not 
even under such circumstances will they 
listen to me: even this sign will be for 
them ineffectual. 22.) Ssre,—viz. 
according to the words of the foregoing 
prophetic passage. ai yA.| the 
tongues, in the ¢hen acceptation of the 
term. He is not interpreting the pro- 
phecy, nor alluding to the tongues there 
spoken of, but returns back to the subject 
in hand—tke tongues about which his ar- 
gument was concerned. εἰς onp. εἰσίν] 
are for a sign: but there is no emphasis 
on the words,—the meaning being much 
the same as if εἰς σημεῖον were omitted, 
and it stood ὥςτε ai yA. εἰσὶν οὐ τοῖς π. 
Not seeing this, Commentators have dif- 
tered widely about the meaning of σημεῖον. 


So Chrys. (Hom. xxxvi. p. 335): εἰς σημεῖον, 
τουτέστιν, eis ExmAntw:—Bengel: ‘ quo 
allecti auscultare debebant :’'—Calvin: ‘lin- 
gue, quatenus in signum date sunt:’ &e. 
&e. All dwelling on the word σημεῖον 
would introduce an element foreign to the 
argument, which is, that tongues are (a 
sign) for the unbelieving, not for the be- 
lieving. ov τ. πιστ.) not to men 
who believe, but to unbelievers, i.e. 
“men who do not believe :’ not, as Nean- 
der, Billroth, Riickert, and in substance 
De Wette, ‘men who will not believe :’ 
ἄπιστος must be kept to the same sense 
through this whole passage, and plainly by 
ver. 23 it is not one who will not believe, 
but an unbeliever open to conviction. The 
mistake has been occasioned by regarding 
those to whom the prophecy was directed, 
and interpreting Paul by Isaiah, instead of 
by himself. ἡ δὲ mpod.] scil. ἐστίν, 
as Meyer, or εἰς onu. ἐστίν, as De Wette: 
it seems to me to import little which we 
supply, seeing that eis onu. is of so very 
slight weight in the preceding clause. If 
emphatic meaning had been attached to 
σημεῖον as belonging to ai yA., we must not 
have supplied it here: but if it be a mere 
indifferent word, to be interpreted accord- 
ing to the sense in which af yA. and 7 
mpop. were σημεῖα, there can be no objec- 
tion to it here: and the uniformity of con- 
struction seems to require it. Both 
here and above, tots ἀπίστ. and the other 
are datives commodi-—for, not ‘to,’ the 
unbelieving. ἡ προφητεία was a sign to 
the unbelieving, see vv. 24, 25. Pro- 
phecy, i.e. tnspired and intelligent expo- 
sition of the word and doctrine, was emi- 
nently for believers, but, as below, would 





“..«Εδιω- 
Tat P, 


: ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. 


597 


fal , aA 
λαλῶσιν γλώσσαις, εἰξέλθωσιν δὲ ἰδιῶται ἢ υ ἄπιστοι, οὐκ aver. 16. 


ἐροῦσιν ὅτι ὃ μαίνεσθε ; 34 ἐὰν δὲ πάντες 
Sa θ 5ὲ u Wee , ; 
εἰξέλθῃ ὃέ τις ἃ ἄπιστος ἢ 5 ἰδιώτης, 


᾿ b ae xii. 15 
c reff. 
προφητεύωσιν, ech. xi. 4,5 
ἃ >>. 4 οι ΄ reff. γὶ 
ἐλέγχεται ὕπο παάν- ἃ = Jonniii, 


20. Ps. xlix. 


των, © ἀνακρίνεται ὑπὸ πάντων, 35 τὰ ἴ oe 21. 
’ ρ ων, τὰ ᾿ κρυπτὰ τῆς καρ- 


δί > “ δ \ g / \ h .“ Ϊ \ b] 
tas cutov ὃ φανερὰ 8 γίνεται, καὶ "οὕτως ἱπεσὼν ἐπὶ 
i / τ 4 lal θ A 1 > A cd m » 
TPOswTroy “προςκυνήσει τῷ Cew, | ἀπαγγέλλων ὅτι τὸ ὄν- 


e Acts iv. 9 reff. 
\ f Rom. ii. 16 
reff. 


gz ch. xi. 19 reff. 
h = ver. 21. 
Rom. v. 12 


i Matt. xvii. 6. xxvi. 39. Luke v. 12. xvii. 16. Rey. xi. 16. Num. xvi. 4. xx. 6. 


reff. 
k Paul, here and Acts xxiv. 11 only. dat., Matt. ii. 2 al. fr. 
1 John i. 2,3 only. Gen. xiv. 13. 
Num. xxii. 37 only. 


Heb. ii. 12. 
1 Tim. vy. 5 al. 


passim. elsw.,1 Thess. i. 9, 
32. Luke xxiii. 47. 


Ps. xxviii. 2. 1 gospp. and Acts, 


m = Mark xi. 


om ἡ απιστοι Bl: infideles et idiote] Ambrst. 


24. for 2nd de, re A Syr (eth). 


om avak. v. π. (homeot) K. 


25. rec ins καὶ ουτω bef τα κρυπταί Srom below,—the result being imagined better 


to begin here ; 


left, or reintroduced without erasing this Sormer. 
syr Chr, Thdrt [Damasc]: om ABD!FN 17 latt 


the follg x. ουτως being by some omd, as Chr Ambr, by some carelessly 


So Meyer), with D3{-gr] KL rel 
(Syr) copt goth (eth arm) Orig/-c,- 


int, Did,] Bas, Chr, (Euthal-ms (Ambr). Syr xth arm Orig-int, Ambr ins xa:.] 


avayyeAAwy F(not G). 


be also profitable fo unbelievers, furnish- 
ing a token that God was truly among 
his assembled servants. 23—25. | 
Instances given of the operation of both 
on the ungifted or the unbeliever. 

23.] οὖν, following up the axiom just 
laid down, by supposing a case —if then 
-... The first case put answers to the 
former half of ver. 22: the second, to the 
latter. The supposition is this: that 
all the (Corinthian) church is assembled, 
and all its members speak with tongues 
(not in a tumultuary manner—that is not 
part of the present hypothesis, for if it 
were, it must apply equally to ver. 24, 
which it clearly cannot :—but that all have 
the gift, and are in turn exercising it): 
—then ἰδιῶται, “ plain believers,’ persons 
unacquainted with the gift and its exercise, 
come in. It is obvious that the hypothesis 
of all being assembled, and ald having the 
gift, must not be pressed to infer that no 
such ἰδιώτης could be found: no one hypo- 
thesizes thus rigidly. If any will have it 
so, then, as Meyer, we may suppose the 
ἰδιῶται to come from another congrega- 
tion: but the whole difficulty seems to me 
mere trifling. The i. plainly cannot be, 
as De W. maintains, an unbeliever, for his 
case is separately mentioned. Such plain 
men, or perhaps a company of unbelievers, 
have come in :—they have no understand- 
ing of what is going on: the γλῶσσαι 
sound to them an unmeaning jargon; and 
they come to the conclusion, ‘These men 
are mad ;’ just as men did infer, on the 
day of Pentecost, that the speakers were 
drunken. 24.) But if all (see 
above) prophesy (i. e. intelligibly lay forth, 
in the power of the Spirit, the Christian 
word and doctrine) and there enter any 
(singular now, setting forth that this 
would be the effect in any case: plural 
before, to shew that however many there 


might be, not one could appreciate the 
gift) unbeliever or plain man (ἄπιστος 
Jirst now, because the great stress is on the 
power of prophecy in its greatest achieve- 
ment, the conversion of the unbeliever ; 
but ἰδιῶται was first before, because the 
stress there was on the unprofitableness 
of tongues, not only to the ἄπιστοι, but to 
the ἰδιῶται), he is convicted by all (the 
inspired discourse penetrating, as below, 
into the depths of his heart,—by all, i.e. 
by each in turn), he is searched into by 
all (each inspired speaker opening to him 
his character), the hidden things of his 
heart become manifest (those things which 
he had never before seen are revealed,— 
his whole hitherto unrecognized personal 
eharacter laid out. Instances of such re- 
velations of a man to himself by powerful 
preaching have often occurred, even since 
the cessation of the prophetic gift): and 
thus (thus convicted, searched, revealed to 
himself :—in sucha state of mind) having 
fallen on his face, he will worship God, 
announcing (by that his act, which is a 
public submission to the divine Power 
manifest among you: or, but not so well, 
aloud, by declaration of it in words) that 
of a truth (implying that previously he 
had regarded the presence of God among 
them as an idle tale ; or, if a plain Chris- 
tian, had not sufficiently realized it) God 
is among you (or in each of you: by His 
Spirit). In this last description the 
ἰδιώτης is thrown into the background, 
and (see above) the greater achievement 
of prophecy, the conviction and conversion 
of the ἄπιστος, is chiefly in view. “Fora 
similar effect of the disclosure of a man’s 
secret self to himself, compare the fascina- 
tion described as exercised by Socrates over 
his hearers by the ‘ conviction ’ and ‘judg- 
ment’ of his questions in the Athenian 
market-place. Grote’s Hist. of Greece, 


598 


ἢ = 2 Cor. xiii. 


9. 

Ὁ Acts xxi. 22. 
vex. 15. 

p = Eph. vy. 19. 
Col. iii. 16 
(Luke xx. 42. 
xxiv. 44. 
Acts i. 20. 
xiii. 33) only. 
Isa. lxvi. 20. 

q ver. 6 (reff.). 

rch. xii. 10 
onlyt. Sir. 
prol. ἃ xlvii. 
17 only. 
(-νεύειν, 
John i. 43.) 

8 ver. 12. 

t = ver. 40. ch. xvi. 14, 

xxi. 25. Xen. Anab. iv, 7. 8. 


Polyb. iv. 20. 10, and al. freq. see Rom. xi. 25 reff. 


z Acts xii. 17 reff. change of subject, Luke xv. 15. xix. 4. Acts vi. 6. 
fF. 


27 reff. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINO@IOTS A. 


Twos ὁ θεὸς " ἐν ὑμῖν ἐστιν. 
ὅταν © συνέρχησθε, Ex 'ιστος [ὑμῶν] P ψαλμὸν ἔχει, " διδα- 
\ v > Ud ” “ 7 e / 
VV ἐχεῖ, 4 ἀποκάλυψιν ἔχει, γλῶσσαν ἔχει, * ἐρμηνείαν 
ἔχει: πάντα " πρὸς " οἰκοδομὴν " γινέσθω. 
τὶς λαλεῖ, ἃ κατὰ δύο ἢ " τὸ " πλεῖστον τρεῖς, καὶ δ 
¥ μέρος καὶ εἷς * διερμηνευέτω" 38 ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἢ Y διερμηνευ- 
τής, " συγάτω ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ, ἑαυτῷ δὲ λαλείτω καὶ τῷ θεῷ. 
398 προφῆται δὲ δύο ἢ τρεῖς λαλείτωσαν, καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι 


XIV. 


56 οΤύ οὖν ἐστιν, ἀδελφοί ; 


27 εἴτε γλώσσῃ 
ἀνὰ 


u = Mark vi.40. ἀνά, Luke ix. 8. χ. 1. John ii.6. καθ᾽ ἕνα, Eph. v.33. John 
v here only. 


where only. ἀνὰ μ. ἄδειν, 
y here only +. 
a Acts xi. 


(Isa. ix. 3.) 
x ch. xii. 30 reff, 
Winer, edn. 6, $ 67. 1. ο. 


rec o Geos bef οντως, with KL rel syr Chr, Thdrt [Bas, Damasc]: om ovrws k 3. 32 
Thdrt-comm : txt AB(DFR) h 17 latt Syr copt goth eth arm Orig-[¢,-]int, [Did, Chr, 
Euthal-ms Ambr, ].—om o D!FX? 1} 109! Orig[-c], Chr. 

26. om vuwy ABN! a 17 copt [Bas, Euthal-ms]: ins DFKLN3 rel [latt syrr goth 


eth(appy) arm] Chr, Thdrt Damasc [Ambrst ]. 


om διδαχ. exer (homeotel) A Κα. 


rec γλωσσαν exer αποκαλυψιν exer (the clauses dropped out by homeotel, and were 
then confusedly reinserted), with L rel Chr, Thdrt Damasc: om ἀποκαλυψιν exer m 


35-9. 42-7. 63 arm Chr-mss: 


om yAwooay exer K 35-9. 42-3. 57. 911. 106-77. 238 


[fuld!: epu. exer yA. ex. goth: | txt ABDFX [d] 17 latt syrr coptt eth Bas, [ Euthal- 


ms] ΤῊ] Gic-comm [ Ambrst ]. 


διερμηνειαν DF. 


rec γένεσθω, with Damasc: 


txt ABDFKLR® rel Chr [Bas, Euthal-ms] Thdrt &e. 


28. for Siepu., epunvevtns BD'F, pref 6 D'F. 


29. om οἱ DIFL 1. 


vili. 609—611.” Stanley. 26—35. | 
Regulations respecting the exercise of 
spiritual gifts in the assemblies. 
26.] The rule for all, proceeding on the 
fact of each having his gift to contribute 
when they come together: viz. that all 
things must be done with a view to edi- 
fication. τί οὖν ἐστιν] See ver. 15. 
ὅτ. ovv.| whenever ye happen 
to be assembling together: the present 
vividly describes each coming with his gift, 
eager to exercise it. ψαλμόν] most 
probably a hymn of praise to sing in the 
power of the spirit, as did Miriam, De- 
borah, Symeon, &c. See ver. 15. 
διδαχήν) an exposition of doctrine or 
moral teaching: belonging to the gift of 
prophecy, as indeed do also Wop. and 
ἀποκάλ., the latter being something re- 
vealed to him, to be prophetically uttered. 
γλώσσαν) a tongue, i.e. an act 
of speaking in tongues: see vv. 18, 22. 
ἑρμηνείαν) See below, and ver. 5. 
πόντ. 3p. ok. yw. | THE GENERAL 
RULE, afterwards applied to the several 
gifts: and 27, 28.] fo the speaking 
with tongues. εἴτε begins the construc- 
tion, but is not carried on, ver. 29, where 
προφῆται δέ answers to it. 27.] κατὰ 
δύο (scil. let it take place), by two (at each 
time, i. e. im one assembly : not more than 
two or three might speak with tongues at 
each meeting) or at the most three, and 
by turn (one after another, not together) : 


for eavTw, avtw F. 


and let one (some one who has the gift,— 
and not more than one) interpret (what 
is said in the tongue). 28.] But if 
there be not an interpreter (Wieseler, in 
the Stud. und Krit. for 1838, p. 720, would 
render it, ‘tf he be not an interpreter, viz. 
himself. But this would exclude the pos- 
sibility of others interpreting, which we 
know from ch. xii. 10 might be the case. 
And thus the preceding εἷς could hardly 
bear its proper meaning. Wieseler tries to 
make it mean ‘one at a time. Besides, 
the emphatic position of 7 seems to require 
more stress than this sense would give, 
which would be better expressed by ἐὰν δὲ 
διερμηνευτὴς μὴ 5). let him (the speaker 
in a tongue, see reff.) be silent in the 
church: but (as if ovyarw had been μὴ λα- 
λείτω) let him speak for himself and for 
God: i.e. in private, with only himself and 
God to witness it. Chrys. καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν 
φθεγγέσθω : which Theophyl. enlarges to 
τουτέστιν ἀψοφητὶ καὶ ἠρέμα καθ᾽ ἑαυτόν : 
which does not seem to agree with Aa- 
Acitw, the speaking being essential to the 
exercise of the gift. 29—33.] Simz- 
lar regulations for PROPHECY. 29.]} 
δέ, transitional. δύο ἢ τρεῖς, viz. at 
one assembling ;—not together; this is 
plainly prohibited, ver. 30. There is no τὸ 
πλεῖστον as in the other case, because he 
does not wish to seem as if he were limit- 
ing this most edifying of the gifts. 

οἱ ἄλλοι, scil. rpopHra:,—or perhaps, any 


ABDFK 
LN abe 
defgh 
kimo 
17. 47 








26—33. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 599 


\ Ui A 
> διακρινέτωσαν" 89 ἐὰν. δὲ ἄλλῳ “ ἀποκαλυφθῇ καθημένῳ, 5 ch. νἱ. 5. 
5 Hs Ρ 9] ᾿ 5 x δ a ‘ och: ii. 0 ef 
ὁ πρῶτος ὅ σιγάτω. δύνασθε γὰρ “Kal” ἕνα πάντες 4%," 
d ΄ “ , 6 , \ , e e = Rom. xii. 
προφητεύειν, wa Travtes: μανθάνωσιν καὶ TayTEs παρα- Sreff. 
= CN. ΧΙ. 
< τ τ ἘΡῚ é ag an Aer ΤΕ ff. 
καλῶνταυ" “5 καὶ ᾿Ξππνεύματω ξ΄ προφητῶν προφήταις ᾿ὑπο- Β΄... 
΄, Σ , 3 ΠΕ , ΠΩΣ , h Luke ii. 51. 
τάσσεται 88 ov yap ἐστιν ἱ ἀκαταστασίας o 1 θεός, ἀλλὰ ᾿ Rom. viii 
7, 20 al. 
ἢ > lA δ © 3 k / A k 3 ΄ A ] e / ᾽ 
Ἰειρήνης, ὡς ἐν “πάασαις ταῖς. “ἐκκλησίαις τῶν ᾿ ἁγίων. 1 Chron. 
i Luke xxi: 9. 2 Cor. vi..5. xii. 20. James iii. 16.only, Prov. xxvi. 28. Tobit iv. 13 (notin δὲ) only. (-στατος͵ 
Jarnes i: 8.) j Rom. xv. 33 reff: om, xvi..16. ch. vii. 17. 2 Cor. viii. 18. xi. 


28 only. l1\Rom.i.7. Acts ix. 13 reff, 


ανακρινετωσαν DIF, 

30. om δὲ D!{and lat] ΕἾ τοῦ G-lat] Orig-int,[: e¢ δὲ Syr: quodsi vulg F-lat] 
Ambrst. (κα in’ καθημενω is written over the:line; om having been first written, 
and then marked for erasure by &!.) 

31. παντες bef καθ eva DF h! latt Syrarm: om παντες 17 Ambrst: exaoro: 6. 67? : 
exacTo. παντες 38. 72. 

32. for πνευματα, πνευμα Ὁ) ΕἾ -gr(and G-lat)] 1. 43. 52. 67%. 213 [fuld] Syr [Epiph, ] 
Thdrt Orig-int,{-ed Did-int, Novat,, Hil, Ambrst]: txt ABKL® rel vulg(and F-lat) syr 
copt [arm] Orig,(and int,) Epiph, Chr,. [Euthal-ms] Thdrt-ms Damasc ΤῊ] Cc Tert,. 
(The plur was corrd to the sing because, One Spirit inspiring all the prophets, 


πνευματα was not understood.) 


e g k 47 (Chr, Euthal-ms Damasc ].) 


υποτασσονταῦῖ Li. 


33. 0 θεος bef ακαταστασιας. A 57 Syr eopt [Hip,]: om o F. 


(adda, so ABDN 
at end ins διδασκω (from ch iv. 17) F bo 


2. 10. 39 vulg ({fuld demid hayl tol :| not am): syr-w-ast [arm-ed'] Chr,: διατασσομαι 


Chr-ms, Damase. 


person possessing the gift of διακρίσεις 
πνευμάτων, mentioned ch. xii. 10 in im- 


mediate connexion with προφητεία. Such 


would exercise that gift, to determine 
whether the spirit was of God : see ch. xii.. 
3; 1 John iv. 1—3. 90.1 But if 
a revelation shall have been made to 
another (prophet) while sitting’ by,. let 


the first (who was: prophesying) hold his. 


peace (give place tothe other : but clearly, 
not as ejected by the second in any dis- 
orderly manner: probably, by being made: 
aware of it and ceasing his discourse): 
The rendering of Grot., al.,.“let him (the 
second) wait till the first has done speak- 


tng, α. ἃ., ‘let the first have left off, is | 


ungrammatical. See also vv. 28,. 34. 
31, 32.] He shews that the 6 
πρῶτος σιγάτω is no impossibility, but in: 
their power to put into effect. For ye 
have the power (the primary emphasis of 
the sentence is on δύνασθε, which is not 
merely permissive, as Εἰ. V., ‘ye may,’ but 
asserts the possession of the power ;—the 
secondary on’ καθ᾽ ἕνα) One by one all. 
to prophesy (i.e. you have power to bring 
about this result—you can be silent if you 
please), in order that all may learn and 
all may be exhorted (or, comforted) : 
32.]| and (not, for: but a parallel assertion 
to the last, ‘ye have power, &c. and’) 
spirits of prophets (i.e. their own spirits, 
filled with the Holy Spirit: so Meyer, and 
rightly: not, as De Wette, the Spirit of 
God within each: and so ver. 12: the 
inspired spirit being regarded as a 
πνεῦμα in a peculiar sense—from God. 


or otherwise: See: the distinction plainly 
made 1 John iv. 2: ἐν τούτῳ γινώσκετε 
τὸ πνεῦμα. TOU θεοῦ. πᾶν πνεῦμα K.T.A. 
The-omission of the art. generalizes the 
assertion, making it applicable to all 
genuine Christian prophets) are subject 
to prophets (i.e. to the men whose spirits 
they are. But very many Commentators, 
e.g. Theophyl.(alt.), Calvin, Estius, and 
more recently Bleek and Riickert, take 
προφήταις to signify other prophets— 
τὸ ἔν σοι χάρισμα, καὶ ἣ ἐνέργεια’ τοῦ ἔν 
σοι πνεύματος, ὑποτάσσεται. τῷ χαρίσματι 
τοῦ ἑτέρου τοῦ κινηθέντος εἰς. τὸ προφη- 
τεύειν (Theophyl.).. But the command 
ὁ πρῶτος ovyétw would be superfluous, 
if his gift was in subjection to another). 

33.] Reason of the above regula- 
tions, The premiss,. that the church is 
God’s: chureh,. is suppressed. He is the 
God of peace, not confusion: therefore 
those assemblies which are His must be 
peacefully and orderly conducted. And 
this character of God is not one depen- 
dent for its truth on preconceived views 
of Him:—we have a proof of it wherever 
a church of the saints has been gathered 
together. ‘In all the churches of the 
saints, God is a God of peace: let Him 
not among you be supposed to be a God 
of confusion.’ I am compelled to 
depart from the majority of modern crities 
of note, e.g. Lachmann, Tischendorf (ed. 7 
[and 8]), Billroth, Meyer, De Wette, and 
to adhere to the common arrangement 
of this latter clause. My reason is, that 
taken as beginning the next paragraph, 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. XIV. 34—40. 


600 


34. Αἱ fad x 5] a ’ A αι Z L 4 ὁ > \ 
eh lL Yyuvaikes ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις 5 συγατωσαν' οὐ yap 


Acts Be | ’ , a a \ 
ref. ἊΝ τ ™ ἐχγιτρέπεται αὐταῖς λαλεῖν, ἀλλὰ δ ὑποτάσσεσθαι, καθὼς 
n Gen. iii. 16. ΜΥ͂Σ Ἶ ) a Σ Ε 
och. xi 34 πεῖ. καὶ ὁ πγόμος λέγει. 35 εἰ δέ TL μαθεῖν θέλουσιν, ° ἐν 


p Matt. xii. 10 


al. fr. Epp., ” \ γὼ ” ὃ P2 ΄ Aa ᾽ \ / 
Rom. x. 20 οἴκῳ TOUS ἰδίους ἄνδρας P éTTEpwTdTwaav “ αἰσχρὸν γάρ 
(from pe “ ς es 9 ᾽ , 36 \ ee ee a fry , 
oak puke ἐστι YuvaLKL λαλεῖν EV ἐκκλησίᾳ: ἢ ad ὑμῶν o * λογος 
A i. 1 reff. a a a A > con ’ , 
s— Rom.x.18 TOU 1 θεοῦ ὃ" ἐξῆλθεν, ἢ " εἰς ὑμᾶς μόνους ᾿ κατήντησεν ; 51 εἴ 


reff. A , 5 ΕἸ Ud 5] / 
i u a ν w 
τ ἐν ee δοκεῖ προφήτης εἰναι ἢ πνευματικος, “ ἐπυγινωσκέτω 


reff. 
u= ch. iii. 18 reff, v ch. ii. 15 reff. w constr., Acts iii. 10. iv. 13. 2 Cor. i. 14. xiii. 5. 


Vv. 34, 35 are placed aft ver 40 in DF 93 fuld? Ambrst Sedul. 

34. rec aft yuvaikes ins vuwy, with DFKL rel Syr syr-w-ob Chr, Thdrt @e Ambr, 
Ambrst Sedul: om ABN 17 vulg(and F-lat: vestre is written over ὑμῶν in the gr 
column) coptt eth arm Orig[-c,] Mcion-e, Dial, Nys, Damasc (Cypr,) Pel. rec 
επιτετραπται (‘the sense of the perfect, permissum est, was more familiar to the trans- 
cribers.’ Meyer), with K rel syrr Mcion-e, Chr, Thdrt, εἐπιτετρεπται L: txt ABDFN 
17 [latt coptt arm Orig-c, Euthal-ms] Mcion-e, Damase [Ambr, Ambrst]}. (aAAa, 
so ABD'X [ Mcion-e, Euthal-ms ].) * ὑποτασσέσθωσαν ABN 17 Syr coptt 
eth Mcion-e, [Euthal-ms] Damasc: vrotacoec@a: DFKL rel latt syr arm Dial, Chr 
Thdrt ΤῺ] (ἔς [Ambr Ambrst ]. add rots avdpacw A. 

35. εἰ τι δὲ si quid autem DF vulg Ambrst. 
Nys,. (A! doubtful.) θελωσιν A 78 Damase. om εστιν B [ Euthal-ms]. 
rec γυναιξὶν (to agree with plurals preceding), with DFKLN? rel syrr Orig[-cj, Chr- 
mss, Thdrt Ambrst: txt ABN! 17 vulg(and F-lat: mulieribus is written over γυναιξὶν 
in gr column) coptt eth arm Orig[-c,] Chr[-ed, (Euthal-ms) ] Damase Pel. rec ev 
exkAnow bef Aadew, with D(F)K(L) 47 syrr Orig{-c], Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt 
Ambrst: txt ABN m 17 vulg coptt eth Orig, Damase Bede.—exxAnoims ΕΓ ποῦ F-lat] 
L 49. 69. 106-8 D-lat syr Thdrt. 

86. κατηντ. bef μονους ΕΓ not F-lat] copt. 


μανθανειν ΑἿΝΙ 17. 23-6. 31. 73 ᾽ 


87. επιγιγνωσκετω 1) : γινωσκετω B Chr,(addg ταυτα). 


it is harsh beyond example, and super- 
fluous, as anticipating the reason about to 
be given οὐ yap «.7.A. Besides which, 
it is more in accordance with St. Paul's 
style, to place the main subject of a new 
sentence first, see 1 Tim. iii. 8, 11, 12; 
and we have an example of reference to 
general usage coming in last, in aid of 
other considerations, ch. xi. 16: but it 
seems unnatural that it should be placed 
first in the very forefront of a matter on 
which he has so much to say. 34, 35. | 
Regulation prohibiting women to speak 
publicly in the church, and its grounds. 
If ὡς... ἁγίων be placed at the begin- 
ning of this sentence, we must not, as 
Lachm. absurdly does, put a comma be- 
fore τῶν ἁγίων, which would throw the 
emphasis on it and disturb the sense: and 
which besides would then be expressed 
ἁγίων γυναῖκες, or even ἁγίων αἱ γυναῖκες, 
but certainly not τῶν ἁγίων αἱ γυναῖκες. 

34.] ἀλλὰ ὑποτάσσεσθαι, scil. 
κελεύεται αὐταῖς. The same construction 
where a second verb must be supplied 
from the context, occurs 1 Tim. iv. 3. 
So Soph. (Ed. Tyr. 236, τὸν ἄνδρ᾽ ἀπαυδῶ 
TOUTOV ..... μήτ᾽ eisdéxerOat μήτε mpos- 
φωνεῖν τινα, ὠθεῖν δ᾽ am οἴκων πάντας: 
Lucian, χάρων ἢ ἐπισκοποῦντες, line 49 
from beg.,—oé δὲ καὶ αὐτὸν κωλύσει ἐνερ- 
γεῖν τὰ τοῦ θανάτου ἔργα, καὶ τὴν Πλού- 


τωνος ἀρχὴν ζημιοῦν. See other examples 
in Kiihner, ὃ 852 xk. ὁ νόμος — 
ref. Their speaking in public would be 
of itself an act of independence ; of teach- 
ing the assembly, and among others 
their own husbands. 35.| ‘This pro- 
hibits another kindred irregularity—their 
asking questions publicly. They might 
say in answer to the former ovydétwoar, 
‘But if we do not understand any thing, 
are we not to ask?’ The stress is on 
μαθεῖν. ἰδίους, confining them to 
their own husbands, to the exclusion of 
other men. αἰσχρόν] See ref.: 
indecent, bringing deserved reproach. 
86—40.| GENERAL CONCLU- 
ston: the unseemliness and absurdity of 
their pretending to originate customs un- 
known to other churches, as if the word 
of God first went forth from them: and 
the enforcement of his apostolic authority. 
Then, a summary in a few words of the 
purport of what he has said on the spiritual 
gifts, and a repetition, in another form, of 
the fundamental precept, ver. 26. 
86.| I cannot agree with Meyer in refer- 
ring this only to the regulation concerning 
women which has preceded. It rather 
seems to refer to all the points of church 
custom which he has been noticing, and 
to be inseparably connected with what 
follows,—the recognition of Ais apostolic 


ABDFK 
δὺς 
defgh 

klmo 


17. 47 





| 
| 


VEL: ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 601 
A ΄ A 0 ͵ \ , , 
ἃ γράφω ὑμῖν, “ ὅτι κυρίου ἐστὶν [évrory]* 38 εἰ δέ τις x=? Petit. | 
x ἀγνοεῖ, * a f 39 Y Gf ; , 2 δ ass.,2 Cor. 
ie es vs τὐκέης τ πο ἀδελφοί [μου], “ ξηλοῦτε init 
Ῥκωλυε- τὸ * προφητεύειν, καὶ TO” λαλεῖν μὴ ° κωλύετε ὃ ἐν ἢ γλώσ- ἢ τα. 
Gace 7 ; τ ; $ Ἢ 2 = ver. 1. 
σαις, 49 πάντα δὲ ἃ εὐσχημόνως Kai κατὰ " τάξιν ' γινέσθω. 3.“ αἰ 4. 
XV. 1ε Ῥνωρίζω δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ | rij 
c = Matt. xix 


Exod. xxxvi. 6. : _ d Rom. xiii. 13. 1 Thess. iy. 12 only t. (-μων, 
e Lukei. 8. Col. ii.5. Heb. ν. 6,10 & vi. 20 (from Ps. cix. 4), vii. 11, 
f = ver. 26. ch. xvi. 14. g ch. xii. 3 


14. Luke xxiii. 2 al. 
ch. xii. 24.) 

ἄς. only. L.P.H. Job xxxviii. 12. 
reff. 2 Cor. viii. 1. 


rec ins tov bef xupiov, with Thl: om ABDFKLN rel Orig, Chr, Thdrt Damasc 
Ce. for κυριου, θευυ A copt Origs. rec εἰσιν ἐντολαι, with D?-3[-gr] KL rel 
vulg(and F-lat) syrr basm Chr Thdrt Ambrst-ms: evroAa: εἰσιν m: ἐντολή εστιν XR}: 
ἐστιν, omg evtoAn, D'(and lat) F[-gr(and G-lat)] Orig,[-c,-](int,) Hil, Ambrst-ed: 
εστιν evtoAn ABN? 17 copt ath Aug,. 

38. for αγνυειτω, ayvoerra Ὠϊ(-τε) F(nyy-) δὲ! 17 Orig¢[-c,(appy): simly coptt 
(engelbr)] and perhaps A!(w is written secunda manu, the original letter being erased): 
zgnoratur D-lat: ignorabitur vulg [F-lat] G-lat Orig-int, [Ambr, Ambrst]: non cog- 
noscetur Hil,: txt A?B D?-3[-gr] KILN? rel syrr copt[-wilk] eth arm Origj -c}, Chr, 
[Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase Thl Ee. (There appears no reason why the indic should 
have been altered to the imperat ; but the form of exprn in ch viii. 2, 3 may perhaps 
have occasioned an alteration of the imperat into the indic, esp if, as Meyer supposes, 
in writing ayvoeitw wste, one w had dropped out, and left the last letter of αγνοειτ. to 
be supplied.) 

39. aft αδελφοι ins μου AB! D2-3[-gr] δὲ ὁ g m o syrr copt Chr, Thdrt Damasc [nostri 
eth]: om B2(sic: see table) D! FKL rel latt basm arm Ambrst Pel. om Ist το F. 

om 2nd το B 48. rec γλωσσαις bef un κωλνετε, with DFKL rel latt syrr 
eth arm Chr, Thdrt Ambrst: txt ΑΒΡΝ m 17 [Euthal-ms] Damasc.—rec om ev (Aaa. 
va. being the more usual exprn 7), with A D3[-gr] KL[P]& rel vulg(and F-lat) syrr [arm 
Euthal-ms] Chr Thdrt Ambrst: ins B D!(and lat) F[-gr] G-lat coptt. 

40. rec om δε (because there appeared to be no contrast ?), with KL rel basm [ Bas, | 
Orig-int, Ambr,: ins ABDFPN 17 a πὶ vulg Syr copt arm Chr, [Euthal-ms Cyr, ] 


Thdrt Damase Pel Bede. 


Cuap. XV. 1. (aft γνωριζω δὲ! has written a, but erased it.) 


orders, as those of God. 37.] πνευ- 
ματικός, one spiritually endowed: not 
quite as in ch. ii. 15. ἃ γράφω] 
the things which I am writing, viz. 
‘ these regulations which I am now mak- 
ing.’ κυρίου, emphatic: the Lord’s 
(commandment): carrying His authority. 
No more direct assertion of inspiration can 
be uttered than this. ‘ Paul stamps here 
the seal of apostolic authority: and on 
that seal is necessarily Christ.” Meyer. 
38. dyvoeitw| implying both 
the hopelessness of reclaiming such an 
one, and the little concern which his op- 
position gave the Apostle. The other 
reading, ἀγνοεῖται, gives a passable sense 
—‘he is ignored,’ scil. by God: cf. ch. 
vill. 2,°3; xiii. 12; Gal. iv. 9. 
39.] ζηλοῦτε and μὴ κωλύετε express 
the different estimations in which he held 
the two gifts. 40. δέ, only pro- 
vided, that.... κατὰ τάξιν 
i. e. in right time, and due proportion.— 
Meyer compares Jos. B. J. ii. 8. 5, of the 
Essenes : οὔτε κραυγή ποτε τὸν οἶκον οὔτε 
θόρυβος μολύνει, τὰς δὲ λαλιὰς ἐν τάξει 
παραχωροῦσιν ἀλλήλοις. See Stanley, 
edn. 2, pp. 298 f. 


Cuap. XV.] Or THE RESURRECTION 
OF THE DEAD; WHICH SOME IN THE 
CORINTHIAN CHURCH DENIED. For 
the enquiry, WHO they were that denied 
the Resurrection, see note on ver. 12. 
1—11.] The Apostle lays the founda- 
tion of his intended polemical argument 
in the historical fact of the RESURREC- 
TION OF CuRIST. But he does not alto- 
gether assume this fact. He deals with its 
evidence, in relating minutely the various 
appearances of the Lord after His Resur- 
rection, to others, and to himself. Then, 
in ver. 12, the proclamation of Christ’s 
Resurrection asthe great fact attending the 
preaching of the gospel, is set against the 
denial of the Resurrection by some of them, 
and it is subsequently shewn that the two 
hang together, so that they who denied the 
one must be prepared to deny the other ; 
and the consequences of this latter denial 
are pointed out. But it by no means 
follows, as De W. (in part) and Meyer 
have assumed, that the impugners were 
not prepared to deny the Resurrection of 
Christ. The Apostle writes not only for 
them, but for the rest of the Corinthian 
believers, shewing them the historical cer- 


602 ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOT® A. a. A 


- , . 4 e 
h constr. ace. & ἢ εὐηγγγελέσάμην ὑμῖν, ὃ καὶ ἱπαρελάβετε, Jév ᾧ καὶ 


dat., Luke 1. 
] 10. 9 k , 7, , > , 
Ae iéotyxate, 3 dv οὗ καὶ * σώξεσθε, tive λόγῳ εὐηγγελισά- 
ii. 18) con > , 9 \ > \ δ" νς ῶ > , 
2 Cor. zi. τ μὴν ὑμῖν εἰ ' κατέχετε, ™ ἐκτὸς MEL μὴ " εἰκῆ ° ἐπιστεύσατε. 
i = ch. xi. 2, 


a ν δον 
ΘΑ]. 1.9, 12 8 Ρ gapédwxa γὰρ ὑμῖν 4 ἐν 4 πρώτοις ὃ καὶ ἱπαρέλαβον, 


16) — John 


j i = viii. 44. Rom. v. 2. ἊΝ Cor. i. 24.) Col. iv. 15. k pres., Acts ii. 47. ch. 1. 18. 2 Cox. ii, 15. i Pet. 
iii. 21, iv. 18. Isa. xlv. cae xi. 2 reff. m ch, xiv.5. 1 Tim, v. 19 only. n Rom, 
xiii. 4 reff. o — Acts xix. Rom. xiii. 11. ch. iii. 5. Eph, i. 13. p=ch. xi. 2 reff. 

q here only. see note, Gen. xxxiii. 2. 


arr D Orig-c. for εστηκατε, στηκετεῖ statis} D'¥ latt copt Ambrst. 
2. aft Aoyw ins και D!(and lat) ; quod et sermone Ambrst. for εἰ κατέχετε, 
οφειλετε κατεχειν D}(and lat) ΕἸ ποῦ F-Jlat lux Ambrst. 


’ tainty, and vital importance of Christ’s thie gospel a fable; see ver. 14, of which 
Resurrection, and its inseparable connexion — this is an anticipation: —unless (perchance) 
with the doctrine which they were now ye believed (not as Εἰ. V. ‘ have. believed,’ 
tempted to deny. 1, 2.] δέ transi- » which confuses the idea: it is, ‘ became 
tional. γνωρίζω, not, as most Com- believers,’ see reff.) in vain (εἰς κενόν, as 
mentators, aft. (Ee., οἷον ὑπομιμνήσκω, ver. 14). So Chrys., who remarks: νῦν 
nor as Riick., ‘I direct your attention to’ μὲν ὑπεσταλμένως αὐτό φησι, προϊὼν δὲ 
(both which meanings are inadmissible, καὶ διαθερμαινόμενοΞ" γυμνῇ λοιπὸν τῇ 
from the usage of the word: see reff.),— κεφαλῇ βοᾷ καὶ λέγει Εἰ δὲ χριστὸς οὐκ 
but as E. V. Ideclare: i. 6. ‘declare ἐγήγερται, κιτ.λ., ver. 14. Hom. xxxviii. 
anew ? not without some intimation of p. 352. This explanation of the words 
“surprise and reproach to them. τὸ appears to me the only tenable one. 
evayy.] the (whole) Gospel: not merely Meyer, and in the main De W., under- 
the Death and Resurrection of Christ, stand them of a vain and dead fuith, 
which were ἐν πρώτοις parts of it; the which the Apostle will not suppose them 
reproach still continues; q.d.‘Iamcon- tohave. But surely if the previously ex- 
strained to begin again, and declare to you pressed condition of κατέχετε were ful- 
the whole gospel which I preached to _ filled, their faith could not be vain or dead ; 
you.’ ὃ καὶ wap.| The thrice re- and again the aovist is against this inter- 
peated καί indicates a climax :—which ye pretation: unless ye became believers in 
also received (see especially ref. John), in vain, not, ‘unless your faith has been a 
which moreover ye stand, by means of vain one.’ A still further reason is, the 
which ye are even being saved (in the parallelism of εἰκῆ ἐπιστεύσατε here and 
course of salvation). τίνι λόγ. if οὕτως ἐπιστεύσατε, ver. 11: leading to the 
ye hold fast, with what discourse (not, inference that εἰκῆ here relates, not tothe 
as Moulton supposes me to interpret subjective insufficiency of their faith, but 
(in his Winer, Gr. Gr. p. 211, note 2,) to the (hypothetical) objective nullity of 
= the discourse with which) I preached that on which their faith was founded. 
to you: the clause tiv: Ady. being pre- (Kc., Theophyl., Theodoret, Luther, Calv. ty 
fixed for emphasis’ sake. λόγος, of the Estius, and De W. connect ἐκτὸς εἰ μή (see 
import, not the grounds of his preaching : above) as a second conditional clause to εἰ 
for of this he reminds them below, not of κατέχετε, supplying between, κατέχετε δὲ 
the arguments. Some Commentators take πάντως (Theophyl.) : but this is arbitrary 
τίνι λόγῳ K.T.A, aS a mere epexegesis of and unnatural. \ 3—11.] A detail of 
εὐαγγέλιον, ---“ the gospel... ., with what the great facts preached to them, centering 
discourse I preached to you,’ as οἷδά ce, in THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. 
tis el. But as Meyer has remarked, in 8. ἐν πρώτοις ] in primis, with relation not 
that case,—(1) σώζεσθε and εἰ κατέχετε to order of time (as Chrys.: ἐξ &pxiis), 
being altogether severed from one another, but to importance (as Theophyl.: οἱονεὶ γὰρ 


εἰ κατέχετε becomes the conditional clause θεμέλιός ἐστι πάσης τῆς πίστεως). 80 


to γνωρίζω ὑμῖν, with which it has πὸ Plato, Rep. vii, 6, p. 522: τοῦτο τὸ κοινὸν 


logical connexion: (2) εἰ κατέχετε would 8 nal νας δ πρώτοις ἀνάγκη 
be inconsistent with ἐν ᾧ καὶ ἑστήκατε, ἀμυθάνέιν. ὃ καὶ παρέλαβον] viz. 


which would thus be an absolute assertion: (see ch. xi. 23 and note) from the Lord 
(3) the words ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ εἰκῆ ἐπιστ. would himself, by special revelation. Before his 
have to be referred as a second conditional conversion he may have known the bare 
ele ise to εἰ κατέχετε (see below). * fact of the death of Jesus, but the na- 
ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ εἰκῆ emtor.| The only chance, ture and reason of that Death he had to 
if you hold fast what I have taught you, of learn from revelation :—the Resurrection 
your missing salvation, is the hardly sup- he regarded as a fable,—but revelation in- 
posable one, that your faith is vatm,and formed him of its reality, and its accord- 





2—6. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


603 


\ > ΄ “ rn “ 
ὅτι χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν * ὑπὲρ τῶν * ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν " κατὰ τ Hed. v.1. vii 
x 


\ t / 4. Ay ἐν u ,’ / vo. Vv > / ry OM - , 
τὰς ᾿ γραφάς, 4 καὶ ὅτι ἃ ἐτάφη, Kai ὅτι " ἐγήγερται TH ἡμέρᾳ 
a \ \ ΄ ¢ lal 
τῇ τρίτῃ ἣ κατὰ τὰς " γραφάς, ὅ καὶ ὅτι * ὠφθη Κηφᾷ, εἶτα 


τοῖς δώδεκα. 


Xvi. 22. 
xxvi. 19. 


Acts ii. 29. v. 6,9, 10 only. 
w Psa. xv. 10. 


Gen. xxiii. 4. 
Isa. liii. 9, 10. 


Ezek. xlv. 22. 
s Psa. xxi. 16. 
Isa. 111}, 5. 
Dan. ix. 24. 
ZECH. &iii. 7. 


la 
6 ἔπειτα * ὥφθη ¥ ἐπάνω πεντακοσίοις ἀδελ.- t Plur., Aets 
φοῖς * ἐφάπαξ, ἐξ ὧν 5 οἱ ὃ πλείονες ὃ μένουσιν ° ἕως “ ἄρτι, 


ν — Matt. χ. 8. xiv. 2. xvi. 21 8]. Isa. 
HosEa vi. 2. Jon. i. 17 (ii. 1). see Matt. xii. 40. 


x Acts ii. 3 reff. 1 Tim. iii. 16. in this ref., = ἐφάνη or ἐφανερώθη. (Mk. xvi. 9—20) John. See Stanley. 


= Mark xiv. 5 only. Exod. xxx. 14 al. 
z = here (Rom. vi. 10. 


xxi. 22,23. Phil. i. 26. 


4. rec rn Tpit ny. (see Matt xvi. 213 xvii. 23. 


elsw. of place or authority. 
Heb. vii. 27. ix, 12. x. 10) only +. 
Ὁ ch, iv. 13 reff. 


See Winer, edn. 6, $ 37. 5. 
ach. ix. 19 reff. b = John 


Here tn np. Tn Tp. ἐδ solemn and 


emphatic), with FKLP rel vulg Syr basm goth Mcion-e, Dial, Eus, [Cyr-jer,) Chr, 
Thdrt [Archel, Damasc] Iren-int, Tert,: txt ABDX m 17 syr copt Cyr-jer, Cyr[-p; 


Euthal-ms] Hil). 


5. emeita AN m 17 Eus, Cyr-jer, Chr, [Euthal-ms Hesych,]: καὶ μετα ταῦτα DIF 


am goth [(Syr arm) ]. 


for δωδεκα, evdexa DIF nonnulli-codices-in-Aug latt syr- 


mg goth arm-usce {Eus, ] Archel,; Damase Phot [Ambrst] Jer. 
6. rec πλείους, with KLP rel Eus, Chr, Thdrt Damase: txt ABDFX k m 17 Orig, 


Ens, Cyr[(varies) Euthal-ms]. 


ance with prophecy. On the following 
clauses, ‘the earliest known specimen of 
what may be termed the creed of the early 
Church,’ see Stanley’s notes, and [his } dis- 
sertation at the end of the section. 

ὑπὲρ τ. ap. 7p. ] ON BEHALF OF OUR SINS: 
viz. to atone for them. Meyer makes the 
important remark, that this use of ὑπέρ 
with τῶν Gpaptidv ju. shews, that when 
Paul uses it in speaking of Christ’s suffer- 
ings with ἡμῶν only, he does not mean by 
it ‘loco nostri.’ He also quotes from Butt- 
mann (Index to Meidias, p. 188), on the 
distinction between ὑπέρ and περί: “id 
unum interest, quod περί usu frequentis- 
simo teritur, multo rarius usurpatur ὑπέρ, 
quod ipsum discrimen inter Lat. prmp. 
de et super locum obtinet.” It may 
be noticed, that in 3 Kings xvi. 19, where 
it is said that Zimri ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ τῶν 
ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτοῦ ὧν ἐποίησεν, it is for his 
own sins, as their punishment, that he 
died. So that ὑπέρ may bear the meaning 
that Christ’s death was the punishment of 
the sins of that our nature which he took 
upon Him. But its undoubtedly inclusive 
vicarious import in other passages where 
ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν and the like occur, seems to 
rule it to have that sense here also. 

κατὰ τὰς yp.|] This applies to Christ’s 
. Death, Burial, and Resurrection on the 
third day: see reff. 4. ἐγήγερται] 
the perfect marks the continuation of the 
state thus begun, or of its consequences : 
so Herod. vii. 8, ἀλλ᾽ 6 μὲν τετελεύτηκε, 
καὶ οὐκ ἐξεγένετό of τιμωρήσασθαι: see 
Kiihner, ὃ 441. 6. 5.] That the fol- 
lowing appearances are related in chrono- 
logical order, is evident from the use of the 
definite adverbs of sequence, εἶτα, ἔπειτα, 
ἔσχατον δὲ πάντων. See examples in 
Wetstein. Wieseler, Chron. Synops. der 


vier Evv. pp. 420 f., attempts to disprove 
this, but certainly does not succeed in get- 
ting over ἔσχατον πάντων, ver. 8. 
ὥφθη Kydd] See Luke xxiv. 34. 
τοῖς δώδεκα) used here popularly, as 
decemviri, and other like expressions, al- 
though the number was not full. The 
occasion referred to seems to be that in 
John xx. 19 ff. ; Luke xxiv. 36 ff. Clearly 
we must not with Chrys., suppose Mat- 
thias to be included as possibly having 
seen Him after His ascension: for the 
appearance is evidently one and the same. 
6. |} He drops the construction with 
ὅτι, dependent on παρέδωκα, and pro- 
ceeds in a direct narration. But evidently 
the sense of the former construction con- 
tinues: he is relating what he had re- 
ceived and preached to them. 
ἐπάνω mevrax. a8. épam.| From Matt. 
xxviii. 17, it appears (see note there) that 
others besides the eleven witnessed the 
appearance on the mountain in Galilee. 
But we cannot say that it is the appearance 
here referred to :—nor indeed is it likely 
that so many as 500 believers in Jesus 
would have been gathered together in Gali- 
lee: both from its position in the list, and 
from the number who witnessed it, this 
appearance would seem rather to have 
taken place at Jerusalem, and before the 
dispersion of the multitudes who had as- 
sembled at the passover: for we find that 
the church of Jerusalem itself (Acts i. 15) 
subsequently contained only 120 persons. 
ἐφάπαξ] not here in its commoner 
meaning of ‘once for all, but at once, 
at one and the same time; as Theodoret, 
ov καθ᾽ ἕνα, GAA” ὁμοῦ πᾶσιν. 
μένουσιν] survive; see reff. The circum- 
stance of most of them remaining alive is 
mentioned apparently by way of strength- 


d ch. vii. 39 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


XV. 


τινὲς δὲ [καὶ] *éxoupnOnoav’ 7 ἔπειτα * ὥφθη ᾿Ιακώβῳ, 


reff. , a ͵ a \ ΄ 
eadvhere | ἔπειτα τοῖς ἀποστόλοις πᾶσιν. 8." ἔσχατον δὲ ἱ πάντων 
only. : ), 

“..ὁ \ A / /, » e 
xan 3. 8 ὡςπερεὶ τῷ »E€xTpwuate * wWhOn κἀμοί. 95 ἐγὼ γάρ εἶμι O 
{neut., see ra 

Mark xii. 28, 9 , A > ’ meer. > 5 ate \ a 

and note. ἐλάχιστος τῶν ATTOTTOAWY" OS οὐκ εἰμι * LKAVOS καλεῖσθαι 
g here only τ. 5 ἦ - 5 = x 

Jos. Antti ἀπόστολος, διότι JédiwEa τὴν " ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ * θεοῦ" 

Sic. iii. 39. 10 ΄ Se a ee ae > Pe ee | , > rus Cy pes a. κ᾿ 
h here only. χάριτι δὲ θεοῦ εἰμὶ 6 εἰμι, καὶ ἡ ' χάρις αὐτοῦ ἡ ' εἰς ἐμὲ 

Eccles. vi. 3 only. i = Matt. iii, 11, 2Cor. iii. 5. Exod. iv. 10. constr., 2 Tim. ii. 2. j = Matt. 

v.10, ll al. fr. Ps. vii. 1. 2 Macc. vy. 8. k ch. i. 2 reff. 11 Pet.i..10. 


aft δὲ ins εξ avtwy K. 


exo:) Al(perbaps) BD!FR? latt syr coptt goth arm [Ambrst Aug, }: 


om και (not perceiving its force or confusion from € kar 


ins A? D3[-gr] 


KLPN? rel (Syr) eth Orig, Archel, Eus, Chr [Cyr-p, Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damasc. 
ἡ. for Ist επειτα, εἰτα 1) copt [Cyr,]: txt ABFKLPR 17 rel Orig, [ Eus, Euthal-ms] 


Cyr-jer, Chr Damasc. 


rec (for 2nd επειτα) evra, with BDLPR3 rel Chr, Thdrt ς, 


txt AFKN! ace g 17 Orig, Eus, [Cyr, Euthal-ms] Damase. 


8. wsmep (for -περει) D! Eus,. 


om Tw F lect-19 sah. 


και εμοι F. 


10. om 2nd ἡ D!F, gratia ejus in me latt Ἰαῦ- 


ening the evidence : q. d. “ and can attest 
it, if required :”’—hardly for the reason 
suggested by Stanley, that the dead among 
them would have been worse off even 
than others, if there were no resurrection, 
having been “ tantalised by the glimpse of 
another world in the vision of their risen 
Lord.” tv’ 7. Ἰακώβῳ] Probably, 
from no distinguishing epithet being added, 
the celebrated James, the brother of the 
Lord: see Gal. i. 19. So Chrys.: ἐμοὶ 
δοκεῖ, τῷ ἀδελφῷ τῷ ἑαυτοῦ, p. 895. See 
notes on ch. ix. 5, Matt. xiii. 55, and the 
Prolegg. to the Epistle of James. On 
Wieseler’s view that this is the appearance 
on the road to Emmaus, see note on Luke 
xxiv. 13. This appearance cannot how- 
ever be identical with that traditional one 
quoted by Jerome (from the Gospel ac- 
cording to the Hebrews), Catal. Script. 
Eccles. ii. vol. ii. p. 831 f.: “ Juraverat 
enim Jacobus, se non comesturum panem 
ab illa hora qua biberat calicem Domini, 
donec videret eum resurgentem a mortuis.” 
This would imply that the appearance was 
very soon after the Resurrection, and be- 
fore any of those to large collections of be- 
lievers, in which James would naturally 
be present. ἀποστ. πᾶσιν] This is 
decisive for the much wider use of the term 
ἀπόστολος than as applying to the Twelve 
only: and a strong presumption that 
James, just mentioned, and evidently here 
and Gal. i. 19, included among the ἀπό- 
στολοι, was not one of the Twelve. Chrys. 
(ubi supra) extends the term to the Seventy 
of Luke x. and others: ἦσαν yap καὶ 
ἄλλοι ἀπόστολοι, ws οἱ ἑβδομήκοντα. 

8.) But last of all (not masc., as Meyer, 
who refers it to τῶν ἀποστόλων, ---ἰοῦ 
others than the Apostles have already been 
mentioned,—but neut., as in ref. and in 
the expression πάντων μάλιστα (Plato, 
Protag. p. 380)), as to the abortively 


born (τῴ pointing out the Apostles as a 
family, and himself as the abortion among 
them,—the one whose relation to the rest 
in point of worthiness, was as that of the 
immature and deformed child to the rest 
of the family. That this is the meaning is 
evident from ver. 9, which drops the figure. 
On ἔκτρωμα, see examples in Wetstein. 
It is not, as τινες in Theophyl., τὸ ὕστερον 
γέννημα, ‘a weakling child of old age.’ 
The grammarians find fault with the term, 
and prefer ἄμβλωμα or ἐξάμβλωμα: but 
it occurs in Aristotle, de generatione ani- 
malium, iv. 5,—ov δύναται τελειοῦν, ἀλλὰ 
Kunwar ἐκπίπτει παραπλήσια τοῖς κα- 
λουμένοις ἐκτρώμασιν. The suggestion 
of Valcknaer, al., that τῷ is τῳ for τινι, is 
equally inconsistent with usage and the 
sense of the passage), He appeared to me 
also: viz. on the road to Damascus. This, 
and this only, can here be meant; as he is 
speaking, not ofa succession of visions, but 
of some one definite apparition. 

9, 10.] Digressive, explanatory of ἐκτρώ- 
ματι. 9. ἐγώ] The stress is on ἐγώ, ‘J, 
and no other,’ ὅς | ‘ut qui: assigns 
the reason. ἱκανός | see reff. 
καλεῖσθαι] ‘to bear the honourable name 
of an Apostle.’ 10. χάρ. δὲ θεοῦ] 
“With the humiliating conviction of his 
own unworthiness is united the conscious- 
ness of that higher Power which worked on 


and in him,—and this introduces his chas- . 


tened self-consciousness of the extent and 
success of his apostolic labours.” De 
Wette. The position of χάριτι δὲ θεοῦ, and 
the repetition of 7 χάρις αὐτοῦ afterwards, 
shew the emphatic prominence which he 
assigns to the divine Grace. ὅ εἰμι] viz. 
in my office and its results. The church has 
admirably connected this passage, as Epistle 
for the 11th Sunday after Trinity, with 
that other speech of a Pharisee, Luke xviii. 
11,—é θεός, εὐχαριστῶ σοι ὅτι οὐκ εἰμὶ ὥ5- 


ABDFK 
LPN ab 
cdefg 
ἢ ΚΙ πὶ 
ο 17. 4 





7—12. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 605 


, , nr , Ξ 
οὐ τ κενὴ ἐγενήθη, ἀλλὰ " περισσότερον αὐτῶν πάντων m= Actsiv.25 


from Ps. ii. 


ἈΝ : 7 ᾿ a \ Η Ξ 

οἐκοπίασα, οὐκ ἐγὼ δέ, ἀλλὰ ἡ χάρις τοῦ θεοῦ Ῥσὺν 1}..15,88. 
f 4 1 58. ii. 

ἐ ol 114 εἴτε οὖν ἐ ν) VEX Pty ef r / Deut. xxxii. 
μοι. yo “εἴτε ἐκείνοι, οὕτως * κηρύσσομεν, ee 

Wit 38. Heb. 


vi. 17. vii. 15. 


\ Ὁ 5 δ , 12 > be t ‘ t , ὡς 3 
καὺν οὕτως “επιστευσατε. ευ O€ χρίστος Κηρυσσέται εκ 


u a er uv τ w a ! ? cae “ ο Matt. vi. 28. 
νεκρων OTt EYNYVEPT AL, TTWS λέγουσιν εν υμιν τινες OTL Rete xx. 35. 
- XVI. '6; 

12. Phil. ii. 16: Ps. cxxvi. 1. p Acts xiv. 4. q ch, xiii. 8 reff. μι ΤΕ ΒΟΙΣ 


Matt. iii. 1, and passim. Exod. xxxii. 5. s = ver. 2 reff. t see Acts viii. 5 reff. 
u Matt. xvii. 9. (Ἴγ. ἀπὸ τ. v., Matt. xiv. 2 al. not in Mk., who has ex ν, ἀναστ., vi. 14.) Luke ix.7. John 
ii. 22. xii. 1,9, 17. xxi. 14. Acts iii. 15 al2. Paul, passim. Heb. xi. 19. 1 Pet. i. 21. Vv = ver. 


4 al. fr. w = Rom. vi. 2. Gal. ii. 14. iv. 9. 


for ov κενὴ εγενηθη, πτωχὴ οὐκ εγενηθη 1)} : πτωχή ov γεγονεν F: pauper(a) non fuit 
1)-ἰαὺ G-lat [Ambrst] (not Jeraic Aug,: egena [Ambr,: simly goth]). om 
avtev D!-gr L!: παντων bef avtwy a. aravtwy (but a erased) δὲ. (αλλα, 
so ΑΒΌΙΝ 17.) rec ins ἡ bef σὺν (see note), with A D-corr(? οἵ 3?)[-gr] 
KLPN? rel sah eth arm [ Bas, Ps-]Ath Chr, Cyr[-p, Euthal-ms] Thdrt, Damase, Thl 
(Ke Orig-int, Jerjaic): om BD!FN? latt goth Orig(gr and int,) [Ambrst]. 

11, for ουν, δὲ autem D'F goth Iren-int,: entm vulg Tert,. πιστευσατε X}. 

12. Ἔτες OTL ἐκ νεκρῶν, with AB D2[-gr] KLPN rel Iven(gr and int) Chr, 
Thdrt [Cyr, Euthal-ms Damase Tert, Ambrst: quod resurrexit a mortuis] vulg(and 
F-lat): ex νεκρων or: D1:3(and lat) F[-gr] G-lat Orig,. rec τινες bef ev υμιν, with 
DFKL rel goth arm Epiph, Chr, Thdrt Ambrst Promiss,: quidam dicunt in vobis Jatt 
[coptt] Tert,: txt ABPN a 17 syrr Orig,([-c, ]-int,) Chr, [Cyr-p, Euthal-ms] Damase. 


περ of λοιποὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων : see note there. 

ἡ els ἐμέ] which was (manifested) 
towards me: see ref. and Rom. viii. 18. 
ἀλλά opposed to κενὴ ey.,—‘ by means of 
God’s grace’ being understood after ἀλλά, 
as afterwards explained. περισσότε- 
pov] adverbial, as in reff.: or perhaps 
neut. accus. governed by ἐκοπίασα. 


αὐτῶν πάντων) either, ‘than any of 


them, or ‘than they all, scil. together. 
Meyer prefers the latter, on account of 
τοῖς am. πᾶσιν, ver. 7. But it seems 
hardly necessary, and introduces an element 
of apparent exaggeration. ἐκοπίασα] 
Spoken of his apostolic work, in all its 
branches ; see reff., especially Phil. 

οὐκ ἐγὼ δέ] explanatory, to avoid misap- 
prehension : it had been implied (see above) 
in the ἀλλά :--ποῦ I, however, but the 
Grace of God with me (see var. readd.) : 
5011. ἐκοπίασεν. x.7.A. That  is,—the 
Grace of God worked with him in so over- 
whelming a measure, compared to his own 
working, that it was no longer the work 
of himself but of divine Grace. Augus- 
tine, de Grat. et Lib. Arb. § 5 (12), vol. 
x. p. 889, hardly expresses this: “Non 
ego autem, i.e. non solus, sed gratia Dei 
mecum: ac per hoc nec gratia Dei sola, 
nec ipse solus, sed gratia Dei cum illo :”” — 
for he overlooks the entire preponderance 
of Grace, which Paul asserts, even to the 
exclusion of his own action in the matter. 
The right view of this preponderance of 
Grace prevents the misunderstanding of 
the words which has led to the insertion 
ot the article, 7 σὺν ἐμοί, whereby Grace 
becomes absolutely the sole agent, which 
is contrary to fact. On the coagency of 
the human will with divine Grace, but in 


subordination, see Matt. x. 20; 2 Cor. v. 
20; vi. 1, and ch. iii. 9, note. thal 
He resumes the subject after the digression 
respecting himself :—it matters not whe- 
ther it were I or they (the other Apostles) 
—SUCH is the purport of our preaching— 
SUCH was your belief:—oitws, after 
this manner, viz. that Christ died, was 
buried, and rose again, as vv. 3, 4. 

12—19.] On the fact of Christ’s Resur- 
rection, announced in his preaching, and 
confessed in their belief, he grounds (nega- 
tively) the truth of the general Resurrec- 
tion :—If the latter be not to happen, 
neither has the former happened :—and 
he urges the results of such a disproof 
of Christ’s Resurrection. 12.] intro- 
duces the argument for the resurrection, 
by referring to its denial among a portion 
of the Corinthian church. δέ belongs 
to the whole question, and’ is opposed to 
οὕτως Knp. and ovr. émor. of the fore- 
going verse. The position of χριστός 
before the verb gives it the leading 
emphasis, as an example of that which is 
deuied by some among you: But if 
CuRIstT is preached [not subjunctive, be 
preached: he is arguing from a matter of 
fact, not from a mere hypothesis | that He 
is risen from the dead (if an instance of 
such resurrection is a fact announced in 
our preaching), how say some among you 
(how comes it to pass that some say) that 
a resurrection of the dead does not exist 
(οὐκ ἔστ. as ver. 13)? If the species be 
conceded, how is it that some among you 
deny the genus ? tives | It is an in- 
teresting question, WHO these τινες were; 
and one which can only be answered by 
the indications which the argument in 


G06 


᾽ ; Ξ 
χα Μαῖ χα. Σαναστασις * 
41 only in 
gospp. Acts 
xvii. 32 al4. 
Paul, Rom. i. 
4. here ἄς. 
4 times only. 
Heb. vi. 2. 
see Acts iv. 2 
reff, x. 41 reff. 
b Rom, xvi. 25 reff. 


19. -pta, Matt. xv. 19.) 


y ver. 4. 
c = ch. iv. 2 reff. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


al » ” »>OX\ \ 3 / x 14 2 \ 

κρῶν οὐκ ἔστιν, οὐδὲ χριστὸς "ἡ ἐγήγερται" 13 εἰ δὲ χριστὸς 
‘ Ν lal h k 

οὐκ ἡ ἐγήγερται, *Kevov *apa καὶ TO ἢ κήρυγμα ἡμῶν, οἷ᾽ 

2 κενὴ καὶ ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν" 158 ὁ εὑρισκόμεθα δὲ καὶ ἃ ψευδο- 


z ver. 10. 


XV. 


Ἀ 


a2Cor. v.15. Gal. iii. 29, see Rom. Vii. 3, 25. 
d Matt. xxvi. 60 only +. see Acts vi. 13. (-ρεῖν, Mark x. 


13. om εἰ δε to ἐστιν (homeotel) [ἘΠ €'(ins N-corr!) a ἃ 17 [Cyr,].—for εἰ, eav F. 


14. om εἰ to eyny. (homeotel) D}{ and lat]. 


rec om Ist ka: (as superfluous), 


with BLN? rel [vulg F-lat syrr coptt ath arm] Ps-Ign, Constt Epiph, Cyr-jer, Chr, 


[Cyr-p,] Thdrt Damase Jac-nisib, [Iren-int, Tert, Ambrst] 


: ins AD F{-gr] KPR' ἃ 


(e) [31 m 17. 47 G-lat basm goth Dial, [Euthal-ms | (@c. (D-lat [Tren-int] lat-ff express 


neither καὶ nor apa.) 


rec aft κενὴ ins δε, with D3[-gr] KL [47(sic)] rel (am) syr 


Ps-Ign, Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] @e: om ABD!FPN a! m 17 latt [Syr goth wth arm] coptt 


Cyr-jer, Dial, [Cyr, Euthal-ms] Damasc [Iren-int, Tert, Ambrst]. 


ἡμῶν BD! [17] 


672. 73. 91. 106 sah goth Ps-Ign-2-mss Dial, Cyr-jer [Cyr-p,] Ze Ruf, Arnob Bede. 


15. om καὶ D! goth arm Tert,. 


this chapter furnishes. 
Sadducees? If so, the Apostle would 
hardly have begun his argument with the 
fact of the Resurrection of Jesus. And yet 
we must remember that he is arguing not 
with the deniers, but with those who being 
as yet sound, were liable to be misled by 
them. But the opposition between Sad- 
duceism and Christianity was so complete, 
that we have little reason to think that any 
leaven of the Sadducees ever found its way 
into the church. (2) Were they Enpi- 
eureans ἡ Probably not, for two reasons: 
(a) the Epicurean maxim, “ Let us eat and 
drink,” &c., is represented as a legitimate 
eonsequence of adopting their denial of the 
resurrection, not as an accompaniment of, 
much less as the ground of it: and (8) had 
the Epicurean element entered to any 
extent into the Corinthian chureh, we 
certainly should have had more notice 
of its exceedingly antichristian tenets. 
It is possible that the deniers may have 
been, or been in danger of being, cor- 
vupted by mixture with Epicureans avith- 
out, from the warning of ver. 33. (3) 
Were they Jews? If not Sadducees, 
hardly Jews at all, or Judaizers : a strong 
tenet of Pharisaism was this very one of 
the Resurrection, see Acts xxiii. 6: and 
we know of no tendency of Essenism which 
should produce sueh a denial. (4) They 
must then have been Gentile believers, 
inheriting the unwillingness of the Greek 
mind to receive that of which a full account 
could not be given, see vv. 35, 36: and 
probably of a philosophical and cavilling 
tnrn. Meyer argues, from the antimate- 
rialistic turn of the Apostle’s counter-argu- 
ments, vv. 35 ff.,—that the objections were 
antimaterialistic also: De W. infers the 
very opposite, which certainly seems to me 
more probable. No trace whatever is 
found in the argument of an allegorizing 
cuaracter in the opponents, as was that of 


(1) Were they 


Hymenezus and Philetus, who maintained 
that the resurrection was past already, 
2 Tim. ii. 17, 18,—as Olsh. after Grot. sup- 
poses. Whether the Apostle regarded 
the resurrection of the body as inseparably 
bound up with a future existence of the 
soul, does not very clearly appear in this 
chapter. From the use of the word ἀπ- 
ὦλοντο, ver. 18, which must refer, not to 
aunihilation, but to perdition, it would 
seem that he admitted an independent ex- 
istence of the soul ; as also from Phil. i. 23. 
But from ver. 32, εἰ νεκροὶ οὐκ ἐγείρονται, 
φάγωμεν κ. πίωμεν, αὔριον γὰρ ἀποθνή- 
σκομεν, it would seem that the Apostle re- 
garded the denial of the resurrection as in- 
volving that of the future state and judg- 
ment. On the question, to which of the 
(supposed) Corinthian parties the oppo- 


nents belonged, I have nothing to say, not. 


recognizing the divisions into the Pauline, 
Apollonian, Petrine, and Christine parties 
as having any historical foundation; see 
note on ch. i. 12. 13.] δέ is the but 
argumentandi, frequent in mathematical 
demonstrations. Gv. VEK. οὐκ ἔστιν] 
the words (ovx) of the deniers. οὐδ 
χριστ. ἐγήγερται] This inference depends, 
us Grot. observes, on the maxim, “ Sublato 
genere tollitur et species ;” the Resurrec- 
tion of Christ being an instance of the 
yule, that dead men rise; inasmuch as 
He is man. This is enlarged on, vv. 
20—22. 14.) δέ, again introducing 
a new inference. οὐκ ἐγ. Again 
repeating and ἀβίησ as matter of fact 
(ov«) the inference of the last verse; 
4. ἃ. εἰ δὲ xp. οὐκ-ἐγήγερται. 

κενόν) idle, ‘empty,’ ‘without result: 
placed first for emphasis. ἄρα] then: 
‘rebus ita comparatis’ (Meyer). 

καί) also, q.d. “If Christ’s Resurrec- 
tion be gone, then also our faith is gone.” 
Without the copula δέ, the clause is mnch 
more forcible :—-idle also is our preach- 


2 ω > ΝΜ 13 2 δὲ x ? U : x 
VEKPWV OUK ἐστιν >; ““εἰ OF ~ αναστασις ~ VE- ABDFK 


LPxRab 
edefg 
kl m - 
7 


; 
Ι 








13—19. 


μάρτυρες τοῦ “θεοῦ, ὅτι 


ΠΡΟΣ ‘KOPINOIOTS A. 


“ἐμαρτυρήσαμεν 


607 


fxata τοῦ Oeove = John i. 7,6, 


xxiii. 11 al. 


“ ‘ U ἃ 
ὅτι " ἤγειρεν τὸν χριστόν, ὃν οὐκ Y ἤγειρεν ὅ εἴπερ ἄρα “here only. 


νεκροὶ οὐκ Υ᾽ ἐγείρονται. 
\ / 

Tat, οὐδὲ χριστὸς Y-éynyepTac’ 

ἡ ἐγήγερται, 


ἱἁμαρτίαις ὑμῶν" 18 ἄρα καὶ οἱ * κοιμηθέντες 
19 εἰ ἐν τῇ " ζωῇ ταύτῃ 


» ,ὔ 
™ ἀπτώλοντο. 


‘ , ’ ’ὔ 7 
κότες 4 ἐσμὲν μόνον, * ἐλεεινότερον πάντων ἀνθρώπων ἐσμέν. 9 


h ch, iii. 20 reff. 
iv. 16. Rev. xiv. 13. 
iii. 10, from Ps. xxxiii. 12. 
45. 2Cor. i. 10. 
iii. 17 only +. compar., ch. xiii. 13 reff. 


aft χριστον ins αὐτου N!(&3 disapproving). 


sah goth [Thdrt] Iren-int, [Tert, Archel, Ambrst]. 
16. om εἰ to eyerp. (homeotel) Ῥ am(with fuld). 
17. aft vuwy ins est BD! (vss (not arm)). 

[copt(etiam) goth(Tischdf) arm-usc Euthal-ms] Damasc : 


Ambrst }. 


h / e / ε n 4 3 \ 
ματαία ἢ πίστις ὑμων, ETL ἐστε 


i John viii. 24 bis. ix. 34. 
m = Rom. κἀν. 16 reff. 
o 4 Kings xviii. 5. see Eph. i. 12. 
1 Tim. iy. 10. v. 5. vi. 17 only. 


Xen. Cyrop. 


16 > \ \ ᾽ ΕῚ ΄ , 
εὖ Yap νεκροὶ οὐκ -) ἐγειίρον- ἰ.3.16, 


ταῦτα μὲν δὲ 
κατὰ πάν- 
των Περσῶν 
ἔχομεν λέ- 
Ύειν. Arist. 
Eth. Nic. i. 
10. 7, ἀλη- 
θεύσεται 
κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ. 
= Rom. viii. 
9 (reff.), 17. 
1 Pet. i. 3. 
k = ch. vii. 39 reff. 1] = 1 Thess. 
n = Phil. i. 20. James iv. 14. 1 Pet. 
p perf., John vy. 
q constr., Acts xxy. 10 reff. r Rey. 


17 εἰ δ᾽ χριστὸς οὐκ 
ἱ ἐν ταῖς 
12 a 
ἐν χριστῷ 


A }] 
° ἐν χριστῷ δῬἡλπι- 


om εἰπερ to εγειρονται 1) 43 harl! Syr 
ins οἱ bef νεκροι F. 
ins o bef xp. P. 
ins καὶ bef er: AN! Syr sah eth 
[adhue enim] Orig|-int, 


19. rec ἡλπίκοτες ἐσμεν bef ev χριστω, with D*[-gr] KLP rel [syrr coptt sth arm] 


Orig, Chr, Thdrt ic: 
Ambr, Ambrst. 


txt ABD! EX m 17 latt goth (Orig,)[-c,] Chron, (Thl) Iren-int, 
2nd ἐσμεν bef παντων.ανθρωπων 1) latt{ (not G-lat) Syr arm } goth 


Orig[-c,(txt,) Ambr, Ambrst]: omnibus sumus hominebus Iren-int. 


ing, idle also is your faith. ‘Thus καί 
both times refers to the hypothesis, ef xp. 
οὐκ ἐγήγ. 15.] Not to be joined 
with the former verse, as Lachm., al., and 
Meyer: for it does not depend on εἰ δὲ 
xp. «.7.A., but has its reason given below. 
δὲ kai, moreover. ψευδ. 

τοῦ θ.1 false witnesses concerning God 
gen. obj.), not ‘belonging to God’ (gen. 
subj.), as Billroth: and false witnesses, 
as beariny false testimony (see below), 
not, as Knapp, as pretending to be wit- 
nesses, and not being :—-there is no such 
distinction as Miller attempts to lay down 
(Diss. Exeget. de loco Paul. 1 Cor. xv. 
12— 19, cited by De Wette) between ψευ- 
δεῖς μάρτυρες, ‘qui falsum testimonium di- 
cunt,’ and Wevdoudprupes, ‘qui mentiuntur 
se esse testes : see τοῖς, and compare (De 
Wette) ψευδοδιδάσκαλος, ψευδοκατήγορος. 
κατὰ τοῦ θεοῦ | not, as commonly, and 
even Meyer, ‘ against God ? but as E. V., 
of, or concerning God: see, besides ref., 
Plut. de Liberis Educandis, § 4:—@ κατὰ 
τῶν τεχνῶν K. τῶν ἐπιστημῶν λέγειν εἰώ- 
θαμεν, ταὐτὸν καὶ κατὰ τῆς ἀρετῆς φατέον 
ἐστίν, ὧς εἰς τὴν παντελῇ δικαιοπραγίαν 
τρία δεῖ συνδραμεῖν, φύσιν, κ. λόγον, kK. 
ἔθος. εἴπερ ἄρα] If in reality, 88 
they δβϑουΐ,...., compare Plato, Protag. 
p- 319 (§ 27), A καλόν, ἦν δ᾽ ἐγώ, τέχνημα 
ἄρα κέκτησαι, εἴπερ κέκτησαι, and see Har- 
tung, Partikellehre, i. 848. 16,] Re- 
petition of the inference in ver. 13, for 
precision’s sake. 17, 18.] Repetition 
of the consequence already mentioned in 
ver, 14, but fuller, and with more refer- 


ence to its present and future calamitous 
results. 17. ματαΐα] from μάτην, 
and thus more directly pointing at the 
Jrustration_ of all on which faith relies 
as accomplished,—e. g. the remoyal of the 
guilt and power of sin ;—and of all to 
which hope looks forward, e. g. bliss after 
death for those who die in Christ, This 
is so, because Christ’s Resurrection ae- 
complished aur justification (Rom. iv. 
25), and, through justification, our future 
bliss, even in the disembodied state (for 
that seems here to be treated of). 18. 
ἄρα καί] then also. οἱ κοιμ.7 those 
who fell asleep in Christ, perished (i. e. 
passed into misery in Hades). He uses 
the aorists, speaking of the act of death, 
not of the continuing state: the act 
of falling asleep in Christ was to them 
ἀπώλεια. ἐν χρ.» in communion with, 
membership of Christ, On κοιμηθέντες 
Meyer quotes a beautiful sentence from 
Photius (Quest. Rage 168 (al. 
187 or 197), vol. i. p. 861, Migne) : ἐπὶ 
μὲν οὖν τοῦ χριστοῦ θάνατον καλεῖ, ἵνα τὸ 
πάθος πιστώσηται᾽ ἐπὶ δὲ ἡμῶν κοίμησιν, 
ἵνα τὴν ὀδύνην παραμυθήσηται. ἔνθα μὲν 
yap παρεχώρησεν n ἀνάστασις, θαῤῥῶν κα- 
λεῖ θάνατον. ἔνθα δὲ ἐν ἐλπίσιν ἔτι μένει, 
κοίμησιν καλεῖ. 19.1 Assuming this 
ἀπώλεια of the dead in Christ, the state 
of Christians is indeed miserable. It has 
perhaps not been enough seen that there 
are here two emphases, and that μόνον be- 
longs to the aggregate of both. According 
to the ordinary interpretation. ‘If im this 
ἔχε only we have hope in Christ... ,’ it 


608 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. XV. 
zs 90 s s ΔΝ ee ΠΣ νυ a a ee 

+= ch xiti.19 20 Spypi δὲ χριστὸς " ἐγήγερται ' ἐκ νεκρῶν, ἃ ἀπαρχὴ τῶν 
ret. 

ver. 12. k Ε ΘΟ Οὐϑ \ \ x > , e 1 

ἃ Rom, viii, 23 MEKOLLNMEVWD. ἐπειδὴ yap δι’ ἀνθρώπου [ὁ] θάνατος, 
reff. \ 5 ’ 5) θ ΄ ee w aA 29 » \ 

vactsxv.a καὶ δι ἀνθρώπου “ ἀνάστασις δὶ νεκρῶν. ὥςπερ γὰρ 
reff. Ἢ ᾿ ν 3 

wrer sre, X gy τῷ ᾿Αδὰμ πάντες ἀποθνήσκουσιν, οὕτως Kai * ἐν TO 
It 2Cors. χριστῷ πᾶντες ¥ ζωοσποιηθήσονται. 58 ἕκαστος δὲ ἐν τῷ 
. Col. i. 16. 

Gal. it i7. ‘Eph. i. 4. iii, 11. y Rom. iv. 17 reff. 


20. for vum, νυν F Dial,. ins των bef vexpwy F Damasc-comm, rec at 
end adds eyeveto (supplemental gloss), with D3{-gr] KL rel syrr goth Thdrt Damasce 
Orig-int, : γενόμενος 80: om ABD!FPN 17 latt coptt [wth] arm Orig[,-c, ](and int,) 
Dial, {Chr, Euthal-ms] Iren-int, Hil, [Ambrst]. 

21. δια (twice) F. om o (bef @avaros) ABD! KN 17(appy) Orig, Dial, Ath, 
Ps-Ath, [Cyr-p, Euthal-ms] Damase (appy to conform to avacr. below: this is more 
prob than to suppose with Meyer that it has been introd from Rom y. 12): ins 
D?3FLP rel Orig[-c], Eus, [Did, Cyr-p,] Ath, Cyr-jer, Chr, Thdrt Euther,. [Of these 
Eus Cyr-jer Chr Euther, have 7 avaor. also. | 


23. δὲ is written over the line by XN! [om Orig,(-ins,) ]. 


would be implied that in reality we shall 
have hope in Christ in another state also, 
which would not agree with the perfect 
ἠλπικότες ἐσμέν. The right arrangement 
of the Greek gives the key to the sentence: 
εἰ (ἐν TH ζωῇ ταύτῃ ἐν χριστῷ ἠλπικότες 
ἐσμὲν) udvov,—‘if all we have done is 
merely having hoped in Christ in this life,’ 
‘if it is there to end, and that hope have no 
result...’ The perf. ἠλπικότες ἐσμ. 
implies the endurance of the hope through 
our lives. ἐλεειν. πάντ.) We are 
most to be pitied (most miserable) of all 
men; viz. because they, all other men, live 
at ease,—we on the contrary are ever ex- 
posed to danger ud death: because our 
hope is more incense than that of all others, 
and leads us to forego more: and to be 
disappointed in it, would be the height of 
misery. 20—28.] Reassertion of 
the truth that Christ Is RISEN from the 
dead,—and prophetic exposition of the 
consequences of that great event. 

20.] νυνί, ‘as matters now stand:’ see 
τῆ, [and note.]| ἀπαρχ. τ. Kekoup. | 
(as) (the) first-fruit of them that sleep 
(anarthrous, because categorematical). 
For the construction Meyer compares Eur. 
Or. 1098: Ἑλένην κτάνωμεν, Mevedréw 
λύπην mxpav. The sense is, ‘Christ, in 
rising from the dead, is but the firstling 
or earnest of the resurrection of the whole 
number of those that sleep.’ There does 
not appear to be any intended reference to 
the legal ordinance of the tirst-fruits (Lev. 
xxiii. 10, 11): but however general the 
application of the analogy may be, it can 
hardly fail to have been suggested to the 
mind of a Jew by the Levitieal ordinances, 
especially as our Lord rose on the ‘very 
morrow after the Paschal Sabbath, when 
(l. c) the first-fruits were offered. τῶν 
κεκοιμημένων, from the logical connexion, 
should mean, not the dead in Christ, but 
all the dead; see next verse: but it is 


the Christian dead who are betore the 
Apostle’s mind, when he calls our risen 
Lord ἀπαρχὴ τῶν KEK. 21.] Man 
the bringer-in both of death and life: 
explanation (not proof) of Christ being 
the ἀπαρχὴ τ. κεκοιμ.: and (1) in that 
He is Man: it being necessary that the 
first-fruit should be as the lump. The 
verity lying at the root of this verse is, 
that by MAN ONLY can general effects 
pervading the whole human race be in- 
troduced. δι᾿ ἀνθρώπου, sc. ἐστίν. 

22. (2) In that He is (and here 
the fact of His being the Lord of, Life 
and Righteousness, and the second and 
spiritual Head of our nature, is assumed) 
to us the bringer-in of LiFe, as Adam 
was the bringer-in of DEATH. ἐν τῷ 
°A8., ἐν τῷ χριστῷ] in community with, 
as partakers in a common nature with, 
Adam and Christ: who are respectively 
the sources, to the whole of that nature 
(πάντες), of death, and life, i.e. (here) 
physical death, and rescue from physical 
death. The practice of Paul to insulate 
the objects of his present attention from 
all ulterior considerations, must be care- 
fully here borne in mind. The antithesis 
is merely between the bringing in of death 
by Adam, and of life (its opposite) by 
Christ. No consequence, whether on the 
side of death or of life, is brought into con- 
sideration. That death physical involved 
death eternal—that life eternal (in its 
only worthy sense) involves bliss eternal, 
is not so much as thought of, while the 
two great opposites, Death and Life, are 
under consideration. ‘This has been missed 
by many Interpreters, and the reasoning 
thereby marred. But the ancients, Chrys., 
Theophyl., Theodoret, CEeum., and Olsh., 
De Wette, and Meyer, keep to the wniver- 
sal reference. Theophylact’s note is clear 
and striking: αἰτίαν προυςτίθησι δι᾽ ἧς mo~ 
τοῦται τὰ εἰρημένα" ἔδει γάρ, φησιν, αὐτὴν 


ABDFK 
LPrab 
edefg 
hklm 
017. 47_ 





20—24. 


IPOS KOPIN@IOTS A. 


609 


O7 Z / " 1 ’ Ἁ Ud ” a et A Lal 
ἰδίῳ 5 τάγματι" " ἀπαρχὴ χριστός, ἔπειτα ὃ οἱ τοῦ χριστοῦ «here only. 


1 Kings 1v. 10. 


hel gle athe Be “ings ἦν. 10 
"ἐν τῇ ᾿Ξ παρουσίᾳ αὐτοῦ, 3' εἶτα τὸ 4 τέλος, ὅταν ὅπαρα- 75K™8***"" 


Rom. xvi. 10,11. ch. i. 11. 
xxiv. 3, &c. 
e = Matt. xi. 27. 


rec om του (bef xpiatov) (by a mistake appy). 


b = 1 Thess. ii. 19. iii. 13. v. 23. 
James v. 7,8 al. (ch. xvi. 17 reff.) 


a w. gen., see 
c = Matt. 
1 Ροῖ. ἵν. 7. 


1 John ii. 28. 
d — Matt. xxiv. 6, 14. 


ins o bef ev τὴ παρουσια and add 


ελπισαντες F G-lat vulg-ed [Orig-int, Hil, Ambrst]. (qui in adventu(m) ejus erediderunt 
demid fuld [spec], sperantes is written over eA7. in the gr column of F: on the other 
hand, am [tol] D-lat F-lat have ix adventu ejus ; fri Aug,, im presentia ejus.) 

24. rec mapadw (alteration to conform to katapynon, the propriety of the pres being 
overlooked : see note), with KL rel Orig, Eus, Chr, [Euthal-ms] 'Thdrt Daimasce : 
παραδιδω ADPX Hip, [Marcell,] Eus, Did, Bas[-mss,| Nys,: txt BF. (17 def.) 


νικῆσαι τὴν ἡττηθεῖσαν φύσιν, καὶ τὸν 
καταβληθέντα, αὐτὸν ἐκνικῆσαι καὶ γὰρ 
ἐν τῷ ᾿Αδάμ, τουτέστι διὰ τὸ τοῦ ᾿Αδὰμ 
πταῖσμα, πάντες τῷ θανάτῳ ὑὕὑπέπεσον'" 
οὕτως οὖν ἐν χριστῷ πάντες ἀναστήσονται" 
τουτέστι διὰ τὸ εὑρεθῆναι τὸν χριστὸν ἀνα- 
μάρτητον κ. ἀνένοχον τῷ θανάτῳ, καὶ ἑκόντα 
μὲν ἀποθανεῖν, ἀναστῆναι δέ, καθὸ οὐκ ἣν 
δυνατὸν αὐτὸν κρατεῖσθαι ὑπὸ τῆς φθορᾶς, 
roy ἀρχηγὸν τῆς (ζωῆς. See on the great 
antithesis, Rom. v. 12 ff., and notes. 
23.| But in this universal Resurrection, 
ALL SHALL NOT HOLD THE SAME RANK. 
Chrys. rightly, εἶτα, ἵνα μὴ τὴν ζωοποί- 
now κοινὴν ἀκούσας, καὶ τοὺς ἁμαρτωλοὺς 
νομίσῃς σώζεσθαι, ἐπήγαγεν ἕκαστος δὲ 
KT Ne, το OMS αχχῖχ. .}...967. 
τάγμα is not order of priority, but rank, 
or ‘troop in an army, so Plut., Otho, p. 
1072 (Wetst.): λεγεῶνες, οὕτω yap Ta 
τάγματα Ῥωμαῖοι καλοῦσιν ἐπίκλησιν. 
The three ranks are mentioned in order of 
priority, but this does not constitute their 
distinctive character :—Christis the ἀπαρχή 
this is His ἴδιον τάγμα, see Col. i. 18 :— 
οἱ τοῦ χριστοῦ follow at His coming, who 
are the φύραμα (as understood by the con- 
text, and implied by ἀπαρχή), in the proper 
and worthiest sense, made like unto Him 
and partaking of His glory; then (after 
how long or how short a time is not 
declared, and seems to have formed no 
part of the revelations to Paul, but was 
afterwards revealed,—see Rev. xx. 4—6: 
compare also 1 Thess. iv. 15—17) shall 
come THE END, viz. the resurrection of the 
rest of the dead, here veiled over by the 
general term τὸ TéAos,—that resurrection 
not being in this argument specially 
treated, but only that of Christians. The 
key to the understanding of this passage 
is to be found in the prophecy of our Lord, 
Matt. xxiv., xxv., but especially in the 
latter chapter. The resurrection and judg- 
ment of of τοῦ χριστοῦ forming the sub- 
ject of vv. 1—30 there, and τὸ τέλος.--- 
the great final gathering of πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, 
of vv. 31—46. ἀπαρχή, therefore 
necessarily the first τάγμα : and hence the 
word stands first. ot τοῦ xp.] = vf 
νεκροὶ ev xpiatg@, 1 Thess. iv. 16. No 


Vou. Tt. 


mention occurs here of any judgment of 
these his ἴδιοι δοῦλοι, as in Matt. xxv., for 
it does not belong to the present subject. 

ἐν τῇ Wap. αὖτ.) ἐν as forming 
part of, involved in, His appearing,— 
which, as the great event of the time, 
includes their resurrection in it. It ought 
to be needless to remind the student of the 
distinction between this παρουσία and the 
final judgment ; it.is here peculiarly impor- 
tant to bear it in mind. 24. εἶτα] 
then, next in succession, introducing the 
third rayua,—see above. τὸ τέλος] 
the end κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν : not the end of the 
resurrection, as Meyer, after Theodoret, 
(Keum., Bengel, al. :—nor, of this present 
world, as Chrys., al.,—which properly 
happens at the παρουσία: nor exactly, of 
the Kingdom of Christ, as Grot. and 
Billroth: but generally, THE END, when 
all shall be accomplished, the bringing in 
and fulness of the Kingdom by the subjuga- 
tion of the last enemy, the whole course 
of [the] mediatorial work of Christ, the 
salvation of the elect; the time indicated 
by Matt. xxv. ult.: καὶ ἀπελεύσονται οὗτοι 
els κόλασιν αἰώνιον, οἱ δὲ δίκαιοι εἰς ζωὴν 
αἰώνιον. ὅταν παραδιδοῖ) when He 
(Christ) gives up (the pres., for that 
which is certainly attached to the event 
as its accompaniment—éray indicating 
the uncertainty of the time when, and 
the verb being probably subjunctive: see 
Winer, Moulton’s Trans. p. 360, note 2), 
the Kingdom to God, and the Father 
(reff. : to Him who is God and His Father) 

Then the rest of the section as far 
as ver. 28, is in explanation of the giving 
up the kingdom. And it rests on this 
weighty verity : the KINGDOM OF CHRIST 
over this world, in its beginning, its 
furtherance, and its completion, has one 
great end,—THE GLOKIFICATION OF THE 
FATHER BY THE Son. Therefore, when 
it shall be fully established, every enemy 
overcome, every thing subjected to Him, 
He will,—not, reign over it and abide 
its King, but DELIVER IT UP TO THE 
FatHER. Hence as in ver, 25, His reign 
will endure, not, like that of earthiy kings, 
WHEN He shall have put ali enemies under 

RR 


610 


f - Acts xx. 
25 al. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@!IOTS A, 


XV. 


διδοῖ τὴν "βασιλείαν ὃ τῷ θεῶ καὶ ὃ πατρί, ὅταν ™ καταρ- 


rae 3 , nm i ’ \ \ lal k ᾿Ὶ / \ i , 
gsee Rom. xv. yon πᾶσαν 'apynv Kat πᾶσαν ἐξουσίαν καὶ ' δύναμιν. 


38 (reff.). 


os ’ \ ς Ν \ 
ii. ἐχθροὺς ὑπο τοὺς 


= { Η Ἃ κ -“ θ / 
πὲ 1 καταργεῖταν ὁ θάνατος. 


΄ » an 
"aug πόδας αὐτοῦ. 
ἢ Matt. xxil. 


44 ||, Acts ti. 35, ἃ Heb. i, 13. x. 13, from Psa. cix. 1. 
ch. vi. 16 (reff.). 


του θὺ &?}. 


’ ’ “-“ 
πόδας αὐτοῦ. 


Ξ a \ , v Re A 7 \ 
» 25:1 $6? γὰρ αὐτὸν ™ βασιλεύειν, ἄχρι ov " θῇ πάντας τοὺς 


26 ἔσχατος ἐχθρὸς 
27 [lavta γὰρ ° ὑπέταξεν ὑπὸ 


[κέ \ ” ed 3 k £ , 
ὅταν δὲ Peinn ὅτι Tavta * ὑποτέ- 


o Rom. viii. 20 reff. Psa. viii. 6. p ellips., 


[for πατρι, πνι F-gr(not G).] 


25. rec axpis, with B27 DF K LN rel: txt AB'PX! 17 (Chr-c,) {[Euthal-ms] Damase. 
rec aft axpt ov ins αν ( perhaps from Matt xxii. 42 ||, or, as Meyer, from Lxx, 
Ps cix. 1), with D?-3KLN3 rel Orig,{-c, ?] Marcell, Cas, | Did; Mare,} Chr, Thdrt: om 


ABD!FPR! a? 17 Hip, Orig, Eus, Epiphsape { Huthal-ms] Damase. 


aft εχθρους 


ins αὐτου AF 17 Syr coptt goth eth Orig,/-int,) Marcell, Eus, Cas, Cyr-jer, [ Did, 


Marc, | Tert, Hil, : 


om BDKLPN® rel vulg(with am demid [fuld tol], agst har) F-lat 


[fri]) syr arm Hip, Orig,(-int,) Marcell, Eus, Ath, Chr, [Nys, Euthal-ms] Thdrt 


Damase Iren[{-int, } Hil, [Ambrst]. 


om αὐτου F(not F-lat). 


26. This ver in D!{and lat] N-corr! tol harl'! goth eth [Hil,] Ambrst Jer stands 
after πόδας αὐτοῦ ver 27: om ver 26 and 1st clause of ver 27 (Aome@otel) NR (ins (but 


see above) N-corr!:3) 17. 92(sic). 


27. om Ist ort B vulg D-lat Hip, [Did, Chr,] Iren[-int, Hil, Ambrst]. (not F-lat 


Aug,-) 


His feet, but only ΤΙΙ1, He shall have, &c., 
—and then will be absorbed in the all- 
pervading majesty of Him for whose glory 
it was from first to last carried onward. 
It may be observed that the whole of this 
respects the mediatorial work and king- 
dom: the work of redemption, -- and that 
Lordship over dead and living, for which 
“Christ both died and rose. Consequently 
nothing is here said which can affect 
either (1) His coequality and coeternity 
with the Father in the Godhead, which is 
prior to and independent of this mediatorial 
work, and is not limited to the mediatorial 
kingdom; or (2) the eternity of His 
Humanity: for that Humanity ever was 
and is subordinate to the Father; and it 
by no means follows that when the media- 
torial kingdom shall be given up to the 
Father, the Humanity, in which that 
kingdom was won, shall be put off: nay, 
the very fact of Christ in the body being 
the tirst-fruits of the resurrection, proves 
that His body, as ours, will endure for 
ever: as the truth that our humanity, 
even in glory, can only subsist before 
God by virtue of His Humanity, makes it 
plain that He will be vERY MAN to all 
eternity. τὴν βασιλείαν That king- 
dom, which in its fullest sense is then 
first His. At this very time of τὸ τέλος, 
Matt. xxv. 34, He first calls Himself by the 
title of 6 βασιλεύς. The name will no 
sooner be won, than laid at the feet of the 
Father, thus completing by the last great 
act of Redemption the obedience which He 
πων οἰ τῷ in his Incarnation. and in his 
eath. ὅταν καταργή (aor. 
When He shall have eouhone Some 


ins ta bef 2nd παντα δὲ [ Did, }. 


&e.: see above. πᾶσ. apy. K.T.A.] 
not only, as Meyer, &c., hostile power and 
government, but as the context necessi- 
tates, ALL power. Christ being manifested 
as universal King, every power co-ordinate 
with His must come under the category of 
hostile: all kings shall submit to Him: 
the kingdoms of the world shall become the 
kingdoms of the Lord and of His Christ : 
—and see the similar expressions Eph. i. 
21, where speaking proleptically, the 
Apostle clearly indicates that legitimate 
authorities, all the powers that be, are in- 
cluded. Compare by all means Rev. xi. 15. 
25.] See on the last verse :—this is 
the divine appointment with regard to the 
mediatorial kingdom,—that it should last 
till, and only till, all enemies shall have 
been subdued to it. θῇ, viz. Christ, 
not the Father, as Beza, Grot., Est., Billr., 
al.: it is parallel with καταργήσῃ, and 
included in the mediatorial acts of Christ, 
who in His world’s course goes forth νικῶν 
kal ἵνα νικήσῃ, Rev. vi. 2. It is otherwise 
with ὑπέταξεν, ver. 27: see there. 
26. | Connect ἔσχατ. ἐχθρός together ; not 
as Bloowf., “last of all, the enemy Death is 
to be destroyed,” which is ungrammatical. 
If ἔσχ. is to stand alone, ἐχθρὸς καταργεῖται 
must be “is destroyed as an enemy.” 
Death is the last enemy, as being the con- 
sequence of sin: when he is overcome and 
done away with, the whole end of Redemp- 
tion is shewn to have been accomplished. 
Death is personified, as in Rev. χχ. 14. 
katTapyettat,—pres., either as a prophetic 
certainty as παραδιδοῖ above,—or as an 
axiomatic truth. 27.) Scriptural 
proof of the above declaration, 


ABFEK 
LPR ak 
cdetg 
hklm 
υ 17.47 





V2 


25—29. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 6114 


re 


A “ \ e - Ν cre 
τακται, © δῆλον “ ὅτι " ἐκτὸς τοῦ ο ὑποτάξαντος αὐτῷ Ta aGal.iii-1 
͵΄ “ \ e A A \ ΄ r \ 33: 
πάντα 38 ὅταν δὲ ὑποταγῇ αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα, τότε [καὶ] * Hee? 
ἀν ς e\ os 7, ἔχ ἘΣ ͵΄ Sable \ 7Zonly. _ 
αὐτὸς ὁ υἱὸς ο ὑποταγήσεται τῷ “ὑποτάξαντι αὐτῷ TA Num. xxvii. 


99 ἐπεὶ u TL s == Acts xxvi. 


22. Isa. xxvi. 


, ““ { 3 ε 60 \ t 7 3 a 
TaVTa, Wa η) ο εος TTAVTA ἐν πασιν. 
u / ς , ς \ n a ν ew 13. 

ποιήσουσιν οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν ; εἰ "ὅλως + = Gols τι. 
ch, xu. 
6.) Herod. iii, 157, πάντα ἣν ἐν τοῖσι Βαβυλωνίοισι Ζώπυρος. Polyb. v. 26.5, τὸ ὅλον αὐτοῖς ἣν 


καὶ τὸ πᾶν ᾿Απελλῆς. u = Mark xi, 5. John xi. 47. Acts xxi. 18. v Matt. νυ. 
34. ch. v. 1. vi. 7 only +. 


aft vroreraxta ins avtw et F [vulg Syr copt arm] Hip, Orig[-int,] Hil, Ambr[st]; 
bef υπ., [Cyr-jer, ] Epiph,. om τα Εἰ ποῦ G]. 

28. om 1st clause (homeotel) X!(ins X-corr!) m [Hip, Hil,(-ms,) ]. avtw bef 
vrotayn D Eus, Orig-int,[ txt, | Iren[-int, |. om «ka: B D![and lat] F[-gr(and G-lat) ] 
17 am(with fuld harl mar tol) Syr Orig, Marcell, [Did,] Iren-int, Ps-Ath-int, Hil; Jer: 
ins AD?KLPR [vulg-clem F-lat fri demid] rel syr coptt [eth arm] Ps-Ign, Hip, Eus, 
Ath, Ps-Ath, Ces, Cyr-jer, Chr, [Bas, Nys, Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase Orig-int; 
Yert, Hil, [Ambrst ]. θεος bef 7 D'{and lat]. rec ins ta bef 3rd παντα, with 
D5FKLPR rel Orig, Marcell, Eus, Ath, [Did,] Tit, Epiph, Cas Cyr-jer, Chr, [Nys, ] 


Thdrt Damase: om ABD! 17 arm] Hip (Orig,) Marcell, Eus, [Euthal-ms]. 


29. ποιησωσιν τὴ 47, ποιουσιν Εἰ. 


ὑπέταξ. viz., from the Psalm,—Gop, the 
Kather. See on the Psalm itself, Heb. 
ii. 6 ff. notes. εἴπῃ, scil. ὁ θεός, the 
same subject as ὑπέταξεν. Meyer alone, 
as it seems to me, gives the right construc- 
tion of ὅταν... ὑποτέτακται. “The aor. 
εἴπῃ must be rendered regularly, not in 
the present sense, but as a futurum 
exactum: see Luke vi. 26: Plato, Parm. 
p. 143, ὁ (ti δ᾽ ὅταν εἴπω οὐσία τε καὶ 
ἕν, ἄρα οὐκ ἀμφοτέρω ;),—Ion, p. 535, B 
(ὅταν εὖ εἴπῃς ἔπη καὶ ἐκπλήξῃς μάλιστα 
τοὺς θεωμένου5). The time referred to, is 
that when the as yet unfulfilled πάντα 
ὑπέταξεν shall be fulfilled and completed : 
hence it is no longer the aor., but the 
perf. ὑποτέτακται. The meaning then is: 
‘when God, who in Ps. viii. 6 has an- 
nounced the ὑπόταξις, shall hereafter have 
declared that this ὑπόταξις is come to pass,’ 
. . . This form of expression was suggested 
to the Apostle by his having already ex- 
pressed himself in the words of a saying of 
God.” Irender then, But when God shail 
have declared that all things have been 
subjected to Him, it is evident that 
they have been subjected (ellipsis of the 
predicate of the foregoing sentence after 
δῆλον ὅτι and οἶδ᾽ ὅτι is common; so Plato, 
Gorg. p. 475, C, ‘ οὐκοῦν κακῷ ὑπερβάλ- 
λον τὸ ἀδικεῖν κάκιον ἂν εἴη τοῦ ἀδικεῖ- 
σθαι," ---- δῆλον δὴ ὅτι;,᾽---5011. κάκιον ἂν 


εἴη. Kiihner, ὃ 852, d) with the excep-_ 


tion of Him who subjected all things to 
Him. 28.] On the sense, see above. 
“The interpretations, that subjection is 
only an hyperbolical expression for the 
entire harmony of Christ with the Father 
(Chrys., Theophyl., Gc.) .—the limitation 


of it to His human nature (Theodoret, _ 


' Aug., Jerome, Est., Wolf, al.), with the 
declarative explanation, that it will then 


Rk 


aft oAws ins οἱ P. 


become plain to all, that Christ even in 
regard of His kingship, is, on the side of 
His Humanity, dependent on the Father 
(Flatt)—and the addition, that Christ will 
then in His divine nature reign with the 
Futher (Calv.:—‘ regnum—ab humanitate 
sua ad gloriosam divinitatem quodammodo 
traducet’) ;—the interpretation (of αὐτὸς 
6 vids!) as referring to Christ’s mystical 
Body, i.e. the Church (Theodoret),—are 
idle subterfuges (leere Ausfliidte).” De 
Wette. The refutation of these and all 
other attempts to explain away the doctrine 
here plainly asserted, of the ultimate sub- 
ordination of the Son, is contained in the 
three precise and unambiguous words, av- 
τὸς ὁ vids. ἵνα ἡ ὁ θ. πάντα ἐν 
πᾶσιν] that God (alone) may be all things 
in all,—i. 6. recognized as sole Lord and 
King: ‘omnia erunt subordinata Filio, 
Filius Patri” Bengel. Numerous exam- 
ples of πάντα in this sense (less commonly 
τὰ πάντα, Kiihner, ὃ 422) may be found 
in Wetst. 29—34.] ARGUMENTS 
FOR THE REALITY OF THE RESURKEC- 
TION, from the practice (1) of those who 
were baptized for the dead, (2) of the 
Apostles, &c., who submitted to daily peril 
of death. 29.] ἐπεί resumes the main 
argument, which has been interrupted by 
the explanation since ver. 23 of ἕκαστος 
ἐν τῷ ἰδίῳ τάγματι. After it is an ellipsis 
of ‘if it be as the adversaries suppose.’ 

τί ποιήσουσιν) There is in these 
words a tacit reprehension of the practice 
about to be mencioned, which it is hardly 
possible altogether to miss. Both by the 
third person, and by the art. before Ban, 
he indirectly separates himself and those 
to whom he is writing from participation in 
or approval of the practice :—the meaning 
being, what will become of—‘ what ac- 


2 
ai 


612 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. Kv. 
΄ / ς \ 
ΑὙΤῊΝ νεκροὶ οὐκ δ ἐγείρονται, "τί "καὶ βαπτίξζονται ὑπὲρ ARDFK 
here bis a ΄ A er see Rab 
᾿ Rom. vii, αὐτῶν; 29% 7d * καὶ ἡμεῖς Y κινδυνεύομεν * πᾶσαν * ὥραν j;cuetg 
24.) 
y Acts xix. 27 reff. (-vos, 2 Cor. xi. 26.) z here only. Exod. xviii. 22,26. Levit. xvi. 2. " τῷ br 


rec (for avtwv) των νεκρων (mechanical repetition of the above), with D*[-gr] L rel Syr 
Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] (Ec: avtwy των vexpwy m 48. 62: txt ABD! FKPN ἃ d 17, 47 latt syr 
eoptt goth arm Orig, Dial,[but mss vary] Epiph, [Euthal-ms 1514, Damase Jac-nisib, 


Ambrst]. 


count can they give of their practice ?’ 
ot βαπτιζόμενοι) those who are 
in the habit of being baptized—not οἱ 
βαπτισθέντες. The distinction is impor- 
tant as affecting the interpretation. See 
below. ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν) on behalf 
of the dead; viz. the same νεκροΐ who are 
spoken of in the next clause and through- 
out the chapter as the subjects of ava- 
oracis—not νεκροί in any figurative sense. 
τῶν vexp., the art. marking ‘the particular 
dead persons on behalf of whom the act 
took place. Before we pass to the exegesis, 
it will be well to go through the next 
question—ei ὅλως x.7.A. If dead men are 
not raised at all, why do they trouble 
themselves (ri καί as in reff.) to be bap- 
tized for them ? Thus much being said 
as to the plain meaning of the words 
used, there can be no doubt as to their 
interpretation. The only legitimate re- 
Serence is, to a practice, not otherwise 
known to us, not mentioned here with 
any approval by the Apostle, not gene- 
rally prevalent (οὗ βαπτ.), but“in use by 
some, of survivors al/owing themselves to 
-be baptized on behalf of (believing ?) 
Sriends who had died without baptism. 
With the subsequent similar practices of 
the Cerinthians (Epiph. Her. xxviii. § 6, 
p- 114) and Spo a (Chrys., Tertull. 
de resurr. 48, vol. ii. p. 864, adv. Mare. 
v. 10, p. 494 f.) this may or may not have 
been connected. All we clearly see from 
the text, is that it unquestionably did 
exist. With regard to the other inter- 
pretations, Bengel well says, “Tanta est 
interpretationum varietas, ut is, qui non 
dicam varietates ipsas, sed varietatum 
catalogos colligere velit, dissertationem 
scripturus sit.” I will give a few of them, 
mostly in the words of their authors : 
Chrys. (Hom. xl. Ρ. 379) :--οὑπὲρ τῶν 
νεκρῶν, τουτέστι τῶν σωμάτων. καὶ γὰρ 
ἐπὶ τούτῳ βαπτίᾳῃ, τῇ τοῦ νεκροῦ σώματος 
ἀναστάσει, πιστεύων ὅτι (Migne reads THY 
TV. O. ἀνάστασιν. πιστ., ὅτι) οὐκέτι μένει 
νεκρόν. καὶ σὺ μὲν διὰ τῶν ῥημάτων λέγεις 
νεκρῶν ἀνάστασιν" ὃ δὲ ἱερεύς, ὥςπερ ἐν 
εἰκόνι Tul... . δείκνυσί σοι... «. διὰ τοῦ 
ὕδατος" τὸ γὰρ βαπτίζεσθαι K. καταδύεσθαι, 
εἶτα ἀνανεύειν, τῆς εἰς Gdov καταβάσεως 
ἐστὶ σύμβολον κ. τῆς ἐκεῖθεν ἀνόδου. διὸ 
κ. τάφον τὸ βάπτισμα ὁ Π. καλεῖ (Rom. vi. 
4),—Theophyl.: φησὶν οὖν, ὅτι of πιστεύ- 


σαντες ὕτι ἔσται ἀνάστασις νεκρῶν σωμά- 
των, καὶ βαπτισθέντες ἐπὶ τοιαύταις ἐλπίσι, 
τί ποιήσουσιν ἀπατηθέντες ; τί δὲ ὅλως 
καὶ βαπτίζονται ἄνθρωποι ὑπὲρ ἀναστάσεως, 
τουτέστιν ἐπὶ mpusduxia ἀναστάσεως, εἰ ν 
οὐκ ἐγ.; and so in the main, Pelag., 
(Ecum., Phot., Corn.-a-Lap., -Wetst. — 
Theodoret:—6 βαπτιζόμενός, φησι, τῷ 
δεσπότῃ συνθάπτεται, ἵνα τοῦ θανάτου 
κοινωνήσας καὶ THS ἀναστάσεως γενήῆται 
κοινωνός" εἰ δὲ νεκρόν ἐστι τὸ σῶμα, καὶ 
οὐκ ἀνίσταται, τί δήποτε καὶ βαπτίζεται ; 
and so Castal., al. ΑἹ] these senses would 
require τί ποιήσετε βαπτισθέντες, to say 
nothing of the impossibility of thus under- 
standing ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν. Estius explains 
ὑπὲρ τῶν vexp. as = ‘jamjam morituri,’ 
and Calvin justifies this, ‘baptizari pro 
mortuis erit sic baptizari ut mortuis non 
υἱοῖς prosit.’ So too Epiph. (1. c.),—of 
catechumens who πρὸ THs τελευτῆς λουτροῦ 
καταξιοῦνται :---ἂαἀπὰ Bengel :—“ baptizan- 
tur super mortuis ii, qui mox post bap- 
tismum ad mortuos aggregabuntur.” But 
against this ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν is decisive,— 
as is ὑπέρ against ‘ over the dead,’ i.e. over 
their sepulchres (Luth., al.) : this local 
sense of ὑπέρ not being found in the N. ἽΝ, 
Le Clerc, Hammond, Olsh., al., explain ὑπ. 
τ. vexp., ‘to fill the place of the dead.’ 
But, as Meyer observes, such an idea can 
hardly be gathered from the words, but 
would want explaining in the context ;— 
and besides, the question would thus be 
irrelevant, because, the place of the dead 
being supplied by their successors, it would 
be no matter to them, whether the dead 
themselves rose or not: whereas now, the 
benefits of baptism being supposed to be 
conveyed to the dead by the baptism of his 
substitute, the proceeding would be stulti- 
Jied, if the dead could never rise to claim 
those benefits. This, the only justifiable 
rendering, is adopted by Ambrose, and by 
Anselm, Erasmus, Grotius, al., and recently 
by Billroth, Riickert, Meyer, De Wette, 
al. The ordinary objection to it is, that 
thus the Apostle would be, giving his 
sanction to a superstitious usage, or at all 
events mentioning it without rep'robation. 
But this is easily answered, by remember- 
ing that ifthe above view of τί ποιήσουσιν 
is correct, he does no¢ mehtion it without 
aslur on it;—and more completely still, as 
Rickert (in Meyer), “ usurpaci ab eo mo- 





90---ἶὐῷ, 


21 a ? ¢ , ’ / b Ἂν \ c e , 
καθ ἡμέραν ἀποθνήσκω, νὴ τὴν “ ὑμετέραν 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


613 
de καύχη- a Acts ii. 46 


here only. 


σιν, en SU ἣν 9 ἔχω ἐν χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ ad ἡμῶν. Ee oly: ς 


32 εἰ Γ᾿ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον ὅ ἐθηριομάχησα ἐν Ἔκ όσον, 
h » 3 \ > w2 / 
ὄφελος ; εἰ νεκροὶ οὐκ ™ ἐγείρονται, 


d Rom. iii. 27 reff. 
g here only +. 


33. see Rom. xv. 4. 
note, and ch. iii. 3 reff. 
i Isa. xxii, 13. 


16 only. 
τί foe TO c= ae xi. 
i 7 φόβῳ 
φώγωμεν καὶ πίωμεν" τῷ Guess 
Thucyd. 1 
e Rom. xv. 17. fies 


h James ii. 14, 16 only. Job xy. 3 only. 


31. Steph nuetepay, with Aa (h!?) k m 23. 4. 441. 51-6. 721. 89, 120-2 lect-14 xth 


Orig[-c, Euthal-ms(nuepav) Thdrt, | : 


(but mss vary) Chr, Thdrt,; Damase Ambr, Ambrst Augsepe ]- 
2} Chr, Thdrt Damase Ambrst : 


syrr coptt [goth] eth Dial [Cyr- Pp Euthal-ms] Aug;sepe} Pel Bede. 


DFL rel arm-zoh Orig[ -c 


twand nu. D!(and lat) Ambrst. 
32. om to D!F Clem). 


rem, qui ceteroqui displiceret, ad errorem, 
in quo impugnando versabatur, radicitus 
evellendum ; ipsius autem reprelendendi 
aliud tempus expectari.” See a inultitude 
of other interpretations in Pool’s Synopsis 
and in Stanley’s note. His concluding re- 
marks are worth quoting : “ On the whole, 
therefore, this explanation of the passage 
(that given above) may be safely accepted, 
(1) as exhibiting a curious relic of primi- 
tive superstition, which, after having, as 
the words imply (?), prevailed generally in 
the apostolical church, gradually dwindled 
away till it was only to be found in some 
obscure sects, where it lost its original 
significance : (2) as containing an example 
of the Apostle’s mode of dealing with a 
practice, with which he could have no real 
sympathy; not condemning or ridiculing 
it, but appealing to it as an expr ession, 
however distorted, of their better feelings.” 
30. ] Not only the practice of those 
just spoken of, but his own, and that of 
those like him, who lived a life of perpetual 
exposure to death, were absurd, if there be 
no resurrection. Observe that the argu- 
ment here applies equally to the future 
existence of the soul ; and so Cicero uses it, 
Tusc. Quest. i. 15: « Nescio quomodo in- 
heret in mentibus quasi seculorum quod- 
dam augurium futurorum . .. quo quidem 
demto, quis tam esset amens, qui semper in 
laboribus et periculis viveret ?” 31.] ‘To 
die daily is a strong expression for to be 
daily in sight of death and expecting it. See 
2 Cor.iv. 11. This he strengthens by an 
asseveration, grounded on his boast of them 
as his work in Christ: not that this is im- 
mediately or proximately at stake in the 
matter, but much as we should say, “ As I 
love you, it is true.” He would not think 
of deceiving those of whom he boasted be- 
fore God in connexion with Christ. 
tper.] gen. abj., see reff. vy, the affirma- 
tive, as ua is the negative particle of ad- 
juration: but ναὶ μά is often found in an 
affirmative sense: see Kiihner, § 701. 
82.) The stress of the first clause is on κατὰ 


txt BDFKLP rel [latt syrr coptt goth arm Dial, 


rec om adeAga, w ith 
ins ABKPR m 17 vulg fri 


om xp. ino. 


ἄνθρωπον, and its meaning, merely as 
man, i. 6. ‘according to this world’s views,’ 
“as one who has no hope beyond the grave ;’ 
seeref. If thusonly he fought, &c., where 
was his profit (seeing he despised all those 
things which κατὰ ἄνθρωπον might compen- 
sate for such a fight,—fame, praise, ἄς.) ? 
The renderings, ὅσον τὸ εἰς ἀνθρώπους 
(Chrys. p. 381), i.e. ‘so far as one can be 
said θηριομαχεῖν against men,’—and κατὰ 
ἀνθρώπων λογισμὸν θηρίων ἐγενόμην Bopa 
(Theodoret),—‘ exempli causa’ (Semler, 
Rosenmiiller),—‘ ut hominum more loquar’ 
(Estius and Bloomf.), are all constrained, 
and scarcely to be extorted from the words. 

ἐθηριομάχησα7 I fought with beasts 
(aor. referring to one special occasion). 
How? andwhen? Most ancient and mo- 
dern Commentators take the expression 
figuratively, as used in Appian, B. C. ii. 
p. 763 (Wetst.), where Pompey says, οἵοις 
θηρίοις waxdue9a,—and Ignat. ad Rom. 5, 
p. 689 f., ἀπὸ Συρίας μέχρι Ῥώμης Onpio- 
μαχῶ διὰ γῆς K. θαλάσσης, δεδεμένος δέκα 
λεοπάρδοις, ὅ ἐστι στρατιωτικὸν τάγμα. So, 
of our text, Tertull. de Resurr. 48, vol. ii. 
p- 865: “ Depugnavit ad bestias Kphesi, 
illas scilicet bestias Asiaticee pressure.” 

And this explanation must be right : 
for his Roman citizenship would have 
precluded his ever being literally thrown 
to beasts : and even supposing him to have 
waived it, and been miraculously rescued, 
as Ambrst., Theodoret, Erasm., Luther, 
Calv.,, 4]. suppose, is it conceivable that 
such an event should have been altoge- 
ther unrecorded in the Acts? Adopting 
the figurative rendering,—we cannot fix 
on any recorded conflict which will suit 
the words, His danger from Demetrius 
and his fellow-craftsmen (Acts xix.) had 
not yet happened (see Prolegg. § vi. 2): 
but we cannot tell what opposition, justi- 
fying this expression, the ἀντικείμενοι πολ- 
Aol of ch. xvi. 9 may ere this have made 
to his preaching. εἰ νεκρ. If dead 
men rise not, i.e. ‘if none of the deud 
rise. ‘These words are best joined with 


014 


“ a > , 
b «ἀν Matt. vi. Κ αὔριον yap ἀποθνήσκομεν. 


30. Luke xil. 
28. xiii. 32, 
33. Acts 
xxiii. 20. xxv. 
22. James ιν. 
13. Exod. 
vill. 29. 
1 ch. vi. 9 reff. 
m = ch. iii. 17 
reff. 
ni here only. ᾿ 
Sir. xx. 26 only. o = here (Matt. x1. 30. 
p here only. Exod. xxi. 10. Prov. vii. 21. 
37. met.,as here, Joeli.5. avavyd., 2 Tim. ii. 26. 
12. 1 Pet. ii. 23) only. see Deut. xvi. 20. 
t = ch. vii. 35. xiv. 12 al. u ch. vi. 5 only. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOT®S A. 


Luke v. 39. vi. 35. Rom. ii. 4. Eph. iv. 32. 
Wisd. vill. 18 only. i 


Ps. xxxiv. 26. 


XV. 


33 μὴ ᾿πλανᾶσθε. ™ φθείρου- 


σιν " ἤθη 5 χρηστὰ " ὁμιλίαι κακαί. 58 «ἐκνήψρατε * δικαίως, 
καὶ μὴ ἁμαρτάνετε" " ἀγνωσίαν γὰρ θεοῦ τινὲς ἔχουσιν. 
ἱ πρὸς " ἐντροπὴν ὑμῖν λαλῶ. 

35 VAAN’ " ἐρεῖ τις Πῶς * ἐγείρονται οἱ νεκροί ; ποίῳ 


1 Pet. ii. 3) only. 
Gen. ix. 24. 1 Kings xxv. 
1 Thess. ii. 10, Tit. it. 
Job xxxv. 16. ΨΥ Ί5Ρ. xiii. 1 only. 
v James li. 18. w ver. 4. 


q here only. 
r | here (Luke xxiii. 41. 
s 1 Pet. ii. 15 only. 


33. rec χρησθ᾽ (to suit the metre), with Clem,: txt ABDFKLPR rel Clem-hom, Eus, 
Ath, Chr, [Cyr-p, Euthal-ms} Thdrt Damasc, ‘Thl Ce. 

34. rec Aeyw (negligence, the force of λαλω not being perceived), with AFKL rel 
Chr, Thdrt [Damase], dico flor(and F-lat) G-lat [προς Orig-int, simly Syr basm eth 
arm]: txt BDPX k m 17 Dial, (Euthal-ms], loguor vulg D-lat(and fri) Ambrst [simly 


syr copt goth }. 
35. αλλα BP Orig,. 


the following, as Chrys., Theophyl., Beza, 
Bengel, Griesb., Meyer, De Wette, al.— 
not with the preceding, as Theodoret, 
Grot., Est., Luther, al. [and E. V.] For 
κατὰ ἄνθρωπον already expresses their 
meaning in the preceding sentence; and 
the form of ver. 29 seeins to justify this 
arrangement, besides that otherwise ody. 
K. πίωμεν, &c., would stand awkwardly in- 
sulated. day. «. πίωμεν .. .] In Isa. 
the words represent the recklessness of 
those who utterly disregard the call of God 
to weeping and mourning, and feast while 
their time lasts. Wetst. has collected very 
numerous parallels from the classics. The 
most striking perhaps is Herod. ii. 78. 
33.] The tendency of the denial of the re- 
surrection, represented by the Epicurean 
maxim just quoted, leads him to hint that 
this denial was not altogether unconnected 
with a practice of too much intimacy with 
the profligate society around them. 

μὴ πλαν., as in ref., introduces a warning 
against moral self-deception. φθείρ. 
ἤθη. .| These words (according to the 
reading χρῆσθ᾽, which has, however, hardly 
any support) form an Jambic trimeter, 
and occur in this form in a fragment of 
the Thais of Menander ; but Clem. Alex. 
Strom. i. 14 (59), p. 350 P., says, πρὸς 
γοῦν Κορινθίους. . ἰαμβείῳ συγκέχρηται 
τραγικῴ---Ὀπΐ this may be a mere inac- 
curacy. Socrates, Hist. Eccl. iii. 16, 
quotes it as a sufficient proof that Paul 
was conversant with the tragedies of Euri- 
pides. ‘ Perbaps,” says Dr. Burton, “Me- 
nander took it from Euripides.” The Apos- 
tle may have cited it merely as a common- 
place current, without any idea whence it 
came ;—and χρηστά seems to shew this. 
The plur. ὁμιλίαι, points out the repetition 
of the practice. Meyer quotes Plato, Rep. 
Vill. p. 550, διὰ τὸ μὴ κακοῦ ἀνδρὸς εἶναι 
τὴν φύσιν, ὁμιλίαις δὲ ταῖς τῶν ἄλλων κακαῖς 


κεχρῆσθαι, 34. ἐκνήψ.] Awake out 


of (your moral) intoxication, already pos- 
sessing you by the influence of these men. 

δικαίως | either, as is just,—as you 
ought (Wail, al.),—or, in a proper man- 
ner (Olsh., al.j,—or, ἐπὶ συμφέροντι καὶ 
χρησίμῳ (Chrys. p. 382, al.), or so as to be 
δίκαιοι [i.e. so as to recover your right- 
eousness, Which you are in danger of losing ], 
as E. V., Awake to righteousness. ‘The 
last meaning is well defended by Dr. Peile 
from Thue. i. 21: ἀπίστως ἐπὶ τὸ μυθῶδες 
ἐκνενικηκότα,----“ so as to become incredi- 
ble ;;—and seems to be the best. The 
aor. imper. ἐκνήψατε marks the quick 
momentary awaking; the pres. imper. 
μὴ ἁμαρτάνετε, On the other hand, the 
enduring practice of abstinence from sin 
(Meyer). But that this must not al- 
ways be rigidly pressed, see Kihner, 
§ 445. 2. Anm. 1. ἀγνωσίαν] The 
stress is on this word: for some (the 
tives of ver. 12, most probably, are hinted 
at, and the source of their error pointed 
out) have (are affected with) ignorance 
(an absence of all true knowledge) of 
God. See ref. to Wisd. πρὸς évT. 
tp. A. shews that these τινές were ἐν ὑμῖν, 
—not the heathen without :—the exist- 
ence of such in the Corinthian church 
was a disgrace to the whole. . Aare | 
I am speaking; not merely 1 say this; 
it refers to the spirit of the whole passage. 

35—50.] The argument passes from 
the fact of the resurrection, already sub- 
stantiated, to the MANNER Of it: which is 
indicated, and confirmed, principally by 
analogies from nature. 35.] The new 
difficulty is introduced in the form of a 
question from an objector. This is put first 
generally, πῶς ...., In what manner,— 
and next specifically, ποίῳ δὲ (δέ, ‘ what I 
mean, is... «Ὁ σώματι, With what kind 
of body—épx., do they (pres. as transfer- 
ring the action to that time,—as éyelpov- 
tat before: so Meyer and De W.:—or 


ABDFK 
LPN ab 
cdefg 
hklm 
017.47 





33 —39. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


615 


΄ \ ἃ . 
σώματι ἔρχονται; “ὺ χἄφρων, σὺ ὃ σπείρεις, οὐ Y ζωο- x Luke αἱ, 40. 


xii. 20 al. Ps. 
xcill. 8. 


a 2\ A σι ἋΣ 6 / ἑ 37 \ A ah > \ 
ποιεῖται, ἐὰν μὴ *atroCavy καὶ O σπείρειν, OU TO πον τ] 


σῶμα τὸ γενησόμενον σπείρεις, ἀλλὰ * γυμνὸν 
ὌΠ τύχοι, d σίτου ἤ τινος τῶν λυιπῶν᾽" 38 ὁ δὲ θεὸς δίδωσιν 
αὐτῷ σῶμα καθὼς ἠθέλησεν, καὶ ἑκάστῳ τῶν σπερμάτων 
39 οὐ πᾶσα σὰρξ ἡ αὐτὴ σάρξ: ἀλλὰ ἄλλη 


ὁ ἴδιον σῶμα. 
ili. 17. 


d John xii. 24. Acts xxvii. 38 al. epp., here only. 


΄ reff. 
KOKKOD, z = John xii. 24 
a = here only. 
Ὁ Matt. xiii. 
31 ||. xvil. 
20 ||. John 
xii. 24 only. 

6 ch. xiv. 10 
only (reff.). 
opt., 1 Pet. 

e = ver. 23. Acts i. 26 al. 


b 


36. rec αφρον, with KL rel Orig, [Dial Epiph, Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damase]: txt 


ABDEFPN m 17. 47. 
ad loc) Chr,[-imss(txt,)] Thdrt,[txt, }. 
erasure) X!. 
Orig-int,[(om Orig.) Ambrst Aug, ]. 
37. om 2nd σπειρεις N'(ins N-corr'). 


for ζωοποιειται, ζωογονειται β. 108! Epiph,, and(but n t 


aft (worSins εἰς τὴν (but marked for 


aft ἀποθανὴ ins wpwrov D[-gr]: pref, F latt(not fri) Dial, Iren[-int, ] 


for εἰ, ἡ A. 


38. rec avtw bef διδωσιν, with DFKL rel fri [spec] Orig, Chr, Thdrt Ambrst : txt 
ABPX bdmo17 vulg(and F-lat) syrr (copt) Orig,(-int,) Dial, Epiph, {Euthal-ms] 


Damasce Tert,. 


rec ins To bef «διον, with KLX8 rel Orig, Chr Thdrt Damase Thl 


(Ec: om ABDFPR! 17 [arm] Epiph, [ Euthal-ims ]. 


39. om 2nd capé F(not F-lat) Syr Chr-2-mss,. 
rec aft aAAn μεν ins capé, with Syr arm [copt Dial,}: om ABDFKLPR 


[ Augalic ] . 


om adda D![-gr] frizeth Dial, Chr, 


rel [latt] syr eth [Chr Euthal-ms Thdrt Ambrst Augaic |. 


rather perhaps, as assuming for the mo- 
ment the truth of the resurrection as a 
thing actually happening in the course of 
things) come (forth at that time) ? 
36—41.] Analogies illustrative of the 
‘question just asked : and first, that of seed 
sown in the earth (36—38). 36. | Meyer 
would point this, ἄφρων σύ, ὃ σπείρεις .. .» 
because according to the common punctua- 
tion there is necessarily an emphasis on σύ, 
which the context does not allow. But on 
the other hand, it seems to me, there is an 
objection to the introduction of a new 
matter so lamely as by ὃ σπείρει. Besides 
which, the emphatic ov does not necessarily 
require any other agency to be emphatically 
set against it, but may imply an appeal to 
the objector’s own experience (as Billr. in 
Dr. Peile) :—‘ thou say this, who art con- 
tinually witness of the process, &ec. ?’ And 
let it be remembered that we have another 
σπείρειν below, vv. 42—44, which may be 
set against thy sowing. Iretain therefore 
the stop at ἄφρων (nom. for voc. as freq. 
See Luke xii. 20; Mark ix. 25; Luke vii. 
54, al., and Winer, edn. 6, § 29. 2), and 
the emphasis on ov. The similitude was 
used by our Lord of His own Resurrection, 
ref. John. ov Lworrarettar| Its lite is 
latent in it; but is not developed into quick 
and lively action without the death of the 
deposited seed,—i. 6. its perishing, disap- 
pearing from nature. The same analogy 
was used by the Rabbis, but to prove that 
the dead would rise clothed : “ ut triticum 
nudum sepelitur et multis vestibus orna- 
tum prodit, ita mnlto magis justi,’ &e. 
37.] Before, the death of the seed was in- 
sisted on: now, the non-identity of the seed 
with the future plant. There is a mixture 
of construction, the words ὃ υπείρεις being 


pendent, as the sentence now stands. The 
two constructions as De W. observes are, 
εἴ τι σπείρεις, ov τὸ σ. τὸ γεν. σπείρεις,--- 
and ὃ σπείρεις, οὐ τὸ σ. τὸ γεν. ἐστιν. 
He names the plant τὸ σῶμα τὸ γενησό- 
μενον, having already in his eye the appli- 
cation to the Resurrection. εἰ τύχοι] 
if it should so happen,— peradven ure: 
not, ‘for example.’ See on ch, xiv. 10. 
τῶν λοιπῶν, 5.1]. σπερμάτων. 38.} ἠθέ- 
λησεν, willed, viz. at the creation : the aor. 
setting forth the one act of the divine Will 
giving to the particular seed the particular 
development at first, which the species re- 
tains: whereas θέλει would imply a fresh 
act of the divine Will giving to every in«i- 
vidual seed (not ἑκάστῳ τῶν σπερμάτων, 
but ἑκάστῳ σπέρματι, or rather ἑκάστῳ 
κόκκῳ) his own body. But the whole gift 
to the species being God’s, to continue or 
withhold, the pres. δίδωσιν still holds good. 
ἑκάστ. τῶν σπερμ.} to each of 
the (kinds of) seed; see above: τῶν is 
generic. ἴδιον σῶμα] a body of its 
own. Such then being the case with all 
seeds, why should it be thought necessary 
that the same body should rise as was sown, 
or that God cannot give to each a resur- 
rection-body, as in nature ? 39—41.] 
And the more,—because we have examples 
from analogy of various kinds of bodies ; 
viz. (1) in the flesh of animals (ver. 39) : 
(2) in celestial and terrestrial bodies (ver. 
40): (3) in the various characters of light 
given by the sun, moon, and stars. 
σάρξ] animal organism (De W.). Dean 
Stanley’s former rendering (corrected in 
his 3rd edn.) of οὐ πᾶσα σάρξ, 7 αὐτὴ 
σάρξ, ‘no flesh is the same flesh,’ is con- 
trary to the usage of the passages which 
he alleged to defend it, where the negative 


010 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


XV. 


fLukex st. μὲν ἀνθρώπων, ἄλλη δὲ σὰρξ ' κτηνῶν, ἄλλη δὲ σὰρξ 


Acts xxiii. 24. 


Rev. xviii. 135. 8 πτηνῶν, ἄλλη δὲ h ἰχθύων. 


only. Num. 

xx. 4, 8, ll. 
g here only +. 

Job v.7 Aq 


ta). 3 
i. 4. 11. 

h Matt. vii. 10 
al. epp., here ye ͵ ᾿ 
only. ἄστερων 

i John ili. 12. 

Phil. ii. 10 al. 4.2 
Ps. Ixvii. 15. 


τὰ ‘ 7 m , 1 ess , \ ΄ -“- k ’ / 
fanded-sex- γίων δόξα, létépa δὲ ἡ τῶν * ἐπιγείων. 


40 καὶ σώματα | ἐπουράνια, 


\ , k , Ὁ ? \ ] od U \ [4 ~ i b] 
καὶ σώματα * ἐπιγεια' adda ‘ETEPAa μὲν ἢ τῶν ' ἐπουρα- 


41 ἄλλη 


͵ \ > ΄ , \ , 
m δόξα ἡλίου, Kal ἄλλη ™ δόξα " σελήνης, καὶ ἄλλη ™ δόξα 
οἀστὴρ yap “ ἀστέρος Ρ διαφέρει ἐν ™ δόξῃ. 
οὕτως καὶ ἡ ᾿ ἀνάστασις τῶν 4 νεκρῶν. 


τ σπείρεται ἐν 


2 Macc. ill. 39 an 3 / 5 ᾽ τως U > ’ / 

only. Dan. ἣ" φθορᾷ, ἐγείρεται ἐν ᾿ ἀφθαρσίᾳ 45 1 σπείρεται ἐν " ἀτιμίᾳ, 

iv. 23 (26) 

Theod-A Ald. 

compl. (ovp., BF.) k here bis. John iii. 12. 2Cor.v.1. Phil. ii. 10. iii. 19. James iii. 15 only +. 
] = here only. see Luke ix. 29. m = Acts xxii. 11 reff. ἢ Epp., here only. Acts ii. 20 reff. 
o Paul, here 3ce only. Matt. ii. 2, &c. xxiv. 29|; Mk. Jude 13. Rev. i. 16 4113, Gen. i. 16. p -= and 

constr., Gal. iv. lonly. (Rom. ii. 18 al.) Dan. vii. 3(Theod.). q ver. 12 reff. r see ver. 36. 

s = Rom. viii. 21. ver. 50. Gal. vi. 8. Col. ii. 22. 2 Pet. i. 4. ii. (12 bis) 19 only. Jonah 11. 7. τ Rom. ii. 7 


reff. u Rom. i. 26 reff. 


av@pwrov [)}} (and lat) spec] Syr Dial, Tert, [ Ambrst]. 
(exe fri) Syr Chr, Tert [Ambrst]: om 3rd clause Καὶ k m 47 harl!. 


Jat] F[-gr] Syr 'Tert [Ambrst]. 


om 8rd capt D!F 17 latt 
κτηνους D!{and 


om 2nd δε D'[(and lat) vulg fri spee Ambrst ]. 


rec om 4th capt, with AKLP rel [vulg-clem fuld? harl! spec] fri syrr Chr Thdrt 
Augfalic) Pel: ins BDF (17) 47 am(with demid fuld har]? tol) copt [ath arm Euthal- 


ms] (Damasce) Thl Orig-int, Tert, Ambrst. 


[πετεινων D'F a. rec ἐχθυων 


, αλλη Se πτηνων, with FKL rel syr Thdrt @e Orig-int,: txt ABDPX 17. 47 vulg fri 
[spec } Syr copt 2th arm Chr Th! Orig-int, Tert, [Ambrst.—Damasc Orig-int, transpose 


κτηνων and πτηνων |. 


40. om 2nd σωματα F(not F-lat) [eth] (Tert,). 


(adda, so ABD'P.) 


41. aft 150 and 2nd αλλη ins δὲ ΕἾ ποῦ F-lat]: aft 2nd, lect-8(sic).—om Ist καὶ F 


lect-8 vulg(and F-lat) fri copt Orig-int, [Archel, Ambrst] Jer. 


Κ. om yap K Orig-int,[-ins, }. 


is always attached to the verb ; ov δικαιω- 
θήσεται πᾶσα σάρξ, Rom. iii. 20; Gal. ii. 
16. See Matt. xxiv. 22 ||; Acts x. 14; 
ch. 1. 29; 1 John iii. 15; Rev. vii. 16; 
ix. 4. On the other hand, where the 
negative is attached to πᾶς, as here, the 
sentence is a particular negative, not an 
universal : e.g. Rom. x. 16, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ πάντες 
ὑπήκουσαν : ix. 6,7; Heb. iii. 16; Matt. 
vil. 21, οὐ πᾶς ὁ λέγων μοι κύριε κύριε εἰς- 
ελεύσεται εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν, 
—where the rendering in question would 
involve portentous consequences indeed. 
I observe that Conyb. also, although dis- 
approving on the ground of the sense, 
adds, “ the words of the Greek text no 
doubt admit of such a rendering.” 
κτηνῶν) properly (kréavos, κτάομαι) ani- 
mals possessed by man: but used in a 
wider sense for quadrupeds in general. 
40. σώματα ἐπουράνια] not, ac- 
cording to our modern expression, heavenly 
bodies,—for they are introduced first ver. 
41, and if we apply these words to them, 
we must suppose the Apostle to have 
imagined the stars to be endowed with 
bodies in the literal sense: for he is here 
comparing not figurative expressions, but 
physical realities :—nor (as Chrys., al.) the 
bodies of the righteous, as opposed to those 
of the wicked; for in these there is no 
organic difference whatever: but, as Meyer 
and De Wette, ‘the bodies of angels,’ — 
the only heavenly organisms of which we 


aotepos (for -ρων) 


are aware (except indeed the Resurrection- 
Body of our Lord, and that of those few 
who have been taken into glory, which, as 
belonging to the matter im question, are 
not alleged) which will bear comparison 
with bodies on earth. δόξα belongs 
to the ἐπουράνια more strictly than to the 
ἐπίγεια. In Luke ix. 26, we have ἐν τῇ 
δόξῃ αὐτοῦ Kal Tod πατρὸς καὶ τών ἁγίων 
ἀγγέλων. 41.) This third analogy 
is suggested perhaps by δόξα just before. 
There is no allusion whatever here (as some 
have imagined,—even Chrys., C£cum., 
Theodoret, Calov., Estius, al.) to different 
degrees of glorification of the bodies of 
the blessed ; the introduction of such an 
idea confuses the whole analogical reason- 
ing: which is, that even various fountains 
ot light, so similar in its aspect and pro- 
perties, differ; the sun from the moon 
and the stars: the stars (and much more 
vividly would this be felt under the pure 
sky of the East than here) from one 
another : why not then a body here froma 
resurrection-body,—both bodies, but dif- 
ferent ? 42—44 ἃ.) Application of 
these analogies to the doctrine of the 
Resurrection. 42.) οὕτως, thus, © 
viz. in the entire diversity of that which 
is raised again from the former body. 

σπείρεται) “Cum posset dicere 
sepelitur, maluit dicere seritur, ut magis 
insisteret similitudini supra sumte de gra- 


no.” Grot. ἐν φθορᾷ, ἐν ἀφθαρσίᾳ] in 





ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 617 


’ , Vv > Vv ὃ ᾿ A r / 5, Ww ’ θ = / 5 / wae ; 
EYVELPETAL εν ὀξῃ OTTELPETAL εν adc ενξίᾷᾳ, EVELPETAL v= Luke ix. 31, 


2 Gor. iii. 7, 


, / a , > ͵ a 5 

* ἐν * δυνάμει" 411 σπείρεται σῶμα ¥ ψυχικόν, ἐγείρεται σῶμα ὅπ Pil. 

Ζ ΄ >” A y ͵ ” \z 1 Tim. iii. 16 
πνευματικόν. εἰ ἔστιν σῶμα Y ψυχικόν, ἔστιν καὶ * TVEU= only. ΤΡ. 


w= ch. 11.3 


ματικόν. 48 δοὕτως καὶ γέγραπται »’Eyévero ὁ πρῶτος ref. (see 
. note.) 
7 5. \ ᾽ \ a € f ? \ Rom. i. 4 reff. 
ἄνθρωπος ᾿Αδὰμ Yes ψυχὴν ζῶσαν, ὁ ἔσχατος ᾿Αδὰμ 5 itere dee. ch. 
ii. 14. James 
iii. 15. Jude 19 only +. z = here 4 times only. (ch. x. 3, 4 reff.) πὰ = Matt. ii, 


5. Luke xxiv. 46. Acts xiii, 47 al. Ὁ Gen. ii. 7. constr., Acts v. 36 reff. 


44. rec on εἰ, with D?3[-gr] KL rel syrr (Chr, 1 Thdrt Phot-cat, Jac-nisib,: ins ABCD! 
FN 17 latt copt eth arm Damase [Ambrst] Aug;altic) Bede. (ι is written above the line by 
&1(?)%.) [homeeotel in P k spec Chr-2-mss Euthal-ms 150 to 2nd πνευματικον. |—ree και 
bef 2nd ἐστιν, with KL rel &: txt ABCDFR 17 &e. [eth doubtful. ]—rec ins σωμα bef 
[2ud] πνευματικον, with KL rel syrr (copt) ath [Chr] Thdrt Phot-cat Jac-nisib,: om 
ABCDE® 17 latt arm [Damase Ainbrst Aug,iic |. (Conformation to the foregoing asser- 


tions: or perhaps εἰ overlooked from ἐστιν following. The 2nd σωμα was ὦ gloss.) 
45. for ovrws και, καθως F fuld [demid(sicut et) tol(sicut entm)] arm[-usc Auguiic |. 
om av@pwros BK Did, Iren[-int,] (Orig-int,) [Ambr,(txtaic) Aug, |. 


a state of corruption,—in a state of in- 
corruptibility. 43. ἐν ἀτιμίᾳ, ἐν δόξῃ] 
in dishonour (τί γὰρ εἰδεχθέστερον νεκροῦ 
διαῤῥυέντος ; Chrys. Hom. xli. p. 890. Cf. 
Xen. Mem. i. 3. 59,---τῆς ψυχῆς ἐξελθούσης, 
οὐ τὸ σῶμα τοῦ οἰκειοτάτου ἀνθρώπου τὴν 
ταχίστην ἐξενέγκαντες adaviCovo.v),—in 
glory: regarding, as throughout this argu- 
meut (see on ver. 23), only the resurrec- 
tion of the just : see Phil. iii. 21. ἐν 
ἀσθενείᾳ] in weakness,—the character- 
a . . . . . 
istic of the lifeless body, which is relaxed 
and powerless. Chrys. understands ἀσθ. of 
its inability to resist corruption: De Wette 
would refer it tothe previous state of pain 
and disease: but it seems better to under- 
stand it of the powerlessness of the corpse, 
contrasted with ἐν δυν., in vigour, viz. 
the fresh and eternal energy of the new 
body free from disease and pain. “ That 
which Grot. adds : ‘cum sensibus multis, 
quos nunc non intelligimus,’ is very likely 
in itself ¢rwe, but is not implied in ἐν 
δυνάμει." Meyer. 44 ἃ. σῶμ. ux. | 
an animal body, of which the ψυχή, the 
animal soul, was the acting and informing 
power. This soul having departed out of 
it, does not do away with the correctness 
of the predicate: its whole organism which 
still remains when it is sown, is arranged to 
suit this predominance of the animal soul. 
σῶμα πνευματικόν) Theophyl., 
having explained σῶμα wuy.,—ev ᾧ ἡ 
ψυχὴ τὸ κῦρος καὶ τὴν ἡγεμονίαν ἔχει,--- 
proceeds πνευματικὸν δέ, τὸ τὴν τοῦ ἁγίου 
πνεύματος καταπλουτοῦν ἐνέργειαν, καὶ 
ὑπ’ ἐκείνου τὰ πάντα διοικούμενον. εἰ 
γὰρ καὶ νῦν ἐν ἡμῖν ἐνεργεῖ τὸ πνεῦμα, 
ἄλλ᾽ οὐχ οὕτως, οὐδὲ ἀεί. ἀφίπταται γὰρ 
ἁμαρτανόντων. καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος δὲ παρ- 
ὄντος, ἣ ψυχὴ διοικεῖ τὸ σῶμα᾽ τότε δὲ 
διηνεκῶς παραμενεῖ τοῖς σώμασι τῶν δι- 
καίων τὸ πνεῦμα. But this is not quite 
enough : —for thus the body might remain 
as it is, sin only being removed: whereas 





it shall be no longer a body in which the 
ψυχή predominates to the subordination of 
the higher part, the πνεῦμα, but one in 
which the πνεῦμα, and that informed fully 
by the Spirit of God, shall predominate,— 
its organism being conformed not to an 
aniinal, but toa spiritual life: see on ch. vi. 
13. Some understood πνευματικόν, ethe- 
rial, aery, κουφότερον καὶ λεπτότερον, καὶ 
οἷον καὶ ἐπ᾽ ἀέρος ὀχεῖσθαι (Chrys. p.391), 
or as Origen, ἀερῶδες κ. αἰθέριον (see Theo- 
phyl.), but the other is certainly right. 
44 b—49.] Reassertion and Con- 
Jjirmation of the existence of the spiritual 
body. 44 b. | lf there exists an animal 
body, there exists also a spiritual: i.e. 
it is no more wonderful a thing, that there 
should be a body fitted to the capacities 
and wants of man’s highest part, his spirit, 
than (which we seeto be the case) that there 
should be one fitted to the capacities and 
wants of his subordinate animal soul. The 
emphasis is both times on ἔστιν. 
45.| Confirmation of this from Scripture. 
οὕτως, thus, viz. in accordance with 
what has been just said. The citation 
extends only to the words ἐγένετο ὁ ἄνθρ. 
eis ψυχ. ζῶσαν: πρῶτος and ᾿Αδάμ are 
supplied, as are also the concluding words, 
in which lies the real confirmation. The 
words quoted serve therefore rather for the 
illustration of man being a ψυχή, than for 
a proof of the existence of the spiritual 
body. ἐγένετο] by his creation,—by 
means of God breathing into him the 
breath of life. eis Ψ. Lac. | becoming 
thereby a σῶμα ψυχικόν. ὁ ἔσχ. 
᾿Αδάμ.) This expression was well known 
among the Jews as indicating the Messiah. 
The Rabbinical work Neve Shalom ix. 9 
(Schéttgen),says: “Adamus postreimus est 
Messias:” see other instances in Schéttg. 
ad loc. ἔσχατος, as being the last 
HEAD of humanity,—to be manifested in 
the last times: or merely in contrast to the 


618 ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@OIOTS A. ἜΘ 
,’ ~ lal al » ’ > A % 

c ver. 36. Deis πνεῦμα “ ζωοποιοῦν. 4ὃ ἀλλ᾽ οὐ πρῶτον TO * πνευ- 
Rom, iv. 17 δι , , Ἢ Ἵ 
«πῆι times) ματικόν, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἡ ψυχικόν, ἔπειτα τὸ * πνευματικόν. 

1ere ( 5 aoe ΕἸ ” > ἴὰ ΕΝ. © ΄ 
ewer, Ἢ 0 πρῶτος ἄνθρωπος ἐκ γῆς ἃ χοῖκός, ὁ δεύτερος 
f Kom. xiii. 4 ” 3 > ms 48 e ε ὰ νᾶ a ᾿ 

το ἄνθρωπος ἐξ οὐρανοῦ. οἷος ὁ “yoikos, τοιοῦτοι καὶ 


g Rom. viii, 29 


es , > 3 > , - \ 
pee 286. οἱ 4 χοϊκοί, καὶ οἷος ὁ “επουρανιος, TOLOUTOL και 


see ch. 1. 12. e " ΄ Ἂ 40 \ Ἢ f > , 7 . g > ’ a 
i= Matt.xvi. © E7TOUPAVLOL καὶ καθὼς εφορέσαμεν τὴν ϑείκονα τοῦ 


i. Eph vie - Lal ‘ , wn 5 / 
12. Hebi, ἃ γρϊκοῦ, ᾿φορέσομεν καὶ τὴν ὅ εἰκόνα τοῦ “ ἐπουρανίου. 
v. 18. a ΄ - . \ a oe » 
xen ννϑ,10. 202 τρῦτο δέ ἢ φημι, ἀδελφοί, ὅτι ' σὰρξ καὶ | αἷμα * βασι- 
reff. 


46. adda D!'. 

47. aft o πρωτος ανθρωπος add adau C!. rec ins o κυριος bef εξ ovp. (gloss), 
with A D[-gr?]3 KLPN3 rel syrr goth [arm Hip-ed,] Orig, Chr, [Bas, Euthal-ins] 
Cyr[- p,(but mss and the old syr and lat translations vary) | Thdrt Ps-Ath, Damase Til 
(Ec Tert, Maximin, (the insertion is ascribed to Marcion by Tert and in Dial): ow 
BCD!FR?! 17 latt copt eth arm{-marg] Orig,(and int,) Hip-ms, [Petr,] Ath, Nys, 
Naz, Cyr[-p,(but see above) Ps-Ath ] ἐξ ὰ τέο -in- Epiph, Photin Tert, Cy prespe fil 
[Ambr, Ambrst]. aft ovpavov add ὦ ουρανιος F vulg{-clem am? eth arin marg Bas, 


ς 
οι 


(Ps-Ath,)] Orig-int, [Cypr-ms, Ambr, Ambrst ]}. 


48. att τοιουτοι ins ουτοι (Οὐ. 
vary : ins, ] 


ει: om Orig-int, Cypr,.] 


om 1st και F(not F-lat) [am!] Iren-int,[but mss 
for ἐπουρ., ovpavios and ουρανιοι DIF, 


49. [for lst και, apa K(and G-marg) Aug 


φορεσωμεν 


(from a desire (as Chrys below) to turn what is really a physical assertion into an 


ethical exhortation : 


see note at Rom ν. 1) ACDFKLP® [17(sic)] rel latt copt goth 


Thdot,[not ed Migne] Orig,!-c, |(-int,) Caes, [Nys,] Mac, Meth( pref iva) ΟΠ γεχρε(τοῦτ᾽ 


ἐστιν, ἄριστα πράξωμεν. .. . 
Iren-int, Tertyexpr Cy prs 


συμβουλευτικῶς eisdyer τὸν λόγον) Kpiph, Ps-Ath, Damase 
Hil, [Ambratic Aubrst ] Jer: 


txt Bae g {eth(Tischdf)] arm 


Thdrterpr(7d yap φορέσομεν Apt Oe Tine οὐ παραινετικῶς εἴρηκεν) Thlexpr Ccexpr- 
50. for δε, yap 1) ΕἾ ποῦ F-lat| Iren{-int, ] Tert,. 


first. εἰς tv. ζἕωοπ.7ὔ scil. ἐγένετο---- 
became a quickening (life - bestowing) 
spirit. When? ‘This has been variously 
answered: see De Wette and Meyer. ‘The 
principal periods selected are his Jncarna- 
tion, his Resurrection, and his Ascension. 
But it seems to me that the question is 
not one to be pressed: in the union of the 
two natures, the second Adam was consti- 
tuted a life-bestowing Spirit, and is such 
now in heaven, yet having the resurrec- 
tion-body. The whole complex of his suf- 
fering and triumphant state seems to be 
embraced in these words. That His re- 
surrection-state alone is not intended, is 
evident from ἐξ οὐρανοῦ, ver. 47. He was 
a πνεῦμα ζωοποιυῦν, even while in the σῶμα 
ψυχικόν; and is still such in the σῶμα 
πνευματικόν. The life implied in (wo- 
ποιοῦν. is the resurrection-life: see John 
v. 21, 28; Rom. viii. 11. 46.) But in 
the natural order, that which is animal 
pr cedes that which is spiritual (τὸ ψυχ., 
τὸ πνευμ., not σῶμα, but abstract aud 
general): as in ver. 45, 6 πρῶτο---ὁ & éoxa- 
TOS. 47.) So exactly in Gen. ii. 7. 
God made man χοῦν λαβὼν ἀπὸ Tis γῆς. 
Meyer has some excellent remarks here, 
with which I entirely agree :—“ Since the 
body of Adam is thus characterized as a 
ψυχικὸν σῶμα, as ver. 45, and psychical 
organism involves mortality (ver. 44), it 


is clear that Paul treats of Adam not as 
created exempt from death : in strict ac- 
cordance with Gen. ii. 7; 1.19. Nor does 
this militate against his teaching that 
death came into the world through sin, 
Rom. v. 12. For had our first parents 
not sinned, they would have remained in 
Paradise, and would, by the use of the Tree 
of Life, which God had not forbidden them 
(Gen. ii. 16, 17), have become immortal 
(Gen. iii. 22). But they were driven ont 
of Paradise, ere yet they had tasted of this 
tree (Gen. iii. 22), and so, according to the 
record in Genesis also, Death came into 
the world by sin.” See also some striking 
remarks on the verse in Genesis in Stier, 
‘Andeutungen fiir glaiibiges Schriftver- 
stindniss,’ pp. 202, 3. ἐξ οὐρανοῦ] 
either, in this glorified Body, at his 
coming,—as Meyer: or, in his whole Per- 
sonality (De W.) as the God-man: this 
latter seems more probable from John iii. 
13, where 6 vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου is desig- 
nated as 6 ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς. 

48.) ὁ χοϊκός. Adam ; ot x., his posterity 
on earth: ὃ ἔπουρ., Christ; ot éw., His 
risen people. See, as admirably illustrating 
this verse, Phil. iii. 20, 21. 49.] For 
the reason of keeping φορέσομεν, see var. 
readd. As we (Christians) bore in this 
life ; the time imagined is when this life is 
past, and the resurrection instant... 


ABCDP 
KLrPs a 
vbedef 
gbkiin 
017. 47 


M σαλ- 
πισει... 


4.6—52. ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 619 


1 ver. 42 reff. 

᾿ ᾿ J 2 3 m Rom. δ 
51 ἐδοὺ μυστήριον ὑμῖν, τοι α, xii 
11. Rum. x1. 
25. | Dan. ii. 
18 al 


λείαν θεοῦ * κληρονομῆσαι od δύνανται, οὐδὲ ἡ 'POopa 
2 m ad@ ᾿ k Ἂ 
τὴν ' ἀφθαρσίαν * κληρονομεῖ. 


λέγω. πάντες οὐ ο κοιμηθησόμεθα, πάντες δὲ Ρ ἀλλαγη- 


, me ’ ᾽ , > ¢€ Ayes a - ΄ στε. 
σόμεθα, © ἐν 4 ἀτόμῳ, ἐν "ῥιπῇ ὀφθαλμοῦ, ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ » -- ον. ν. 89 
ς / ΓΝ: , ΄ \ e a ee θ / p herebis. Acts 

σαλπιγγι' “oaATicEL γάρ, καὶ οἱ νεκροὺ " ἐγερθησονταν vi.14. Rom. 
Ps. ον. 20). Gal. iv. 20, Heb. i. 12 (from Ps. ci. 26) only. Lev. xxvii. 33. 


i. 23 (from 
r here only+. Eur. Iph. Taur. 885. {-πέζειν, James i. 6.) 


q here ou'y +, 
sch. xiv. 8 reff. 1 Thess. iv. 16. 
t Matt. vi. 2. Rev. vill. 6, &c. (6 times.) ix. 1,13. x. 7. x1. 15 only. Num. x. 3—8. u ver. 4, 


for κληρονομῆσαι ov δυνανται, ov KAnpovouncovow (see ch vi. 9, Gal ν. 21) F 42 copt 
Mace, Chr{and 2-mss] Iren[-int,} Orig-int, Tert,—éuvara: BPX k. κληρονομήσει 
(see as above) C1D'F latt[(not am!) syrr] copt (Meth,). 

51. ins οἱ bef παντες, twice, A; but 2nd οἱ corrd into ov Al. rec aft παντες ins μὲν 
(on acct of the δε following), with AIC? 1)3[-gr] KLPR rel vulg syr copt Dial, Orthod, 
Cyr, [Ephr, Nys, Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damase] Cees, Orig-int, Tert,: wey ovy A? 
(appy) F [17(‘Tischdf) |: δὲ k: om B(CP!) D}(and lat) Syr eth [arm(Tischdf) | Orig, (-int,) 
Jer(on the testimony of the greek mss: for after stating that the lat mss rea omnes 
quidem resurgemus, he says all the greek have either omnes dormiemus or non omnes 
dormiemus) Jac-nisib,. for κυιμηθησομεθα, αναστησομεθα D}(and lat) vulg(and 
F-lat) arm-marg lat-mss-mentioned-by-Jer-Aug-Pel-Gennad Jac-nisib, Hil, Ambr Aug. 

κοιμηθησομεθα bef ov (thus reading πάντες (μὲν) κοιμηθησόμεθα, οὐ πάντες δὲ 
ἀλλαγησόμεθα) A'C(D!)FR 17 and greek-inss-mentioned-by-[ Max-conf ]-Jer-Aug- Pel, 
also vulg eth[{-rom] arm Orig,(and int,) Did[-in-Jer]: ov (? ovv) kom. ov A, the Ist ov ᾿ 
is written over the line in small letters Αἱ : txt B D?{appy 73 Κα ΠΡ rel and greek-mss- 
mentioned-by-[ Max-conf ]-Jer-Acac- Did-Pel, also syrr copt goth zth-pl [spec] Thdot 
Orig,'int,: also [once] more in Jer) Thdor-heracl Diod Apollin(these three in Jer) 
Dial-trin, Tit, Nys, Cas, Chr, [Cyr, Euthal-ms] Thdrt, Andr,; Damase Th] (ἔς Tert 
Jer,. (Lhevariation has prob arisen from the apparent difficulty of reconciling παντες 
(μεν) ov kom. with the fact that St. Paul and his readers had all died. Hence the 
negative particle was transferred to the other clause, to the detriment of the sense.) 

52. ins ws bef ev pun ΟἹ. for pin, porn D'F 67? Diall-ms, Nys,] and greek- 
mss-mentioned-by-Jer(pirn s. porn utrumque enim legitur, et nostri interpretati sunt in 


itu [latt Ambrst], 5. in motu ['Tertaiic]). 


for εγερθ., αναστησονται ADFP Orig, 


Chr, Damasc Thl-marg: txt BCKLMX rel Orig, Dial, Chrna, Cyr[-p] Thdrt Cosm,. 


50—54.] The necessity of the change of 
the animal body into the spiritual, in 
order to inherit God’s kingdom. The 
manner of that change prophetically de- 
scribed: and the abolition of Death in 
victory consequent on it. 
δέ φ., see reff. It calls attention to some- 
thing to be observed, and liable to be 
overlooked. Not only is the change of 
body possible, and according to natural 
and spiritual analogies,—but it is NECES- 
SARY. σὰρξ καὶ αἷμα] = σῶμα 
ψυχικόν, the present organism of the 
body, calculated for the wants of the 
animal soul. τὴν θνητὴν φύσιν καλεῖ" 
ἀδύνατον δὲ ταύτην ἔτι θνητὴν οὖσαν τῆς 
ἐπουρανίου βασιλείας τυχεῖν. Theodoret. 

ἡ φθορὰ. . .. τὴν ἀφθαρσίαν, 
the abstracts, representing the impossi- 
bility of the φθαρτόν inheriting the ἄφθαρ- 
τον as one grounded in these qualities. 

κληρονομεῖ, pres., sets forth the 
absolute impossibility in the nature of 
things. 51.] He proceeds to reveal 
to them something of the process of the 
change at the resurrection-day. This he 
does under the name of a μυστήριον, a 
hidden doctrine (see reff., especially Rom.). 


80.) τοῦτο ΄ 


πάντες ov κοιμ.} See var. readd. 
Meyer maintains that the only ren- 
dering of the words which is philologi- 
cally allowable (the ordinary one, re- 
garding πάντες (μὲν) ov as = οὐ πάντες 
(uév),—we shall not all sleep, being inad- 
missible, here and in other instances where 
it has been attempted, see Winer, edn. 6, 
§ 26. 1), is this, ‘we all (viz. as in 
1 Thess. iv. 15, ἡμεῖς of ζῶντες of περι- 
λειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν Tov κυρίου, 
—in which number the Apostle firmly 
believed that he himself should be, see 
2 Cor. v. 1 ff. and notes) shall not sleep, 
but shall all be changed.” But we may 
observe that this would commit the Apos- 
tle to the extent of believing that not 
one Christian would die before the παρ- 
ovola;—and that it is besides not ne- 
cessary, for the emphasis is both times 
on mdytes—‘ (All of us) shall not sleep, 
but (all of us) shall be changed:’ i.e. 
‘the sleep of death cannot be predicated of 
(all of us), but the resnrrection-change 
ean.” See also Winer, ὃ 61. 5 ἢ, -and 
Moulton’s note, p. 695. 52.) ἐν ἀτόμῳ, 
in a point of time absolutely indivisible, 
ἐν ῥιπήματι, Hesych. "ἐν τῇ ἐσχ. 


620 ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. XV. 53—58. 


» “ , an A 
‘adaptor, Kal ἡμεῖς P ἀλλαγησόμεθα. 3 δεῖ yap τὸ 
ἡ φθαρτὸν τοῦτο * ἐνδύσασθαι '' ἀφθαροίαν καὶ τὸ ¥ θνητὸν 


v Rom. i. 23 
reff. 













w Acts iv. 

* Kom a τοῦτο * ἐνδύσασθαι “ ἀθανασίαν. 51 ὅταν δὲ τὸ ἡ φθαρτὸν : a 
aunt τοῦτο " ἐνδύσηται Ὁ ἀφθαρσίαν καὶ τὸ 7 θνητὸν τοῦτο Σέξην 
yRoanis * ἐνδύσηται ἀθανασίαν, τότε "γενήσεται ὁ λόγος ὁ ὑδπαὺς 
εἶξε ‘bis, ας γεγραμμένος, » Κατεπόθη ὁ θάνατος " εἰς “4 νῖκος. 55 [lov k 1m 
only +. Wisd- σου, θάνατε, TO © κέντρον; ποῦ σου, θάνατε, TO δ νῖκος ; 


= Matt. v. 18. =p \ \ r / e as ΄ a 
“Mark xi 33.” 58-79 δὲ ὃ κέντρον τοῦ θανάτου ἡ ἁμαρτία, ἡ δὲ δύναμις τῆς 1 θανα- 


b Isa. xxv. 8 Tov .. 


id / ς ΄ ὲ 57 A A θ - τῇ , a ὃ ὃ / e a“ Ξ: 
Heb..not  quapTlas Ο νομος᾽ 9! τῷ δέ θεῳ * χάρις τῷ OLOOVTL ἡμίν ΑΒ DF 
LXX, but ra 4 ᾽ ἐ ki M 
Kat. occ. there) — 2 Cor. ‘ii. 7.) v. 4 (Matt. xxiii. 24. Heb. xi. 29. 1 Pet. v.8. Rev. xii. 16) only. c Matt. “Ὁ b 
xii. 20 only. 2 Kings ii. 26. Job xxsvi. 7. d as above (c). here 3ce only. ehere is, VNabe 
Acts xxvi. 14. Rev. ix. 10 only. Hosea xiii. 14. f = Rom. vi. 17 reff. te μη 
a 


53. [for lst τουτο, τουτον P k. | om 2nd tovro ΕΓ μοῦ F-lat]. ins τὴν bef’ ὁ i7. 47 


abavaciay Ip. 

54. om to φθαρτ. Tour. evd. αφθ. και (i.e To φθαρτ. to το θνητ.) C'TyMN1(in supply- 
ing the omission X3 has written καὶ to, To being superfluous) 64. 71 vulg copt goth 
eth arm Mcion-e, Ath{-4-mss,] Iren-int,(citing from oportet enim, ver 53, to victoria 
tua, ver 55) Hil, Ambrst Aug, Fulg Oros Bede.—in A arm, To $8. to αφθαρσ. is put aft το 
θν. του. evd. abavag.—om k. To Ov. Tov. evd. αθαν. D'(supplied in D-lat, a prima manu) 1. 
Orig, : om αθανασ. to abavac. F, ins τὴν bef αθανασιαν Al, 17 also bet αφθαρσ. }. 

55. transp vices and κεντρὸν (see LXX) BCI)MN? 17 vulg copt eth[-rom] arm{-zob ] 
Orig,(-int,) Eus, Ath, Did, Cyr-jer, Bas-sel, [Euthal-msj Damase, Iren-int, Tert, 
Ambr’ sepe Ambrst] Jer: txt A7 DF K LPR rel syrr_ goth ath-pl [arm-mss] Orig,(and’ 
int,) Eus, Ath, Cyr-jer, Chr, Thdrt Euther{-in-Thdrt] Iren-int, Tert, Cypr, Hil,.—om 
που σου θ. το νικ. A}.—(veikos, here and in vv. 54, 57 (confusion between εἰ and 1 as 
constantly elsw) BD1I,(& ver 57) τὰ, confentio 'Tert,[ victoria vel contentio,: Aug 
varies }.) rec for 2nd θανατε, adn (so LXX), with A? D3[-gr](appy) KLM PN? rel 
syrr goth [eth-pl arm] Orig, Ath, [Did, Bas, Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt] Euther,: txt 
BC D'[and lat] ΕἸ δὲ! vulg copt eth-rom Eus, lren-int, [Orig-int,] Tert, Cypr, Hil, 
Ainbrsepe AUZsepe- 

56 ins ἐστιν bef ἡ auapr. A. 

57. for διδοντι, δοντι D a Ὁ ἃ 1 ο [syrr(not syr-mg) ] Ath-3-mss Chr, Ge. 


ὅταν δέ. &c. isa repetition, in a triumphant 
spirit, of the description of the glorious 
change. γενήσεται shall come to 
pass—really de. The citation is from 


σάλπ. at (in, as part of the events of) the 
last trump2t-blowing. The word écx. 
niust obviously not be refined upon as 
some (τινές in Theophyl.—and Olsh.) have 


done, identifying it with the seventh trum- 
pet of the Apocalypse ;—nor pressed too 
closely as if there were necessarily no 
trump after it,—but is the trump at the 
time of the end, the last trump, in a wide 
and popular sense. See ref. 1 Thess. 

σαλπίσει} impersonal, —6é σαλπιγκτής, 
scil. So Od. φ. 142, ἀρξάμενοι τοῦ χώρου 
ὅθεν τέ περ οἰνοχοεύει (scil. ὁ oivdxoos) : 
Herod. ii. 47, ἐπεὰν θύσῃ : Xen. Anab. i. 
2.17, ἐπεὶ ἐσάλπιγξε : ili. 4. 36, ἐκήρυξε : 
—vi. 5. 25, ἕως σημαίνοι τῇ σάλπιγγι. 
Kiilbner, § 414. 2. σαλπίσω for σαλ- 
πίγξω is reprobated by the grammarians: 
see Wetst. ἡμεῖς. see above [on ver. 
511. 53.] Confirmation of καὶ ἡμ. 
ἀλλαγ., by a re-statement of the necessity 
of putting on incorruptibility and immor- 
tality. τὸ $0. τοῦτο... τὸ Ov. τοῦτο] 
this, indicating his own body. ἐνδύσασ- 
Gar—see note on the force of the aor. as 
indicating that which is momentary, on 
ver. 34, Compare on the figure of put- 
ting on, 2 Cor. v. 3 and notes. 54. | 


the Heb. with this difference, that the 
active, ‘He (Jehovah) abolishes,’ ya, is 
made passive, and my3), ‘for ever,’ is ren- 
dered (as elsewhere by the LXX, e. g. ref. 
2 Kings, but not here) eis vixos. 
eis v. ‘so as to result in victory. Wetst. 
quotes from the Rabbis, ‘In diebus ejus 
(Messie) Deus S. B. deglutiet mortem.’ 
55.] TRIUMPHANT EXCLAMATION 
of the Apostle realizing in his mind that 
glorious time: expressed nearly in the 
terms of the prophetic announcement of 
Hosea,—7od ἡ δίκη σου, θάνατε; ποῦ τὸ 
κέντρον σου, ἅδη ; The figure of death 
as a venomous beast is natural, from the 
serpent, Gen. iii, Num. xxi. The souls 
in Hades being freed by the resurrection, 
Death’s victory is gone: sin being 
abolished by the change of the animal 
body (the source of sin) to the spiritual, 
his sting is powerless. For a discussion 
of the quotation, see Stanley’s note. 
56.| See above: and compare Rom. v. 12, 
and vii. 57.] For this blessed con- 


eR? Be 


+0 4 


haderdot μου " ἀγαπητοί, ‘ ἑδραῖοι γίνεσθε, * ἀμετακίνητοι, 
’ - / “ ΄ ’ / 
Ἰ περισσεύοντες ἐν τῷ ™ ἔργῳ τοῦ ™ κυρίου πάντοτε, εἰδότες 
ιν , id Lal lj / 
ὅτι 0" κόπος ὑμῶν οὐκ ἔστιν ° κενὸς ἐν κυρίῳ. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS A. 


ἴω ὔ a ,’ A Lal 
νῖκος διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ. 


621 


58 8 ὥςτε, 6 = chv.8 


h ee, Paul, 
here only. 
James i. 16, 
19. ii. 5 only. 
(Eph. vi. 21. 
Col. i749. 
Philem. 16. 

2 Pet. iii. 15.) 


XVI. 1 Περὶ δὲ τῆς Ρ λογίας τῆς “ εἰς τοὺς ᾿ ἁγίους, τὰν sg 


ὥςπερ * διέταξα ταῖς peas THS Γαλατίας, οὕτως καὶ 


ὑμεῖς ποιήσατε. “ ἃ κατὰ " μίαν 


*rap " ἑαυτῷ τιθέτω Y θησαυρίζων ὅ τι ἂν * εὐοδῶται, ἵνα 


iv. 16 [8 om. vv. θ---181. 
o ver. 10 reff. 
r Acts ix. 13 reff. Rom. xv. 26. 


m ch, xvi. 10. 
p here bis only +. 


Col. i. 23 

only +. Ps. 

lvi. 8 Symm. 
k here only 4. 


"σαββάτου ἕκαστος ὑμῶν Rom. ἈΝ 


Phil. i. 26. 
1 Thess. iv. 
10 4]. Tobit 


(Phil. ii. 30.) n 2 Cor. vi. 5 reff. 
= Rom. xv. 26. 2 Cor. viii. 4. ix. 13. 
sch. vii. 17. Acts xviii. 2. L.P., exc. Matt. xi. 1. 3 Kinesx:, 


18. Dan. i. 5 Theod. t plur., Rom. xvi. 16 reff. u = Acts ii. 46 al. v Mark 
xvi. 2. Luke xxiv.1. John xx.1,19. Acts xx. 7. w = Luke xviii. 12. Mark xvi, 9. 
=x see Luke xxiv. 12, y Matt. vi. 19,20. Luke xii. 21. Rom. ii.5. 2 Cor. xii. 14. James νυ. 


3. 2 Pet. iii. 7 only. 4 Kings xx. 17. 
3, 23. 


iro. xp. bef τ. κυρ. nu. M. 


58. ins και bef αμετακινητοι A [vulg F-lat Syr eth] Ambrst. 
ov ἐστιν bef v Kom. vuwy Εἰ not F-lat }. 


om Tov I}. 


z Rom. i. 10 (reff.). 3 John 2 (bis) only. Gen. xxxix, 


for epyw, οἰκω Ῥ, 


CuHap. XVI. 2. rec σαββατων, with KIL.MN? rel copt goth [arm Euthal-ms] Thdrt 


Damasc: σαββατω Xl meer: txt ABCDFI,P &-eorr! 17 latt [syrr] Chr,. 


BI,M.—67’ ἂν n(and so vv. 3 
ms | Damase. 


Beye) 47 


summation of victory over death, he breaks 
out in thanks to God, who gives it to us 
(present, as being certain) through our Lord 
Jesus Christ (the Name in full, as befits 
the solemnity and majesty of the thanks- 
giving). 58.] Conclusion of the whole 
up an earnest exhortation. ὥςτε] 
‘que cum ita sint, —seeing that the victory 
is sure. ἕδρ., apetaxiv. | a climax 
(Mey.);—in reference, viz. to the doubt 
which is attempted to be raised among 
you on this matter. ἐν TO ἔργῳ τοῦ 
κυρ.] The work of the Lord is the Chris- 
tian life, with its active and passive duties 
and graces,—the bringing forth the fruits 
of the Spirit. εἰδότες] Knowing 
(as you do—being convinced by what has 
been said), that your labour (bestowed 
on the ἔργ. τοῦ Kup.) is not vain (which it 
would be, were there no resurrection: 
see reff.) in the Lord. These last words 
cannot belong to 6 κόπος ὕμ., nor very 
well to οὐκ ἔστι κενός (as Meyer), but 
are best taken with the whole sentence, 
your labour is not in vain: so ch. ix. 1. 
CuaP. XVI.] VARIOUS DIRECTIONS AND 
ARRANGEMENTS (1—18). SaLurarions 
(19, 20). AUTOGRAPH CONCLUSION AND 
BENEDICTION (21—24), 1—4.] Di- 
rections respecting the collection and 
transmission of alms for the poor saints 
at Jerusalem. 1.) The construction 
isas inch. vii. 1; viii. 1; xii. 1;—the περὶ 
de... rather serves to introduce the new 
subject than to form any constructional 
part of the sentence. Similarly in ver. 
12. λογίας λογία, συλλογή, Hesych. 
λογίαν, τὴν συλλογὴν τῶν χρημάτων 
καλεῖ, Theodoret (Wetst.). The word is 


€av 


εὐοδωθη ACI,KM &*- 5007) [ Euthal- 


said in the Lexx. not to be found in 
classic writers. εἰς τ. ay. | = es 
TOUS πτωχοὺς T. ἁγίων τῶν ἐν Ἵερουσα- 
Anu, ref. Rom. See also 2 Cor. viii. 
1 ff.; ix. 1 ff: and on the poverty of 
the church at Jerusalem, note on Acts 
ii. 44. That poverty was no doubt in- 
creased by the continual troubles with 
which Jerusalem was harassed in this, the 
distressful close of the Jewish national his- 
tory. See other causes in Stanley. That 
the mother church of Christendom should 
be thus, in its need, sustained by the 
daughter churches, was natural; and it is 
at the same time an affecting circumstance, 
to find him the most anxious to collect and 
bear to them this contribution, whose for- 
mer persecuting zeal had doubtless (see 
Acts xxvi. 10) made not a few of those 
saints widows and orphans. ὥςπερ 
διέτ.] We do not find any such order in the 
Epistle to the Galatians: ch. ii. 10 there 
being merelyincidental. It had probably 
been given during his journey among them 
Acts xviii. 28,—or perhaps by message (9) 
from Ephesus. Notas E. V., ‘as I have 
given order, but as I gave order. He 
refers to the occasion, whatever it was, 
when that order was given. Bengel re- 
marks: “ Galatarum exemplum Corinthiis, 
Corinthiorum exemplum Macedonibus, Co- 
rinthiorum et Macedonum Romanis pro- 
ponit. 2Cor.ix.2. Rom. xv. 26. Magna 
exemplorum vis.” 2.) μίαν oafB.] 
For this Hebraism, and σαβ. in the sin- 
gular, signifying week, see reff. On the 
observance of the first day of the week, see 
notes, Acts xx. 7, and Rom. xiv. 5. Here 
there is no mention of their assembling, 


622 


a absol., Acts 
xvii. 10 re 

b = Rom. xiv. 
22 reff. 

c = Rom. ii. 27. 

d Acts xix. 12 
reff. 

e= τ Cor. viii. 
6,7, 19. 

f seal constr., σονται. 


here only. 


Ε are xxi. h διέλθω: 


πέμψω 


h Acts xiii. 6 k τ ] OES a ν 
ce ff. 

eh te xii, Ττύχον "παραμενω ἢ ™ καὶ 
56. Johni. 
1,2. Gal.i. 18. 1 John i. 2. see ver. 10. ch. ii. 3. 

1 Phil. i. 25. Heb. vii. 23. Jamesi. 25 only. Gen. xliv. 33. 


Tit. iii. 12 only t. 


for εαν, av BD'F. 


12. xxviii. 11. 


3. [omous K.] 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ A. 


a \ 
ἃ ἀπενεγκεῖν τὴν 


XVI. 


» , U Ὁ Ν 
μή, ὅταν ἔλθω, τότε P λογίαι γίνωνται" 3 ὅταν δὲ ὃ παρα- 
, r ‘ , ’ a , 
γένωμαι, οὺς ἐὰν ὃ δοκιμάσητε, ° δι’ ἐπιστολῶν τούτους 


ὁ χάριν ὑμῶν εἰς Ἱἱερουσαλήμ' 


’ ‘ » “- ᾽ Ν \ ’ 
4 ἐὰν δὲ faEvov ἢ ὃ τοῦ κἀμὲ πορεύεσθαι, σὺν ἐμοὶ πορεύ- 
3 / \ \ ¢. lal A / 
5 ἐλεύσομαι δὲ πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ὅταν Μακεδονίαν 
Μακεδονίαν γὰρ ἢ διέρχομαι'" 


Η \ id a 
Sigpos ὑμᾶς δὲ 
4 e al 
" παραχειμάσω, iva ὑμεῖς με 
k here only. Xen. Anab. vy, 9. 20, (see ch. xiv. 10.) 


m ch. ix. 8 reff. n Acts xxvii. 


ιεροσολυμα A. 


4. rec ἡ bef αξιον, with D F{-gr] KLN! rel syr (goth) [arm Euthal-ms] Chr, Thdrt 
Damase: txt A(nv) BCI,MPX* a m 17 [latt( not G-lat) Syr copt]. 


5. for yap, δε ΕἾ -gr}|(uot G) m. 
6. for a y(ap) Ip. 
(sic)] P om ἡ F(not F-lat) 2. 


Katauevw BM 672 
om καὶ BM 3. 116 (Syr) Chr-2-mss. 


: παραπομεινω F.—mapau. bef τυχίων 


for wa, εἰ un ΕΓ μοῦ F-lat} D-lat.—iva εἰ καὶ παραχ. D)[-gr]. 


which we have in Acts xx. 7, but a plain 
indication that the day was already consi- 
dered as a special one, and one more than 
others fitting for the performance of a reli- 
gious duty. map ἑαυτῷ 719. | let each 
of you lay up at home (reff. ) in store 
whatsoever he may by prosperity have 
acquired (lit. ‘whatsoever he may be pros- 
pered in:’ i.e. the pecuniary result of any 


prosperous adventure, or dispensation of 


Providence): not, as Bengel, al.: ‘quod 
commodum sit,—a meaning which the 
word will not bear. tva py... | 
that there may not, when I come, THEN 
be collections to be made. His time would 
be better employed in imparting to thema 
spiritual benefit, than in urging them to 
and superintencing this duty. 3. | 
* Vide quomodo vir tantus nullam suspi- 
cioni rimam aperire voluerit.” Grot. 
δι᾿ ἐπιστολῶν cannot belong to δοκιμά- 
σητε (as Beza, Calv., Wetst., E. V.,—for 
what need of letters from them ὅταν 
παραγένωμαι, or before his coming, if the 
person recommended were not to be sent 
off before his arrival ?), but is emphati- 
cally pretixed, as the safe and proper way 
of giving credentials to those sent ;— 
τούτους méuWw,—the alternative which 
follows, of himself accompanying them, 
being already in the miud of the Apostle. 
ἐπιστολών, plur.,—not of the cate- 
gory merely, meaning one Jdetter,—but 
meaning, either that each should have 
his letter of credentials,—or more pro- 
bably, that Paul would give them letters 
to several persons in Jerusalem. 
Meyer well remarks: “ Hence we see how 
common in Paul’s practice was the writ- 
ing of Epistles. Who knows how many 
private letters of his, not addressed to 
churches have been lost ? The only letter 
of the kind which remains to us (except 


the Pastoral Epistles), viz. that to Phile- 
mon, owes its preservation perhaps to 
the mere circumstance, that it is at the 
same time addressed to the church in the 
house of Philemon. See ver.2.” χάριν] 
see reff. Meyer compares Plato, Det. p. 
113, E: χάρις, εὐεργεσία ἑκούσιος. 
4.) But if it (the occasion,—dependent on 
the magnitude of your collection) be wor- 
thy of my also taking the journey (i.e. 
if your collection be large enough to war- 
rant an apostolic mission in order to carry 
it,— not said for security, —nor to procure 
himself a fair reception at Jerusalem,—but 
with a sense of the dignity of an apostolic 
mission: “ justa eestimatio sui non est su- 
perbia,” Bengel), they shall go in my 
company (σὺν ἐμοὶ π. contrast to δι᾽ ém- 
στολῶν πέμψω, and observing the same 
order). This did apparently take place, see 
Acts xx. 4 ff 

5—9.] Taking up ὅταν παραγένωμαι, he 
announces his plan of visiting them. 
5.| This plan was a change from his for- 
mer intention, which had been (see 2 Cor. 
i 15. 16, and note), to pass through them 
to Macedonia, and again return to them 
JSrom Macedonia, and thence to Judea. 
This he had apparently announced to them 
in the lost Epistle alluded to ch. v. 9 (or in 
some other), and he now tacitly drops this 
scheme, and announces another. For this 
he was charged (2 Cor. i. 17 ff.) with levity 
of purpose :—ut his real motive was, lenity 
towards them, that he might not come to 
them in sorrow and severity (2 Cor. i. 23; 
ii. 1). The seeond plan he adhered to: 
we find him already in Macedonia when 
2 Cor. was written (2 Cor. ii. 13; viii. 1; 
ix. 2, 4), and on his way to Corinth (2 Cor. 
xii. 14; xiii. 1);-—and in Acts xx. 1, 2, the 
journey is briefly narrated. Maxed. 
γ. διέρχ. is not parenthetical, but es 


ABCDF 
1,KLM 
PR abe 


defgh 


kilmn 
o 17, 47 





τ} ΠΡῸΣ KOPIN@IOYS A. 623 


δ 7 eo ΄, on θ \ ΜΟΙ “- 
προπέμψητε οὗ ἐὰν πορεύωμαι. οὐ θέλω γὰρ ὑμᾶς ἄρτι ο Acts αν. 8 
, Qn ’ / \ 7 \ , -" ΠῚ Ν ξ ὃ, 
ἐν Ῥ παρόδῳ ἰδεῖν" ἐλπίζω γὰρ χρόνον τινὰ 4 ἐπιμεῖναι ἱ πρὸς ἢ Gen. rxsviii 
> ae 2. e 7 r2 7 8 q ae a δὲ , Ἐ , 14. Polyb. v. 
ὑμᾶς, ἐὰν ὁ κύριος " ἐπιτρέψη. ἐπιμενῶ δὲ ἐν Edéow ies osce 
a a AL. ΄ ΄ dee Gd e / ware ri 
veo ἕως τῆς "πεντηκοστῆς" 9 θύρα yap μοι ἃ ἀνέῳγεν μεγάλη * Aci.) 
ev Ty. 


ή ᾿ ; Esth. 
ABCDF Kat ° ἐνεργής, καὶ “ ἀντικείμενοι πολλοί. ὩΣ 
KLMPR 


vi. 3. 
ix. 14. 
s Acts ii. 1 reff. 


avede 9 Ἐὰν δὲ ἔλθη Τιμόθεος, * βλέπετε ἵνα Y ἀφόβως νοι... 
feb Kl ty Ζ Nk ryt NS ΠΑΝ a Se ee ae u 2 Cor. vi. 11. 
mnoi7, ~ YEVNTAL TT pos υμαᾶς TO yap Epyov Κυρίου ἐργάζεται " Philem. 6. 
47 ΄ > yi 1] , > πο ο 7 ΄, ο 7 eb. iv. 12 
ws κἀγώ: 11 μήτις οὖν αὐτὸν “ ἐξουθενήσῃ, ° προπέμψατε only. 
23.2. (-yetv, -γημα, ch. xii.6. ~yeta, Eph. i. 19.) w Luke xiii. 17. xxi. 15. Gal. v.17. Phil. 
i. 28. 2 Thess. ii.4. 1 Tim.i.10. v. 14 only. L.P. Zech. iii. 1. x w. ἕνα, Col. iv. 17 only. (see 
2John 8.) w. πῶς, Luke viii. 18. ch. iii. 10. Eph. v. 15. y Luke i. 74. Phil. i. 14. Jude 12 
only. Prov. i. 33, Wisd. xvii. 4 BN Ald. (-Bos, AC compl.) only. z ch. ii. 3 reff. ach, 
xv. 58. b Acts xiii. 41 reff. c = Rom. xiv. 3 reff. 
for εαν, αν D!F, πορευσομαι P; -cwuat Ὁ] o [-ομαι LM ἐκ 47]. 
7. tor Ist yap, δε Ty: om Syr. rec (for 2nd yap) δε, with KL rel syr [eth] 
Thdrt: txt ABCDFI,MPR® 17 latt Syr copt goth Chr, Damase [Euthal-ms Ambrst]. 
rec επιτρεπη (the force of the aor not being perceived: see note), with DFK rel 
[Thdrt Damasc, -re: Le f k?]: txt ABCI,M P(-fer) δὲ dm 17 Chr, Thi-mss, permiserit 
latt. 
8. om ev F(not G). 9. om καὶ αντ. πολ. L. 
10. opoBws Β! : apoBos P 47. rec kat eyw, with DF rel Orig{-c], Chr,(kadws k. 
ey.) : eyw, omg και, BM 672: txt ACKI-PR n 17 Thdrt Damase. 
11. om ovy D}(and lat) ΕἾ ποῦ F-lat] goth arm Ambrst. 


is opposed (by δέ) to παραμενῶ. The 
pres. imnplies, as in Εἰ. V., his now matured 
plan,—not, as in the erroneous subscrip- 
tion of the Epistle, that he was on his way 
through Macedonia, when he wrote the 
word. 6. παραμενῶ) This, of which 
he speaks uncertainly, was accomplished ; 
he spent (Acts xx. 3) three months, and 
tliose (ib. ver. 6) the three winter months, 
in Greece (at Corinth). ὑμεῖς, Meyer 
justly remarks, is emphatic, and conveys 
an affectionate preference, in his present 
plan, for them. ov, with a verb of 
motion. The account of this is that the 
ideas of motion and rest are both involved 
in the verb: rest, when the motion is ac- 
complished. So Luke x.1 ;—Soph. Trach. 
40, κεῖνος δ᾽ ὅπου βέβηκεν οὐδεὶς οἶδε :— 
Xen. Hell. vii. 1. 25, ὅπου βουληθεῖεν 
ἐξελθεῖν. See Kiihner, ὃ 623, Anm. 2. 

Whither he should go from Corinth, was as 
yet uncertain, see ver. 4. 7: For Iam 
not willing, this time to see you in pass- 
ing. There isa slight, but a very slight, 
reference to his change of purpose (see 
above) ; but we must not take ἄρτι with 
θέλω (which Meyer charges Neander with 
doing, but clearly in error, see Pfl. u. Leit. 
p- 415 note): rather the ἄρτι refers to the 
occasion, the news from ‘them of Chloe,’ 
which had made it advisable that he should 
not now pay them a mere passing visit. 

yap | ground of οὐ θέλω---αῦ not the ulti- 
mate one, see above. ἐπιτρέψῃ | shall 
have permitted me, i.e. ‘if it shall so turn 
out, in the Lord’s direction of my work, 
that I shall then find my way open to do 
So.” 8,9.] His present plan regarding 


his stay in Ephesus (where he was writ- 
ing). τ. wevtTynk.| viz. that next 
coming. This probably happened so, or 
nearly so, notwithstanding the tumult of 
Acts xix.: for he already (see there vv. 
21, 22) was meditating his departure, and 
had sent on two of his company, when the 
tumult occurred. θύρα, see reff.: an 
opportunity of action. μεγάλη refers 
to the extent of the action thus opened 
before him: évepyys, to its requirements : 
neither of them (though μεγάλη may be 
referred to θύρα) properly agreeing with 
the figure, but both with the reality. 
Meyer compares Plato, Pheedr. p. 245, a: 
μουσῶν ἐπὶ ποιητικὰς θύρας ἀφίκηται. 
ἀντικ. πολλ.] See Acts xix. 9, 23 ff. 
10, 11.] Recommendation. of Timothy to 
their good reception and offices. He had 
preceded Paul (Acts xix. 22) in the journey 
to Macedonia. From ἐὰν ἔλθῃ, it would 
appear to have been probable, but not 
quite certain, that he would visit them. 
Inch. iv. 17, he is described as sent on for 
that purpose: so that the ἐάν may merely 
refer to the uncertainties of the journey. 
10. BA. ἵνα ἀφόβ. y.} There 
must have been some special reason for 
this caution respecting Timothy, besides 
that assigned by Meyer, al., that he would 
naturally be depreciated as only a subor- 
dinate of Paul, whom so many of them 
opposed. His youth occurs to us, men- 
tioned 1 Tim. iv. 12: bunt even that is ἢ t 
enough, and would hardly be intended 
here, without some reference to it. De 
Wette’s conjecture may not be withont 
foundation, that he was perhaps of a timid 


624 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOT®S A. 


\ \ , > ΄ “ ” U Ξ ᾽ , \ 
dtuxe igs, δὲ αὐτὸν ἃ ἐν ἃ εἰρήνῃ, ἵνα ἔλθῃ πρός με" ° ἐκδέχομαι yap 


Acts xvi. 36 ’ 


15. James 1]. 
1611]. Judg. 
xviii. 6 B (εἰς 
εἰρ. A Ald. 
compl.). 


gospp., Matt. 

. Mark 
jii. 12 a5.) 
ver. 19. 
James iil. 2. 
Eccl. xii. 
10 (2). 

g constr., ch. i. 
10 reff. 


δὲ Ὁ“ m > , 
€ oTav ™ εὐκαιρησῇ. 


4 κραταιοῦσθε. 


w.inf., Rom. 


(reff). οἰ ει, αὐτὸν μετὰ τῶν ἀδελφῶν. 

12 Περὶ δὲ ᾿Απολλὼ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ, ᾿ πολλὰ 8 παρεκά- 
Neca αὐτόν, ὃ ἵνα ἔλθη πρὸς ὑμᾶς μετὰ τῶν ἀδελφῶν' 
καὶ "πάντως οὐκ inv * θέλημα "iva νῦν ἔλθη, ἐλεύσεται 


“ ΄ ΄- ‘ 
18 π Πρηγορεῖτε, “στήκετε ἐν τῇ πίστει, Ρ ἀνδρίζεσθξ, 
14 τ άντα ὑμῶν ἐν ἀγάπῃ " γινέσθω. 
1ὅ εἸΤαρακαλῶ δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί: οἴδατε τὴν " οἰκίαν 


xii. 1 reff. a στὶν Va τῆς ᾽ i } Xap ¥ " 
mitre.” Στεφανῶᾶ, Y ὅτι ἐστὶν ἡ ἀπαρχὴ τῆς ᾿Αχαΐας καὶ * εἰς ¥ δια 

reff. i Matt. xviii. 14. k of man, ch. vii. 37 reff. l see Matt. vii. 12. Mark vi. 

25. ix. 30 al. m Mark vi. 31. Acts xvii. 21 (reff.) only. n — Mark xili. 87. 1 Thess. v.6 

al. fr. (Jer. v. 6.) o Rom. xiv. 4 reff. p here only. Josh. i. 6. q Luke 


i. 80. ii. 40. Eph. iii. 16 only. Neh. ii. 18. 
t ver. 12. 


w Rom. viii. 23 reff. 


ix. 15. xiv. 26, 40. 

20, Gal. i. Mal. 

ΠΡ wie dal + 
for δε, ow MP: om NR}. 
αδελφ. B. 

12. om ἀπολλω N}(ins X-corr!) eth. 
[not am harl?j goth [Ambrst ]. 

13. om τη F. 


(-os, 1 Pet. v. 6.) 
Ὁ = John iv. 53. Gen.1. 8. 


eue BD'F Orig[-c, |(txt,) Damase. 


s=ch. 
v constr., ch. ili. 
ych. xii.5. Actsi. 


r constr., here only. 


x Acts xiii. 48 reff. 


Om μετὰ TOY 


ins dnAw vu ott bef πολλα D!IFN! latt 


ins kat bef κραταιουσθε A D-gr vulg(and F-lat) Syr copt xth 


[Pel] : om BC F[-gr] KLPX rel D-lat(with G-lat fri) syr goth Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt 


Damase ΤῊ] Ee Ambrst. [ M doubtful. ] 
15. om δὲ D!-gr &! 71 goth eth arm. 


aft στεφανα ins καὶ φορτουνατου DX* 


am(with demid fuld harl) arm Thdrt Damase Ambrst: καὶ φορτ. και αχαΐκου C! Fa 
vulg-ed(with [demid] tol F-lat) syr-w-ast(and mg-gr) (additions from ver 17)» 
for ἐστιν, εἰσιν Cl(appy) DF [vulg arm] Orig-int,. 


disposition. Meyer objects that we have 
no historical trace of this: but I think some 
are to be found in 1 Tim.:—e. g. iii. 15; 
v. 22, 23. τὸ ἔργον κυρ.] see ref., 
note. 11. ἐν εἰρήνῃ] χωρὶς μάχης 
καὶ φιλονεικίας, ‘Iheophyl., and similarly 
Chrys. ἵνα ἔλθ. the aim of mpoméuy. 
ἐκδέχ. yap αὐτ.] καὶ τοῦτο φοβοῦν- 
τος αὐτοὺς ἦν. ἵνα γὰρ εἰδότες, ὅτι πάντα 
εἰρήσεται πρὸς αὐτὸν ἅπερ ἂν πάθῃ. ἐπιει- 
κέστεροι γένωνται, διὰ τοῦτο προςέθηκεν" 
éxd. y. avt. Chrys. Hom. xliv. p. 407. 
Theophyl. adds, ἅμα δὲ καὶ αἰδεσιμώτε- 
ρον αὐτὸν ποιῶν, εἴγε οὕτως ἀναγκαῖον 
τοῦτον ἔχει, ὥςτε ἐκδέχεσθαι αὐτόν. 
By μετὰ τῶν ἀδελφῶν it would appear, 
comparing ver. 12, that more brethren be- 
sides Erastus (Acts xix. 22) accompanied 
Timotheus to Macedonia. It is hardly pro- 
bable (as Calov. and De W.,al.), that wera 
τ. 45. is to be taken with éxdéxoua: “1 
and the brethren expect him.’ 12. 
Of Apollos: that he was not willing at 
present to go to them. δέ, transitional. 
On the construction of wept... . a8., 
see on ver. 1. παρεκάλ. ἵνα ἔλθῃ] 
ἵνα denotes the aim, no! only the purport 
of the exhortation. See remarks on ch. 
xiv. 13. *‘ Ideo excusat, ne suspicentur 
Corinthii ab eo fuisse impeditum ... .« 
Apud se queerere poterant : Cur hos potius 
quam Apollo nobis misit ? Respondet, 
minime per se stetisse, &c.” Calvin. Meyer 


remarks, perhaps the Corinthians had ex- 
pressly desired that Apollos should be sent 
to them. peta τ. ἀδελφ.} perhaps, those 
who went with Timotheus (see above): 
perhaps, those who were to bear this letter 
(ver. 17). kai] and, not, ‘but :’ 
see John xvi. 32; Rom.i. 13. It merely 
couples the exhortation with its result. 
θέλημα Evidently the will of 
Apollos, not, as Theophyl.: τουτέστιν, 6 
θεὸς οὐκ ἤθελεν. ὅταν εὐκαιρ.7 The 
present καιρός not seeming to him a suit- 
able one: apparently on account of the 
divisions hinted at in the beginning of the 
Epistle. 13.] εἶτα δεικνὺς ὅτι οὐκ ἐν 
τοῖς διδασκάλοις, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς 
ὀφείλουσι τὰς ἐλπίδας ἔχειν τῆς σωτηρίας. 
φησί: ypny. κιτ.λ. Chrys., who adds: διὸ 
λέγει, γρηγορεῖτε, ὡς καθευδόντων" στή- 
κετε, ὡς σαλευομένων: ἀνδρίζεσθε, κρα- 
ταιοῦσθε, ὡς μαλακιζομένων. πάντα Up. ἐν 
ἀγάπῃ γινέσθω, ὡς στασιαζόντων. p. 407 f. 
avdpif. | Aristot. Eth. iii. 6. 12:—@ua 

δὲ καὶ ἀνδρίζονται, ἐν ois ἐστιν ἡ ἀλκή, 
ἢ καλὸν τὸ ἀποθανεῖν. Wetst.: where see 
cther examples. 15—18.| Recommen- 
dation of the family of Stephanas to their 
honourable regard: and by occasion, ex- 
pression of his own joy at the presence of 
Stephanas and his companions. 15. | 
Some expositors (Erasm., Wolf, al.) take 
οἴδατε as imperative, and regard if as the 
command: but the imperative use of οἴδατε 


KAT: 


APECDF 

KLMPR 

abcde 

fghkl 

mnol7, 
47 





12—19. 


/ wn z / x ¥ e 4 16 t (/ \ e a : 
κονίαν τοῖς 7 ἁγίοις * ἔταξαν ἑαυτούς" ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς « Acts ix.13 

e - μ᾿ " ᾿Ξ ren. 
εὑποτάσσησθε ὃ τοῖς ὃ τοιούτοις, καὶ παντὶ τῷ “ συνερ- ἴ; 


γοῦντι καὶ ἃ κοπιῶντι. 


=e a , - ~ e Ν ic 

Xtehava καὶ Φορτουνάτου καὶ Ayaixod, ὅτι τὸ ὃ ὑμέτερον 
e , ’ \ “Weed 

"ὑστέρημα αὐτοὶ ' ἀνεπλήρωσαν' 18 * ἀνέπαυσαν yap τὸ 


ἐμὸν 'ἱ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὑμῶν. 
> τοιούτους. 


> Lal -Ὗ 
19 ᾿Ασπάζονται ὑμᾶς αἱ " ἐκκλησίαι τῆς ᾿Ασίας. 
a f 
e ΄ῸὉ ,’ 
eTal ὑμᾶς °év °Kupiw πολλὰ ᾿Ακύλας καὶ Ἰ]ρίσκιλλα, 4,7. 
t 2 2 


αἱ ‘ Macc. viii. 12. xv. 21 only. 
12. x1.9. Phil. ii. 30. Col. i. 24. 
xiv. 16 reff. 

1= Acts xvii. 16 reff. 

n Rom. xvi. 16 reff. 


16. om Ist και M. 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


ive χαίρω δὲ 


m 5 7 9 b \ 
ETTLYLUMOKETE OVV TOUS 


k = Matt. xi. 28. 
m ==-2 Cor. vi. 9. 
o Rom. xvi. 2, 8, 12 ἃ]. 


625 


Rom. i. 


a Rom. vili. 7, 
ese Cole / 20 reff. 
ETL ΤΊ) παρουσία Ὁ ch. vii. 15, 28. 
c Mark xvi. 20. 
Rom. viii. 28. 
2 Cor. vi. 1, 
James ii. 22 
only+. Esdr. 
vii.2. 1 Macc. 
xii. 1 only. 
(-yos, ch. iii. 
95) 
d ch. xv. 10 reff. 
> ΄ econstr., ch. 
ACTTA~ _ xiii. 6 reff. 


= 2 Cor. vil. 


Phil. i. 
6. 11. 12 
= chy αν, Ὁ: h 2 Cor. viii. 13, 14. ix. 
1 Thess. iii. 10. P., exc. Luke xxi. 4. Judg. xviii. 10. ich. 


2 Cor. vii. 13. Philem. 7,20. 1 Chron. xxii. 9, 18. 
Deut. i. 17. xxxiii. 9. (see 1 Thess. v. 12.) 
p ver. 12 reff. 


aft καὶ κοπιωντι ins ev υὑμιν F Ambrst. 


17. rec φουρτουνατου, with KMP rel Chr-ed Thdrt-ed [Euthal-ms Damase-ed]: txt 


ABCDFLX®& e m 17. 47. 


rec (for υμετερον)ὴ υμων, with AKLN rel Chr, [Euthal- 
ms] Thdrt Damase: txt BCDF[M]P m 17. 


ree outro, with BCKLPN rel 


{Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase: txt ADFM vulg Syr [syr] Chr, Ge (#d¢ D-lat [fri] : 


pst [aut] ili G-lat: tsi vulg [Ambrst]). 
18. aft yap ins καὶ D!F latt goth Ambrst Pel Bede. 
aft ac εκκλησιαι add πασαι CP 47 Syr Chr,. 


19. om A 34 [om Ist clause a m]. 


Tots τοιουτοις P, 


rec ασπαζονται (for -e-), with BFLM rel [latt &c Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc]: 


txt C D[-grj KPX ὁ goth [Thdrt-c, ]. 
ev κυρ. 123 Ambrst. 


ακυλας bef πολλα D [fri]. 


πολλα bef ev kupiw Μ ἃ 17.74 arm: om 
for πρισκιλλα, πρισκα 


BMPR 17 am(with demid harl) fri copt goth arm Pel. 


for ἴστε) seems to be without example. 
We must therefore understand it as indica- 
tive, and the construction is the well-known 
attraction, οἶδά σε τίς εἶ (Meyer). 

ἀπαρχή] See Rom. xvi. 5: the first 
Achean converts. ἔταξαν, plur., refer- 
ring te the noun of number, οἰκία. This 
family were among the few baptized by 
Paul, see ch. i. 16. ἔταξαν ἑαυτούς] 
So Demosth. de falsa legat.: βούλομαι δὲ 
ὑπομνῆσαι eis τίνα τάξιν ἔταξεν ἑαυτὸν 
Αἰσχίνης, Wetst.: where see other exam- 
ples. The ἑαυτούς is not without mean- 
ing—they voluntarily devoted their ser- 
vices. eis Stak. Tots ἁγίοις to ser- 
vice for the saints : in what way, does not 
appear: but perhaps, from the fact of Ste- 
phanas being at that time in Ephesus,— 
for journeys and missions. 16.] καὶ 
ὑμεῖς, you in your turn,—in retarn for 
their self-devotion. ὑποτάσσ.] viz. 


in honouring their advice and being ready. 


to be directed by them: there is an allu- 
sion to ἔταξαν ἑαυτούς above. τοῖς 
τοιούτοις | fo such persons, meaning the in- 
dividuals of Stephanas’s family, whom they 
knew. See the usage of 6 τοιυῦτος in reff. 

συνεργοῦντι] viz. with τοῖς τοιούτοις. 

17.) Perhaps Fortunatus and Achai- 
cus were members of the family of Ste- 
phanas. The Fortunatus mentioned by 
Clement at the end of his Ep. i. to the 
Corinthians (c. 59, p. 328) may be the 
same. παρουσίᾳ) viz. in Ephesus. 


Vor. Tl. 


τὸ ὑμέτερον vor.| The want of 
you (ref.): i.e. of your society. Grotius 
interprets it, “Quod vos omnes facere 
oportuit, id illi fecerunt: certiorem me 
fecere de vestris morbis,” and holds them 
to have been οἱ Χλοῆς of chap.i.11. But 
it is very improbable that he should men- 
tion thus a family so distinguished as this : 
he names them just after, ch. i. 16, as the 
household of Stephanas :—and still more 
improbable that one of so fine feeling 
should add of the bearers of such tidings, 
ἀνέπαυσαν k.T.A., which would on that 
hypothesis be almost ironical. 
18. καὶ ὑμῶν this is a beautiful expres- 
sion of true affection used in consciousness 
of the effect of this epistle on them: q. ἃ. 
‘it is to their presence here that you owe 
much of that in this my letter which 1 
know will refresh and cheer your spirits.’ 
Theophyl. explains it: ἔδειξεν αὐτοῖς ὅτι 
ἣ αὐτοῦ ἀνάπαυσις, αὐτῶν ἐστιν. ὥστε 
ἐπεί, ἐμοῦ ἀναπαυθέντος περὶ αὐτῶν, Kat 
ὑμεῖς ἐκερδήσατε αὐτὸ τοῦτο, τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνά- 
παυσιν, μηδὲν ἄχαρι πρὸς αὐτοὺς τούτους 
ἐνδείξησθε :—Grot., of the announcement 
which they would make on their return 
of Paul’s love for the Corinthians. But 
this last can hardly be. ἐπιγινώσκετε] 
know, the prep. giving force, and slightly 
altering the meaning to that of vecog- 
nition. Grot. and Theophyl.,—ev τιμῇ 
αὐτοὺς ἔχετε. 19, 20.] Salutations, 
19, ἐν κυρίῳ] see note, Rom. xvi. 2, 


Ss 


C26 ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@GIOTS A. XVI. 20,84: 


ὺν τῇ 51 > To. ἠχῶν 9 ἐκκλ 20 g il 
qRom.xvi.5. σὺν ITN “ἴ καὶ * OlKOY AUTwWY * ἐκκλησίᾳ. aOTACOVTAL ABCDP 


Acts ii. 46 reff. = e > , / , KLMPR 
sRom.xvi.18 ὑμᾶς οἱ ἀδελφοὶ πάντες. ἀσπάσασθε ἀλλήλους ἐν " φιλή- adede 
τοῦ. a) fghkl 
ἐφ μενοι i, = MATL ALO. mnol7, 
17. ¢ \ a tal ξ 47 
u and Paul) 91 ‘O "ἃ ἀσπασμὸς TH ἐμῇ " χειρὶ Ἰ]αύλου. 35 ἡ εἴ τις 
asa Ove : ) cs ΄ / 
only: (°5PP» οὐ φιλεῖ TOV κύριον, ἡ ἤτω ἡ ἀνάθεμα.  μαραναθά. 38 ἡ 
7 i al4.)+ a , a a / ᾽ nA a > ς a Αγ 8 > ΄, 
v as above (Ὁ). χάρις του KUPLOU Inoov μεθ ULV). Se Sy ayaTn 


Gal. vi. 11. 
Philem. 19. 
w Rev. xiv. 11. 
x James v. 12. 
Ps. ciii. 31. 


b a \ , = lal 2 an? lal 
μου META πάντων ὑμῶν ἐν χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 


[ἀμήν.] 


1 Macc. x. 31. 
y Rom. ix. 3 
reff. 
z here only 


a Rom. xvi. 20 [24]. Rev. xxii. 21 al. 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOTS A. 


b gen. subj., Phil. i. 9. Col.i.8. Philem. 5,7. Rey. ii. 4, 19. 


at end ins map ois(ovs ΕἾ και ξενιζομαι DF latt[mot am fuld harl(appy, Treg) fri] goth 
Pel. 

21. om τη C. 

22. rec aft κυριον ins inoovy χριστον, with C3DFLN* e g m 47 am [fuld harl] syr 
copt goth [Damase Ambrst |: ἡμῶν imo. xp. KP rel vulg-ed [demid] (Syr) [eth] Chr, 
(Victorin,): om ABC!MN?! 17 fri Chr-ms [Euthal-ms | Cyr). 

23. aft kupiov ins nuwy ALP bf k m o 17 vulg ({fuld demid &c] not am) fri Syr 
copt Chr, [Euthal-ms | Thl Ambrst. rec aft inaou adds xpiorov, with ACD F{-gr] 
KLMPN:? rel latt syrr copt «th arm Chr [Euthal-ms Damase] Ambrst; om BN! n 17. 
47 am(with tol F-lat al) goth Thdrt. 

24. om μου A 73. om αμην BFM 17 fuld(and tol) fri [Euthal-ms Ambrst] : 
ins ACDKLPX rel [vulg-clem am demid syrr copt goth wth arm Chr,-txt Thdrt-txt 
Damasc-txt ]. 


SUBSCRIPTION: rec adds eypapyn amo φιλιππων δια στεφανα και φουρτουνατου και 
αχαικου και τιμοθεου, with KL(first inserting ἐπιστολη) ἃ e f g k (m) n 47 [Euthal-ms], 
similarly (but for φιλιππων, epecov) ἃ h: eypapyn amo εφεσου B*P: eypapyn amo 
φιλιππων μακεδυνιας D?: εγραφη amo acias k.T.A., omg (as does m) mp. Kop. πρωτη, b 0: 
om altogether M1: txt AB!CX 17, and D!(adding ἐπληρωθὴ) F(prefixing ἐτελεσθη). 


On Aquila and Priscilla, see Rom. xvi. 3, 
4; Acts xviii. 2. They had removed from 
Corinth (Acts xvili. 1) to Ephesus (ib. 
26), and had there, as su'sequently at 
Rome (Rom. xvi. 3, 5), an assembly of 
the faithful meeting in their dwelling. 

οἱ 48. mavres—the whole Ephesian 
church. ἐν gtd. ay. | see Rom. xvi. 
16, note. 21—24. | Autograph con- 
clusion. ὃ ἀσπασμός is the final greet- 
ing, which, according to ref. 2 ‘Thess., 
was always in his own hand, the rest 
having been written (see Rom. xvi. 22) 
by an amanuensis. Παύλου is in 
apposition with ἐμοῦ implied in ἐμῇ, as 1]. 
ρ. 226, ὑμέτερον δὲ ἑκάστου θυμὸν ἀέξω : 
ἐμὸς τοῦ ἀθλίου βίος, and the like. See 
Kiihner, ὃ 499. 4. 22.1 He adds, as 
in Col. iv. 18; Eph. vi. 24, some exhorta- 
tion, or solemn sentence, in his own hand, 
as having especial weight. On the dis- 
tinction between φιλεῖν and ἀγαπᾷν see 
notes on John xxi.15. The negation here 
of the feeling of personal affection, “ has 
no love in his heart for,” is worthy of 
note, as connected with the curse which 
follows. ἤτω ἀνάθ.] On ἀνάθεμα, 
see note, Rom. ix. 3:—let him be 80- 


cursed. papavada | An Aramaic ex- 
pression, NN JV or NON NIT the (or our) 
Lord cometh (or, is come, as Chrys., al., 
ὁ κυρ. nu. ἦλθε: in 1 John iv. 2 the 
same Syriac form is used to express 
ἐληλυθότα) : probably unconnected with 
ἀνάθεμα: and added perhaps (Mey.) as 
recalling some remembrance of the time 
when Paul was among them: at all 
events, as a weighty watchword tending 
to recall to them the nearness of His 
coming, and the duty of being found 
ready for it :—not added, as Riickert, to 
stamp genuineness on the letter,—for why 
here rather than in other Epistles, espe- 
cially as those who were to bear it were so 
well known? See Stanley’s note. 

24. ἣ ay. μου] Because the Epistle had 


contained so much that was of a severe 


character, he concludes it with an expres- 
sion of affection ; so Chrys.: μετὰ τοσαύ- 
THY κατηγορίαν οὐκ ἀποστρέφεται, ἀλλὰ 
καὶ φιλεῖ καὶ περιλαμβάνει πόῤῥωθεν αὐτοὺς 
ὄντας. Hom. xliv. p. 411. ἐν xp. 
Ἴησ.] τουτέστιν, οὐδὲν ἀνθρώπινον ἢ cap- 
κικὸν ἣ ἀγάπη μου ἔχει, ἀλλὰ πνευματικῇ 
ἐστι καὶ ἐν χριστῷ. Theophyl. 


‘ 








C και ει- 
ρηνὴ... 

AKBCDEF 
KLMPxR 
abcef 
yhkim 
nol/, 47 


NS SERS -.- -.- SE — 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOYS B. 


1. 1 ἸΠαῦλος ἀπόστολος χριστοῦ “Inood * διὰ θελήματος * Rom. xv. 32 


λ ῇ a “ἢ a A 
θεοῦ, καὶ Τιμόθεος ὁ ἀδελφός, τῇ ” ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ » θεοῦ τῇ 
οὔσῃ ἐν ἹΚορίνθῳ “ σὺν τοῖς 4 ἁγίοις πᾶσιν τοῖς οὖσιν ἐν 


ὅλῃ τῇ ᾿Αχαΐᾳ. 


A b1Cor.i.2 
reff. 

ce = Acts xxiii. 
15, 1 Cor. 
i.2. Phil. 


9 e 7 e a \ e > , > K θ na 1. re 
Xapes ULL και ELPHVY agro €OU ἃ Acts ix. 13. 
Ἢ raf 3 al A 
πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ. 
ὑ Γὐλογητὸς ὁ ϑθεὸς καὶ ὃ πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν 
ἢ 


reff. 

e Rom. i. 7. 

f Rom. ix. 5 
reff. 

g Rom. xy. 6 
reff. 


TITLE. Steph 7 προς τοὺς κορινθιους δευτερα : elz παυλου του αποστολου ἢ προς 
κορινθιους ἐπιστολή δευτερα, with rel: τοῦ αγιου αποστολου παυλου επιστολὴ προ Κορ. 


8.1. (h): 
top of page. (P [def. ]) 


apxeTat mpos κυρινθιους B’ D! Ἐ(δευτερη) : [ἡ mp. Kop. B’ em. εκτεθεισα ws ev 
πίνακι Μ :] ἐπιστολὴ προς Kop. δευτερα k 1: txt ABKN m(devt.) ἢ ο 17. 47, and C at 


Cuap. I. 1. rec inoov bef χριστου, with ADGKL rel [latt Syr copt goth xth arm | 


Chr, Damase [Ambrst]: om iyo. xp. F(and lat) : 


[ Euthal-ms] Thdrt. 


Cuap. I. 1, 9.1 ADDRESS AND GREET- 
ING. 1, διὰ θελ. θεοῦ] see 1 Cor. i. 
1, note. Τιμόθεος ὁ ἀδ.} So of Sos- 
thenes, 1 Cor. i. 1; ‘one of of ἀδελφοί; 
—but perhaps in this case with peculiar 
emphasis: see 1 Cor. iv. 17; 1 Tim. i. 2, 
18; 2 Tim. ii. 1. On his being with Paul 


at this time, see Prolegg. to this Epistle, * 


§ 11. 4. σὺν τ. ἀγ. πᾶσιν... . This, 
and the Epistle to the Galatians, were cir- 
cular letters to all the believers in the 
respective countries: the variation of ex- 
pression in the two cases (ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις 
τ. Γαλατίας, Gal. i. 2) being accounted 
for by the circumstance that the matter 
of this Epistle concerned directly the 
church at Corinth, and indirectly all 
the saints in the province,—whereas that 
to the Galatians, being to correct deep- 
rooted Judaizing error, directly concerned 
all the churches of Galatia. Achaia 
comprehended Hellas and Peloponnesus ; 
the province was so named by the Ro- 
mans because they became, possessed of 
them by subduing the Achean league, 
Pausan. vii. 16. 7. See Acts xviii. 12. 
2.] See 1 Cor. i. 8. 8—11.] 
THANKSGIVING FOR DELIVERANCE FROM 
5 


ΡΞ 


5 


txt BMPN 17 hal(and mar al) syr 


GREAT DANGER OF HIS LIFE: — HIS 
ABILITY TO COMFORT OTHERS IN AaFFLIC- 
TION. Commentators have endeavoured 
to assign a definite purpose to this open- 
ing of the Epistle. De Wette thinks that 
Paul had xo definite purpose, except to 
pour out the thankfulness of his heart, 
and to begin by placing himself with his 
readers in a position of religious feeling 
and principle far above all discord and 
dissension. But I cannot agree with this. 
His purpose shews so plainly through the 
whole latter part of the chapter, that it is 
only consistent with vv. 12—24 to find it 
beginning to be introduced here also. I 
believe that Chrys. has given the right 
account: ἐλύπει Alay αὐτοὺς K. ἐθορύβει 
τὸ μὴ παραγενέσθαι ἐκεῖ τὸν ἀπόστολον, 
καὶ ταῦτα ἐπαγγειλάμενον, ἀλλὰ τὸν ἅπαντα 
ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ ἀναλῶσαι χρόνον, καὶ δοκεῖν 
αὐτῶν ἑτέρους προτετιμηκέναι. διὰ τοῦτο 
πρὸς τοῦτο ἱστάμενος τὸ θορυβεῖν (al. ἀνθ- 
ορμοῦν), λέγει τὴν αἰτίαν δι’ ἣν οὐ παρεγέ- 
vero’ οὐ μὴν ἐὲ εὐθείας αὐτὴν τίθησιν, οὐδὲ 
λέγει ὅτι οἶδα μὲν ὑποσχόμενος ἥξειν, 
ἐπειδὴ δὲ διὰ τὰς θλίψεις ἐνεποδίσθην, σύγ- 
Ὕνωτε, K. μὴ καταγνῶτέ τινα ὑπεροψίαν 
ἢ ῥᾳθυμίαν ἡμῶν" ἀλλ᾽ ἑτέρως αὐτὸ (al, 
2 ΄ 


ad 


625 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. j 
» - »-“ e h \ - i 5 ~ \ θ Ἀ , 
= Eph. i 17. Ιησοῦ χριστοῦ, ὁ ὃ πατὴρ τῶν ' οἰκτίρμὼν καὶ θεὸς πάσης aBcDF 
ames 1. 17 = 
͵ ¢ & a as ἜΝΝ ; ~ KLMPx 
i Rom. xi1- J) παρακλήσεως, 40 XqapaxaX\ov ἡμᾶς ᾿ἔπι Taon Τῇ « b ce : 
Col. iii. 12. ᾿ cr > \ ΄ Palin Pm - 
Hes. x28 θλίψει ἡμῶν, " εἰς τὸ δύνασθαι ἡμᾶς " παρακαλεῖν τοὺς 017.47 
Su | ΐ θλί διὰ ns 7 X21) pe ee 
(cuss ee eee Ayer διὰ τῆς ) παρακλήσεως " ἧς “παρακα- 


xciii. 19. 
k == Luke xvi. 
25. Acts xx. 


, Mba Geek Τῶν a θ a 5¢ θὰ o ΄, \ 
λούμεθα αὐτοὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, ὃ ὅτι καθὼς ° περισσεύει τὰ 
΄ A ‘a 3 an i -“ 

Ρ παθήματα τοῦ χριστοῦ “ εἰς ἡμᾶς, οὕτως "Oia τοῦ 


12. ch. ii. 7, “A 0 , My erat ΄ oF ες ὦ 6s ε" 

Sal. Gen. ἰστου TTEPLOO EVEL Kat ἢ TTapAaK ησις μῶν. €LTE 
xxiv. 67. , = ΜΗ τς Ὁ ἰ F Η 

1 = Mark xii δὲ ᾿Θλιβόμεθα. ὑπὲρ THs " ὑμῶν Ἰ παρακλήσεως καὶ σω- 

m. ¥. 

2. Matt. xiv. 14 al. fr. m Acts iii. 19. vii. 19 al. n constr., Rom. it. 16. o Rom. 

ili. 7 reff. p Rom. vii. 5 reff. (see note.) q = Rom. vy. 15. viii. 18. r — 1 Thess. 

iv. 2 s constr., | Cor. xii. 26. t = ch. iv. 8. vii.5. 1 Thess. i1.4, 2 Thess. 1. 


6.7. 1Tim. v.10. Heb. xi. 37 (Matt. vii. 14. Mark iii. 9) only. Ps. exix. 1. 


19 reff. and note. 


3. om 2nd ο F. 


4. for em, εν Ο 1n Eus, Chr, Antch, Procop,. (P [def.]) 


for εἰς, wa F [μέ possimus latt]. 


Ambr: vuwy 3. 


Ambr, Bede (not fri Jer, Ambrst). (P [def. }) 
5. for τα παθηματα, το παθημα Ὁ} [ D-gr, Tischdf: ta παθητα τη]. 
ins καὶ DIF τὰ 17. 80 latt copt goth. (vulg Damase om καὶ below.) 


Ὁ posn., see ch. xii. 


om ynuwy M Hil 

ins και bef avto: D!F latt 
for ὑπο, aro F(not G) 109. 

aft ουτως 

rec om Tou 


(bef 2nd χριστου) : ins ABCDFKM P(appy) δὲ rel Orig,[om δ. τ. x.,].—om from περισσ. 


to περισσ. L. 


6. for εἰτε δε, εἰ δε D'[-gr] 32: om δε C. 


τοῦτο) K. μεγαλοπρεπέστερον kK. ἀξιοπισ- 
τότερον κατασκευάζει, ἐπαίρων τῇ παραμυ- 
θίᾳ τὸ πρᾶγμα, ἵνα μηδὲ ἐρωτῶσι λοιπὸν 
τὴν αἰτίαν, δι᾽ ἣν ὑστέρησε. Hom.i. p. 420. 
Calvin, somewhat differently: ‘ Incipit 
ab hac gratiarum actione, partim ut Dei 
bonitatem pradicet, partim ut animet 
Corinthios suo exemplo ad persecutiones 
fortiter sustinendas : partim ut pia gloria- 
tione se efferat adversus malignas obtrec- 
tationes pseudapostolorum.” But this 
does not touch the matter of the post- 
poned journey to Corinth, which through 
the latter part of the chapter is coming 
more and more visibly into prominence, till 
it becomes the direct subject in ver. 23. 


3.] εὐλ., Blessed (above allothers) , 


ek ph iy ee 71 The 
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
Here, as in ref. Rom., De Wette would 
render, ‘ God, and the Father’ ...., which 
grammatically is allowable; but I prefer 
the other rendering, on account of its 
greater verisimilitude and simplicity. 

ὁ π. τ. οἰκτιρ.7 οἰκτ. can hardly be the 
gen. of the attribute, as De W. and Grot., 
seeing that oir. is plural and refers to acts 
of mercy; but as Chrys., p. 421, 6 οἰκτιρμοὺς 
τοσούτους ἐπιδειξάμενος : see ref. James. 
This meaning De W. himself recognizes in 
ὁ 0. πάσης mapaxA.,—‘ the God who works 
all (possible) comfort,’ and refers to 6 θεὸς 
τ. ἐλπίδυς, Rom. xv. 13. 4.) The 
Apostle in this Epistle uses mostly the 
Jirst person plur., perhaps as including 
Timothy, perhaps, inasmuch as he writes 
apostolically (cf. ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀποστύλους, 
ot himself and Apollos, 1 Cor. iv. 9), as 


for lst vuwy, ἡμων L. om Ist 


speaking of the Apostles in common. This 
however will not explain all places where 
it occurs elsewhere: e.g. 1 Thess. ii. 18, 
ἠθελήσαμεν ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ἐγὼ μὲν 
Παῦλος, καὶ ἅπαξ x. Sis,—where see note. 
So that after all perhaps it is best to regard 
it merely as an idiomatic way of speaking, 
when often only the singular is intended. 
In order that we may be able: not, 
‘so that we are able.’ διὰ τοῦτο yap παρ- 
εκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς, φησίν, va ἡμεῖς ἀλλήλους 
παυακαλῶμεν. Chrys. ib. “ Non 5101 vivebat 
Apostolus, sed Ecclesiz: ita quicquid gra- 
tiarum in ipsum conferebat Deus, non sibi 
soli datum reputabat, sed quo plus ad alios 
juvandos haberet facultatis.” Calv. 
ἧς, attr. for 7, or perhaps (Winer, edn. 6, 
§ 24. 1) for ἣν (παράκλησιν παρακαλεῖν). 
5.] ‘As He is, so are we in this 
world τ 1 John iv. 17. As the suffer- 
ings of Christ (endured by Christ, whether 
in his own person, or in his mystical body 
the Church, see Matt. xxv. 40, 45) abound 
towards us (i.e. in our case, see reti.) ;— 
even so through Christ our consolation 
also abounds. The form of expression is 


altered in the latter clause: instead of 7- 


παράκλησις τοῦ χριστοῦ περισ. We have 
ἡ παράκ. ἡμῶν περισσ. διὰ τοῦ χριστοῦ. 
And not without reason :—we suffer, be- 
cause we are His members: we are con- 
soled because He is our Head. There is 
no comparison (as Chrys., p. 422, ob yap 
ὅσα ἔπαθε, φησίν, ἐπάθομεν μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ 
περισσά) between the personal sufferings 
of Christ, and theirs. 6.1 And all 
this for your benefit. But whether we 
are afflicted, (it is) on behalf of your 


es 


4- 8, ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ Β. 629 

τηρίας τῆς ¥ ἐνεργουμένης ἐν ἡ ὑπομονῇ TOV αὐτῶν 4 παθη- + Rom. vi. 5 
, x 2 \ ς a ΄ ἀν, aN 7 Se B= ii. 7 

μάτων *@v καὶ ἡμεῖς πάσχομεν, καὶ ἡ " ἐλπὶς ἡμῶν " Re 

Ζ ΄ αὐτὸν ee te k ΄ ees a παρ, Acts i. 
βεβαία " ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν" "Ἡ εἴτε * παρακαλούμεθα, ὑπὲρ τῆς 


1 reff. 


j ͵ y constr., w. 
υ ὑμῶν παρακλήσεως καὶ σωτηρίας, 7 εἰδότες OTL Ws Fe Ofer 
τὰ τη ia is τ IP ᾽ - son, Acts 
5] lal ΄ “ \ aA . . “iii. 20. 
Ὁ κοινωνοί ἐστε τῶν I παθημάτων, οὕτως καὶ τῆς Jmapa- ἘΝῚ 20. 
7 8c > \ , ey a ο » = 9 , pi sr iv. 
κλήσεως. Οὐ γὰρ θέλομεν ὑμᾶς “ ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, ¥ (ref). 


aA / e a A / n~ 9 j Η τι 
Limp τῆς θλίψεως ἡμῶν τῆς γενομένης ἐν τῇ ᾿Ασίᾳ, «Hit! 
\ ee ͵ or. x. 18, 
ὅτι “ καθ᾽ “ ὑπερβολὴν ὑπὲρ δύναμιν ὃ ἐβαρήθημεν, ὥςτε 20 reff 
c om. 1. 
15. xi, 25. 1 Cor. x. 1. xii. 1. 1 Thess. iv. 13. = John i. 30. ch. viii. 23. 2 Thess. ii. 1. 


e Rom. vii. 13 reff. f f = Acts xxvi. 13 al. g Matt. xxvi. 43 (|| ΜΚ. ν. σ.). Luke ix. 
32. xxi. 34. ch. ν. 4. 1Tim.v.16 onlyt. Isa. i. 4 Symm. [Aq., &c.?j 


και σωτηριας Β 17. 176. rec has εἰτε παρακαλουμεθα ὑπερ της υμων παρακλήσεως 
και σωτηριας bef και ἡ ελπις μων βεβαια ὑπερ υμων : εἰτε παρακ. UTEP T. υμ. παρακλη- 
σεως TNS ενεργουμενης EV ὑπομονὴ τῶν avT. παθ. ων K. Nu. π. καὶ ἡ ελπ., OME και 
σωτηριας, ΑΟΜΡΝ am(with flor fuld? harl tol’) fri Syr copt 2th (arm Ephr,) Antch, 
[Ambrst (Jer,)], and, but insg καὶ σωτηριας, m fuld!: sive consolamur pro vestra 
consolatione sive exhortamur pro vestra exhortatione et salute vulg-ed(with demid) : 
txt (BDFK)L rel syr[has rns σωτηριας w-ast] goth Chr, Thdrt Damase Phot Thi 
(Ec.—om avtwy Καὶ : avtov Ὁ ὁ g Καὶ 0.—ws D'!F (G-lat has both).—for nuwy, vuwy Β o. 


7. rec (for ws) wsrep, with D?-3[-gr} KL rel Chr, Thdrt: οἱ (= εἰ 3) F{-gr], si D-lat 
Syr: om G-lat: sicut F-lat [vulg Ambrst]: txt ABC D}{[-gr] MPN 17 Orig, Ephr 


Damasce. 


D-lat Syr goth. 


των παθηματων bef εστε DF latt goth. 


om ουτως Εἰ ποῦ F-lat| 


8. for υπερ, περι ACDFPR Ὁ m? 0 17. 47 Orig[-c,] Bas, Chr, Thdrt Antch, Tert: 


txt BK LM rel [Chr,] Damase ΤῊ] Cc. 


rec aft γεν. ins nu, with D3[-gr] KLN? 


rel [syrr copt-wilk goth eth] Bas, Chr, Thdrt [Antch] Damase Ambrst: om ABC 


D!FMPR! 17 latt [arm] Orig[-c, Euthal-ms] (Tert,) Jer,. 


for ὑπερ, παρα D!TF. 


rec εβαρηθημεν bef ὑπερ δυναμιν, with DFKL rel vulg syrr goth Chr, Thdrt 
[Antch] Damasc Tert Ambrst: txt ABCMPS m 17 fri arm [(Orig-c,) Euthal-ms]j 


Bas, Jer). 


comfort (εἰς τὸ δύνασθαι x.T.A. ver. 4, 
only now applied to the Corinthians) and 
salvation (the great end of the παρά- 
KAnots), Which (viz. παράκλησις and σω- 
τηρία) is working (not, as Chrys., Theo- 
phyl., Estius, Beza, al., ‘being worked :’ 
the passive does not occur in St. Paul) in 
the endurance of the same sufferings 
which we also suffer ;—and our hope is 
stedfast on your behalf (that you zz7/l en- 
dure hardness, and be consoled and saved) ; 
—or whether we are comforted, (it is) for 
your comfort and salvation. This place 
of the words καὶ--- μῶν agrees best with the 
sense, besides being in accordance with the 
best Mss. Their position has perhaps been 
altered to bring the two parts vf the dilem- 
ma closer together, and because ἐλπὶς ἡμῶν 
seemed to suit the part. εἰδότες, and the 
future supposed to be implied after οὕτως 
καί (asin E. V.). The objection to this is 
(as De W.) that the ἐλπίς clearly must be 
referred to σωτηρία, which however is not 
hinted at in ver. 7. 7.] εἰδότες re- 
fers back to mapaxadovucba:—we are 
comforted with the assurance that, &c. 
After οὕτως καί understand not ἔσεσθε, but 
ἐστε: he is speaking generally, of the com- 


munity of consolation subsisting mutually: 


between himself and the Corinthians ; and 
it was this thought which helped to console 
him. 8.] see var. read. It is gene- 
rally supposed that the tribulation here 
spoken of was the danger into which Paul 
was brought by the tumult at Ephesus, re- 
lated in Acts xix. This opinion has been 
recently defended by Neander, Wieseler, 
and Dr. Davidson, but impugned by De 
Wette, on the grounds, (1)-that ἐν τῇ ᾿Ασίᾳ 
can hardly refer to Ephesus, which Paul 
generally names, 1 Cor. xv. 32; xvi. 8; 
(2) that he was not in danger of his life 
in this tumult. The first ground is hardly 
tenable: there would be an appropriate- 
ness in ἐν τῇ ᾿Ασίᾳ here, as he has in 
his mind an apologetic account of the 
reasons which hindered him from leaving 
those parts and coming to them. I own, 
however, that the strong expresstons here 
used do not seem to me to find their justifi- 
cation in any thing which we know of that 
tumult or its consequences. I am unable 
to assign any other event as in the Apos- 
tle’s mind: but the expressions seem rather 
to regard a deadly sickness, than a perse- 
cution : see below, vv. 9, 10. καθ᾽ 
ὑὕπερβ. signifies the greatness of the afflic- 
tion itself, objectively considered: ὑπὲρ 


630 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. BE: 
peniv.sonly.® ἐξαπορηθῆναι ἡμᾶς καὶ ‘tod ζῆν: 35 ἀλλὰ αὐτοὶ ἐν 
5. iXxXXVil. 
15 only. j ς a Nir he FZ rn fa / ΤᾺ ΄ m % \ 
pan. 1 ἑαυτοῖς τὸ " ἀπόκριμα τοῦ θανάτου | ἐσχήκαμεν, ™ wa μὴ 
Acts iii. 12 ᾿ 5 . an > \ A a A 
ref. πὸ πεποιθότες " ὦμεν 5 ἐφ᾽ 1 ἑαυτοῖς, ἀλλ᾽ 5 ἐπὶ TO θεῷ τῷ 


j Ist pers., ch. : 3 β ; : 
iii. 1 reff. aod = 10 a > r 
καρ one, PEYELPOVTL TOUS νεκρούς, *Y ὃς ἐκ 4THALKOUTOU θανάτου 
oo ii. 13. via. 5 2c .7 ς ε μα, 3 a tu 2 ͵ “ 
> Epp VOaATO μας Kab PUCETAL, εις ον ηλπίκαμεν οτι 
m = Johni. 31. 


n Heb. ii. 13, ΝΖ 8 47) ll v , } YTS Kare 
ΠΟ ἼΩΝ, ak: Και ετι βυσεται, συνυπουργο υντῶν και υμων ὑπερ 
17. 5 

Ὁ constr.,as above (η). Mark x. 34. Luke xi. 22. xviii. 9 only. Ps. ii. 12. w. acc., ch. ii. 3 reff. p = 1Cor. 

xv. 4 reff. : q Heb. ii. 3. James 11]. 4. Rev. xvi. 18 onlyt. 2 Mace. xii. 3. ri Choa 
23. Ps.lv.13. (see ἀποθνήσκειν, 1 Cor. xy. 31.) s Kom. vii. 24 7 if t see Rom. xv. 
12 reff. u perf., 1 Cor, xv. 19 reff. v here only t. 


9. om εσχηκαμεν [)}. 
Thdrt Thi. 

10. for eppv., ερυσατο B!. rec (for Ist ρυσεται) ρυεται (see notes), with DSFKLM 
rel vulg-ed(with fuld F-lat) syr goth Orig{-c],(and int,) Chr, Thdrt Th] ec [Ambrst ] 
Jer,: txt BCPN 17. 47 G-lat am(with mar tol) copt '(eth{-rom doubtful (Tischdf) |) 
arm (Ath,) [Euthal-ms] Damase.—om καὶ ρυσεται A D![and lat] demid Syr zth-pl 


θεον Tov εγειραντα Εἰ: εγειραντι Ὁ] 11 o Cyr[-ms-p, | 


Chry.1. om oT: B Di. gr | M: 


goth. 
11. [for upoov] query A, 


Suv., the relation of it to our power of en- 
durance, subjectively. ὥςτε ἐξ.) So 
that we utterly despaired even of life. 
Such an expression surely would not be 
used of a tumult, where life would have 
been the first thing in danger, if Paul had 
been at all mixed up in it,—but to some 
wearing and tedious suffering, inducing de- 
spondency in minor matters, which even 
reached the hope of life itself. 
9.1 ἀλλά, moreover,—carries en and in- 
tensifies the description of his hopeless 
state. We had in ourselves the re- 
sponse of death, i. 6. our answer within 
ourselves to the question, ‘ Life or Death ?’ 
was, ‘ Death.’ So Vulg., Estius, Billroth, 
Rickert, Meyer, De Wette. τ. ἀπόκρ. 
may perhaps mean, the ‘sentence,’ as 
Hesych.: ἀπόκριμα, κατάκριμα, Wipov,— 
and most Commentators, The perfect 
ἐσχήκαμεν is here (see also ch, ii. 12, 13) 
n a historical sense, instead of the aorist : 
which is unusual. Winer, edn. 6, § 40. 4 
(see Moulton’s note 4, p. 340), illustrates 
the usage by ἦλθεν καὶ εἴληφεν (τὸ βιβ- 
λίον), Rev. v. 7: see also Rev. viii. 5. 
ἵνα μὴ . . .7 very similarly ch. iv 
7, ἔχομεν δὲ τὸν θησαυρὺν τοῦτον ἐν ὄστρα- 
κίνοις σκεύεσιν, ἵνα ἣ ὑπερβολὴ τῆς δυνά- 
μεως ἡ τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ μὴ ἐξ ἡμῶν. 
τῷ ἐγ. τ. νεκρούς] Our thoughts were 
weaned from all hope of surviving in 
this life, and fixed on that better deliver- 
ance which God shall work when He raises 
us from the dead. To see in this expres- 
sion merely a figure (De W.), and under- 
stand ‘ Who raiseth the dead’ as = ‘ Who 
delivers men from peril of their lives? 
because such peril is below and elsewhere 
(ch. xi. 23) called @dvaros,—is surely very 


και bef ort ΕἾ not F-lat]. 
F-lat] ἢ k [Chr,] Ambrst Jer [goth eth om καὶ also]. 


for ὑπερ, περι DIF. 


om ev: D? ΕἾ not 
for 2nd puo., ρυεται F(-gr | 


τὴ Senoe: bef vrep μων C 


forced. Understanding it literally as 
above, I cannot see how it can be spoken 
with reference to the Ephesian tumult. 
If it alludes to any external danger, I 
should be disposed to refer it to the same 
obscure part of Paul’s history to which he 
alludes 1 Cor. xv.32, where he also speaks of 
the hope of the resurrection as his great 
support. But there would be this objection, 
that these two passages can hardly refer to 
the same event; this evidently had taken 
place since the sending of the first Epistle. 

10.| Who rescued us from so great 
a death, and will rescue us,—on whom 
we hope that He will also continue to 
rescue us. ‘The rec. ῥύεται, has been sub- 
stituted for the fut. ῥύσεται, as more ap-~ 
propriate. But it regards the immediate 
future,—the καὶ ἔτι ῥύσεται the continu- 
ance of God’s help in time distant and 
uncertain. The whole verse (as De W. 
confesses, who although he repudiates the 
Ephesian tumult, yet interprets the pas- 
sage as alluding to external danger) seems 
to favour the idea of bodily sickness being 
in the Apostle’s mind. 11.1 ovv- 
πυπουργούντων --- with whom? From the 
similar passage Rom. xv. 30, συναγωνίσασ- 
θαί μοι ἐν ταῖς mposevxais ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ, τὸ 
would seem as if μοι should be supplied ;— 
but he himself could hardly be said ὕπουρ- 
γεῖν, though he well might ἀγωνίσασθαι. 
We must therefore understand the prepo- 
sition either with Chrys., Hom. ii. p. 432, 


ἃ ρνεται 


ABCDF 
KLMPx 
abcdf 
ghkim 
no 17.47 


τουτέστιν, εὐχομένων πάντων ὑμῶν ὑπὲρ 


᾿ἡμῶν, τοῦ as merely signifying coinci- 


dence with the purpose to be accom- 
plished, as in μὴ mpose@vTos ἡμᾶς τοῦ 
ἀνέμου, Acts xxvii. 7, where see note: 

ἵνα ἐκ πολλῶν προφςώπων..... .7 


9-- 12, 


ἡμῶν τῇ δεήσει, ἵνα ἡ ἐκ πολλῶν " προςώπων τὸ 
. al Z ΄ ἃ ὃ \ AAG b > θῇ ¢ ‘ ΄ a 
ἡμᾶς *xapicpa * διὰ πολλῶν ” εὐχαριστηθῇ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν. 
12°H yap “καύχησις ἡμῶν αὕτη ἐστίν, τὸ μαρτύριον 
τῆς “ συνειδήσεως ἡμῶν, OTL ἐν ἶ ἁγιότητι καὶ ὅ εἰλικρινείᾳ 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B. 


691 


. ὙΞ 

J ELS w= ch. ii. 2. 
ll. 5. 

x — here only. 
πρόςωπον 
ἀξιόχρεων 
τὸ προστη- 
σόμενον. 
Polyb. xy. 2a. 


A a > 2 / i re Paes ee 7 ΄ “ 8. 
ἢ τοῦ θεοῦ, οὐκ ἐν σοφίᾳ ' σαρκικῇ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν Ἰ᾿ χάριτι θεοῦ, y= λει: xx. 


k ἀνεστράφημεν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ, 'ἱ περισσοτέρως δὲ πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 


29 41.1 8 80] Cor. i. 9. 

c Rom. iii. 27 reff. d Matt. viii. 4 al. fr. 
xxiii. 1. Rom. ii. 15al.fr.{ (Eccles. x. 20.) 
only+. 2 Macc. xv. 2 only. 


h so δικαιοσ. θεοῦ, Rom. iii. 21, 22. 
k = Eph. ii.3. 1 Tim. iii. 15. 1 Pet. i. 17. 


Wisd. xvii. 11 only. 


2 Pet. ii. 18. 


21. xxiv. 24. 
ch. ii. 4 al. 
z = Rom. v. 15, 
16. vi. 23. xi. 
b 1 Cor. xi. 24 reff. constr., here only. 
e = (John viii. 9.] Ack 
f Heb. xii. IN 


Josh. xxiv. 27. 


g1Cor. ν. 8. ch. ii. 17 only+. (-ἥς, Phil. i. 10.) 
11 Cor. iii. 3 reff. j — Rom.i.5. 1 Cor. iii. 10 al. 
Ezek. xix. 6. see Matt. xvii. 22, 1 ch. ii. 


4 218., Paul. Heb. ii. 1. xiii. 19 (Mark xv. 14 ν. r,) only+. (-pos, 1 Cor. xii. 23, 24.) 


vulg copt Chr,: om [υπ. ημ.} Sedul, syr has it with ast. 


[G-gr] &!(but corrd) e?. 


for Ist nuwy, vuwy A 


ev πολλω Tposwrw ΕἾ -gr] M 67? Chr,{ txt, |, in multi- 
facie D-lat, in multa facie G-lat.—homeceotel in P πολλων to πολλων. 


vuas 17. 


[for 2nd nuwy| υμων BD3 F[-gr(not α)}] KLP ce? ἔξ ΒΕ] τὴ ἢ ὁ [eth(appy, 


Treg) } Damase Phot(in ic). 
12. for 2nd ἡμων, vuwy(but corrd) X!. 


rec (for αγιοτητι) απλοτητι (see note, 


and Eph vi. 5, Col iii. 22), with DFLN? latt syrr goth Chr, Thdrt ΤῊ] Gc Ambrst : 


txt ABCKMPN?! m 17 copt arm Clem, Orig 


ev bef εἰλικρινεια A. 
DMR?3b a τὰ 17.47 Damasc,. 
Damasc,[{om μ1.]- σαρκινη F. 


“ Three constructions of this verse are pos- 
sible: (1) to take ἐκ πολλ. προςώπ. as well 
as διὰ πολλῶν with εὐχαριστηθῇ, -- in 
order that the mercy shewn to me may be 
given thanks for on my behalf by many 
persons with many words’ (Storr, Opusce. 
ii. 253): but the rendering ‘ with many 
words,’ is objectionable, see Matt. vi. 7 :— 
(2) to take ἐκ πολλ. mposwm. with evxap., 
and διὰ πολλῶν with τὸ εἰς Nu. χάρ.---- in 
order that the mercy shewn to me by means 
of (the intercession of) many, may be given 
thanks for by many persons on my behalf’ 
(Theophyl., Billroth, Meyer, who explain 
ἐκ π. mpos#m. ‘ex multis oribus:’ Stan- 
ley, ‘from many upturned faces’): but 
the position of the words is against this,— 
and it is more natural that the mention of 
the effect of the intercession should pre- 
cede that of the thanksgiving. (3) Con- 
sequently, the best method is to take ἐκ 
TOAA. Tposmm. with τὸ εἰς ju. χάρ., and 
διὰ πολλῶν with εὐχαρ. (Beza, Calov., 
Estius, Fritz., Rickert, al.):—in order 
that the mercy shewn to us by the inter- 
cession of many persons, may by many 
be given thanks for on our behalf.” De 
Wette. The emphasis of the whole 
being on the ἐκ πολλῶν προςώπων, he 
places it first, even before the art., after 
which it would naturally eome. 
προςώπων, ‘persons, a later meaning, 
which Phrynichus (see Wetst.) blames as 
used by of ἀμφὶ τὰς δίκας ῥήτορες. 

12. 94 EXPRESSION OF HIS CONFI- 
DENCE IN HIS INTEGRITY OF PURPOSE 
TOWARDS THEM (12—14), AND DEFENCE 


, [Euthal-ms] Antch Damasc,. ins 
rec om Tov, with FKLPX* rel Orig, ΤῊ] Gc: ins ABC 
ins καὶ bef ove BM a τὰ vulg(and F-lat) syr 


OF HIMSELF AGAINST THE CHARGE OF 
FICKLENESS OF PURPOSE IN NOT HAVING 
COME TO THEM (15—24). 12.) yap, 
reason why they should help him with their 
united prayers. καύχησις] viewed in 
its ground and substance. But we must 
not say that it is for καύχημα : the Apostle 
regards the μαρτύριον and the καύχησις 
as coincident :—it is not the testimony, 
&c., of which he boasts, but in which his 
boasting itself consists. ἁγιότ.) ἁπλό- 
Τητι seems to be a gloss from Eph. vi. 
5:—in holiness and sincerity of God: 
i.e. either ‘belonging to God, as ἢ δικαιοσ. 
αὐτοῦ, Matt. vi. 33, or ‘which is the gift 
of God,’ as in ref. Rom.,—or better than 
either, as Εἰ. V., ‘ godly,’ i.e. maintained 
as in the service of and with respect to 
God. Calvin interprets it, ‘ coram Deo. 
See on ch. ii. 17; and on the senses of 
ἁγιότ. and ἁπλότ., Stanley’s note. 

οὐκ ἐν cod. aap. | which fleshly wisdom 
is any thing but holy and pure, having 
many windings and insincerities in order 
to captivate men. ἀλλ᾽ ἐν yap. 
θεοῦ) but in the grace of God, i.e. in 
that χάρις which he had received (ref. 
Rom.) eis ὑπακοὴν πίστεως ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς 
Zéveoww—the grace of his apostleship. To 
this he often refers, see Rom. xii. 3, xv. 
15; Eph. iii. 2, al. περισσοτέρως | 
“Non quod apud alios minus sincere con- 
versatus fnisset; sed quia majora sincere 
suz conversationis documenta apud Corin- 
thios ostenderat: ut quibus gratis ae sine 
stipendio preedicasset evangelium, parcens 
eorum infirmitati.” Estius. But perhaps 


632 


m Luke xii. 51. 
Num. xiii. 29. 

n Acts viii. 28 
reff. 

ΟἹ Cor. ix. 8 
reff. 

p Acts xxiii. 
28 reff. 

q 1 Cor. i. 8 
only (reff.). 

r constr., see 
1 Cor. xiv. 
37. 

s Rom. xi. 25 
(reff.). xv. 15, 24. ch. ii. 5 only. 

u Rom. iv. 6 reff. v 1 Cor. i. 8 reff. 

2. Eph. iii. 12. Phil. iii. 4 only. P. 


13. om αλλ᾽ F. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


i. 


13 οὐ yap ἄλλα γράφομεν ὑμῖν ™aXN ἢ ἃ ™ ἀναγινώσκετε 
ο ἢ ο καὶ Ῥ ἐπιγινώσκετε, ἐλπίζω δὲ ὅτι 4 ἕως 4 τέλους P ἐπι- 
ὕσεσθε. 1+ καθὰ τ Gore ‘us * ame. PME 

γνώσεσθε, 1: καθὼς καὶ Ὁ' ἐπέγνωτε ἡμᾶς " ἀπὸ "ὃ μέρους, 
ὅτι ᾿ καύχημα ὑμῶν ἐσμεν " καθάπερ καὶ ὑμεῖς ἡμῶν ἐν τῇ 
ἡ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ἰησοῦ. 

/ 3 a , \ e cal 3 “ [4 , 
ποιθήσει ἐβουλόμην πρότερον πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐλθεῖν, ἵνα δευτέ- 


t Paul (Rom. iv. 2 418.) only, exc. Heb. ili. 6. Deut. x. 21 al. 


15 καὶ Κ᾽ ταύτη TH * πε- 


w dat., 1 Cor. ix. 7. xi. ὃ ἃ]. x ch. iii. 4. viii. 


4 Kings xviii. 19 only. 


om ἢ ἅ ἃ : om ἤ 4. [17] 219' Svr goth arm: om ἅ Dl. 


om ἢ kat επιγινώσκετε (homeotel) B οἱ 81. 41. 109. 288 (Ec: om ἡ ΕΚ 114 latt copt 


arm Awmbrst. 


rec ins kat bef ews, with D3[-gr] KLMP rel syr Chr, Thdrt [Antch, ] 


Thi Ge: om ABCD!FR 17 latt Syr copt goth arm Damasc [Euthal-ms Ambrst]. 


14. om καθ. κ. vu. nu. Κ. 


rec om last ἡμων, with ACD [K¢e sil) } L rel goth 


(Ec : ins ΒΕΜΡΝ m 17 vulg Syr syr-w-ast copt 2th arm Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Antch, 


Damasc } Ambrst. 


aft ino. add χριστου D'F MP §&3(but erased) Ὁ m o latt Syr 


syr-w-ast copt goth eth arm-ed Chr Antch ΤῊ] [Ambrst]. 

15. eAdew bef προς υμας DFKL rel Jatt Syr copt goth Chr-ms Thdrt Thl [Ambrst] : 
txt ABCMPN (a) ἢ m 17 syr [arm Euthal-ms] Chr Damasc.—rec zpos vuas ελθειν heft 
mporepov, with (K h 47) copt Thdrt: eA@ew mpotepoy προς υμας a [Antch,(ro mp.) |: 


it may relate only to the longer time, and 
greater opportunities which he had had at 
Corinth for shewing his purity of purpose: 
so Calv., De W. 13, 14. Confirmation 
of the foregoing assertion. For we do not 
write to you any other things, except 
those which ye read, or [even| acknow- 
ledge (by experience of facts), and I hope, 
shall [continue to] acknowledge to the 
end :—i. e. ‘my character in my writings 
is one and the same, not fickle and chang- 
ing, but such as past facts have sub- 
stantiated it to be, and as I hope future 
facts to the end of my life will continue to 
do” ἀναγινώσκοντες γὰρ ἐπιγινώσκετε, 
ὅτι ἃ σύνιστε ἡμῖν ἐν τοῖς ἔργοις, ταῦτα καὶ 
ἐν τοῖς γράμμασι λέγομεν" καὶ οὐκ ἐναντιοῦ- 
ται ὑμῶν ἣ μαρτυρία ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς, ἀλλὰ 
συνάδει τῇ ἀναγνώσει ἡ γνῶσις, ἣν προλα- 
βόντες εἴχετε (al. ἔχετε) περὶ ἡμῶν. 
Chrys., Hom. iii. p. 443, who has the 
advantage of being able to express in his 
exposition the play of words in ava- and 
ἐπι-γινώσκετεις, ΑΒ also ye did partly 
(that part of you, viz. which have fairly 
tried me: ἀπὸ μέρους, because they were 
divided in their estimate of him, and those 
who were prejudiced against him had shut 
their minds to this knowledge. Chrys. 
refers it to what follows: μετριάζων εἶπεν: 
Theophyl. to the not yet completed testi- 
mony of his ἐναρέτου Biov: Estius and 
Calvin, to their inadequate estimation of 
him, which he blames: but I much preter 
the above. So most Commentators) ac- 
knowledge us, that (not ‘because,’ putting 
a colon at μέρους, as Luth., Griesbach, 
and Scholz: nor is it to be joined with 
ἐπιγνώσεσθε, what follows being parenthe- 
sized, as Theophyl., al., Meyer, Olsh.) we are 
your boast, [even] as ye [also] are ours, 


in the day of the Lord Jesus. ἐσμεν, 
‘present, as of that which is a settled re- 
cognized fact. 
its being joined with ἐπιγνώσεσθε, as Olsh. 
The experimental mutual knowledge of 
one another as a καύχημα was not confined 
to what should take place ἐν τῇ jm. τ. κ. 
Ἰησοῦ, but regarded a present fact, which 
should receive its full completion at the day 
of the Lord. 15—24.] His defence uf 
himself against the charge of fickleness of 
purpose for not having come to them. 

15.| ταύτῃ τῇ TeT., i.e. of my character 
being known to you as that of an earnest 
and sincere man. πρότερον belongs 
to ἐλθεῖν, not to ἐβουλόμην. πρότερον, 
viz. before he visited Macedonia, where he 
now was. ἵνα δευτέραν χάριν σχῆτε] 
that you might have a second benefit (ef- 
fusion of the divine x&pis by my presence : 
not=xapav as Chrys., see var. read.). 

δευτέραν. second, because there would thus 
have been opportunity for é¢wo visits, one 
in going towards Macedonia, the other in 
returning. This is the interpretation of De 
Wette, Bleek, and Wieseler, and I believe 
the only one which the words will bear. 
The other, according to which δευτέραν 
χάριν would mean ‘a second benefit,’ by 
my Visiting you for the second time, is in 
my view unnatural, and would hardly have 
justified the use of δευτέραν at all. For 
come when he would, the xdpis of the 
second visit would be the δευτέρα χάρις, 
and the conferring a δευτέρα χάρις would 
have been of no signification in the present 


connexion, which is to state a purpose of 


paying them two visits in one and the same 
journey. The first of these he characterizes 
by πρότερον .. . €A@eiv,—the second by 
δευτέρα apis, implying also the first. So 


But this is no ground for. 


«.tva M. 
ABCDF 
KLdxra 
bedef 
ghkim 
no17.47 





15--- 1 8, ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B. 635 


, a \ , a om : 
ραν χάριν σχῆτε, 16 καὶ τ δι ὑμῶν 7 διελθεῖν ὃ εἰς Maxe- y = here ony. 
z Acts ix. 32 
Ἷ reff. tome: 
xx. 18, 20. 


i ͵ ΕΣ Ν nw ral 
δονίαν, καὶ πάλιν ἀπὸ Μακεδονίας ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς Kat 
>) lal fol > 5 al i 4 
ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν "ἡ προπεμφθῆναι εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν. '7 τοῦτο οὖν {eR χν. 


oN , me ce» a @ ὮΝ , e 2 , ᾿ Ἃ a Mark ly. 30 Ne 
βουλόμενος μὴ τι “ἄρα τῇ *éXadpia " ἐχρησάμην ; ἢ Acts xvii. 
ἃ ,] \ s , “ 5 . «Ve 
ἃ ‘Boudevopat § κατὰ ὃ σάρκα ' βουλεύομαι, ἵνα ἢ “Tap Bony. . 
\ Ny) \ ! \ \ j , \ b Act -3 
ἐμοὶ TO ἱναὶ ναί, Kat τὸ ἰοὺ ov; 18 Ἐπιστὸς δὲ ὁ θεός, τεῦ 


c in interrog., 


d here only+. (-pos, ch. iy. 17.) Θ᾽ ΞΞ- ch. 10,125, (Cor 


vii. 21 reff.) fepp., here bis only. Acts y. 33. xxvii. 39. gospp., Luke xiv. 31. John (xi. 
53 v. r.) xii. 10 only. Isa. iii. 9 al. g Rom. i. ὃ reff, h = Rom. xii. I6 al. 
i Matt. v. 87. James v. 12. k — 1 Cor. i. 9 reff. 


txt ABC(DFL)MP N-corr! m 17 (rel) Jatt syrr goth [arm Euthal-ms] Chr, Damase 
[Ambrst].—to mporepoy L rel [Antch,] Thl Gc: to δευτερον K: om προτερον XN}. 
χαραν B L(Tischdf(N. T. ed 7 [and 8])) ῬΝ5 31. 71-3. 80. 115 Thdrt, [Antech, 1. 
(Chr says: χάριν δὲ ἐνταῦθα τὴν χαρὰν λέγει.) rec exnte ( probably from 
similarity of sande. There is nothing in what Tischdf (ed 7 {not 81) says against 
σχῆτε as being conformed to the tense of ἐβουλόμην, seeing that that word may be 
either imperfect or aor), with ADFKL rel: txt BCP Thdrt, [Euthal-ms Antch, | 
Damase. 
16. δια F(not G). 
Damasc: «Adew ἃ Ὁ ὁ (ec [proficisci D-lat?| 
BC D8[-gr] KLN rel vulg [F-lat] syrr Chr, Thdrt Thl [Euthal-ms Ambrst]. 
_ Rom xv. 28.) for vp, ap D!F b1 0 47 Chr-mss Thdrt-ms, εφ 17. 
17. for ουν, δὲ A; vero igitur goth. rec. βουλευόμενος, with DK rel G-lat syrr 
goth «th arm Thdrt Ambrst: BovAevoouevos L: txt ABCFPR ach mo 17 vulg copt 
Chr, {Euthal-ms] Damase. om τη F Thdrt. [euov Pbo.] 


Acts (vii. 1.] xxi. 38. 


for διελθ., ἀπελθεῖν A D[-gr] F[-gr P arm] copt Chr, 
: proficiscerer aut transirem G-lat: txt 
(See 


that I do not believe this passage to be 
relevant to the question respecting the 
number of visits which Paul had made to 
Corinth previously to writing these Epis- 
tles. See on that question, Prolegg. to 
1 Cor. § v. 16.| If this is the same 
journey which is announced in 1 Cor. xvi. 
5, the idea of visiting them in the way to 
Macedonia as well as after having passed 
through it, must have occurred to him 
subsequently to the sending of that Epis- 
tle; or may even then have been a wish, 
but not expressed, from uncertainty as to 
its possibility,—the main and longer visit 
being there principally dwelt on. But 
perhaps the following is the more likely 
account of the matter. He had announced 
to them in the lost Epistle (see 1 Cor. v. 
9) his intention, as here, of visiting them 
on his way to Macedonia: but the intel- 
ligence from ‘‘them of Chloe” had altered 
his intention, so that, in 1 Cor. xvi., he 
speaks of visiting them after he should 
have passed through Macedonia. For 
this he was accused of levity of purpose. 
Certainly, some intention of coming to 
them seems to have been mentioned in 
that lost Epistle: see 1 Cor. iv. 18. But 
the προπεμφθῆναι εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν can 
hardly but be coincident with the alms- 
bearing scheme of 1 Cor. xvi. 4; in which 
case the two plans certainly are modifica- 
tions of one and the same. 17.] py τοὺς 
Did I at all use levity (of purpose)? τῇ 
ἐλαφ., as ἡ ἀρετή, ἡ TioTis,—the art. 
being generic. Olsh., De Wette, Billroth, 


take it to mean ‘the levity of purpose 
which has been laid to my charge : Winer, 
‘the levity of purpose inherent in human 
nature. Or those things which I plan, 
do I plan according to the flesh (1. 6. ac- 
cording to the changeable, self-contradic- 
tory, and insincere purposes of the mere 
worldly and ungodly man), that there may 
be with me (not, so that there is with 
me: he is speaking not merely of the re- 
sult, but of the design: ‘do J plan like the 
worldly, that I may shift and waver as 
suits me?’) the Yea, yea, and the Nay, 
nay (i.e. both affirmation and negation 
concerning the same thing)? Chrys., Theo- 
doret, Theophy]l., (c., “Calv., Bengel, 
Billroth, Winer, al., take it thus: ‘ Or 
those things which I plan, do I plan after 
the flesh (as fleshly men do), so that my 
yea must (at all events) be yea, and my 
nay, nay ?’ i.e. as worldly men who per- 
form their promise at all hazards, and 
whatever the consequences, whereas I am 
under the guidance of the Spirit, and can 
only journey whither He permits. But 
this explanation is directly against the 
next verse, where val καὶ οὔ is clearly 
parallel to vat val καὶ od οὔ here, the words 
being repeated, as in ref. Matt., without 
altering the sense : and inconsistent with 
ver. 23 and ch. ii. 1, where he says that 
his alteration of plan arose from a desire 
to spare them. See the whole discussed 
in Stanley’s note. 18.1 Such fickleness, 
you know, was not my habit in preaching 
to you. Chrys. gives the connexion well : 


634 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. I. 19—24. 

4 c , ς al c \ € nw ’ » i \ \ i v 
leonstr., see 'OTL ὁ λόγος ἡμῶν ὁ πρὸς ὑμᾶς οὐκ ἔστιν ' ναὶ καὶ ‘ov. 
Rom. xiv. 11. Ξ τ = 9 54 . ε > ΓΝ 9 
jaath ait 19 ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ γὰρ υἱὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς χριστὸς ὁ ™év ὑμῖν δι 
n = Acts vili. 5 


reff. 

o constr., Matt. ὃ ae 
x. 14. 

p Acts i. 4 reff. oun eyeveTo 

ἃ Matt. xix. 18. 
Mark ix. 23. 


ἡμῶν ™ κηρυχθείς, δι’ ἐμοῦ καὶ Σιλουανοῦ καὶ Τιμοθέου, 
ἱναὶ καὶ ‘ov, ἀλλὰ ναὶ ἐν αὐτῷ γέγονεν" 
30 οὅσαι yap P skis Sasa θεοῦ, ἐν αὐτῷ “ τὸ * vat, διὸ καὶ 
τἀμὴν τῷ θεῷ πρὸς 5 δόξαν δι 


ἡμῶν. 


Eph. iv. Ἂν > ~ \ 
Heb, xii.27. δ’ αὐτοῦ “ τὸ 
r see Rev. i. 
xxii. 20. s see Rom. xv. 7,9. ch. iv. 15. viii. 19. 


18. om ἡμων L'[insd above the line a prima manu(appy, Tischdf) ]. 
rec (for ἐστιν) eyeveto (corrn to suit the supposed reference to the past ?), cdefs 


mpos) 19}. 


with D[-gr?*]3 KL&3 rel Chr, Thdrt Damase, fuit syrr : 
[eopt arm Euthal-ms] Thl- -marg [ Ambrst }. 


txt ABCD!FP®! 17 latt goth 


19. rec yap bef του θεου, with D(F)KL rel Chr, Thdrt [Damasc]: txt ABCPS m 


17 [(Euthal-ms) |.—om tou F. 


ἐγένετο, ἐστι C 


20. ins του bef θεου A f 0 48. 72. 106 [Mcion-e,(om,)] Thdrt. 
δι᾽ avrov) και ev avtw, with D?3[-gr] KL rel syr Chr, Thdrt Th) (c: 


χριστ. bef ina. ACN', om xp. 17. 
δι’ ἡμων F[-gr], gui per nos D-lat G-lat fuld [Ambrst]. 


- ins o bef 
σιλβανου DF. for 
rec (for διο και 
και Ov avTou, 


omg 6:0, D}(and lat) Epiph,(appy) : txt ABCF | O(appy)] PX m 17 vulg G-lat Syr copt 


goth arm Mcion-e, [ Euthal-ms Thdrt-comm(appy) |] Damasc Pel Fulg Bede. 


2nd το N}. 
over the greek in F.) 


καλῶς ἀντίθεσιν ἀνακύπτουσαν καταλύει. 
εἰ γὰρ ὑποσχόμενος, φησί, παραγενέσθαι 
ὑπερέθου, καὶ οὐκ ἔστι παρά σοι ναί, ναί 
(predicate in Chrys.’s interpretation ; see 
above), καὶ οὔ, οὔ, ἀλλὰ νῦν ἃ λέγεις ava- 
τρέπεις μετὰ ταῦτα, ὥςπερ ἐπὶ τῆς σῆς 
ἐπιδημίας ἐποίησας" οὐαὶ ἡμῖν, μή ποτε καὶ 
ἐν τῷ “κηρύγματι τοῦτο γέγονεν. ἵν᾽ οὖν 
μὴ ταῦτα ἐννοῶσι, μηδὲ θορυβῶνται, φησί: 
πιστὸς δὲ 6 θεὸς κιτ.λ. p. 446. 
πιστ. δὲ ὃ θ., ὅτι] a form of asseveration : 
see reff. The δέ follows on the denial 
of the preceding question. ὁ λόγ.] 
Our doctrine (which we preached, cf. 6 
λόγος 6 τοῦ σταυροῦ, 1 Cor. i. 18), to you 
is not (present, inasmuch as the cha- 
racter of the doctrine was present and 
abiding. The pres. has been altered in 
rec. to the easier ἐγένετο) yea and nay 
(i. e. inconsistent with itself). 19. | 
Confirmation of the last verse, by affirming 
the same of the great Subject of that doc- 
trine, as set before them by Paul and his 
colleagues. χριστός, personal—not 
for ‘ doctrina de Christo’—H®r HIMSELF 
is the centre and substance of all Christian 
preaching : see 1 Cor. i. 28, and note at 
ii. 2. ὁ Tov θεοῦ vids is prefixed for 
solemnity, and to shew how unlikely fickle- 
ness or change is in Christ, being such as 
He is. Cf. 1 Sam. xv. 29, ‘the Strength 
of Israel will not lie nor repent.’ 
Σιλουανοῦ) so 1 Pet. v. 12; = Silas, see 
Acts xviii. 5 and al. He names his com- 
panions, as shewing that neither was he 
inconsistent with himself, nor were they 
inconsistent with one another. The Christ 
vas the same, whether preached by dif- 
ferent persons or by one person at dif- 


om 


aft dofay ins και τιμὴν F. (not vulg nor F-lat, but honorem per nos 
om & (bef nuwv) CLIO} vulg. 


ferent times. ἀλλὰ val ἐν air. 
yey-] ‘Christus predicatus, i.e. preedi- 
catio nostra de Christo, facta est nee in 
Ipso Christo.” Bengel. This seems to me 
far better than with De Wette, al., to 
make ναί the subject, and γέγονεν pre- 
dicatory. The absence of the art. before 
vai, as well as the sense, stamps it as the 
predicate. ‘Christ preached as the Son of 
God by us, has become yea in Him,’ 
i.e. has been affirmed and substantiated 
as verity by the agency of the Lord Him- 
self. 20.] ὅσαι yap... is an inde- 
pendent relative clause, as in ref.,—not the 
subject answering to ἐν αὐτῷ τὸ vai as a 
predicate, as Εἰ. V.:—For how many so- 
ever be the promises of God, in Him is 
the yea (the affirmation and fulfilment of 
them all); wherefore also through Him 
is the Amen, for glory to God by our (the 
Apostles’) means. This reading, which 
hus the stronger external authority, may 
have arisen from an idea that the clause 
had reference to the Amen uttered at the 
end of prayers. So Theodoret, οὗ δὴ 
χάριν καὶ δι’ αὐτοῦ τὸν THs εὐχαριστίας 
αὐτῷ mpuspepouev ὕμνον, from which com- 
ment De Wette thinks the reading has 
sprung. The apparent objection to it is, 
that then ἡμῶν must mean ἡμῶν καὶ 
ὑμῶν, which without notice it perhaps 
could hardly do. In the next verse, 
when such i is about | to be its meaning, we 
have first ͵ἧμᾶς σὺν ὑμῖν, and then in 
ver. 22, ἡμᾶς. .. ἡμῶν in the general 
sense: but here, without any such piss 
paratory notice, δ’ ἡμῶν must signify ‘by 
means of us Apostles,’ ‘by our work in 
the Lord.” Thus ἀμήν will be merely a 


[O av- 
του.. 


ABC DF 


KL[O] 


om o (bef Prab 


hklim 
nol7,47 





Ἧς 1. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 635 


9] e δὲ { lal e “ \ e an > \ \ u , 
21 ὁ δὲ " βεβαιῶν ἡμᾶς σὺν ὑμῖν εἰς χριστὸν καὶ " χρίσας tom. αν. 8 
ε al / 99 ¢e \ ΄ ς a \ , \ ote 9 
ἡμᾶς θεός, * ὁ καὶ ᾿ σφραγισάμενος ἡμᾶς καὶ ™ δοὺς 5 Actsiv. 27 

᾿ F228 a a ΄, Ἵ tal δί ἔα κε vy = John vi. 
τὸν "ἀῤῥαβῶνα τοῦ πνεύματος “ ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν. " Ὁ Eph i. 
93°? \ \ / \ \ Zs A Pg ee \ 13. iv. 3U. 
3 ᾿Εγὼ δὲ ἡ μάρτυρα τὸν θεὸν * ἐπικαλοῦμαι * ἐπὶ τὴν see Rev. vit 
ἐξ ‘ / 2 , ς lal / , 2. 
ἐμὴν ψυχήν, ὅτι ὃ φειδόμενος ὑμῶν οὐκέτι ἦλθον εἰς Ko- ye si. 16 


&c. Dan. 


6 24.¢,” ew d ΄ erica n , reff. Ezek. 

ρινθον. οὐχ “ὅτι “ κυριεύομεν ὑμῶν τῆς πίστεως, χχανὶ,38. 
΄ A a a A a ac 

ἀλλὰ © συνεργοί ἐσμεν τῆς χαρᾶς ὑμῶν: τῇ yap !miater EPhN 


8 ς / é 1 ἢ ἢ 24 ὃ ἌΡ Ὸ oe) 2 a : oe \ xxxviil. 17, 
EOTIKATE . Explva € EUaAUTD TOUTO, TO ΜΉ 18,20 only. 
ν y Rom. i. 9 reff. 
z = here only. see Acts xxv. 11 al. a = Luke ix. 5. 
ce — John vi. 46. ch. iii. 5. Phil. iii. 12. iv. 11,17. 
e Rom. xvi. 3 reff. constr., here only. 
ΠΞΞ Acts xx.U6. 1 Cor. 11, 2. ν. 3. vil. 37. 
reff. Tit. ii. 14. 


Acts xiii. 51. 
2 Thess. iii. 9 only. 

f dat., Acts xxi. 21. 

Tit, 11, 12. al. 2 Macc, xi. 25. 

k so Rom, xiv. 13. 1 Pet. ii. 19. 2 Pet. iii. 8. 


b Rom. xi. 21 reff. 

d Rom. vi. 9, 14 reff. 

g = Rom. v.2. 1 Cor. xv. 1. 
i dat., Rom. xiv. 7 

lart., Rom. xiv. 13 al. 


21. υμας συν ἡμιν Cadosyr: vuas συν υμιν B 115: nos nobiscum F-lat, so also b! 
[ Ps-Just, }. ins o bef καὶ xpioas D}. for 2nd ynuas, vuas Β]. 
22. om 6 ACIK PX! ae mo 17 Syr(appy) copt goth Ps-Just Did Chr Damase: καὶ bef 


ὃ F [am fuld spec] tol demid [ Ambr, ]. 


apaBwva [A](F)LX& m [47]; -Bova FP. 


23. for οὐκετι, οὐκ ΕἸ ποῦ F-lat] latt Syr copt goth (eth). 
24. της πιστεως bef vuwy DF ἃ latt Ambrst Aug. 


Cuap. II. 1. for δε, re D'[-gr] eth: yap Β m 17 syr copt. 


strengthening of vai—the affirmation and 
completion of God’s promises. 

21, 22.] construction as in ch. v. 5, which 
in form is remarkably similar ; 21.) 6 
δὲ BeB. ... ἡμᾶς is the (prefixed) predicate, 
and θεός the subject. βεβ. εἰς χριστόν = 
βεβ. τῇ πίστει εἰς χριστόν, confirmeth us 
(in believing) on Christ. χρίσας ἡμᾶς, 
after ἥμ. σὺν ὑμῖν and the καί, cannot 
refer (as Meyer, al.) to any anointing of 
the Apostles only, but must be taken, as 
Chrys., al., of αὐ, Apostles and Corinthians. 
—6puod προφήτας κ. ἱερεῖς κ. βασιλεῖς 
ἐργαζόμενος" ταῦτα γὰρ τὸ παλαιὸν ἐχρίετο 
τὰ γένη. Chrys., Ρ. 448. See 1 John ii. 20. 
“Observe the connexion of χριστός and 
χρίσας." Stanley. 22.) copay. again 
cannot refer to the Apostles alone, nor is 
ref. John any ground for such a refer_ 
ence,—but as in the other N. T. reff., to 
all,—sealed by the Holy Spirit to the day 
of redemption. καὶ δοὺς... .7 ‘ And 
assured us of the fact of that sealing :’ see 
Rom. viii. 16. τ. app. τ. πν.] the 
pledge or token of the Spirit: genitive of 
apposition: the Spirit ἐς the token. ἀῤῥ., 
mpddoua, Hesych. :—% ἐπὶ tats vais παρὰ 
τῶν ὠνουμένων διδομένη προκαταβολὴ ὑπὲρ 
ἀσφαλείας, Etymol. in Wetst., where see 
examples. “It is remarkable that the 
same word jin, is used in the same 
sense in Gen. xxxviii. 17, 18, from IY, 
to ‘mix’ or ‘exchange,’ and thence to 
‘pledge,’ as Jer. xxx. 21; Neh. νυ. 8. It 
was therefore probably derived by the 
Greeks from the language of Phcenician 
traders, as ‘ tariff,’ ‘ cargo,’ are derived, in 
English and other modern languages, from 
Spanish traders.” Stanley. 23, 24. | 
His reason for not coming to them. 


23. ἐπὶ.... ψυχ.] against my soul,— 
‘cum maximo meo malo, si fallo.’? Grot. 
φειδόμενος tp. | sparing you,—out 
of a feeling of compassion for you. 
οὐκέτι, ‘no more,’ viz. after the first time: 
see Prolegg. to1 Cor. ὃ v. 6. The follow- 
ing οὐχ ὅτι κυρ. seems to be added to 
remove any false inference which might 
have been drawn from φειδόμενος as seem- 
ing to assert an unreasonable degree of 
power over them. But why ὑμῶν τῆς 
πίστεως ? He had power over them, but 
it was in matters of discipline, not of 
faith : over matters of faith not even an 
Apostle has power (‘ fides enim prorsus ab 
hominum jugo soluta liberrimaque esse 
debet.’ Calv.), seeing it isin each man’s 
faith that he stands before God. Andhe 
puts this strongly, that in matters of faith 
he is only a fellow-helper of. their joy (the 
χαρὰ ἐν τῷ πιστεύειν, Rom, xv. 13), in 
order to shew them the real department 
of his apostolic power, and that, however 
exercised, it would not attempt to rule 
their faith, but only to secure to them, 
by purifying them, joy in believing. He 
proceeds to say, that it was the probable 


disturbance of this joy, which induced him 


to forego his visit. τῇ πίστει, dat. 
of the state or condition in which: cf. 
Rom. xi. 20. So Polyb. xxi. 9. 3, ἔστη 
τῇ διανοίᾳ. 

Cuap. II. 1—4.] FuRTHER EXPLANA-~ 
TION ON THE REASON OF THE POSTPONE-~ 
MENT OF HIS VISIT. 1.] δέ is merely 
transitional, and does not imply any con- 
trast with what has preceded. ἐμαυτῴ, 
not=7ap ἐμαυτῷ (as most Commentators: 
and E. V.), but ‘dat. commodi,’ for my 
own sake, as is evident by the considera. 


636 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS Ὁ: 
/ 7 " r ww 
m=1Cor.iv. πάλιν ™ ἐν λύπῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐλθεῖν. 
21 το a ὦ Ξ ἢ 5 ᾿ 
nMatt.xix. ὑμᾶς, ο καὶ τίς ὁ Ῥ εὐφραίνων με εἰ μὴ ο " λυπούμενος ἐξ 
vy. 15 al ~ \ Yj lal Σ Ui δ \ \ 3 
κει τε ἐμοῦ ; 3 καὶ ἔγραψα ' τοῦτο "αὐτό, ἵνα μὴ ἐλθὼν " λύπην 
iit). Eph 8 » tad ὧν ἃ ξὸὃ / ν θὰ mS ; 
S(t) a ap ὧν " ἔδει pe χαίρειν, ᾿ πεποιθὼς ἐπὶ πάντας 
Job xxxi. 39. 


o interrog., 1 Cor. v. 2 reff. see Phil. i. 22. 
1. Lanes 


27 only. t constr., Phil. iv. 11. 


rec eAGew bef ev λυπη, with copt eth: eA@ew bef προς vuas DF latt Syr (goth) arm 
Chr, ΤῊ] [Ambr, Ambrst]: txt ABCKL[O]PR® rel syr [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damasc. 
2. (ε in εἰ is written over the line, and o inserted before λυπω but erased, by &!.) 
rec aft καὶ Tis ins ἐστιν, with DF KL[O]PN3 rel latt Orig,(-int,) Chr, [Cyr-p, ] 
Thdrt : om ABCN! copt [Euthal-ms] Damascg. : 
3. rec aft εγραψα ins vu, with C3DFKLN? rel latt syrr goth eth [arm ?] Chr, 
Thdrt Pel: om ABC!(O]PN! 17 am copt [Euthal-ms] Damasce,{ins, ] Ambrst. 
bef τουτο CLO Euthal-ms] Chr, ΤῊ] : om αὐτὸ A copt arm Damase,/txt,]: txt BDF 


KL[P]® rel [latt goth Thdrt Ambrst]}. 
Pel. 


tion in the next verse. τοῦτο refers 
to what follows: see reff. τὸ μὴ 
πάλιν ἐν λύπῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐλθεῖν) not 
again to come to you in grief. This is 
the only fair rendering of the words; im- 
plying, that some former visit had been 
in grief. Clearly the first visit Acts xviii. 
1 ff., could not be thus described: we 
must therefore infer, that an intermediate 
unrecorded visit had been paid by him. 
On this subject, compare ch. xii. 14; 
xiii. 1 and notes: and see Prolegg. to 
1 Cor. § v. ἐν λύπῃ is explained 
in vv. 2, 3 to mean (so Estius, Bengel, 
Riickert, Olsh., De Wette, al.) in mutual 
grief: ‘1 grieving you (ver. 2), and you 
grieving me’ (ver. 3): not, as Chrys., al., 
Paul’s grief alone, nor, as Meyer, al., grief 
inflicted on them by Paul. 2.) yap, 
reason why I would not come to you in 
grief: because I should have to grieve those 
who formed my proper material for thank- 
fulness and joy. ἐγώ has a peculiar 
emphasis : ‘ If 7 cause you grief’... . im- 
plying, ‘there are who cause you sufficient.’ 

kat prefixed to a question denotes 
inconsequence on, or inconsistency with, 
the foregoing supposition or affirmation : 
so Eur. Med. 1388, ὦ τέκνα φίλτατα! 
“untpl ye, σοὶ δ᾽ ov.” κἄπειτ᾽ ἔκτας ; 
see other examples in Hartung, Partikel- 
lehre, i. p. 147. It is best expressed in 
English by ‘ then :’? who is he then, Xc. 
as in E, V. The explanation of Chrys., 
who has been followed by Erasm., Bengel, 
Olsh., al., is curious, and certainly incon- 
sistent with the context: εἰ καὶ λυπῶ ὑμᾶς, 
χάριν μοι παρέχετε κἂν τούτῳ μεγίστην, 
ὅτι δάκνεσθε ὑπὸ τῶν παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ λεγομέ- 
νων. Hom. iv. p. 456. Some of these 


p Acts vii. 41 reff. act., here only. Prov. xv. 20. 
r see Acts xxiv. 15, 20. xxv. 25. ch. vii. 11 al. 

y i Pet. ii. 12. iii. 16. Ezek. xiv. 4. 
v constr., Matt. xxvii. 43. 2 Thess. iii. 4. νυ. dat., ch. 1. 9 reff. 


aft λυπὴν ins em λυπὴν (see Phil ii. 27) DF a latt syr-w-ast [ Euthal-ms]} Pel. 
rec exw, with CDFKLN? rel Thdrt Damasc: txt AB[O]PN! a ἃ 17 Chr, 
{Euthal-ms] Thi. (See var read, ch i. 15, Phil ii. 27.) 


ἘΞ 


2 εἰ γὰρ ἐγὼ ™ AUTO 


Ὁ ΞΞ οἷ. 
s John xvi. 21,22. Phil. ii. 
Ὁ Acts xxvii. 21. 


om με 


- 


auTo 


tovto αὐτο bef eypava DF latt goth eth 


for ag’, ep’ de F [vulg Pel]. 


Commentators refer the singular to the 
offender, vv. 5—8. But however the 
words may bear the meaning, and how- 
ever true the saying might be, it is 
pretty clear that it would be beside the 
subject: nay, would give a reason the other 
way,—why he should come to them. 

8.1 ἔγραψα τοῦτο αὐτό. I put in writing 
this same thing, viz. the τοῦτο which I 
ἔκρινα, ver. 1: the announcement of my 
change of purpose in 1 Cor. xvi. 7, which 
had occasioned the charge of fickleness 
against him. The theories of Commenta- 
tors have given rise to various interpreta- 
tions of τοῦτο αὐτό: Chrys. understands, 
ch. xii. 21 of this same Epistle :—Beza, 
Meyer, al., my blame of you in the first 
Epistle :—so Estius, especially 1 Cor. iv. 
19, 21:—Bleek supposes a lost Epistle to 
be referred to: De Wette wavers, but is 
disposed with Erasm., Riickert, al., to ren- 
der αὐτὸ τοῦτο ‘on this account,’ as Plato, 
Protag. p. 310, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὰ ταῦτα καὶ νῦν 
ἥκω : but Meyer rejoins, that this idiom is 
foreign to the style of Paul. I imagine 
that two meanings are open tous: (1) as 
above, the announcement which caused the 
charge of fickleness: (2) the reproaches in 
the 1st Epistle which grieved them. Of 
these, specious as is the latter on account 
of the following context, I prefer the for- 
mer because of the τοῦτο in ver. 1. 

ad’ ὧν, ellipt. for ἀπὸ τούτων, ag’ ὧν, sce 
reff. πεποιθὼς... .1 having trust 
in (reposing trust on) you all, that my joy 
is (the pres. expressing the purport of the 
trust when felt) that of all of you: i.e. 
trusting that you too would feel that there 
was sufficient reason for the postponement, 
if it interfered with cur mutual joy. 








2—7. 


σι \ \ “ 
ὑμᾶς ὅτι ἡ ἐμὴ χαρὰ πάντων ὑμῶν ἐστιν. 


ΠΡΟΣ  ΚΟΒΙΝΘΕΘΈΣΊΒ. 


637 


w 2? 5) 
4 εκ yap w = 1 Cor. vii. 


re = A , > a 5 . 
πολλῆς θλίψεως καὶ * συνοχῆς καρδίας ἔγραψα ὑμῖν ¥ διὰ x Luke ταὶ. 55 


only. Job 
xxx. 3. 


a / b) vA Ζ coe > \ \ » / 
πολλῶν δακρύων, οὐχ Wa* λυπηθῆτε, ἀλλὰ ὃ τὴν ἀγάπην vat 


iva γνῶτε ἣν ἔχω ὃ περισσοτέρως © 
3 \ ΤᾺ 5 

“λελύπηκεν, οὐκ ἐμὲ 5 λελύπηκεν, ἀλλὰ ἃ ἀπὸ 4 μέρους, 

6 Γ ἱκανὸν ὃ τῷ δ τοιούτῳ ἡ 


μὴ " ἐπιβαρῶ, πάντας ὑμᾶς. 
h > / Ὁ“ e j 6 \ k 
ἐπιτιμία αὕτη ἡ | ὑπὸ 


Ὁ ch. i. 12 reff. 

e 1 Thess. ii.9. 2 Thess. iii. 8 only +. 
reff. h here only +. 
ii, 22. k 1 Cor. ix. 19 reff. 


. wa yore bef τὴν ayarny F |. 


Op 


Meyer well observes, that πάντας ὑμᾶς, in 
spite of the existence of an anti-pauline 
faction in the Corinthian church, is a true 
example of the love which πάντα πιστεύει, 
πάντα ἐλπίζει, 1 Cor. xiii. 7. 4.) Ex- 
planation (γάρ) that he did not write in 
levity of purpose, but under great trouble 
of mind,—not to grieve them, but to 
testify his love. ἐκ, of the inducement— 
διά, of the condition: he wrote, out of 
much tribulation (inward, of spirit, not 
outward) and anguish (συνοχή, ‘angustie’) 
of heart, with (q. ‘through,’—the state 
being the vehicle of the action, see reff.) 
many tears. τ. ἀγάπην, before the 
conjunction tva, for special emphasis: see 
reff. mepracotépws—‘ than to other 
churches (?)’—so Chrys. (referring to 
1 Cor. iv. 15; ix. 2), Theophyl.: Estius 
thinks, the comparative is not to be 
pressed, but understood as [some take thie 
adjective] in ver. 7,—‘ exceedingly.’ 
d—11.] DIGRESSIVE REFERENCE TO 
THE CASE OF THE INCESTUOUS PERSON, 
WHOM THE APOSTLE ORDERS NOW TO BE 
FORGIVEN, AND REINSTATED. From the 
λύπη of the former verses, to him who was 
one of the principal occasions of that grief, 
the transition is easy. 5, | δέ, transi- 
tional. Now if any one hath occasioned 
sorrow (a delicate way of pointing out the 
one who had occasioned it), he hath 
grieved, not me (not,—‘ not only me,’ 
which destroys the meaning,—‘ J am not 
the aggrieved person, but you’), but, [in 
part (i.e. ] more or less, partially :’ ret.), 
that I be not too heavy on him (refers to 
ἀπὸ μέρους, which qualifies the blame cast 
on the offender), all of you. The above 
punctuation and rendering is adopted by 
Chrys. (ἵνα uh βαρήσω ἐκεῖνον τὸν πορνεύ- 
σαντα, p. 459), Beza, Calvin (but not in 
his ¢ext), al., with Meyer, De Wette. But 
Theodoret, Vulg., Luther, Bengel, Wetst., 
al., join ἐπιβαρῶ πάντας bu., thus: ‘he hath 


τῶν πλειόνων, 7 ὥςτε ' τοὐναν- 
ce Acts xx. 21. xxiv. 24. ch. i. 11 al. 


f Luke xxii. 38. 
Wisd, iii. 10 only. 


(adda, so ABCL[OJPR rel [exe 17].) 
om 7 vT0 των πλειονων F(not F-lat) seth-rom. 


, , 27 reff. 
5 Ke δέ τις 27Tim. ". 2. 
Pe z ver. 2 reff. 
a arrangt. of 
wa words, John 
Acts 


els ὑμᾶς. 


xiii. 25 
xix. 4. 
Rom. xi. 31. 
1, Cor. ix. 15. 
xiv.9. Gal. 


ii. 10. 
d Rom. xi. 25 reff. 
Gen. xxx. 15. g Acts xxii. 22 
(-cov, 2 Mace. vi. 13.) i ellips., see 2 Pet. 
1Gal. ii. 7. 1 Pet. iii. 9 only+. 3 Mace. iii. 22. 


for eis, προς F. 


επιβαρων F. 


not grieved me (alone and principally) but 
only in part (having grieved you also), 
that I may not lay the fault on all of you,’ 
which I should in this case do, by making 
myself the only person aggrieved, and 
classing you with the offender. But this 
can hardly be; ἀλλά must be εἰ μή. 
Another way is adopted by Mosheim, Bill- 
roth, and Olsh.,—to join πάντας with ἵνα 
μὴ emiB.,—‘ but in part,—that I burden 
not all,—you :᾿ ---ἐπιβαρῶ being variously 
understood, either (1) of including you in 
the blame of the offender, or (2) as Olsh., 
of extending to them all the burden of this 
sorrow ;—he supposes it to be ironically 
spoken ; their highest praise would have 
been that all had been troubled. . But 
as Meyer remarks, irony is entirely out of 
place in this part of the Epistle. The mean- 
ings are well discussed in Stanley. 6. | 
ἱκανόν, sc. either ἐστιν or ἔστω. τῷ 
τοιούτῳ) Meyer remarks on the expression 
as being used in mildness, not to designate 
any particular person: but the same desig- 
nation is employed in 1 Cor. v. 5, παρα- 
δοῦναι τὸν τοιοῦτον τῷ σατανᾷ. 

ἢ ἐπιτ. αὕτη) This punishment (= ἐπι- 
τίμιον, see retf.): what it was, we are un- 
able with certainty to say; but 1 Cor. v. 
seems to point to excommunication as form- 
ing at least a partof it. But it was nota 
formal and public, only a voluntary indivi- 
dual abstinence from communion with him, 
as is shewn by ὑπὸ τῶν πλειόνων : the 
anti-pauline party probably refusing com- 
pliance with the Apostle’s command. 
ἱκανόν] enough, not in duration, though 
that would be the case, but in magnitude: 
sufficient, as having produced its desired 
effect, penitence. 7.] so that (con- 
seq. on ἱκανόν) on the contrary you 
(should) [rather (than continue the pun- 
ishment)] forgive and comfort him, &c. 
Meyer denies that δεῖν should be supplied, 
and makes ὥςτε depend immediately on 


638 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. ΤΙ. 
ς - / \ 
m = Luke vi τίον μᾶλλον] vuas ™ “χαρίσασθαι γῶν Oe παρακαλέσαι, ABCDF 
KL[O 
xii 18, Gol. © μὴ οστως τῇ P ἘΠῚ ἢ ἘΠ λύπῃ q καταποθῇ 88 τοιοῦτος. PN ων 
is). L.P. cedelg 
(ιν ρα) 8 διὸ ᾿παρακαλῷ ὑμᾶς " κυρῶσαι εἰς αὐτὸν ἀγώπην. 9" εἰς heim 
n= Lae 4, ἄς. an \ Ne ἂν “ a \ u 5 ‘ ce oer >nol7.47 
ret 4, TOUTO yap καὶ ἔγραψα, Wa γνῶ τὴν " δοκιμὴν ὑμῶν, εἰ 
΄ , / 9 - , , 
pe πακαη, Y εἰς πάντα ἡ ὑπήκοοί ἐστε. 10 ᾧ δέ Te™ χαρίζεσθε, κἀγώ: 
40 |i L. 1 Cor. \ \ Bre N Oe ἢ ΄ A! x 4 δι ἡμμ 
xii.23t. Καὶ γὰρ εγὼ Ὁ " κεχάρισμαι, εἰ τι * κεχάρισμαι, OL υμᾶς, 
(36) Theod. 2 ͵ a ae ὙΦ a etn 
a Cor. od Yeu ἡ πρρουξώπῳ χριστοῦ, | ἵνα μὴ * πλεονεκτηθῶμεν ὑπὸ 
n la) 5 x > lal \ , > lal 
r=w.inf, τοῦ σατανᾶ" οὐ γὰρ αὑτοῦ τὰ “ VonmaTa > ἀγνοοῦμεν. 
ll. 
al. 2 iat, iv. 34. s Gal. iii. 15 only. Gen. xxiii. 20. Levit. xxv. 30 only. t Rom. xiv. 9 reff. 
u Rom. v. 4 reff. v =: ch. viii. 23. ix. 8. Gal. v. 10 al. w Acts vii. 39 reff. * a 


signif., Acts xxvii. 24. Gal. iii. 18. 2 Mace. ii. 33. 
vil. 2. xii. 17, 18. 


only. P.+ Baruch ii. 8 only. 


7. om μαλλον AB Syr Aug, 


1 Thess. iv. 6 only. P. Ezek. xxii. 27. 
b Acts xili. 27. 


: ins CKL[O]PR® rel syr copt arm Chr Thdrty;, Damase 


y ch. iv. 6. Prov. viii. 30. see note. 
a ch. iii. 14, iv. 4. x. 5, xi. 3. Phil. ik "a 


Thi Ke ['Tert, ] Ambrst, and aft vuas DF goth Thdrt,. 
9. aft eypaya ins oa (vuwv(sic) vobis F and G) 31 copt eth Chr, [Euthal-ms] 


Thdrt Pel. 


ins παντων bef vuwy F(not F-lat). 


for εἰ, ἡ (7?) AB 17. 


10. rec καὶ eyw, with ΟἹ Εἰ K[e sil} LX%4 rel Thdrt: txt ABC?D[O]PN! a m 17. 47 


Epiph, Chr, [Euthal-ms] Damasc. 
with D?KL rel syr Thdrt ΤῊ] (Ec: 
Ambrst.—om 6 D![-gr 


‘enough, for you to forgive and 
console him.’ τῇ περισσοτέρᾳ λύπῃ] 
not, as E. V., ‘by overmuch sorrow: but 
(as Meyer), by the increase of sorrow 
which will come on the continuance of his 
punishment. καταποθῇ does not set 
any definite result of the excessive sorrow 
before them, such as apostasy or suicide, 
but leaves them to imagine such possible. 

8.1 κυρῶσαι, hardly (as usually un- 
derstood) to ratify by a public decree of 
the church: if (see above) his exclusion 
was not by such a decree, but only by the 
abstinence of individuals from his society, 
the ratifying their love to him would con- 
sist in the majority making it evident to 
him that he was again recognized as a bro- 
ther. 9.1 Reason why they should now 
be ready to shew love to him again,— 
the end of Paul’s writing to them having 
been accomplished by their obeying his 
order. For to this end I also wrote: 
the καί signifying that my former epistle, 
as well as my present exhortation, tended 
to this, viz. the testing your obedience. 
Meyer (ed. 2) explains the καί as imply- 
ing that other orders to the same effect 
were sent by word of mouth. He alludes 
beyond doubt to the former Epistle, ch. 
v. Yet theancient Commentators, Chrys., 
&e., and Erasm., Wolf, Bengel, al. (not 
Olsh., as De Wette says), interpret it 
of this Epistle: which certainly is gram- 
matically allowable (see 1 Cor. v. 9, note), 
but opposed to the context (see vy. 3, 
4, besides the manifest sense here, that 
the object of his writing had been accom- 
plished). That I might know the proof 
of you, whether in all things (emphatic) 


ixavov,— 


om eyw A. 
txt ABC(D')F[O](P)® latt [Euthal-ms] Damase 
goth) | (zth-pl): ὦ DP m g?(perhaps). 


rec εἰ τι κεχαρ. @ κεχαρ., 


yeare obedient. This was that one among 
the various objects of his first Epistle, 
which belonged to the matter at present 
in hand, and which he therefore puts for- 
ward: not by any means implying that he 
had no other view in writing it. 10. } 
Another assurance to encourage them in 
forgiving and reinstating the penitent ;— 
that they need not be afraid of lack of 
apostolic authority or confirmation of their 
act from above—he would ratify their 
forgiveness by his sanction. ῳ δὲ... 
‘Your forgiveness is mine:’ not said gene- 
rally (as Meyer), but definitely, pointing at 
the one person here spoken of and no other. 
Kayo, scil. χαρίζομαι. Then he 
substantiates this assurance, by further 
assuring them, that his forgiveness of any 
fault in this case, if it takes place, takes 
place on their account. Meyer’s (former: 
now (4th edn.) abandoned) and Riickert’s 
rendering of kexaptopat as passive, dis- 
turbs the whole sense of the passage, be- 
sides being inconsistent with the N.T. 
usage of the word, see reff. ἐν ™pos- 
ὦπῳ Χριστοῦ] either ‘in the presence of 
Christ, as in ref. Prov. (compare Matt. 
xxi. 42),—so Theodoret, Erasm., Beza, 
Calv., Olsh., De W.,—or, and far better, 
in the person of Christ, acting as Christ, 
in the same way as he had commanded the 
punishment ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν 
Ἰησοῦ, 1 Cor. ν. 4: so Vulg., Estius (who 
argues the matter at some length), Wetst., 
al. 11. ἵνα μὴ . . .} follows out the 
δι buas—to prevent Satan getting any 
advantage over us (the Church generally: 
or better, ws Apostles), in robbing us of 
some of our people,—viz. in causing the 





8—]4. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 639 


᾽ ΄ a 
2 ᾿λθὼν δὲ εἰς τὴν Τρωάδα " εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον TOD « Acts τιν. “τ. 


Cor. xvi. 9. 


Bets Ti; 12, 


0. | 


{... μακε- 


n \ , / > / 
χριστοῦ, Kat “ θύρας μοι ὃ ἀνεωγμένης ἐν κυριῳ, 


15 ἢ Col. iv. 3. 
OUK Rey. iii. 8. 
Isa. xlv,1. 


” ” an / / an x ς a 
4 ἔσχηκα “ἄνεσιν ἱστῷ πνευμᾶτι μου, ὅτῳ μὴ εὑρεῖν με ach.i.9. vis. 


, \ ' δ 5) . a 
Titov τὸν ἀδελφόν μου: ἀλλὰ ” ἀποταξάμενος ἱ αὐτοῖς, 


e Acts χχῖν. 23 


reff. 
f Acts xvii. 16 


me Pies Ξ. Ὁ ͵ / A \ a / A 
Κ ἐξῆλθον κΚ εἰς Μακεδονίαν. 13 Τῷ δὲ θεῷ | χάρις τῷ pccakldney 
WT ™ θριαμβεύοντε ἡμᾶς ἐν τῷ D ὶ τὴν Xen. Cyr 
Xen. Cyr. iv. 
TWAVTOTE Play aS V Τῷ χρίστῳ και Τὴν 5.9. Winer: 
edn. 6, } 44. 5. h Acts xviii. 18 reff. i Acts viii. 5 reff. k = Acts 
xi. 25 reff. 1 Rom. vi. 17 reff. m Col. ii. 15 only +. 


12. δια το ευαγγελιον F Damasc : 
latt [ Ambrst ]. 


jie [om] αὐτο ι]ς K. 


penitent offender to despair and fall away 
from the faith. Chrys. remarks: mAcov- 
εξίαν εἰκότως ἐκάλεσεν, ὅταν καὶ διὰ τῶν 
ἡμετέρων κρατῇ. τὸ γὰρ δι’ ἁμαρτίας 
λαμβάνειν, ἴδιον αὐτῷ ἐστι; τὸ μέντοι διὰ 
μετανοίας, οὐκέτι" ἡμέτερον γάρ, οὐκ ἐκείνου, 
τὸ ὅπλον. p.462. The word has yet another 
propriety : the offender was to be delivered 
over τῷ σατανᾷ cis ὄλεθρον τῆς capKds— 
care must be taken lest we πλεονεκτηθῶμεν 
ὑπὸ τοῦ σ., and his soul perish likewise. 


οὐ γὰρ... .] αὐτοῦ before τὰ νοήμ. 


for emphasis :—such devices, as coming 
from him, are special matters of observa- 
tion and caution to every Christian minis- 
ter; much more to him who had the eare 
of all the churches. See 1 Pet. v. 8. 
The personality and agency of the Adver- 
sary can hardly be recognized in plainer 
terms than in both these passages. 
12—17.] He PRoceEDs (after the di- 
gression) TO SHEW THEM WITH WHAT 
ANXIETY HE AWAITED THE INTELLIGENCE 
FROM CORINTH, AND HOW THANKFUL HE 
W4S FOR THE SEAL OF HIS APOSTOLIC 
MINISTRY FURNISHED BY IT. The only 
‘legitimate connexion is that with vv. 1—4. 
δέ serves to resume the main sub- 
ject after parenthetical matter: so Herod. 
Vill. 67,---ἐπεὶ ὧν ἀπίκατο ἐς τὰς ᾿Αθήνας 
πάντες οὗτοι πλὴν Παρίων" Παρίοι δὲ 
ὑπολειφθέντες ἐν Κύθνῳ ἐκαραδόκεον τὸν 
πόλεμον KH ἀποβήσεται: οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ὡς 
ἀπίκοντο ἐς τὸ Φάληρον, κιτ.ιλ. See Har- 
tung, Partikellehre, i. 174. 12.| To 
Troas, viz. on his journey from Ephesus, 
Acts xx.1, 2; 1 Cor. xvi.5—9. “The art. 
perhaps indicates the region of ‘the Troad,” 
rather than the city.” Stanley. cis τὸ 
evayy. τ. xp.] for (the purpose of preach- 
ing) the Gospel of Christ. He had been 
before at Troas, but the vision of a Mace- 
donian asking for help prevented his re- 
maining there. He now revisited it, pur- 
posely to stay and preach. On his return 
to Asia he remained there seven days, Acts 
xx. 6—12. kai θύρας... . and an 
Gpportunity of apostolic action being 


dia Tov ευαγγελιου D[-gr]: propter evangelium 
και Bupa μοι ἣν ewyuevn Β' : qvewy. DP. 
13. for 2nd τω, του C*N!: τὸ ΠΡ fl! mu [Euthal-ms]: ev τω D 17. 


ευρισκειν 


afforded me; ἐν κυρίῳ defines the sort of 
action implied, and to which the door was 
opened. It is remarkable that in speaking 
of this journey, though not of the same 
place, Paul uses this expression, 1 Cor. xvi. 
9. Compare the interesting passage at 
Troas on his return from Europe the next 
spring, Acts xx. 6—18. 13. ἔσχηκα 
ἄνεσιν) perf. in the sense of aorist, as ch. 
i. 9. Ihad not rest for my spirit (not, 
“im my spirit :? compare οὐχ εὑροῦσα ἡ 
περιστερὰ ἀνάπαυσιν τοῖς ποσὶν αὐτῆς, 
Gen. viii. 9). He could not with any 
tranquillity prosecute the spiritual duties 
opened to him at Troas. τῷ μὴ €vp. | 
by (reason of) my not finding: see reff. 
Paul had sent Titus to Corinth, ch. xii. 
18, partly to finish the collection for the 
saints, but principally to bring intelligence 
respecting the effect of the first Epistle. 
Probably it had been fixed that they should 
meet at Troas. τ. ἀδελ. μου implies 
a relation closer than merely that of Chris- 
tian brotherhood—my colleague in the 
Apostleship. αὐτοῖς} the disciples 
there: understood from the context. 
14—17.] Omitting, as presupposed, the 
fact of his having met with Titus in Mace- 
donia, and the nature of the intelligence 
which he brought,—he grounds on these a 
thanksgiving for that intelligence, and a 
magnification of his apostolic office. Itis 
evidently beside the purpose to refer this 
thanksgiving to the diffusion of the gospel 
in Macedonia (as Flatt), or in Troas (as 
Emmerling), or to general considerations 
(as Bengel) :-—both the context, and the 
language itself (see below), shew that its 
reference is to the effects of the apostolic 
reproof on the Corinthians. 14. θριαμ- 
βεύοντι] leading us in triumrh, see ref. 
Two kinds of persons were led in triumph: 
the participators of the victory, and the 
victims of the defeat. In Col. the latter 
are plainly meant; here, according to many 
Commentators (Calv., Elsner, Bengel, De 
Wette, al.), the former : which however is 
never elsewhere the reference of the word, 


64.0 ΠΡΟΣ. KOPINOIOTS B. 11. 15—17. 
ο Ρ δι 
τ here 3ce. " ὀσμὴν τῆς γνώσεως αὐτοῦ φανεροῦντι b 
John xii. 3. 15 ss 
ἐπ ἢ et παντὶ τόπω. 9 ὅτι χριστοῦ 4 εὐωδία ἐσμὲν τῷ θεῷ * 
ull. lv. * 
-“ ~ / \ 3 rad / 
only. Exod. too ὃ σωζομένοις καὶ ‘ev τοῖς ἴ ἀπολλυμένοις, 16 u 
o gen. object. 7 > ΄ e 
τιν χ ὃ. μὲν "ὀσμὴ ἐκ θανάτου " εἰς θάνατον, “ois δὲ "Oopn ἐκ 
Pp om. i. 
eff. 
q Eph. v.2. Phil. iv. 18 only. Ezra vi. 10. r = 1 Cor. ii. 6. s 1 Cor. xv. 2 reff. t Rom. 
li. 12 reff. ul Cor. xi. 21 reff. v= Acts’ xi. 18. Rom. v. 16 refi. 


14, (s of της is written over the line by 8? or -corr!.) 


16. oounv (twice) D{-gr]. 
Thart, ΤῊ] Ge Iren[-int, 


rec om ex (twice), with DFKL rel latt arm (Chr, a 
Ambrst Augsepe | : 


ins ABCN τὰ 17. 47[150] copt [goth" 


(2nd) | eth Clem, Orig,(-int,) Dial, Nys [Cyr-p, Euthal-ms] Hil,. 


but it always implies triuvmphare de aliquo. 
Wetst. quotes this sense, βασιλεῖς ἐθριάμ- 
Bevoe, Plut. Rom. p. 38 D, and in four other 
places :—and the Scholiast to Hor. Od. i. 

37. 31, who relates of Cleopatra, ‘“‘invidens 
Privata deduci superbo Non humilis mulier 
triumpho,” that she refused the terms of- 
fered her by Augustus, saying, ov θριαμ- 
βευθήσομαι. Meyer in consequence under- 
stands it in this sense here: who ever 
triumphs over us, i.e. ‘ who ceases not to 
exhibit us, His former foes, as overcome by 
Him: *—and adds in a note, “ Remark the 
emphatic πάντοτε, prefixed, to which the 
similarly emphatic ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ, at the 
end, corresponds. God vegan His triumph 
over the ἡμεῖς at their conversion ;—over 
Paul, at Damascus, where he made him a 
servant, from being an enemy. This tri- 
umph he ever continues, not ceasing to 
exhibit before the world these His former 
foes, by the results of their present service, 
as overcome by Him. This, in the case 
before us, was effected by Paul, in that (as 
‘Titus brought him word to Macedonia) his 
Epistle had produced such good results in 
Corinth.” De W. objects to this as a 
strange way of expressing thankfulness for 
deliverance from our anxiety. Butis it so 
to those who look beneath the surface ? 
In our spiritual course, our only true 
triumphs are, God’s triumphs over us. 
His defeats of us, are our only real vic- 
tories. J own that this yet appears to me 
to be the only admissible rendering. We 

must not violate the known usage of a 
word, and invent another for which there 
is no precedent, merely for the sake of 
imagined perspicuity. Such is that of ‘to 
make to triumph’ (Beza, Estius, Grot., 
al.) :---μαθητεύειν, Matt. xxviii. 19, and 
βασιλεύειν, 1 Kings viii. 22, are not cases 
in point, their sense being, to ‘make a 
disciple,’ ‘to make a king,’—whereas that 
required for θριαμβεύειν, would be, “ἐγὶ- 
umphatorem facere.’ χορεύειν, for ‘to 
make to dance,’ is more to the point : οὔπω 
καταπαύσομεν μούσας, αἵ μ᾽ ἐχόρευσαν, 
Eur. Here. Fur. 688,---τάχα σ᾽ ἐγὼ μᾶλλον 
χορεύσω, ib. 879 :—but the Apostle’s own 


usage in ref. Col., in my mind, decides the 
question. See also the following context. 

ἐν τῷ xp., as usually, in our con- 
nexion with, ‘as members of,’ Christ: 
not, “ by Christ.’ τὴν ὀσμήν] The 
similitude is not that of a sacrifice, but 
still the same as before: during a triumph, 
sweet spices were thrown about or burnt 
in the streets, which were θυμιαμάτων 
πλήρεις, Plut. mil. p. 272 (cited by 
Dr. Burton). As the fact of the triumph, 
or approach of the triumphal procession, 
was made known by these odours far and 
wide, so God diffuses by our means, who 
are the materials of His triumph, the sweet 
odour of the knowledge of Christ (who is 
the Triumpher, Col. ii. 15). τῆς 
γνώσ.] genit. of apposition: the odour, 
which in the interpretation of the figure, 
is the knowledge. αὐτοῦ,---χριστοῦ, 
cf. next verse. 15.] Here the pro- 
priety of the figure is lost, and the source 
of the odour identified with the Apostles 
themselves. For we are to God a sweet 
savour of Christ (gen. object., of that which 
was diffused by the odour, viz. the Anow- 
ledge of Christ. 
dam unguenti, seu florum aut herbarum, 


‘Instar fragrantis cujus-. 


ἡμῶν ἐν ABCDF 


KLN ab 


EV cdefg 


hklm 


i 
4 οἷς πο 17. 4 


famam nominis ejus, velut bonum et sua- - 


vem odorem,... - spargimus apud omnes.’ 
Kstius) among those who are being saved, 
and among those who are perishing (cw. 
and ἀπολλ., see note, 1 Cor. 1. 18). κἂν 
σώζωνταί τινες, κἂν ἀπολλύωνται, Td 
εὐαγγέλιον, μένει ἔχον τὴν οἰκείαν ἀρετήν, 
K. ἡμεῖς μένομεν τοῦτο ὄντες ὕπερ ἐσμέν, 
Theophyl., mainly from Chrys., who pro- 
ceeds καὶ καθάπερ τὸ φῶς, κἂν σκοτί(ῃ 
τοὺς ἀσθενεῖς, φῶς ἐστι, καίτοι σκοτίζον" 
κ. τὸ μέλι, κἂν πικρὸν ἢ τοῖς νοσοῦσι, 
γλυκὺ τὴν φύσιν ἐστίν" οὕτω καὶ τὸ εὐαγ- 
γέλιον εὐῶδές ἐστι, κἂν ἀπολλύωνταί 
τινες ἀπιστοῦντες. Hom. v. p. 467. 

16 a.| to the one (the latter) an odour 
arising from death and tending to death: 
to the others (the former) an odour 
arising from life and tending to life. 
The odour was, CHRIST,—who to the 
unbelieving is Death, a mere announce- 
ment of a man crucified,—and working 





a ee 


Bib de 


ζωῆς " εἰς Cony. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


\ w Ν A / ν id 
καὶ “apos ταῦτα. τίς ~ ἱκανός ; 

ἤἤ ς ‘ , a 
yap ἐσμεν ws * οἱ * πολλοὶ Y καπηλεύοντες τὸν 5 λόγον TOU 


641 


17 ΤῊ 

OU w here only. 
Wisd. xviii. 
12. Xen. 
Mem. i. 2, 15. 
see Col. i. 12. 


A > 6 > > > e fal 
“θεοῦ, GAN δ ὡς ἐξ ὃ εἰλικρινείας, GAN δ᾽ ὡς ἐκ θεοῦ, x Rom. v.15 


“ κατέναντι [τοῦ] θεοῦ 4 ἐν χριστῷ λαλοῦμεν. 
III. 1τ᾿Αρχόμεθα πάλιν “ ἑαυτοὺς 


i. 14, b ch. i, 12 reff. 


e Ist pers., Rom. viii. 23. xv. 1. 
ch. v. 12. x. 12, 18 only. see Rom. iii. 5 reff. 


[for (wns ] ζωὴν (but corrd) δὲ, 
former writing being a little shorter. | 


1 Cor. xi. 31. ch. & 9. iv. 2, 5. x. 12, 14. 


reff. 
y here only +. 
see note. 
A zActs xi 1] reff. 
7) a = Matt. vii. 
29. John 
d = 1 Thess. iv. 1. 
f (-άνειν) 


, 
f συνιστάνειν ; 


c Rom. iv. 17 reff. 
1 Thess. ii. 8. 


[os ταυτα is written over an erasure in C, the 


17. for πολλοι, λοιποι D F[-gr] L de fg hI nsyrr arm Chr, Thdrt: plurimi vulg 


(and F-lat); ceteri aut plurimi G-lat. 
goth Iren-int [Ambrst ]. 
{ Ambrst ]. 


αλλα (1st) B. om Ist ws F latt copt 


om 2nd add’ F [D-lat] fuld(and demid) syr Iren-int, 
rec (for κατεναντι) κατενωπιον, with DFKL[ (sic, Tischdf N. T. 


ed 8)] rel Bas, Chr, Thdrt Damasc: evwmiov &3[so Tischdf Cod. Sin.]: txt ABCPR? 


m 17 Did, Chr-ms [ Euthal-ms ]. 


om tov (bef θεου) (to corresp with ex θεου before : 


but the art here is significant as giving solemnity) ABCD!X' m 17 Bas [Euthal-ms] : 


ins D?-3FK LPN? rel Chr Thdrt Damase. 


Cuap. III. 1. for συνιστανειν, συνισταν BD! 17: συνισταναι F Thdrt[-ms]: txt 


ACD?3KLPX rel [Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt-ed Damasc ]. 


death by unbelief: but to the believing, 
Life, an announcement of His Resurrec- 
tion and Life,—and working in them life 
eternal, by faith in Him. The double 
working of the Gospel is set forth in 
- Matt. xxi. 44; Luke 11. 34; John ix. 39. 
16 Ὁ. In order to understand the 
connexion, we must remember that the 
purpose of vindicating his apostolic com- 
mission is in the mind of Paul, and 
about to be introduced by a description 
of the office, its requirements, and its 
holders. This purpose already begins to 
press into its service the introductory and 
apologetic matter, and to take every op- 
portunity of manifesting itself. In order 
then to exalt the dignity and shew the 
divine authorization of his office, he asks 
this question: And (see remarks at ver. 
2) for (to accomplish) these things (this 
so manifold working in the believers and 
unbelievers,—this emission of the edw- 
dia χριστοῦ every where), who is suffi- 
cient? He does not express the answer, 
but it is too evident to escape any reader,— 
indeed it is supplied in terms by ch. iii. 5, 
οὐχ ὅτι ἱκανοί ἐσμεν λογίσασθαί τι ad’ 
ἑαυτῶν ὡς ἐξ ἑαυτῶν, ἀλλ᾽ 7H ἱκανότης 
ἡμῶν ex τοῦ θεοῦ. Meyer remarks that 
πρὸς ταῦτα is put first, in the place of 
emphasis, to detain the attention on its 
weighty import, and then τίς purposely 
put off till the end of the question, to 
introduce the interrogation unexpectedly ; 
as in Herod. v. 33,-- σοὶ δὲ κ. τούτοισι 
τοῖσι πρήγμασι τί ἔστι ;—Plato, Symp. 
Ῥ. 204, ὁ ἐρῶν τῶν καλῶν τί ἐρᾷ ; 
17.) ot πολλοί here points definitely at 
those false teachers, of whom he by and 
by, ch. x.—xil., speaks more plainly. 
ἐσμεν... καπηλεύοντες) are not in the 
Vou. II. 


“Kal 


rec (for Ist ἢ) εἰ, with 


habit of adulterating (the word xa- 
πηλος (Sir. xxvi. 29) originally signifies 
any kind of huckster or vender, but espe- 
cialiy of wine,—and thence, from the fre- 
quency of adulteration of wine, καπηλεύω 
implied to adulterate: in Isa. 1. 22, we 
have of κάπηλοί σου μίσγουσι τὸν οἶνον 
ὕδατι: in the Etymol. (Wetst.) κάπηλος, 
ὁ οἰνοπώλης .. .ὃ δὲ Αἰσχύλος τὰ δόλια 
πάντα καλεῖ κάπηλα' “κάπηλα προφέ- 
ρων τεχνήματα : in Lucian, Hermotim. 
59 (10.), ὅτε καὶ φιλόσοφοι ἀποδίδονται 
τὰ μαθήματα, ὥςπερ οἱ κάπηλοι, κερα- 
σάμενοί γε οἱ πολλοί, καὶ δολώσαντες, 
κακομετροῦντες. See many more 
examples in Wetst. The same is ex- 
pressed ch. iv. 2, by δολοῦντες τ. λόγον 
τ. θεοῦ) the word of God, but as (‘ut qui’) 
from sincerity (the subjective regard of 
the speakers), but as from God (the objec- 
tive regard—a dependence: on the divine 
suggestion) we speak before God (with a 
consciousness of 1115 presence) in Christ 
(not ‘in the name of Christ, Grot., al., 
nor ‘concerning Christ, —Beza, al. : nor 
‘according to Christ,’ Calv.: but as usual, 
in Christ: as united to Him, and mem- 
bers of His Body, and employed in His 
work). 

Cu. III. 1—VI. 10.] BEGINNING WITH 
A DISOWNING OF SELF-RECOMMENDATION, 
THE APOSTLE PROCEEDS TO SPEAK CON- 
CERNING HIS APOSTOLIC OFFICE AND HIM- 
SEIF AS THE HOLDER OF IT, HIS FEEL- 
INGS, SUFFERINGS, AND HOPES, PARTLY 
WITH REGARD TO HIS CONNEXION WITH 
THE CORINTHIANS, BUT FOR THE MOST’ 
PART IN GENERAL TERMS, 1—3.] 
He disclaims a spirit of self-recommenda- 
tion. 1.] apx., are we beginning ? 
πάλιν, alluding to a charge probably made 

ἢ 


019 ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ 8: Til. 


eRomavi2 μὴ ὃ χρήζομεν ws “Twes | συστατικῶν ἐπιστολῶν πρὸς ARcDF 
reff. J a ; . a s 3 \ a a KLPNa 

h -lOoriv. ὑμᾶς, ἢ ἐξ ὑμῶν; 3 ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἡμῶν ὑμεῖς ἐστε, dedet 

i here only +. k2 , 2 . δί RL 1 , ν ΘΒ Ἐ ΚΙ πὶ 
ppc, ἐγγεγραμμένη ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν, | γινωσκομένη καὶ no 17.43 
Epictet. ii. 3. - 


k here bis. Luke 
x. 20 only +. 


l ’ e \ / 5 fed ’ 3 mn ΄ 
αναγινωσκομεμὴ ὑπὸ πάντων ανσρώπων, φανερούμενοι 


sss Μ ‘ \ - -“ ΄ » ~ 

| Mace- xii, τ ὅτι ἐστὲ ἐπιστολὴ χριστοῦ ° διακονηθεῖσα Ud ἡμῶν, * ἐγ- 
1 Acts viii. 28, , 2p ΄ ᾽ \ , q ~ ae 

80 (τεθ΄). ᾿ γεγραμμένη OV μέλανι, ἀλλὰ πνεύματι 4 θεοῦ 4 ζῶντος, 
τη Hom. 1. 

- » > \ / 3 ϑιε \ 7 

wet, οὐκ ἐν τ πλαξὶν " λιθίναις, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν τ᾿ πλαξὶν καρδίαις ' σαρ- 

1 John ii. 19. 
ο Sat oh. viii. 19, 20. act.,2 Tim.i.18. 1 Pet. i. 12. iv. 10. ΡΞ 2John 12. 3 John 13 only f. 
q Acts xiv. 15 note. r here bis. Heb. ix. 4 only. Exon. xxxi. 18. s John ii. 6. Rev. ix. 20 


only. Exod. 1. c. al. t Rom. vii. 14 reff. 
AKLP rel arm Chr, Damase: txt BCDFN afm [att copt goth Euthal-ms] Thdrt 
| Pel]. wstrep AD! m. rec at end adds συστατικων, with DELP rel syrr 
goth Thdrt-ms Damasc; συστατικὼν επιστολων F, the words commendaticiis epistolis 
are written over the greek in F(as also in G, the latin being there always so written): 
om ABCR 17 vulg(and F-lat) copt eth arm Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt(exe ms,) Ambrst. 
(cuv- DF: -στατικας D!.) 

2. for 2nd μων, vuey & Ὁ k ο 17 [demid eth-rom]. 
F{-gr(and G-lat). (omnibus vulg with F-lat.) 

8. ins καὶ bef eyyeypauuern B a? 67?. 74 vulg. rec καρδιας (see note), with ΕΚ 
rel latt Syr copt (goth) eth arm Orig,(-int;) Dial, Eus[-edd, Mac,] Chr, Cyr, Thdrt 
Damase Iren-int, Hil, : txt ABCD[G|L/P |X rel syr Eus-mss [Cyr-p, Euthal-ms}. 


for παντων, των 


against him of having done this in his 
former epistle: perhaps in its opening sec- 
tion, and in some passages of 1 Cor. v., ix. 
and xiv. 18; xv. 10 al.: see our ch. x. 18. 

ἢ μὴ xp-] Or do we want (the 
μή gives an ironical turn to the question, 
which is more strongly expressed in the 
rec. reading ei u7,—‘ unless it be thought, 
that’ ....) 85 some (so τινες; 1 Cor. iv. 
18; xv. 12; Gal. i. 7, of the teachers who 
opposed him. Probably these persons had 
come recommended to them, by whom 
does not appear, whether by churches or 
Apostles, but most likely by the former 
(ἐξ ὑμῶν), and on their departure re- 
quested similar recommendations from the 
Corinthian church to others), letters of re- 
commendation to you (ἐπιστ. συστατικαί 
are fully illustrated by Suicer, Thes. in voc. 
Among other passages he cites the 13th 
canon of the council of Chalcedon: ξένους 
κληρικοὺς Kal ἀγνώστους ἐν ἑτέρᾳ πόλει 
δίχα συστατικῶν γραμμάτων τοῦ ἰδίου 
ἐπισκόπου μηδὲ ὅλως μηδαμοῦ λειτουρ- 
γεῖν ; and Epist. celxxi. (al. xi.) of Basil, 
vol. iv. p. 417, which has this inscription : 
Εὐσεβίῳ ἑταίρῳ συστατικὴ ἐπὶ Κυριακῷ 
πρεσβυτέρῳ, “" Eusebio sodali commenda- 
titia Cyriaci presbyteri”) or from you? 
The ree. συστατικῶν at the end, as well 
as συστ. ἐπιστολῶν, have probably been 
zlosses, inserted (the ancient Mss. having 
no stops) to prevent ἐξ vu. being taken 
with ἢ émor. following. 2. Ye are 
our epistle (of commendation), written on 
our hearts (not borne in our hands to be 
shewn, but engraven, in the consciousness 
of our work among you, on our hearts. 
“There hardly ean be any allusion, as Olsh. 


thinks, to the twelve jewels engraven with 
the names of the tribes and borne on the 
breast-plate of the High Priest, Exod. 
xxvili. 21. The plural seems to be used, 
as so often in this Epistle,—see e. g. ch. 
vii. 3, 5,—of Paul himself only), known 
and read (a play on yi. and avayw., as at 
ch. i. 13) by all men (because all men are 
aware, what issue my work among you 
has had, and receive me the more favour- 
ably on account of it. But ‘all men?’ in- 
eludes the Corinthians themselves; his 
success among them was his letter of re- 
commendation to them as well as to others 
from them), 3.) manifested to be 
(that ye are) an epistle of Christ (i. e. 
written by Christ,—not, as Chrys. al., 
concerning Christ:—He is the Recom- 
mender of us, the Head of the church and 
Sender of us His ministers) which was 
ministered (aor.) by us (i.e. carried about, 
served in the way of ministration by us as 
tabellarii,—not, as Meyer and De W. and 
al., written by us as amanuenses: see 
below), having been inscribed, not with 
ink, but with the Spirit of the living 
God (so the tables of the law were γεγραμ- 
μέναι τῷ δακτύλῳ τοῦ θεοῦ, Exod. xxxi. 
18), not on stone tables (as the old law, 
ib.), but on (your) hearts (which are) 
tables of flesh (Meyer calls the reading 
καρδίαις a mistake of the pen. But surely 
internal as well as external evidence is 
strong in its favour, the correction to καρ- 
δίας being so obvious to those who found 
the construction harsh). The apparent 
change in the figure in this verse requires 
explanation. The Corinthians are his Epis- 
tle of recommendation, both to themselves 





2 ΡΣ 6 . 


κιναις. 4αἸ]]εποίθησιν δὲ 


“ Ἁ Ν ΄ - 
χριστοῦ “πρὸς τὸν θεόν. ὅ 
, / / 
Υ λογίσασθαί τι 
οἱκανότης ἡμῶν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ, 


6 διακόνους ἴἷ καινῆς 


Ὀ πνεύματος" τὸ γὰρ ἢ γράμμα ‘ ἀποκτέννει, τὸ δὲ 


al. a Ist pers., ver. 1. 
ἃ Col. i. 12 only +. 

Jer. xxxviil. [xxxi.] 31). ix. 15. 
i (-«revy-) Matt. x. 35. Mark xii. 5. 


4. for exouev, exw A. 
δ. λογιζεσθαι CDF 1 n. 


2nd εαυτων, αυτων BF. 


6. rec αποκτεινει, with B Ὁ ἃ Orig{-ed, Bas-ed, | 


τοιαύτην 
, ’ 
Ww οὐχ 
“Ὁ, δ) χα Se = e 7 
Zap 35 ἑαυτῶν ws ὃ ἐξ 
6 ἃ i 
OS καὶ 
fs διαθήκης, 


e = Eph. iii. 7. Col. 
Luke xii. 4. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 645 


' ἔχομεν διὰ τοῦ ἃ ch. i 15 τες 
i vite i ἱκανοί ἐσμεν w re 24 reff. 
ἃ ἑαυτῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ ἔτ Be 
4 ἱκάνωσεν ἡμᾶς ¥ = alae 


3 28. (Jer. xi. 
" γράμματος 
" πνεῦμα 


B= εἴ εν, ἢ 2 c here only τ. 
f 1 Cor. xi. 25 ". Heb. viii. 8 (from 
h Rom. ii. 29. vii. 6. 


> > 19.) 
OU ἀλλὰ z Luke xii. 57, 
xxi. 30. 
John v. 19. 
x. 18. xvi. 13 


i. 23. al. 


g Rom. ix. 4 reff. 


Rey. vi. 11. 


rec ap’ eauvtwy bef λογισασθαι τι, with KL rel syr Did, 
Chr, Thdrt Damasc: bef ἱκανοὶ ἐσμεν BCR copt arm Bas, [Euthal-ms] Antch: 
εσμεν m (attempts to connect ixavur and ad eavtwy): om 17. 139 Syr: 
latt goth [(zth) Ambrst ].—7: bef Aoy. P [Chr,]: 


bef 
txt ADF(P) 
om τι B. om ws C. for 


: amoxtevet ACDL (αποκτένει D?L) 


rel Orig-ms, [ Euthal- ms] Cyr-p: txt FCerpra), KPN e ΕἸ m? 17 Did, Chr-2-mss. 


and others; an Epistle, written by Christ, 
ministered by Paul; the Epistle itself being 
now the subject, viz. the Corinthians, them- 
selves the writing of Christ, inscribed, not 
on tables of stone, but on hearts, tables of 
flesh. The Epistle itself, written and worn 
on Paul’s heart, and there known and read 
byall men, consisted of the Corinthian con- 
verts, on whose hearts Christ had written 
it by His Spirit. J bear on my heart, as 
a testimony to all men, that which Christ 
has by His Spirit written in your hearts. 
On the tables of stone and of flesh, see 
Exod. as above; Prov. iii. 3; vii. 3; Jer. 
xxxi. 31—34, and on the contrast, also 
here hinted at in the background, between 
the heart of stone and the heart of flesh, 
Ezek. xi. 19; xxxvi. 26. 

4—11.] His honour of his apostolie 
office was no personal vanity, for all the 
ability of the Apostles came from God, 
who had made them able ministers of the 
new covenant (4—6), a ministration infi- 
nitely more glorious than that of the old 
dispensation (7—11). 4.] The con- 
nexion with the foregoing is immediate: 
he had just spoken of his consciousness of 
apostolic success among them (which asser- 


tion would be true also of other churches . 


‘which he had founded) being his world- 
wide recommendation. It is this confidence 
of which he here speaks. Such confidence 
however we possess through Christ to- 
wards God: i.e. ‘it is no vain boast, but 
rests on power imparted to us through 
Christ in regard to God, in reference to 
God’s work and our own account to be 
given to Him:’ 5. | not that (i. 6. “1 
mean not, that’. . .:—not, ‘not because,’ 
as Winer in his former editions: see edn. 
6, § 61. 5. f) we are of ourselves able to 
think any thing (to carry on any of the 
processes of reasoning or judgment, or 


faith belonging to our apostolic calling: 
there is no ellipsis, ‘any thing great,’ or 
‘good, or the like) of ourselves, as if 
from ourselves (ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτ. and ἐξ éavr. are 
parallel: the latter more definitely pointing 
to ourselves as the origin),—but our ability 
(λογίσασθαι τὰ πάντα) is from (as its 
source) God, 6.1 Who also (=‘ qui 
idem ;? so Eur. Bacch. 572, ταῦτα καὶ 
καθύβρισ᾽ αὐτόν, ‘hee eadem illi expro- 
bravi.?. See Hartung, Partikellehre, i. p. 
132) enabled us as ministers of the 
(or, as Stanley, “a:” but not necessarily 
from the omission of the art.: cf. Heb. 
xii. 24, καὶ διαθήκης νέας μεσίτῃ ᾿Ιησοῦ) 
new Covenant (i. 6. the gospel, Eph. iii. 7 ; 
Col. i. 23, as distinguished from the law : 
see 1 Cor. xi. 25; Gal. iv. 24:—the πλάκες 
λίθιναι and σάρκιναι are still borne in 
mind, and lead on to a fuller comparison 
of the two covenants),—not of (governed 
by διακόνους, not by καινῆς d1a8.—* minis- 
ters, not of”? ..... ) letter (in which, viz. 
in formal and literal precept, the Mosaic 
law consisted), but of Spirit (in which, viz. 
in the inward guiding of the Spirit of God, 
the gospel consists. Bengel remarks: 
‘ Paulus etiam dum hee scripsit, non litera, 
sed spuritus ministerium egit. Moses in 
proprio illo officio suo, etiam cum haud 
scripsit, tamen in litera versatus est’): for 
the letter (mere formal and literal precept, 
of the law) killeth ‘as in Rom. vii.,—brings 
the knowledge of sin, its guilt and its 
punishment. The reference is not, as 
Meyer, to natural death, which is the 
result of sin even where there is no law; 
nor as Chrys. to the law executing punish- 
ment), but the Spirit (of the gospel, 1. 6. 
God’s Holy Spirit, acting in and through 
Christ, Who ἐγένετο cis πνεῦμα ζωοποιοῦν, 
1 Cor. xv. 45. See also below, ver. 17) 
ee life (not merely life eternal, but 


041 


k Rom. iv. 17 
reff, 

1 Acts i. 17 al. 

m here only +t. 


K ζωοποιεῖ. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOT> 


7 εἰ δὲ ἡ | διακονία τοῦ 


B. ΤῊ]: 


θανάτου ἐν » γράμματι 


m ἐντετυπωμένη λίθοις ἐγενήθη τ ἐν ὁ» δύξῃ, ὥςτε μὴ δύ- 


Luke iv. 32 ᾽ / \ eo N 5 \ > \ , 
"i ps. ψάσθαι “ἀτενίσαι τοὺς υἱοὺς ᾿Ισραὴλ εἰς τὸ πρόςωτπον 
xxvill. 4. ’ \ Ἢ " = , > ὃν ee 
o1Cor.xv.48 Μωυσέως διὰ τὴν Ῥ δόξαν τοῦ προςώπου αὐτοῦ THY" KaT- 
258 Ἔ f A ees A ς ͵ a , 
rae" αργουμένην, ὃ πῶς οὐχὶ μᾶλλον ἡ ᾿ διακονία τοῦ Ῥπνεύ- 
4 epp., here ” no 2,, op 5 ' 9 2? \ e 1§ , Ag 
and νεῖ. 13 ματος ἔσται "Ὁ EV ὀξῃ; 8 εἰ γὰρ ἡ ' διακονία τῆς * κατα- 
only. Acts i. 
10 reff. 4 t eye u ᾿ Εν 
ton κρίσεως δόξα, ᾿ πολλῷ ' μᾶλλον ἃ περισσεύει ἡ Y διακο- 
iv. 29,30.) ΄ A 7 / , \ \ 5) , 
riCor 28 | Wa τῆς " δικαιοσύνης Ῥ δόξη. 10 καὶ γὰρ οὐ ¥ δεδόξασται 
off. part. 
Tree ἴδ. ii. 6. sch. vii. 3only +. Numb. xiii. 33 alius in Hexapl. {Montf. (not Fd.)]) t Rom. 
v. 9, 10 reff. u — Rom. ili. 7 reff. constr., ch. vili. 7 (πίστει, K.T.A.). Sir. xi. 12. v see ch. 
xi. 15. w = Rom. xi. 13. Judg. ix. 9. 


7. for @avarov, θεου SN? (txt X-corr!). 


rec (for γραμματι) γραμμασιν (see note), 


with ACD2°KLPR rel latt(ditteris aut littera G-lat) syr copt goth Orig,{-c, |(-int,) 


Mac 


Syr farm}. for evret., τετυπωμενὴ F. 


Chr, Thdrt Damase [Euthal-ms Ambrst]: ἐενγεγραμμενὴ 17: txt B D'{-gr] F{-gr] 


rec ins ev bef λιθοις, with D?-3K LN! rel 


flatt arm] Orig,(-int,) Mac, Chr Damasc [Aug,]: om ABC D![-gr] F{-grj PX! 17 


G-lat Orig,[-c, Euthal-ms] Did, Epiph Thdrt. 


for του, αὐτου (but av erased) X}. 


8. for ovx:, ovd: &'(but x written above by N! or -corr!). 
9. for 150 7, τη AC D![and lat] F[-gr] δὲ a 17 am syrr eth Orig,(-int,) Cyr, Ambrst : 
txt B D®[-gr] KLP rel vulg[-ed |(and F-lat) G-lat copt goth Mac, Chr, Thdrt [Antch, ] 


Damasce Aug Pel. 
Orig, ]. 
abundavit D-lat. 


aft δοξα ins ἐστιν D!F [latt (Syr copt arm) ]} Orig-int,{/om 
περισσευσει D-gr Καὶ ὁ syrr Mac, Orig-int,, abundabit G-lat Ambrst: 
rec ins ev bef δοξη (prob from ev δ. above, ver 8, and below, 


ver 11), with DEK LPN’ rel latt goth Orig,(-int,) Mac [Cyr, Antch, ] Ambrst: om ABC 


17 tol Syr [ Euthal-ms ].—dvéa δὰ], 


10. rec ovde (mistake, from δὲ being the first syllable of the next word), with h latt 
Thdot-ancyr,(ovde yap) Thl-ed Orig-int,: txt ABC D[-gr] F{-gr] ΚἼΡΝ rel copt goth 


the whole new life of the man of God, see 
Rom. vi. 4,11; viii. 2,10). On the his- 
tory of this meaning of γράμμα, see 
Stanley’s note. 7—11.] And this 
ministration is infinitely more glorious 
than was that of Moses under the old 
Covenayt. He argues from the less to 
the greater: from the transitory glory of 
the killing letter, to the abiding glory of 
the life-giving Spirit. 7. | But (pass- 
ing to another consideration,—the compa- 
rison of the two διακονίαι) if the minis- 
tration of death in the letter (of that 
death which the law, the code of literal 
and formal precept, brought in. This not 
having been seen, it was imagined that 
γράμματι belonged to ἐντετυπωμένη, and 
hence it was altered, as more according to 


fact, into γράμμασιν, the received reading. | 


No art. is required before γράμματι, 
as Meyer objects,—on account of the pre- 
position ev) engraven on stones (it seems 
strange that ἐντετ. λίθ. should be the pre- 
dicate of διακονία ; but the ministration 
is the whole putting forth of the dispensa- 
tion, the purport of which was summed up 
in the decalogue, written on stones. The 
decalogue thus written was, as in ver. 3, 
διακονηθεῖσα ὑπὸ Μωυσέως) was (con- 
stituted) in glory (as its state or accom- 
panying condition :—the abstract as yet, 
to be compared with the glory of the 
tther: the concrete, the brightness on 


the face of Moses, is not yet before us), so 
that the sons of Israel could not fix their 
eyes on (they were afraid to come nigh 
him, Exod. xxxiv. 30 —so that μὴ δύνασθαι 
is not said of physical inability, but of 
inability from fear) the face of Moses, on 
account of the glory of his face, which 
was transitory (‘transitoria et modici 
temporis,’ Estius;—supernaturally con- 
ferred for a season, and passing away 
when the occasion was over), how shall 
not rather the ministration of the Spirit 
(= ἡ διακονία τῆς ζωῆς ἐν πνεύματι, as 
formally opposed to the other :—but not 
so expressed, because the Spirit is the 
principle of life, whereas the Law only 
led to death) be (future, because the-glory 
will not be accomplished till the manifesta- 
tion of the kingdom: according to Billroth, 
‘esse invenietur si rem recte perpenderi- 
mus :’ or as Bengel, ‘ loquitur ex prospectu 
veteris Testamenti in novum :’ but I much 
prefer the above, as giving the contrast, 
by and by expressed, between τὸ καταργού- 
μενον and τὸ μένον) in glory? 9.] 
For (an additional reason ‘a minori ad 
majus ’) if the ministration of condemna- 
tion was (or, is) glory (the change of 
ἡ διακονία to the dat. has been made ap- 
parently because a difficulty was found in 
the ministration itself being glory), much 
more does the ministration of righteous- 
ness abound in glory. The ministration 


ABCDF 
KLPxa 
bedef 
ghklim 
no 17.47 


7—13. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS, B. 


645 


Ν Χ ὃ ὃ , y ’ / A y , / = 7 e : 
TO (5 οξασμένον εν τοῦυτῷ T@ Mepet, ELVEKEV τῆς UTTEP= x em χχχὶν. 
> { 3 


βαλλούσης δόξης. 11 εἰ γὰρ τὸ 


᾿ καταργούμενον * διὰ δό- ¥ cb. ix: 3. 


Col. ii. 16 
Ἂ eo \ , ᾽ , ς 7 1 Pet. iv. 16 
Ens, πολλῷ 'uadrov τὸ ὃ μένον, "ev °P δόξῃ. 13 ἔχοντες oes iam 
chy ix, 14. 
5 , ᾽ i aA Ὁ af fy a ‘ 13 Σ Ephiaall 
οὖν τοιαύτην ἐλπίδα cary παρρησίᾳ χρώμεθα, ; Kat . Eph we 
ΟῚ , an 7, " Η E , 
ov “καθάπερ Μωυσῆς ἐτίθει ᾿ κάλυμμα ἐπὶ TO πρόςωπον ΝΣ Ty. 
phe ides \ \ iad Soe. ’ \ ei | \ > 13 ual. (ὑπερν 
αὐτου ρος TO ft?) QATEVIGAL τοὺς UVLOVUS σραὴλ, ELS βαλλόντως, 
ch. xi. 23. -βολή, ch. i. 8.) a=chii 4 v.7. b = Heb. xii. 27, 1 Pet. i. 23, 
25 (from Isa. xl. 8) al. fr. c (Gospp. παῤῥησίᾳ, Mark viii. 32. John vii. 13 α16, ἐν 7., John 
vii. 4. xvi. 29 only.) Acts ii. 29 al4. Paul, ch. vii.4 al6. Heb. iii. 6 al3. 1 John ii. 28 al3. only. Prov. i. 
2) al. d ch. i. 17. Rom. iv. 6 reff. f here 4 times only. Exop. 
xxxiv. 33—35. g constr., == 1 Thess. ii. 9. (see note.) h ver. 7. 


eth arm Orig,[-c,] Mac, Bas Chr-2-mss [Euthal-ms] Jer, Aug). 


rec (for ev.) 


evexev, with CF1KL rel Orig, [Mac Bas Chr Euthal-ms Thdot-anc Thdrt]: txt ABD 


F2GPR g m 47 Damase, ἤνεκεν 17. 


13. rec εαὐτου, with DKN rel Chr, Thdrt: [om goth:] txt ABCFLP Frag-coisl 
acdm 17. [47 Euthal-ms] Chr-2-mss Damase. 


of condemnation, because (Rom. vii. 9 ff.) 
the Law detects and condemns sin :—the 
ministration otf righteousness, because 
(Rom. i. 17) therein the righteousness of 
God is revealed and imparted by faith. 
10.] For (substantiation of the 
foregoing πολλῷ μᾶλλον) even that which 
has been glorified (viz. the dian. τ. κατα- 
κρίσ., which was ev δόξῃ by the brightness 
on the face of Moses) has not been glori- 
fied (has lost all its glory) in this respect 
(i.e. when compared with the gospel,— 
κατὰ τὸν τῆς συγκρίσεως λόγον, Chrys. 
Hom. vii. p. 481. De W. takes ἐν rt. 
τῷ μέρ. with δεδοξασμένον, ‘that which 
was in this particular glorified,’ viz. in the 
brightness on the face of Moses :—but 
that would more naturally be τὸ ἐν τούτῳ 
τῷ μέρει δεδοξασμένον :—as it now stands 
1 cannot divide otherwise than οὐ δεδόξασ- 
Tat | τὸ δεδοξασμένον | ἐν τούτῳ τῷ μέρει. 
Meyer takes τὸ δεδοξ. as abstract, and ἐν 
τούτῳ τῷ μέρει as pointing to the conerete : 
‘that which has been glorified (general and 
abstract) has in this particular department 
(concrete, viz. the διακ. τ. κατακρίσ. 
which was δεδοξασμ.) no glory: q.d. the 
glorified is unglorified in this case.? This 
may certainly be, and is ingenious: but the 
other is simpler) on account of (i. 6. when 
we take into consideration) the surpassing 
glory (viz. of the other διακονία :—pre- 
sent, because spoken of qualitatively). 
11.] For (a fresh ground cf superiority in 
glory of the Christian over the Mosaic 
ministry) if that which is transitory (not 
here, as above, the brilliancy of the visage 
of Moses, for that was the δόξα, but the 
ministry itself, the whole purpose which 
that ministry served, which was paren- 
thetical and to come to an end) was with 
glory (διά, see reff., of the condition or 
circumstances in whicha thing takes place), 
much more is that which abideth (tiie 
everlasting gospel) in glory. Estius says, 
“per gloriam (διὰ δ.) innuere videtur 


aliquid momentaneum ac transitorium : ΤΣ 
gloria, aliquid manens et stabile.”” Simi- 
larly, Olshausen: but it is quite in the style 
of our Apostle to use various prepositions 
to express nearly the same relation,—see 
Rom. iii. 22, 30; v. 10. 

12, 18.] From a consciousness of this 
superior glory of his ministration, the 
Apostle uses great plainness of speech, 
and does not, as Moses, use a vail. 

12. ἐλπίδα viz. that expressed Ὀγ ἔσται 
ἐν δόξῃ, ver. 8: the hope of the ultimate 
manifestation of exceeding glory as belong- 
ing to his ministration. παῤῥησίᾳ] 
πρὸς τίνα, εἶπέ μοι πρὸς τὸν θεόν, ἢ πρὸ 
τοὺς μαθητάς; πρὸς ὑμᾶς τοὺς μαθητευο- 
μένους, φησί: τουτέστι, μετ᾽ ἐλευθερίας 
πανταχοῦ φθεγγόμεθα, οὐδὲν ὑποστελλόμε- 
νοι, οὐδὲν ἀποκρυπτόμενοι, οὐδὲν ὑφορώμε- 
νοι, ἀλλὰ σαφῶς λέγοντες" καὶ οὐ δεδοίκα- 
μεν μὴ πλήξωμεν ὑμῶν τὰς ὄψεις, καθάπερ 
Μωυσῆς τὰς Ἰουδαίων, Chrys. p. 482. 

18.1 καὶ ov, and (do) not (place 
a vail on our fuace,—so Mark xv. 8, 
6 ὄχλος ἤρξατο αἰτεῖσθαι (ποιεῖν) καθὼς 
ἀεὶ ἐποίει αὐτοῖς. See Winer, edn. 6, 
§ 64, i. 1 b.) as Moses placed a vail on 
his face, in order that (see below) the 
sons of Israel might not look on the 
termination of the transitory (viz. his 
διακονία, see ver. 11, but spoken of as 
δεδοξασμένη : ‘the glory of his ministra- 
tion’). A mistake has been made with re- 
gard to the history in Exod. xxxiv. 33—35, 
which has considerably obscured the un- 
derstanding of this verse. It is commonly 
assumed, that Moses spoke to the Israel- 
ites, having the vail on his face ; and this 
is implied in our version—‘ till Moses had 
done speaking with them, he put a vail on 
his face.” But the LXX (and Heb.) gave 
a different account: καὶ ἐπειδὴ κατέπαυσεν 
λαλῶν πρὸς αὐτούς, ἐπέθηκεν ἐπὶ τὸ mpds- 
wrov αὐτοῦ κάλυμμα. He spoke to them 
without the vail, with his face shining and 
glorified: when he had. done speaking, he 


646 ITPOS KOPINOIOT®S B. 11]. 
isceRom.x.4. τὸ ἱ τέλος τοῦ ἢ" καταργουμένουις 18 ἀλλ᾽ * ἐπωρώθη τὰ ABCDE 

k Rom. xi. 7 Ἔ I aes " Α ra - ζ wah 
ey coe ἱνοήματα αὐτῶν. “aypt yap τῆς "σήμερον * ἡμέρας bedef 


ghklim 
Do 17.47 


om to D!F. for τελος, tposwrov A vulg(and F-lat) Ambrst. (finem is written 
over TeAos in the greek column of F. The mistakein A and vulg may have arisen 
from the eye of some scribe having passed to the mposwrov in the line above: τελος 
stands just below mposwrov un Mattha@i’s edn of K.) . 

14. adda B. εἐπωρωθησαν Καὶ (g! 3). rec om ἡμέρας (as unnecessary, see 
ver 15), with KL rel [Syr eth] Archel, Did, Bas, Chr, Thdrt Damase: ins ABCDFPX 


m = Rom. viii. 22 reff. n Matt. xxviii. 15. Acts xx. 26. Rom. xi.Sonly. Josh. ν. 9. Jer. i. 18, 


of concealment and transitoriness: the 


placed the vail on his face: and that, not 
because they were afraid to look on him, 
but as here, that they might not look on 
the end, or the fading, of that transitory 
glory ; that they might only see it as long 
as it was the credential of his ministry, 
and then it might be withdrawn from their 
eyes. ‘Thus the declaration of God’s will 
to them was not ἐν παῤῥησίᾳ, but was 
interrupted and broken by intervals of 
concealment, which ours is not. The op- 
position is twofold: (1) between the vailed 
and the wnvailed ministry, quoad the mere 


fact of concealment in the one case, and: 


openness in the other: (2) between the 
ministry which, was suspended by the 
vailing, that its τέλος might not be seen, 
and that which proceeds ἀπὸ δόξης εἰς 
δόξαν, having no termination. On the 
common interpretation, Commentators 
have found an almost insuperable difficulty 
in πρὸς τὸ μὴ at. The usual escape from 
it bas been to render it, ‘so that the 
Israelities could not,’ as in ver. 7. De 
Wette somewhat modifies this, and sees 
in it the divine purpose: ‘in order that,’ 
but not in the intention of Moses, but of 
God’s Providence. But both these render- 
ings are ungrammatical. πρὸς τό with an 
infinitive never signifies the mere result, 
nor, as Meyer rightly remarks against De 
Wette, the objective purpose, but always 
the subjective purpose present to the mind 
of the actor: he refers to Matt. v.28; vi. 
1; xiii. 30; xxiii. 8; Mark xiii.22; Eph. 
vi. 11; 1 Thess. ii. 9; 2 Thess. iii. 8; James 
ili. 3 (rec.) ; and Matt. xxvi. 12 (see my 
note there). I may remark also, that the 
narrative in Exodus, the LXX version of 
which the Apostle here closely follows (see 
below on ver. 16), implies that the bright- 
ness of Moses’s face had place not on that 
one occasion only, but throughout his 
whole ministry between the Lord and the 
people. When he ceased speaking to them, 
he put on the vail; but whensoever he 
went in before the Lord to speak to Him, 
the vail was removed till he came out, and 
had spoken to the Israelites all that the 
Lord had commanded him, during which 
speaking they saw that his face shone,— 
aud after which speaking he again put on 
the vail. So that the vail was the symbol 


part revealed they might see: beyond that, 
they could ποῦ : the ministry was a broken, 
interrupted one; its end was wrapped in 
obscurity. In the τέλος τοῦ Karapy. 
we must not think, as some Commentators 
have done, of Christ (Rom. x. 4), any fur- 
ther than it may be hinted in the back- 
ground that when the law came to an end, 
He appeared. 

14—18.] The contrast is now made be- 
tween the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, on whose 
heart this vail still is in the reading of the 
O. T., and Us ALL (Christians), who with 
uncovered face behold the glory of the 
Lord. This ‘section is parenthetical. 
Before and after it, the ménistry is the 
subject : in it, they to whom the ministry 
is directed. But it serves to shew the 
whole spirit and condition of the two 
classes, and thus further to substantiate 
the character of openness and freedom 
asserted of the Christian ministry. 

14. But (also) their understandings were 
hardened (on this, the necessary sense of 
ἐπωρώθη, sce note, Eph. iv. 18). These 
words evidently refer, as well as what fol- 
lows, not to the τέλος, which they did not 
see, but to that which’ they did see: to 
that which answers to the present ἀνά- 
γνωσις τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης, viz. the word 
of God imparted by the ministration of 
Moses. And by these words the transition 
is made from the form of similitude just ᾿ 
used, to that new one which is about to be 
used ; q. ἃ. ‘not only was there a vail on 
Moses’s face, to prevent more being known, 
but also their understandings were dark- 
ened: there was, besides, a vail on their 
hearts” So that ἀλλά = but also, or 
moreover. To refer this ἀλλ᾽ érwp. to 
παῤῥησίᾳ χρώμεθα, to the present hard- 
heartedness of the Jews under the freedom 
of speech of the Gospel, as Olsh., De W., 
al., is, in my view, to miss the whole sense 
of the passage. No reference whatever is 
made to the state of the Jews under the 
preaching of the gospel, but only as the 
objects of the O. ‘Il. ministration,—zhen, 
under the oral teaching of Moses,—zow, in 
the reading of the O. T. In order to 
understand what follows, the change of 
sinilitude must be carefully borne in mind. © 


14—16. ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@OIOTS B. 647 


\ » Lees / \ A “ -»" 
τὸ αὐτὸ ' κάλυμμα "5 ἐπὶ τῇ ἀναγνώσει τῆς “' παλαιᾶς o=sohnix. | 
Ι. Ch. Vil. 4, 
΄ , 4 » ΄ © A . 
«διαθήκης μένει, μὴ " ἀνακαλυπτόμενον ὅτι ἐν χριστῷ He” 


“- - , 77 ΄ 3 Acts xiii. 15. 
txatapyetras’ 15 ἀλλ᾽ “ws ἃ σήμερον, " ἡνίκα ἂν ~ ava- ἢ 


1 Tim. iv. 13 
͵ Qn f ΄ x , \ A 7 > ᾿Ξ Neh. 
γινώσκηται Μωυσῆς, feadkuupa * ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν αὐτῶν 


only. 
Ne 8. : 
16 Vv ¢ / Lm ἣν τ , Ν ΄ Ζ : pa ἐὰν ξ 
ἡνίκα δ᾽ ἂν ¥ ἐπιστρέψῃ Y πρὸς κύριον, 7 περι- Rom. vi. δ. 
1 Cor. ν. 7,8 
t vv. 7 


κεῖται. 


al. Lev. xxv. 22. s here bis only. Job xii. 22 and Isa. iii. 17 BN. (ἀποκ. A.) 
&e. ἃ here only. Sir. xlvii. 7. see Matt. xxvii. 8. Rom. xi. 8. vy here bis 
only. Exod. xxxiv. 34. Deut. vii. 12. w constr., Acts viii. 28. (xiii. 27.) xv. 21. x sO 
Acts x. li, xills Rev.ill.20: Ὑ ΤΑ vil, 1. xx.) y =1 Thess. i.9. (Acts ix. 40.) Amos 
iv. 6. z Acts xxvii. 20 reff. 
m 17 latt copt [syr goth arm] Clem, Cyr[-p Euthal-ms] Orig-int, [Cypr,] Ambrst. 
for em, ev DF Chry. 

15. rec om av (from av beginning avaywwor.?), with DEKL[P] rel (Orig[-c, ]) Eus, 
Cyr-jer, Cas, Chr, Cyr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt, Damase: ins ABCR Orig, Cyr, Thdrt,, 
eav 17, rec αναγινωσκεται, with FKL rel vulg Eus, Cyr-jer, Cees, Chr, Cyr,{ -ms,- 
ΡΊ Thdrt, Damase Orig-int,: txt A B(see table) CDP ὁ m 17 Orig.[-c,; Chr-ms 
Cyr[-p.-ms, Euthal-ms}| Thdrt,. from καλυμμα to το next ver is repeated by B'. 

κειται bef em τὴν καρδ. av. D'-3F latt [eopt] goth eth. 


16. for ἡνίκα, οταν ΕἾ ora] Chr,. 


τὸ αὐτὸ κάλυμμα] ‘the vail once on 
Moses’s face,’ is now regarded as laid on 
their hearts. It denoted the ceasing, the 
covering up, of his oral teaching; for it 
was put on when he had done speaking to 
the people. Now, his oral teaching has 
altogether ceased, and the διακονία is car- 
ried on by abook. But as when we listen, 
the speaker is the agent, and the hearers 
are passive,—so on the other hand, when 
we read, we are the agents and the book is 


passive. The book is the same to all: the’ 


difference between those who understand 
and those who do not understand is now a 
subjective difference—the vail is no longer 
on the face of the speaker, but on the 
heart of the reader. So that of necessity 
the form of the similitude is changed. 
For (answering to an understood clause, 
‘and remain hardened’) to the present day 
the same vail (which was once on the face 
of Moses) remains at the reading of the 
Old Testament (7 mad. διαθ. here, as we 
now popularly usethe words, the book com- 
prising the ancient Covenant), the dis- 
covery not being made (by the removal of 
the vail) that it (the O. T.) is done away 
in Christ (that the Old Covenant has 
passed away, being superseded by Christ). 
This I believe to be the only admissible 
sense of the words, consistently with the 
symbolism of the passage. The render- 
ings, ‘remains not taken away—for it 
(i.e. the vail) ἐδ done away in Christ,’ 
and (as E.V.) ‘remaineth . . untaken 
away .. which vail (6 τι) is done away in 
Christ, —are inadmissible: (1) because 
they make καταργεῖται, which throughout 
the passage belongs to the glory of the 
ministry, to apply to the vail: and (2) be- 
cause they give no satisfactory sense. It 
is not because the vail can only be done 
away in Christ, that it now remains un- 


de εαν AN! 17: om av C k Mac Bas. 


taken away on their hearts, but because 
their hearts are hardened. Besides, the 
Apostle would not have expressed it thus, 
but ἐν χριστῷ γὰρ καταργ. The word 
ἀνακαλυπτόμενον has been probably chosen, 
as is often the practice of the Apostle, 
on account of its relation to κάλυμμα, 
—it not being unvailed to them that 

15.] But (reassertion of μὴ 
ἀνακαλυπτόμενον, with a view to the next 
clause) to this day, whenever Moses is 
read, a vail lies upon their heart (under- 
standing. κεῖται ἐπί w. acc.,—pregn., in- 
volving the being laid on, and remaining 
there). 16.] Here, the tertium com- 
parationis is, the having on a vail, and 
taking it off on going into the presence of 
the Lord. This Moses did; and the choice 
of the same words as those of the LXX, 
shews the closeness of the comparison ; 
ἡνίκα δ᾽ ἂν eiseropevero Μωυσῆς ἔναντι 
κυρίου λαλεῖν αὐτῷ, περιῃρεῖτο τὸ κά- 
λυμμα. This shall likewise be done in the 
case of the Israelites: when it (i.e. 7 καρ- 
δία αὐτῶν,--ποῦ Israel, as Chrys.; Theod., 
Theophyl., Erasm., al.,—nor Moses, as 
Calv., Estius,—nor τίς, as Orig., al.) shall 
turn to the Lord (here again ἐπιστρέψῃ 
πρός is carefully chosen, being the very ex- 
pression of the LXX, when the Israelites, 
having been afraid of the glory of the face 
of Moses, returned to him after being 
summoned by him :---ἐφοβήθησαν ἐγγίσαι 
αὐτῷ᾽ Kal ἐκάλεσεν αὐτοὺς Μωυσῆς, καὶ 
ἐπεστράφησαν πρὸς αὐτὸν ....-- “π--αυὰ 
κύριον appears to be used for the same 
reason) the vail is taken away (not, shall 
be, because ἣ καρδία is the subject, and 
thus the taking away becomes an indivi- 
dual matter, happening whenever and 
wherever conversion takes place). Let me 
restate this,—as it is all-important towards 
the understanding of vv. 17, 18. ‘When 


648 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B: ΠῚ. ΜΠ ΉῊῚῚ: 


nw ’ a ‘ nm - ᾽ 
a Acts viii, 9. αιρεῖται TO! κάλυμμα. 11 Ὃ δὲ κύριος τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν" ABCDF 


ff. = ’ = , ΚΙΡΝ a 
b Rom. viil,21. οὗ δὲ τὸ * πνεῦμα * κυρίου, ὃ ἐλευθερία. 18 ἡμεῖς δὲ πάντες bedef 
Cor. x. 29. g m 

Gal. v. 1, 13. 


Ley. xix. 20. 


΄ / / 
δ ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳ προςώπῳ τὴν δόξαν κυρίου “ KaT- nol7.47 


c here only t. 


΄ \ > \ ad > , e / θ > \ 

Ἢ (ee mote.) οπτριζόμενοι, τὴν αὐτὴν “ εἰκόνα “ μεταμορφούμεθα ἀπὸ 
om, Vill. « Η . ᾿ 2 3 \ ; , 

_ rel vere δόξης εἰς δόξαν, ᾿ καθάπερ 5 ἀπὸ κυρίου πνεύματος. 


only, see ; 
Moulton’s Winer, p. 538, note 1. 
iv. 6 reff. 


17. for οὗ, που F. for κυριου, To avytoy Li. rec ins exee bef ελευθερια 
(see notes), with D?3FKLP83 rel latt syr goth eth arm Ath,[-int,] Epiph, Bas, Chr, 
Cyr, Thdrt Damase Orig-int; Hil, [Novat, Ambrst]: om ABC D}|-gr] 8! 17 fri Syr 


Matt. xvii. 2!| Mk. Rom. xii. 2 only+. Ps. xxxiii.1 Symm. 


f Rom, 
= Acts ii. 22. Jamesi. 13 al. 
ξ 


copt Nys, [Cyr-p,(in Cyr, both readings are found) Euthal-ms ]. 


8. αποπτριζομενοι F: ενοπτριζομεθα Mac). 


Eus, Mac). καθωςπερ Β. 
their heart goes in to speak with God, 
—ceases to contemplate the dead letter, 
and begins to commune with the Spirit 
of the old covenant (the Spirit of God), 
then the vail is removed, as it was from 
the face of Moses.’ 17.] Now (δέ 
exponentis. tis δὲ οὗτος πρὸς ὃν δεῖ 
ἀποβλέψαι ; Theodoret) the Lord is the 
Spirit: i.e. the κύριος of ver. 16, is, the 
Spirit, whose word the O.T. is: the 
mvedua,—as opposed to the ypduua,— 
which ζωοποιεῖ, ver. 6. But it is not 
merely, as Wetst., ‘Dominus significat 
Spiritum,’ nor is πνεῦμα merely, as Olsh., 
the spiritual sense of the law: but, ‘the 
Lord, as here spoken of, ‘ Christ,’ ‘ts the 
Spirit,’ is identical with the Holy Spirit : 
not personally nor essentially, but, as is 
shewn by τὸ πνεῦμα κυρίου following, in 
this department of His divine working :— 
Christ, here, is the Spirit of Christ. The 
principal mistaken interpretation (among 
many, see Pool’s Synops., Meyer, De Wette) 
is that of Chrys., Theodoret, Theophyl., 
(Ecum., Estius, Schulz,— making τὸ πνεῦ- 
pa the subject, and 6 kup. the predicate, 
which though perhaps (but would δέ then 
have had its present position ?) allowable, 
is against the context, 6 δὲ κύρ. being 
plainly resumed from 6 κύρ. in ver. 16. 
The words are then used by them as a 
proof of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit. 
But (δέ appealing to a known or evi- 
dent axiom, as in a mathematical demon- 
stration) where the Spirit of the Lord 
(see above) is, is liberty (ἐκεῖ has pro- 
bably been inserted, as being usual after 
ov: but, as Meyer remarks, not in St. Paul’s 
style, see Rom. iv. 15; v. 20). They are 
fettered in spirit as long as they are slaves 
to the letter, = as long as they have the 
vail on their hearts; but when they turn 
to the Lord the Spirit, which is not πνεῦμα 
δουλείας but mv. υἱοθεσίας, Rom. viii. 15, 
—and by virtue of whom οὐκ ἔτι εἶ δοῦλος, 
ἀλλὰ vids, Gal. iv. 7,—then they are at 
_ liberty. There can hardly be any allusion 
to a vail over the head implying suljec- 


μεταμορφουμενοι A 23 Orig,(-int,) 


tion, as 1 Cor. xi. 10, (Erasm., Beza, Grot., 
Bengel, Fritz.,) for here the covering of 
the head with a vail is not thought of, 
but merely intercepting the sight. 

18,] But (the sight of the Jews is thus 
intercepted ; in contrast to whom) WE all 
(‘all Christians? not, as Erasm., Estius, 
Bengel, al. m., ‘we Apostles and teach- 
ers: the contrast is to the viol Ἰσραήλ 
above) with unvailed face (the vail having 
been removed at our conversion: the stress 
is on these words) beholding in a mirror 
the glory of the Lord (i.e. Christ: from 
vv. 16,17. κατοπτρίζω is to shew in a 
mirror, to make a reflexion in a mirror ; 
so Plutarch, de Placitis Philosophorum, 
iii. 5: Anaxagoras explained a rainbow to 
be the reflexion of the sun’s brightness 
from a thick cloud, that always stands 
opposite Tod κατοπτρίζοντος αὐτὸ ἀστέρος. 
In the middle, it is ‘to behold oneself in a 
mirror: so Diog. Laert., Plato, p. 115, 
τοῖς μεθύουσι συνεβούλευε κατοπτρίζεσθαι; 
—but also, to see in a mirror, so Philo, 
Legis Allegor. iii. 33, vol.i. p. 107, uh yap 
ἐμφανισθείης μοι δι’ οὐρανοῦ ἢ γῆς ἢ ὕδατος 
ἢ ἀέρος ἤ τινος ἁπλῶς τῶν ἐν γενέσει, μηδ 
κατοπτρισαίμην ἐν ἄλλῳ τινὶ τὴν σὴν ἰδέαν, 
ἢ ἐν σοὶ τῷ θεῷ. And such is evidently 
the meaning here: the gospel is this mir- 
ror, ὑπο εὐαγγέλιον τῆς δόξης TOU χριστοῦ, 
ch. iv. 4, and we, looking on it with un- 
vailed face, are the contrast to the Jews, 
with vailed hearts reading theirlaw. The 
meaning ‘reflecting the glory,’ ἄς. as 
Chrys., Luth, Calov., Bengel, Billroth, 
Olsh., is one which neither the word nor 
the context (see above) will bear (see, 
however, Stanley’s note), are transfigured 
into the same image (which we see in the 
mirror: the image of the glory of Christ, 
see Gal. iv. 19, which is more to the point 
than Rom. viii. 21, cited by Meyer, and 
1 John iii. 3. But the change here spoken 
of isa spiritual one, not the bodily chanye 
at the Resurrection: it is going on here 
in the process of sanctification. No 
prep πορᾶ be understood before τὴν αὐτὴῦ 


Byech 2. 


IV. 1 διὰ τοῦτο ἔχοντες τὴν ! 


iprenOnuev, οὐκ * ἐγκακοῦμεν, 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ Β. 


649 


διακονίαν ταύτην, καθὼς b= Acts xx. 
2 ἀλλὰ ᾿ἀπειπάμεθα τὰ "δὲ τεβ᾽ τ; 


m \ πο ΤῊΣ “ἷ \ o an 02 p k Luke xviii. 1. 

Κρύυπτα ΤῊ ς αὐυσχύυνῆήης, μῆ περύπατουντες Εν πανουρ- ver. 16. Gal. 
vi. 9. Eph. 

iii. 13. 2 Thess. iii. 13 only. L.P.t Symm., Gen. xxvii. 46. Num. xxi. 5. Isa. vii. 16. 1 here 

only. 3 Kings xi. 2. Job x. 3 al. m and constr., Rom. ii. 16 reff. n Luke xiv. 

9. Phil. iti. 19. Hebd. xii.2. Jude 13. Rev. iii. 18 only. Ps. Ixxxviii. 45. o Rom. vi. 4. ch. 


x.3. Eph.v.2al. Prov. vili, 20. 


Cnap. IV. 1. for ταυτην, avtny F[-g 


om vulg-clem]. 


p 1 Cor. iii. 19 reff. 


rec εκκακουμεν, with 


CD3KLP rel [Chr, Thdrt Damasc] : fat ‘ABD! ΕΝ m 17 [Euthal-ms]. 


9. (αλλα, so A(perhavs) BCDN cde fg hk1n 47 [Damasc].) 


epya K. 


eixdva—the passive verb indirectly governs 
the ace., as in ἀποτέμνομαι τὴν κεφαλήν 
and similar cases) from glory to glory 
(this is explained, either (1) ‘from one de- 
gree of glory to another ;? so most Com- 
mentators and De Wette, or (2) ‘from 
(by) the glory which we see, into glory, 

as Chrys. p. 486, ἀπὸ δόξης, τῆς τοῦ πνεύ- 
patos, εἰς δόξαν, τὴν ἡμετέραν, τὴν ἐγγι- 
yvouevnv,—TVheodoret, (cum., Theophyl., 

Bengel, Fritz., Meyer, al. T prefer the 
former, as the other would introduce a 
tautology, the sentiment being expressed 
in the words following) as by the Lord the 
Spirit. κυρίου πνεύματος = τοῦ κυρίου τοῦ 
πνεύματος, ὕπο first art. being omitted 
after the preposition, the second to con- 
form the predicate to its subject, as in 
ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρός, Gal. 1. 3,— and answers 
to 6 δὲ κύριος τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν above. 
This seems the obvious and most satis- 
factory way of taking the words, and, 
froin ver. 17, to be necessitated by the 
context ; and so Theodoret, Luther, Beza, 
Calov., Wolf, Estius, al. The rendering 
upheld by Fritz., Billroth. Meyer, De Wette, 
‘the Lord of the Spirit,’ i.e. ‘Christ, whose 
Spirit He is,’ seems to me to convey very 
little meaning, besides being an expression 
altogether unprecedented. The trans- 
formation is effected by the Spirit (τοῦτο 
μεταμορφοῖ, Chrys.), the Author and Up- 
holder of spiritual life, who ‘ takes of the 
things of Christ, and shews them to us,’ 
John xvi. 14, see also Rom. viii. 10, 11,— 
who sanctifies us till we are holy as Christ 
is holy ; the process of renewal after Christ’s 
image is such a transformation as may be 
expected by the agency of (καθάπερ ἀπό, so 
Chrys., καὶ τοιαύτην οἵαν εἰκὸς ἀπὸ ... .) the 
Lord the Spirit,—Christ Himself being the 
image, see ch. iv. 4. The two other ren- 
derings are out of the question, as being 
inconsistent with the order of the words: 

viz.: (1) that of E. V. and of Vulg., Theo- 
phyl., Grot., Bengel, ‘the Spirit of the 
Lord, and (2) that of Chrys., Theodoret, 
Calov., Estius, ‘the Spirit who is the 
Lord.’ Meyer objects to the interpre- 
tation given above as inconsistent with the 
self- evident connexion of the genitives. 
How would le render ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρός ὃ 


for κρυπτα, 


IV. 1—6.] Taking up again the subject 
of his freedom of speech (ch. iii. 12), he 
declares his renunciation of all deceit, and 
manifestation of the truth to every man 
(ver. 2), even though to some the Gospel be 
hidden (vv. 3,4). And this because he 
preaches, without any selfish admizture, 
only the pure light of. the Gospel of Christ 
(vv. 5, 6). 1.] διὰ τοῦτο refers to 
the previous description of the freeness and 
unvailedness of the ministry of the Gospel, 
and of the state of Christians in general 
(ch. iii. 18). ἔχοντες τ. ὃ. ταύτ. 
further expands and explains διὰ τοῦτο. 

καθὼς ἠλεήθ.] even as we received 
mercy (from God, at the time of our being 
appointed ; cf. ἠλεήθην, 1 Tim. i. 16): be- 
longs to ἔχ. τ. 6. ταύτ., not to what follows, 
and is a qualification, in humility, of 
€xovTes—‘ possessing it, not as our own, 
but in as far as we were shewn mercy.’ 
οὐκ ἐγκακοῦμεν) We do not behave our- 
selves in a cowardly manner, do not 
shrink from plainness of speech and action. 
ἐγκακέω is the opposite of παῤῥησιάζω. οὐκ 
ἐκκακοῦμεν would be, ‘we do not give up 
through faintness or cowardice. It is 
hardly possible to decide satisfactorily be- 
tween the two readings. ἐγκ. seems to be 
universal, except in the N. T. (rec. text) 
and the Fathers, which have éxx. Did the 
Fathers borrow this form from the N. T., 
or was it the usual form of later Greek, and 
as such introduced into the text by the 
copyists? In such doubt, I have followed 
manuscript authority. But (cowardice 
alone prompting concealment insuch a case, 
where it does not belong to the character 
of the ministry itself) we have renounced 
(so Herod. iv. 125, τῶν ἀπειπαμένων τὴν 
σφετέρην συμμαχίην : ABlian, N. Η. vi. 1, 
τὴν ἀκόλαστον κοίτην ἀπείπατο παντελῶς 
πᾶσαν : and other examples in Wetst.) the 
hidden things of shame (the having any 
views, ends, or practices which such as 
have them hide through shame: not, as 
De Wette, the hidden things of infamy or 
dishonesty. αἰσχύνη is subjective, = ΕΒ, 
Meyer, φόβος ἐπὶ mpusdoxia ἀδυξίας, Plato 
Defin. p. 416. It is plain from the context 
that it refers, not to crimes and unholy 
practices, but to crooked arts, of which 


650 


q here only. 
Ῥδ. χῖν. ὃ. 
χχχν. 2. 


r 1 Cor. xii. 7 


Ὁ Ist pers.,ch. 
: ili. 1 reff. 
uch. i. 12 reff. 
v ver. 16. ch. v. 
16. vii. 8 al. 
w 1 Thess. i. δ. 
2 Thess. ii. 
14. see Rom. 
1). 16. xvi. 25. 
2 Tim. ii. 8. 
<i ΡΠ, oto, 
y Rom. ii. 12 reff. 
b Rom. sii. 2 reff. 
4 = Matt. xvii. 17 al. fr. 
Acts xx. 11.) 
Ἄς Ixxvii. 14. Ixxxix. 8 only. 


7 -= GOL. ἂν. 2510 2s 
e John xii. 40. 
f Rom. iv. 11 reff. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOT® B. 


“. ΄ ᾽ , a ae 
πᾶσαν ἃ συνείδησιν ἀνθρώπων ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ: 


al / 7 Ν 
a> αἰῶνος ἢ τούτου © ἐτύφλωσεν τὰ 


i δοξ “ la) Ὁ“ 3 
οζῆς TOV χριστου, ος ἐστιν 


1 John ii. 11 only. 


TV; 


/ \ »-»" \ , »- nw 5" A -" 

γίᾳ, μηδὲ « δολοῦντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ τῇ 
, a , e \ \ 

᾿ φανερώσει τῆς ἀληθείας " συνιστάντες ' ἑαυτοὺς πρὸς 


ὃ ν εὐ δὲ 


v Σ “ NW ἐλ, W mua Dae ry 
καὶ ἔστιν κεκαλυμμένον τὸ Κ᾽ εὐωγγέλιον “ ἡμῶν, * ἐν τοῖς 

’ o ς \ > a 

Υ ἀπολλυμένοις ἐστὶν κεκαλυμμένον, 3. 5 ἐν οἷς 0 θεὸς τοῦ 


/ ~ εν / 
4 γνρήματα τῶν " ἀπίστων, 


f Pd \ \ > , \ ἢ Ν a ji » / na 
εἰς TO μὴ Savyacat τὸν ἢ φωτισμὸν Tov ' εὐαγγελίου τῆς 


΄ Ψ x lal lal 
Κεὐκὼν tov θεοῦ. 


a here only. 


5 » \ 
ov yap 
see John xii. 31. xiv. 30. Eph. ii. 2. vi. 12. 
Isa. xlii. 19 only. d ch. ii. 11 reff. 
g here only. Levit. xiii. 24, ἄς. xiv. 56 only. (-γή, 


h here bis only. notin classics. Job 111. 9 BN®4 F &c. (not ΑΝ 1.) Ps, xxvi. 1. xliii, 
i 1 Tim. i. 11 only. 


k Col. i. 15. Rom. viii. 295 1 Cor. xi. 


7 al. Gen. i. 26, 27. 


rec συνιστωντες, With D3KL rel: συνιστανοντες A(appy) BP 47. 67°. 80: txt CDF 
17 { Euthal-ms |. 

(3. απολυμμενοις F 1 (17). | 

4. διαυγασαι A ἃ 17 Eus, Archel,[-ed,] Cyr-jer, Damasc: katavy. CD[H] Orig, 
{ Dial, Amphil,] Eus, (both glosses, further to particularize the simple verb): txt 
BFKLPR rel Orig, | Archel-ms, Euthal-ms] Chr, Thdrt Damase [Cyr-mss fluctuate 
hopelessly 1. rec adds αὐτοῖς, with D?-3[-gr] KL[P] rel [vulg-clem spec syrr goth 
eth] Orig, Chr, [Amphil, Thdrt]: om ABCD!F[H]X& 17 old-lat am(with demid fuld 
harl [tol]) Orig, Eus, Cyr-jer Epiph, Cyr[-p Archel, Euthal-ms] Iren-int, [Aug, ]. 


for χριστου, κυριου C. 


Col i. 15) LPR? a fl m 47 syr [goth] arm: 


men are ashamed, and which perhaps were 
made use of by the false teachers), not 
walking (having our daily conversation) in 
craftiness (see ref.) nor adulterating (see 
ch. ii. 17, note) the word of God, but by the 
manifestation of the truth (as our only 
means, see 1 Thess. ii. 8, 4;—the words 
come first, as emphatic), recommending 
ourselves (a recurrence to the charge and 
apology of ch. iii. 1 ff.) to (with reference 
to,—the verdict of) every conscience of 
men (every possible variety of the human 
conscience; implying, there is no conscience 
but will inwardly acknowledge this, how- 
ever loath some among you may be out- 
wardly to confess it. So that the expres- 
sion is not exactly = mp. τὴν συν. πάντων 
ἀνθρώπων. Weneed hardly extend av@p. so 
wide as Chrys. (Hom. viii. p. 493), οὐ... 
πιστοῖς μόνον, ἀλλὰ Kal ἀπίστοις ἐσμὲν 
κατάδηλοι :—he is speaking as a teacher, 
and the men spoken of are naturally λὲς 
hearers and disciples), in the sight of God 
(as ch. ii. 17; not merely to satisfy men’s 
consciences, but with regard to God’s all- 
seeing eye which discerns the heart). 
3.] But if (‘which I concede ;’—see note, 
1 Cor. iv. 7) it is even so, that our gospel 
(the gospel preached by us) is vailed, it is 
among (in the estimation of) the perishing 
that it is vailed. The allegory of ch. iii. 
is continued,—the hiding of the gospel by 
the vail placed before the understanding. 
4.| in whose case (it is true, that) the 
god of this world (the Devil, the ruling 
principle in the men of this world, see reff. 





for os, o F. 


aft του θεου ins του aopatou (see 


pref spec. 


It is historically curious, that Irenzeus 
(Her. iv. 39. 2, p. 266), Origen, Tertull. 
(contra Mare. iv. 11, vol. ii. p. 499), Chrys., 
Augustine (c. advers. leg. ii. 7 (29), vol. viii. 
p- 655), @icum., Theodoret, Theophylact, 
all repudiate, in their zeal against the 
Marcionites and Manichzeans, the gramma- 
tical rendering, and take τῶν ἀπίστων τοῦ 
αἰῶνος τούτου together) blinded (the aor. 
of a purely historial event) the under- 
standings of the unbelieving (i.e. who, 
the ἀπολλύμενοι, are victims of that blind- 
ing of the understandings of the unbeliev- 
ing, which the Devil is habitually carrying 
on. Meyer well remarks, that if it had 
merely been τὰ νοήματα, it would have only 
expressed in the concrete the νοήμ. of those 
signified by ἐν ois,—whereas now, by the 
addition of τῶν ἀπίστ., the blinding in- 
flicted on the ἀπολλ. is marked as falling 
under its category. The rendering τῶν 
ἀπίστων ‘so that they believe not,’ Fritz., 
Billroth, is out of all question) in order 
that the illumination of | shining from, 
gen. subj.) the gospel of the glory of 
Christ, who is the image of God (recur- 
rence to the allegory of ch. iii. 18 ;—Christ 
is the image of God, ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης 
αὐτοῦ, Heb, i. 3, into which same image, 
τὴν αὐτὴν εἰκόνα, we, looking on it m the 
mirror of the gospel, are changed by the 
Spirit ; but which glorious image is not 
visible to those who are blinded by Satan), 
might not shine forth ([see var. readd. 
The object of the god of this world was 


not merely to prevent them from being” 


(H iv. 4 
deat 

ABCDF 
ΓΗΊΚΙ, 
PRrabe 
def gh 
klmno 
17. 47 


ΜΠ ἵν. 7 
H?] 


4 eye 
léautous 
] t 


IPOs 


™ κηρυσσομεν, 


° εἰπὼν PEK σκότους 4 φῶς λάμψει, ὃς 4 ἔλαμψεν ἐν ταῖς 
καρδίαις Ἵν ᾿ πρὸς 1 φωτισμὸν τῆς " γνώσεως τῆς " δόξης 1 


τοῦ θεοῦ * 7] προςώπῳ ψριστ οὔ. 


1 ’Beyower δὲ τὸν ἢ θησαυρὸν τοῦτον ἐν ἡ ὀστρακίνοις 


tech. ii. 10. Prov. viii. 30. 
x. 21. Luke vi. 45 als. 
vi. 28. 


Josh. vi. 19. 


KOPINOIOTS B. 


ἑαυτοὺς δὲ δούλους ὑμῶν "dia Inaodv. 


u Epp., Col. ii. 3. 


65] 


» \ Ν ΕῚ lal / 5 
ἀλλὰ χριστὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν κύριον" 1. ii. ret 


A ἐὰν ae ‘ts Vili. 
6 ὅτι δ' θεὸς 0 ee. 
o = James ii. 


p. “Ὁ ΧΧΧΥΊΪ. 


4 Acks xii. 7 
(reff.). Isa. 
1x. 2. 

r=) Coro vite 
35 reff. 

s see Hab. ii. 14, 

Gospp., Matt. ii. 11 418, Mark 
w as above (v) only. Levit. 


Heb. xi. 26 only. 
v 2 Tim. ii. 20. 


5. ino. bef xp. ACDN vulg syr goth [(a#th) Aug,, and but] om κυρ. Pd: κυρ. 


χρ. #[ not F- lat]: om inv. 47: 


txt BLH]KL rel Syr copt arm Mcion-e,[and ms, | pee 
jer, Chr, [Cyr-p Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase Ambrst. 


nuwr(sic) & 17. for 


2nd ἑησουν, moou A’CN! 17 Mcion-e, [Cyr-p,]: xpiorov X-corr! 5 [Cyr-p, ]. 


6. om Ist ὁ Bi(sic: 
erased) X!. 


ΝῚ Clem,. 
vue Ὁ 3. 47 Chry. 
Cyr[-p] Tert, : 


see table) n | Mcion-e-ms,(ins,) ]. 
ree λαμψαι, with CD3F[H]KLPN? rel latt goth Mcion-e, Orig, 
Dial, Mac, [Ps ?- ]Ath, Chr, Cyr[-p Euthal-ms ]Thdrt Damase [Ter 67: 
om os D!F old-lat demid(and harl) Chr, Tert, Ambrst [Aug,]. 
for tov θεου, αὐτου ΟἹ D1/and lat] F[ (not F-lat) fri] eth Dial, 
txt ABC?D3[H|]KULP® rel [vulg F-lat syrr copt goth arm] (Orig,) 


aft εἰπὼν ins o (but 


txt AB θ[- κε] 


Ath, Chr (Euthal- ms] Thdrt Damase Ambr, Ambrst. (του θεου is certainly original ; 
for. as Meyer observes, had avtov been origl, it is hardly possible that του θεου should 


have been a gloss on it, as o θεος occurs just befure.) 


rec ins τήσου bef xp., with 


CLH]KLPR® rel tol [sy rr copt goth arm-ed] Orig, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damasc: aft 


xo. DF latt Cyr, [Ambr Ambrst Aug]: 
[ Cyr-p,-ms, ] Tert,. 


illuminated, but to stop the shining forth 
altogether]:—the rendering, ‘that they 
might not see,’ Grot., al., is inadmissible). 

5, 6.] We have no reason to use 
trickery or craft, having no selfish ends 
to serve : nor concealment, being ourselves 
enlightened by God, and set for the spread- 
ing of light. 5.] For we preach not 
(the subject of our preaching is not) our- 
selves (Meyer understands κυρίους, ‘as 
lords ;? but as De W. observes, this would 
anticipate the development of thought 
which follows, the contrast between xp. 
Ἰησοῦν as κύριον, and ourselves as your 
δούλους, not being yet raised),—but Christ 
Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your ser- 
vants for Jesus” sake (on account of Him 
and His work). 6.1 Because (explains 
and substantiates the last clause,—that we 
are your servants for Jesus’ sake) (ἐέ és) 
God, who said Out of (not, ‘after the dark- 
ness ;? this meaning of éx, though allow- 
able, e.g. ἐκ κυμάτων yap αὖθις αὖ γάλην᾽ 
ὁρῶ, does not occur in N. T.) darkness 
light shall shine (allusion to Gen. i. 3: 
the change to λάμψαι appears to have been 
made because the words cited are not the 
exact ones spoken by the Creator), who 
shined (Grot., Fritz., Meyer, would render 
ἔλαμψεν, ‘caused light to shine,’ using the 
verb in the factitive sense, as ἀνατέλλω, 
Matt. v. 45, and ὦ λάμπουσα πέτρα πυρὸς 
δικόρυφον σέλας, Eur. Phen. 226. But 
this usage of the word seems entirely poeti- 
cal, and the intransitive sense would as well 
express the divine act) in our hearts (the 


om AB 17 arm-mss Orig, Dial, Ath, Chr, 


physical creation bearing an analogy to 
the spiritua') in order to the shining forth 
(to others) of the knowledge (in us) of the 
glory of God in the face of Christ (= τῆς 
δόξης τ. θεοῦ THS ἐν προεώπῳ xp., ‘the 
glory of God manifested in Christ’). The 
figure is still derived from the history in 
ch. ili., and refers to the brightness on the 
face of Moses :—the only true effulgence of 
the divine glory is from the face of Christ. 
Meyer contends for the connexion of ἐν 
mposwm. xp. with φωτισμόν, but his ex- 
planation fails to convey to my mind any 
satisfactor Ὕ sense. He says that when the 
γνῶσις is imparted by preaching, it shines, 
and its brightness illuminates the face of 
Christ, because it is His face whose glory is 
looked on in the mirror of preaching. But 
I cannot think that any thing so very far- 
fetched would be in the Apostle’s mind. 

As to the necessity of the art. τῆς before 
ev, none will assert it who are much versed 
in the many varieties of expression in such 
sentences in the Apostle’sstyle.. 7—18.] 
This glorious ministry is fulfilled by weak, 
afflicted, persecuted, and decaying vessels, 
which are moreover worn out in the work 
(7—12). Yet the spirit of faith, the hope 
of the resurrection, and of being presented 
with them, for whom he has laboured, bears 
him up against the decay of the outer man, 
and all present tribulation (13—18). We 
are not justified in assuming with Calvin, 
Estius, al., that a definite reproach of per- 
sonal meanness had induced the Apostle to 
speak thus. For he does not deal with any 


652 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOT® B. IV. 
, , “ , > tol A 
xActsix.15 ὟΣ σκεύ:σιν, ἵνα ἡ Y ὑπερβολὴ τῆς δυνάμεως ἦ τοῦ θεοῦ 
ren. 
y Rom. vii. 13 x . 3 ς ες ΔΖ ΣΝ Ζ Woe f ’ ’ 27h q 
yRom. τῇ. 1 καὶ μὴ ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐν * παντὶ * θλιβόμενοι ἀλλ οὐ ὥστε 
Antt. i. 18. 4. , > ΄ b) 5) 5) 2 U4 
ΠῚ: νοχωρούμενοι, “ ἀπορούμενοι GAN οὐκ “ ἐξαπορούμενοι, 
z= ch. vi. 4 5 , 
vi. 9. ὁ διωκόμενοι GAN οὐκ ᾿ἐγκαταλειπόμενοι, © καταβαλ- 
ch. i. 6 reff. , ’ ΄ / \ Pay 4 
Sch Mie (bis) NOMEVOL GAN οὐκ ἃ ἀπολλύμενοι, 10 πάντοτε THY ' νεκρωσιν 
only. Josh. 
xvii. 15. Isa. xxviii. 20. xlix.19 only. (-pta, Rom. ii. 9.) c Acts xxv. 20 reff. ἃ ch. i. 8 


only. Ps. lxxvii. 15 only. 
Ps. xv. 10), 31. 2 Tim. iv. 10, 16. 
ili. 19. h = Matt. il. 13 al. fr. 


9. εγκαταλιμιπανομενοι F Eus, Chr, Max,. 


such reproach here, but with matters com- 
mon to all human ministers of the word. 
All this is a following out in detail of 
the οὐκ ἐγκακοῦμεν of ver. 1, already en- 
larged on in one of its departments,—that 
of not shrinking from openness of speech, 
—and now to be put forth in another, viz. 
bearing up against outward and inward 
difficulties. If any polemical purpose is 
to be sought, it is the setting forth of the 
abundance of sufferings, the glorying in 
weakness (ch. xi. 23, 30), which substan- 
tiated his apostolic mission: but even such 
purpose is only in the background ; he is 
pouring out, in the fulness of his heart, 
the manifold discouragements and the far 
more exceeding encouragements of his 
office. 7.] τὸν Oyo. ToUT., viz. ‘the 
light of the knowledge of the glory of God, 
ver. 6. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ πολλὰ Kal μεγάλα εἶπε 
περὶ τῆς ἀποῤῥήτου δόξης" ἵνα μή τις λέγῃ 
Καὶ πῶς τοσαύτης δόξης ἀπολαύοντες μέ- 
vouev ἐν θνητῷ σώματι; φησὶν ὅτι τοῦτο 
μὲν οὖν αὐτὸ μάλιστά ἐστι τὸ θαυμαστόν, 
καὶ δεῖγμα μέγιστον τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ δυνάμεως, 
ὅτι σκεῦος ὀστράκινον τοσαύτην ἠδυνήθη 
λαμπρότητα ἐνεγκεῖν, καὶ τηλικοῦτον φυ- 
λάξαι θησαυρόν. Chrys. p. 496. Some 
(Calv., al.) think the θησ. to be the whole 
διακονία : but it seems simpler to refer it 
to that which has immediately preceded, in 
a style like that of Paul, in which each 
successive idea so commonly evolves itself 
out of the last. The σκεῦος is the body, 
not the whole personality ; the 6 ἔξω ἄν- 
θρωπος of ver. 16; see ver.10. And in the 
troubles of the body the personality shares, 
as long as it is bound up with it here. 
The similitude and form of expression is 
illustrated by Wetst. from Artemidorus 
vi. 25, θάνατον μὲν yap εἰκότως ἐσήμαινε 
τῇ γυναικὶ τὸ εἶναι ἐν ὀστρακίνῳ σκεύει,-- 
Arrian, Epict. iii. 9, ταῦτα ἔχω ἀντὶ τῶν 
ἀργυρωμάτων, ἀντὶ τῶν χρυσωμάτων: σὺ 
χρυσὰ σκεύη, ὀστράκινον δὲ τὸν λόγον, and 
Herod. iii. 96, τοῦτον τὸν φόρον θησαυρίζει 
ὁ. βασιλεὺς τρόπῳ τοιῷδε. ἐς πίθους κε- 
ραωίους τήξας καταχέει, πλήσας δὲ τὸ 
ἄγγος περιαιρέει, ἐπεὰν δὲ δεηθῇ χρημά- 
των, κατακόπτει τοσοῦτον, ὅσου ἂν ἑκά- 
στοτε δέηται. ἡ ὑὕπερβ. τῆς Suv. 
not = ἣ ὑπερβάλλουσα δύναμις, but, the 


e = 1Cor. iv. 12 reff. 
Heb. xiii. 5. 1 Chron. xxviii. 20. 
i Rom. iv. 19 only t. 


f Matt. xxvii. 46 || Mk. Acts ii, 27 (from 
g = here (Heb. vi. 1) only. 4 Kings 


δύναμις contemplated on the side of its 
brepBodAH,—the power consisting in the 
effects of the apostolic ministry (1 Cor. 
ii. 4), as well as in the upholding under 
trials and difficulties. The passage com- 
monly referred to (even by Stanley) to 
prove the hendiadys, may serve entirely to 
disprove it: Jos. Antt. i. 18. 4, μαθὼν δὲ 
αὐτοῦ τὸ πρόθυμον κ. τὴν ὑπερβολὴν τῆς 
θρησκείας : ‘the readiness and surpassing- 
ness of his obedience.” ἡ τοῦ θεοῦ] 
may belong to (i.e. be seen to belang to) 
God. Tertull., Vulg., and Estius, render 
it ‘ut sublimitas sit virtutis Dei, non ex 
nobis,’ which is hardly allowable, and dis- 
turbs the sense by confusing the antithesis 
between 6 θεός and ἡμεῖς. 8 —10.] 
He illustrates the expression, ‘ earthen 
vessels,’ in detail, by his own experience 
and that of the other ministers of Christ. 

8.1 in every way (see reff.) pressed, 
but not (inextricably) crushed (στ. ‘an- 
gustias ἢ. 1. denotat tales, e quibus non 
detur exitus,’ Meyer, from Kypke) ;—in 
perplexity but not in despair (a literal 
statement of what the last clause stated 
Jiguratively : as Stanley, “bewildered, but 
not benighted’’):—persecuted but not 
deserted (ἐγκαταλειπόμενοι, see retf., used 
of desertion both by God and by man. 
Hammond, Olsh., Stanley, al., would refer 
διωκόμ. eee to the foot-race, and render 
it ‘pursued, but not left behind, as Herod. 
viii. 59, of δέ γε ἐγκαταλειπόμενοι ov στε- 
pavodytai,—but the sense thus would be 
quite beside the purpose, as the Apostle is 
speaking not of rivalry from those who as 
runners had the same end in view, but of 
troubles and persecutions): struck down 
(as with a dart during pursuit: so Xen. 
Cyr. i. 8. 14, θηρία .... τοξεύων καὶ 
ἀκοντίζων καταβαλεῖς. It is ordinarily 
interpreted of a fall in wrestling; but 
agonistic figures would be out of place in 
the present passage, and the attempt to 
find them has bewildered most of the 
modern Commentators), but not destroyed: 

10.] always carrying about in our 
body (i.e. ever in our apostolic work 
having our body exposed to and an example 
of : or perhaps even, as Stanley, “ bearing 


with us, wherever we go, the burden of the’ 


ABCDF 
KLPR a 
bedef 
ghklm 
no 17. 47 





8.15. 


ΠΡῸΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B. 653 


faa | ipa fis Nak , k / (ae oN 0) ζωὴ ; , 
τοῦ Ἰησοῦ !} ἐν τῷ " σώματι * περιφέροντες, ἵνα καὶ ἡ * ζωὴ j Gal. νἱ. 11. 


a 5 A 2 A , ς A m θῇ" 1} a \ 
τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματι ἡμῶν ™ φανερωθῇ ἀεὶ yap 
ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες " εἰς θάνατον ™ παραδιδόμεθα ° διὰ Ἰησοῦν, 
ἵνα καὶ ἡ ' ζωὴ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ ™ φανερωθῇ ἐν τῇ θνητῇ 


σαρκὶ ἡμῶν. 


reff, n Matt. x. 21. 
vi. 12 reff. q Rom. vii. 5 reff. 


Mark xiii. 12. 


k Mark vi. 53. 
Eph. iv. 14 
(Heb. xiii. 9, 
and Jude 12 
v. r.] only. 
Prov. x. 24. 
Eccl. vii. 8. 
2 Mace. vii. 
27 only. 


12 [4 « θ / ’ Ε aA“ q » “Ὁ «ες δὲ 
ὥςτε ὁ θάνατος ἐν ἡμῖν 4 ἐνεργειταὶ, ἢ O€ 1“ Rom. v.10. 


m Rom. i. 19 


Isa. liii. 12 a. o ver. 5. p Rom. 


10. rec ins κυρίου bef Ist moov, with KI rel [flor] syr goth Chr, Thdrt Damase 
Tert, Ambrst-ms: om ABCDFP® 17 (latt) Syr copt eth arm Origsepe [Eus, Nys, 
Euthal-ms] Cyr, Iren-int, Tert,.—xpiorov D!F(and their lat) [eth] Orig-int, Tert, : 


xp. ino. D? Tert,. 
int, Orig-int, [Tert, Ambrst]. 


[fri] Orig,. 
[copt Cyr-p,] Tert;. 
11. for ae, εἰ F Κα [Syr] Tert, Ambrst. 


om καὶ Co 8 Tert,. 


att Ist σωματι ins μων DF [latt(not am!) Syr copt arm] Iren- 
aft 2nd (του) ino. ins χριστου D!(and lat) ΕἾ ποῦ 
F-lat} (spec) Iren-int Orig-int, [Ambr, ].—om του F. 


τοις σωμασιν [2nd] δὲ νὰ] 


φανερωθη bef ev τω σωματι ἡμὼων A vulg(not am fuld demid [{0]}} 


for παραδιδ., διδομεθα Fl -gr]. 


for του ino., ins. xptorov D}(and lat) ΕἸ ποῦ F-lat|: tov xp. C. 
12. [om] o [X}(insd] over the line [eadem manu, | appy) [ Damasc]. 


rec ins 


μεν bef θανατος (to correspond to δὲ below), with KL rel syr-w-ob ΤῺ] Ge Ambrst-ms: 
om ABCDFPR 17 latt copt (goth) arm Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damasc lat-ff. 


dead body.’’ But see below) the killing 
(the word seems only to occur besides, 
in ref. Rom., where it signifies, figura- 
tively, utter lack of strength and vital 
power, in a fragment of the Oneirocritica 
of Astrampsychus (Meyer), νεκροὺς δρῶν, 
νέκρωσιν ἕξεις πραγμάτων, where the sense 
is also figurative, and in its primary phy- 
sical sense in the medical works of Are- 
teens and Galen. But here the literal sense, 
‘the being put to death,’ must evidently 
be kept, and the expression understood as 
1 Cor. xv. 31, and as Chrys.: of θάνατοι ot 
καθημερινοί, δι ὧν Kal ἡ ἀνάστασις ἐδείι- 
νυτο. Hom. ix. p. 498. The rendering, 
‘the deadness of Jesus to the flesh, as 
opposed to the vitality, 7 ζωὴ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ 
below,’—see Dr. Peile’s Annotations on 
the Epistles, i. 383,—is beside the present 
purpose, and altogether inconsistent with 
ἀεὶ εἰς θάνατον παραδιδόμεθα διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦν, 
ver. 11. See Stanley’s note) of Jesus (as 
τὰ παθήματα τοῦ χριστοῦ, ch. i. 5 :—not 
‘ad exemplum Christi,’ as Grot., al.), in 
order that also the life of Jesus may be 
manifested in our body: i.e. ‘that in our 
bodies, holding up agaiast such troubles 
and preserved in such dangers, may be 
shewn forth that mighty power of God 
which is a testimony that Jesus lives and 
is exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour :’— 
not, ‘that our repeated deliverances might 
resemble His Resurrection, as our suffer- 
ings His Death,’ as Meyer, who argues 
that the literal meaning must be retained, 
as in the other member of the comparison, 
owing to ἐν τῷ σώματι ju. But, as De 
W. justly observes, the bodily deliverance 
is manifestly a subordinate consideration, 
and the ζωή of far higher significance, 
testified indeed by the body’s preservation, 


but extending far beyond it. 11.] Ex- 
planation and confirmation of ver. 10. 
For we who live (ζῶντες asserting that to 
which death is alien and strange, an an- 
tithesis to εἰς θάνατον παραδ., as in the 
other clause ζωή to ἐν τῇ θνητῇ σαρκί. 
No more specific meaning for ζῶντες must 
be imagined, as ‘tantis mortibus super- 
stitem, Bengel, Estius, al.,—or ‘as long 
as we live,’ Beza, al.,—or ‘ qui adhuc vivi- 
mus, qui nondum ex vita excessimus ut 
multi gam Christianorum,’ as Grot.) are 
alway being delivered to death (in dangers 
and persecutions, so ch. xi. 23, ἐν θανάτοις 
πολλάκι5) on account of Jesus (so in Rev. 
i. 9 John was in Patmos διὰ τὸν λόγον 
τοῦ θεοῦ κ. διὰ THY μαρτυρίαν *Incod), 
that also the life of Jesus may be mani- 
fested in our mortal flesh (the antithesis 
is more strongly put by θνητῇ σαρκί than 
it would be by θνητῷ σώματι, see Rom. 
viii. 11, the flesh being the very pabulum 
of decay and corruption). By this anti- 
thesis, the wonderful greatness of the 
divine power, 7 ὑπερβολὴ τῆς δυνάμεως, 
is strikingly brought out: God exhibits 
DeEaTH in the diving, that He may exhibit 
LiFe in the dying. 12.] By it is 
also brought out that which is here the 
immediate subject,—the vast and unex- 
ampled trials of the apostolic office, all 
summed up in these words: So that death 
works in us, but life in you; ie. ‘the 
trials by which the dying of Jesus is ex- 
hibited in us, are exclusively and pecu- 
liarly OUR OWN,—whereas (and this is 
decisive for the spiritual sense of ζωή) the 
life, whereof we are to be witnesses, ex- 
tends beyond ourselves, nay finds its field 
of action and energizing ἘΝ YoU.’ Estius, 
Grot., and apparently Olsh., take évepyet- 


051 ΤΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS B. TV. 
\ ΄ rl 9 Ν \ Ν rt na 
r = ἃ constr.» | ζωὴ ἐν ὑμῖν. 15 ἔχοντες δὲ τὸ αὐτὸ " πνεῦμα τῆς πίστεως 
om. vill. ὃ \ Ἀ , » , 
τεῆς. 1.8. κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον "᾿πίστευσα, διὸ ἐλάλησα, καὶ 
s Psa. cxv. l. ς - / \ \ - ͵ 
s Psu cry) ἡμεῖς πιστεύομεν, διὸ καὶ λαλοῦμεν, 13 εἰδότες ὅτε ὁ 
41 Cor, xv. 4 


> / \ , > J A Ν ς΄ “ \ ’ A a 
cor αν 4 t éveipas τὸν [κύριον] ᾿Ιησοῦν καὶ ἡμᾶς σὺν Ἰησοῦ * ἐγερεῖ 
Isa. xxvi. 19. 


13. aft 1st 5:0 ins καὶ FN syrr goth arm [Epiph, Aug,(om})]. 

14. om κυριον B 17. 71-3 vulg(with am fuld demid al, agst tol F-lat) arm Chr-comm 
Tert, Pel Sedul Bede: ins CDF KLPR rel D-lat(and G-'at, but not fri) (Chr, Euthal- 
ms Thdrt Damase Ambrst ]. ree (for συν) δια (corrn on account of the difficulty 
found in σὺν Ἰησοῦ being joined to a future verb, His Resurrn being past), with 
D3[-gr] KLN3 rel syrr goth [Chr,] Thdrt Damase: txt BCD! FPR! 17 latt copt xth 
arm [Euthal-ms] (Tert,) Ambr, Ambrst(not ed rom) Pel Bede.—In δὲ a superfluous « 


has been written and erased before εὖ. 
constituit goth. 


ται passively, ‘is wrought ’ (‘ mors agitur et 
exercetur . . . perficitur vita.’ Est.): but it 
is never so used in N. T. Chrys., Calv., 
al., take the verse ironically, τὰ μὲν ἐπικίν- 
Suva ἡμεῖς ὑπομένομεν, τῶν δὲ χρηστῶν 
ὑμεῖς aGmoAavere,—but such a sentiment 
seems alien from the spirit of the passage. 
Meyer, as unfortunately, limits ζωή to 
natural life, whereas (as above) the context 
plainly evinces spiritual life to be meant, 
not merely natural. In Rom. viii. 10, 
11, the vivifying influence of His Spirit 
who raised Jesus from the dead is spoken 
of as extending to the body also; here, the 
upholding influence of Him who delivers 
and preserves the body, is spoken of as 
vivifying the whole man: LIFE, in both 
places, being the higher and spiritual life, 
including the lower and natural. ‘ And, 
in our relative positions,—of this life, YE 
are the examples,—a church of believers, 
alive to God through Christ in your various 
vocations, and not called on to be Gearpi(é- 
μενοι [cf. 1 Cor. iv. 9; Heb. x. 33] as WE 
are, who are (not indeed excluded from 
that life,—nay it flows from us to you, 
—but are) more especially examples of 


conformity to the death of our common . 


Lord :—in whom DEATH WORKS.’ 

18—18.] EncoursGEMENTS: and (1) 
FAITH, which enables us to go on preach- 
ing to you. Meyer connects this verse with 
ἡ δὲ ΔΝ ἐν ὑμῖν : for, he says, by means 
of πιστεύομεν διὸ Kal λαλοῦμεν, is that 
ζωὴ ἐν im. ἐνεργεῖται, wrought. But, 
not to mention that thus the context is 
strangely disturbed, in which we and our 
trials form the leading subject, it would 
surely be very unnatural that ἔχοντες δέ 
should apply not to the principal but to the 
subordinate clause of the foregoing verse. 
But (contrast to the foregoing state of 
trial and working of death in us) having 
the same spirit of faith (not distinctly 
the Holy Spirit,—but as in reff., not 
merely a human disposition: the indwell- 
ing Holy Spirit penetrates and character- 
izes the whole renewed man) with that 


εγιρει D'F [ἐγειρει ῬΊ, suscitat et 


described in the Scriptures (τὸ αὐτὸ κατὰ 
τὸ yeyp., i.e. either as Billroth, τὸ αὐτὸ 
(ἐκείνῳ) περὶ οὗ γέγραπται, or as De W., 
= τὸ αὐτὸ ὡς γέγρ., ὥςπερ being sume- 
times found after 6 αὐτός, ἴσος, and the 
like, and κατὰ here being equivalent to it. 
I prefer the former: but at all events the 
connexion of τὸ αὐτό and κατὰ τὸ γὙεγρ. 
must be maintained, and we must not, with 
Meyer, connect κατὰ τὸ yeyp. . .. with 
kal ἡμεῖς πιστεύομεν, which makes the 
Apostle say that his faith is according to 
the words of the citation, and thus con- 
fuses the whole process of thought), I be- 
lieved, wherefore I spoke (the connexion 
of the words in the Psalm is not clear, nor 
the precise meaning of »3, rendered by the 
LXX διό. See Pool’s Synopsis in loe. for 
the various renderings), we too believe, 
wherefore we also speak (continue our 
preaching of the gospel, notwithstanding 
such vast hindrances within and without): 

14.) knowing (fixes and expands 
in detail the indefinite πιστεύομεν, and thus 
gives the ground of λαλοῦμεν,--- ποῦ as 
commonly understood, the matter of which 
we speak) that He who raised up (from 
the dead) the Lord Jesus, will raise up us 
also (from the dead hereafter, see 1 Cor. 
vi. 13, 14:—not in a figurative resurrec- 
tion from danger, as Beza, who afterwards 
changed his opinion, al., and lately Meyer, 
whose whole interpretation of this passage 
is singularly forced, and his defence of it 
unfair, see below) with Jesus (σὺν Ἰησοῦ 
is not necessarily figurative, as Meyer ; 
even in the passages where a figurative 
sense is the prevailing one, it is only as 
built upon the fact of a literal ‘ raising 
with Christ,’ to be accomplished at the 
great day: see Eph. ii. 6; Col. iii. 1, 3; 
1 Thess. ν. 10) and present us with you 
(i. e. as in Jude 24, τῷ δυναμένῳ... στῆσαι 
κατενώπιον τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ ἀμώμους ἔν 
ἀγαλλιάσει - -.» and in reff., at the day of 
His coming). Meyer’s objection to the 
meaning above given,—that the Apostle 
could not thus speak of the resurrection, 


oe YE- 

γραμ.- 

μενον Α. 
BCDFK 
LPRab 
cdefg 
hkimn 
ο 17. 47 





15—16. ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS B. 


655 


\ u ΄ 3 \ ς r 15 A \ / oe al 6 ὧδ ΞΕ 
7 . La W=, ch, xi. 2: 
Kab TAPACT JOEL συν υμιν Ta Yap TAaVTaA Ou υμας, Wa E a) 


hy f Yor 4 bia αὶ στῶν ὅπλ 4 eb ey Mis 22, 
ἡ " χάρις " πλεονάσασα διὰ δ τῶν “ πλειόνων THY ὃ εὐχαρι- y Rom. νοὶ 
fo , ‘ ͵ A A a \ refi. ). 

στίαν Ymepiccevon εἰς τὴν δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ. 16 διὸ οὐκ wiCor.ix.19 
> A > cae fe , CuNiey rele a 

2 ἐγκακοῦμεν, ἀλλ᾿’ δ εἰὶ δ᾽ καὶ ὁ "ἔξω ἡμῶν ὃ" ἄνθρωπος "Ἀπ 
: ’ e Y €. ka 3 A y transit., ch. 

© διαφθείρεται, ἀλλ᾿ 40 4écw([Gev] ἡμῶν © ἀνακαινοῦται ’ ὌΝ Eph. 
1, ess. 


iii. 12 only $. intr., Rom. v. 15 al. zver.1. — a ver. 3. b here only. see 
Rom. vii. 22 reff. ce Luke xii. 33. 1 Tim. vi. 5. Rev. viii. 9. xi. 18 only. 2Kingsi.14. Dan. 
vii. 14 Theod. dsee1Cor. v.12 reff. [-θεν, = Luke xi. 39, 40 only.} e Col. iii. 


10 only+. (-νέίζειν, Heb. vi.6. Ps. cii. 5.) 


15. B! wrote rap [for τα yap] (whence Mai gives an omn of ra) but corrd perhaps 
eadem manu. 

16. rec εκκακουμεν (see ver 1), with CD3KLP rel: txt BDFN e m. εζωθεν Dlr 
73. 137 Bas,[txt, ] Thdrt,(txt,). for διαφθειρ., φθειρεται KL a? ἃ 46}-7. 114. 
ecw (for uniformity ?) BCD!F PS ἃ m 47 Orig, Ath, Chr, [Bas,; Euthal-ms] Thdrt, 
Damase: ἐσωθεν D?KL rel [Nys, Bas,] Thdrt, Thl Gc. (17 def.) rec om [ Ist | 
ἡμῶν, with KL rel latt(not G-lat) Syr copt goth Orig,[-intsepe | Ath Chr [Euthal-ms | 
Thdrt, Thl Ze Tert, Lucif Ambrst : ins (for uniformity ?) B CL αλλ εἰ to ἡμων is written 
over an erasure, Clehaving appy omd ἡμων] D[-gr] F[-gr] δὲ [m] syr eth arm Thdrt,. 


because he expected (1 Cor. xv. 51, 52; 
i. 8; ch. i. 13, 14) to be alive at the day 
of Christ, is best refuted by this very 
passage, ch. v. 1 ff., where his admission 
of at least the possibility of his death is 
distinctly set forth. The fact is that the 
ἐγερεῖ here, having respect rather to the 
contrast of the future glory with the 
present suffering, does not necessarily imply 
one or other side of the alternative of being 
quick or dead at the Lord’s coming, but 
embraces all, quick and dead, in one blessed 
resurrection-state. This confidence, of 
being presented at that day σὺν ὑμῖν, is 
only analogous to his expressions else- 
where; see ch.i.14; 1 Thess. ii. 19, 20; 
iii. 13. 15.] Explanation of σὺν ὑμῖν 
as a ground of his trust: with reference 
also to ἡ δὲ ζωὴ ἐν ὑμῖν, ver. 12; viz. 
that all, both the sufferings and victory of 
the ministers, are for the church: see the 
parallel expression, ch. i. 6, 7. For all 
things (of which we have been speaking ; 
or perhaps hyperbolically, ALL THINGS, 
the whole working and arrangements of 
God, as in 1 Cor. iii. 22, εἴτε ἐνεστῶτα εἴτε 
μέλλοντα, πάντα ὑμῶν) are on your be- 
half, that Grace, having abounded by 
means of the greater number (who have 
received it), may multiply the thanks- 
giving (which shall accrue), to the glory 
of God. Such (1) is the rendering of 
Meyer, and, in the main, of Chrys., Erasm., 
al., and recently, Riickert and Olshausen. 
Three other ways are possible ; (2) ‘ that 
Grace, having abounded, may, on account 
of the thanksgiving of the greater number, 
be multiplied (‘ πλεονάζω habet vim posi- 
tivi: περισσεύω, comparativi,’ Bengel) to 
the glory of God.’ So Luther, Beza, Es- 


tius, Grot., Bengel, 8]. : --- (8) ‘ that Grace, © 


having abounded, may, by means of the 
greater number, multiply the thanksgiving 
to the glory of God.” So Emmerling and 


De Wette :—(4) ‘that Grace having mul- 
tiplied (see 1 Thess. iii. 12, for the transitive 
sense) by means of the greater number the 
thanksgiving, may abound to the glory of 
God.’ This last has not been suggested 
by any Commentator that I am aware of, 
but is adiissible. I prefer (1), as best 
agreeing with the position of the words, 
and with the emphases. If (2) had been 
intended, I should have expected iva 
πλεονάσασα ἣ χάρις,--πλεονάσασα in its 
present position standing awkwardly alone. 
The same remark applies to (38), and 
this besides, that in that case I should 
expect πλειόνων, and not τῶν πλ., in 
which the art. rather regards the matter 
of fact, the many who have received 
the grace, or who give thanks, than the 
intention, to multiply the thanksgiving 
by the (possible) greater number of per- 
sons. If (4) had been intended, I should 
have looked for ἵνα 7 χάρις Thy εὐχαρι- 
στίαν πλεον. διὰ τῶν πλει., περισσ. K.T.A. 
By adopting (1), we keep the words and 
emphases just where they stand: ἵνα 7 
χάρις, πλεονάσασα διὰ τῶν πλειόνων (not 
διὰ τ. πλ. πλεον., which would give an 
undue prominence to διὰ τῶν πλειόν., 
whereas those words only particularize 
πλεονάσασα), τὴν εὐχ. περισσεύσῃ, εἰς τὴν 
δόξαν τ. θεοῦ. As to the sense, (see the 
very similar sentiment, ch. i. 11,) thanks- 
giving is the highest and noblest offering 
of the Church to God’s glory (θυσία aive- 
σεως δοξάσει με, Ps. xlix. 23, LXX): that 
this may be rendered, in the best sense, 
as the result of the working of grace 
which has become abundant by means of 
the many recipients, is the great end of 
the Christian ministry. 16—18. | 
Second ground of encouragement—HOPE. 

16.] Wherefore (on account of the 
hope implied in the faith spoken of ver. 14, 
which he is about to expand) we do not 


656 


f here only. 
(see note.) 

g neut., 1 Cor. 
i. 25 &c. reff. 

h here only. 
Ps. lxix. 3. 
Tobit tv. 14 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


TV. ee 


θλίψεως ἡμῶν © καθ᾽ Εἰ ὑπερβολὴν ὃ εἰς * ὑπερβολὴν αἰώνιον c 


only(Nomits Ρ ἡ μῶν τὰ ᾿ βλεπόμενα ἀλλὰ τὰ μὴ * βλεπόμενα" τὰ γὰρ 


vv. 6—19). 

i Matt. xi. 30 
only. Exod. 
xvili. 26. 
(-dpta, ch. i. 7.) 

n = Rom. ii. 7 reft. 

ii. 4, (Rom. xvi. 17 reff.) 


k here only. 
o — Rom. iv. 15 reff. 


1 Rom. vii. 13 reff. 


r = Rom. viii. 24. 


t βλεπόμενα SaposKkaipa, τὰ δὲ μὴ " βλεπόμενα αἰώνια. 


(Acts xv. 28 reff.) 
q = Phil. 
Heb. xi. 25 only t. 


m = here only. 
Pp constr., see Acts xxi. 17 reff. 
s Matt. xiii. 21 | Mk. 


17. ins προβκαιρον kat bef ελαφρον D'F latt (Syr) goth arm Orig-int, [Ambrst Augatic ]. 


(Thdrt says: διὰ τοῦ παραυτίκα ἔδειξε τὸ βραχύ τε καὶ mpdskaipov.) 


(appy : see Tischdf’s Cod Ephr) [Syr] Chr. 


38. 80 [syr copt goth eth arm]. 


18. for σκοπ. nuwy, σκοπουντες D' ΕΓ ποῦ F-lat] D-lat. 


om ἡμων BC2 
om εἰς utepBoAnv C1KR!(ins X-corr!) 


aft mposkaipa ins ἐστιν 


F, so also latt [D-lat aft αἰων.} Orig-int;[(om,) Ambrst]. 


shrink (as in ver. 1: but now, owing to 
despair), but (on the contrary) though 
even (not ‘ even tf,’ putting a case; εἰ καί 
with ind. asserts the fact, as in εἰ καὶ σπέν- 
δομαι, Phil. ii. 17) our outward man is 
[being] wasted away (i.e. our body, see 
Rom. vii. 22, is, by this continued νέκρωσις 
and ἐνέργεια tov θανάτου, being worn 
out :—he is not as yet speaking of dissolu- 
tion by death, but only of gradual approxi- 
mation to it), yet (ἀλλά in the apodosis 
after a hypothetic clause, introduces a 
strong and marked contrast :—so Hom. 
Il. a. 81,--οἴπερ γάρ te χόλον γε καὶ 
αὐτῆμαρ καταπέψῃ, ἀλλά τε καὶ μετόπισθεν 
ἔχει κότον, ὄφρα τελέσσῃ : see other ex- 
amples in Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 40) 
our inner (man) is [being] renewed 
(contrast, subordinately to διαφθείρεται, 
but mainly to ἐγκακοῦμεν) day by day 
(nu. καὶ ἣμ., so Hebr. DY) DY, Esth. ili. 4; 
an expression not found (Meyer) even in 
the LXX): i.e. ‘our spiritual life, the life 
which testifies the life of Jesus, even in our 
mortal bodies (ver. 11), is continually fed 
with fresh accessions of grace :’ see next 
verse. So Chrys.,—a@s ἀνακαινοῦται; τῇ 
πίστει, TH ἐλπίδι, TH προθυμίᾳ, τὸ λοιπὸν 
δεῖ (al. τῷ λοιπὸν) κατατολμᾷν τῶν δεινῶν. 
ὅσῳ γὰρ ἂν μυρία πάσχῃ τὸ σῶμα, τοσούτῳ 
χρηστοτέρας ἔχει τὰς ἐλπίδας ἢ ψυχή, καὶ 
λαμπροτέρα γίνεται, καθάπερ χρυσίον πυ- 
ρούμενον ἐπιπλέον. p. 500. 17, 18.] 
Method of this renewal. For the pre- 
sent light (burden) of our affliction (the 
adject. use of παραυτίκα is common with 
Thucyd., e. g. ii. 64, ἢ παραυτίκα Aau- 
πρότης, καὶ és τὸ ἔπειτα δόξα: viii. 82, 
τήν τε παραυτίκα ἐλπίδα : vii. 71, ἐν τῷ 
παραυτίκα, where Schol. ἐν τῷ ἐνεστῶτι 
τότε xpévm;—and with his imitator 
Demosthenes, 6. 5. p. 72. 16, 7 παραυτίχ᾽ 
ἡδονὴ K. ῥᾳστώνη μεῖζον ἰσχύει τοῦ ποθ᾽ 
ὕστερον συνοίσειν μέλλοντος ;—see also 
pp. 34. 24; 215. 10: and more examples 
in Wetst. ἐλαφρόν as a substantive, 
contrasted with βάρος ; see reff.), works 





out for us (‘efficit, ‘is the means of 
bringing about’) in @ surpassing and 
still more surpassing manner (καθ. ὑπ. 
eis ὕπερ. must belong to the verb, as 
Meyer and De W.; for otherwise it can 
only qualify αἰώνιον, the idea of which for- 
bids such qualification, not βάρος, which 
is separated from it by the adjective :— 
i.e. so as to exceed beyond all measure the 
tribulation) an eternal weight of glory 
(αἰώνιον βάρος opposed to παραυτίκα 
ἐλαφρόν). 18.1 Subjective condition 
under which this working out takes place. 
While we regard not (‘propose not as 
our aim,’ ‘spend not our care about,’— 
reff.) the things which are seen (ref. = 
τὰ ἐπίγεια, Phil. iii. 19: Chrys. strikingly 
says, ubi sup., τὰ βλεπόμενα πάντα, κἂν 
κόλασις ἢ, κἂν ἀνάπαυσις" ὥςτε μήτε ἐκεῖθεν 
χαυνοῦσθαι, μήτε ἐντεῦθεν βιάζεσθαι), but 
the things which are not seen (‘aliud 
significat ἀόρατα, invisibilia, nam multa 
que non cernuntur, erunt visibilia, con- 
fecto itinere fidei.’ Bengel. μὴ BA., 
not ov, perhaps because μή stands with 
participles in clauses of a subjective cha- 
racter, SO στήκετε... . - μὴ πτυρόμενοι ev 
pndevrt..., Phil. i. 27, 28. Winer, 
edn. 6, ὃ 55. 5. g. 8,—or rather perhaps, 
as ib. a, as hypothetie (see also Moulton’s 
note, p. 606. 1): τὰ οὐ βλεπόμ. would 
be the things which as a matter of fact 
at any given time we do not see, cf. ot 
οὐκ ἠλεημένοι, 1 Pet. ii. 10: τὰ μὴ BA., 
generally and hypothetically, the things 
not seen. So 6 μὴ dv μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ, Matt. xii. 
30, in a case indefinite and hypothetical. 
This amounts to much the same as when 
in the ordinary account of such clauses, we 
say that μή belongs to the subject, od to 
the predicate,—but is a better explanation, 
inasmuch as that account gives only the 
logical fact,—this, the logical reason of the 
usage): for the things which are seen 
are temporary (not ‘temporal,’ belonging 
to time,’ but ‘ fleeting,’ ‘only for a time,’ 
see reff. ;—i. e. till the day of Christ): but 


ε , , \ . = 
ἡμέρᾳ ἴ καὶ ἴ ἡμέρᾳ. 17 ὃ τὸ yap "παραυτίκα ' ἐλαφρὸν τῆς BCDFK 
PRab 

defg 
m ’ n ’ ο ΄ ὅρῳ. 18 Ἁ ΄ ἢ ΚΙ ἢ 
βάρος » δόξης ° κατεργάζεται P ἡμῖν, 18 μὴ ἃ σκοπούντων ο 


17. 47 





Vou 


V. 1 toléapev ἡδὺ 
* σκήνους Υ καταλυθῇ. 


8 ἀχειροποίητον αἰώνιον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. 


only +. Wisd.ix.15 only. (-νωμα, Acts vii. 46. 
z = 1Cor. iii. 9 reff. 


vi. 14. Ezrze v. 12. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


ὅτι ἐὰν ἡ ἃ ἐπίγειος ἡμῶν 
* οἰκοδομὴν ἐκ θεοῦ ἔχομεν. ν οἰκίαν "Ἱ 1 Gor. αν. 40 


657 
¥ οἰκία TOU eaeni. vii. 14 


= Jobiiv: 19. 
pyre 23.) 
x here bis 
Matt. xxyi. 61 ||. 
Col. 11. 11 only +. 


2 καὶ yap ἐν 


-νοῦν, John i. 14). Acts 


MoS 
a Mark xiv. 58. 


Cuap. V. 1. ins ott bef οἰκοδομὴν DF latt goth Chr,;om,] Cypr, Ambrst je 


Sedul (not fri [Orig-int,] Tert Aug al). 
factam ([latt]). 


the things which are not seen are eternal. 
Chrys. again : κἂν βασιλεία, κἂν κόλασις 
ἢ πάλιν: ὥςτε καὶ ἐκεῖθεν φοβῆσαι, καὶ 
εκεῖσε (al. ἐντεῦθεν) προτρέψασθαι, ib. 

Seneca, Ep. 59 (Wetst.), has a very similar 


sentiment: ‘ista imaginaria sunt, et ad 
tempus aliquam faciem ferunt. Nihil 
horum stabile nec solidum est . . . Mit- 


tumus animum ad ea, que eterna sunt.’ 
Cuap. V. 1—10.] Further specification 
of the hope before spoken of, as consisting 
in anticipation of an eternity of glory after 
this life, in the resurrection-body : which 
leads him evermore to strive to be found 
well pleasing to the Lord at His coming: 
seeing that all shall then receive the things 
done in the body. 1.| For (gives the 
reason of ch. iv. 17,—principally of the 
emphatic words of that verse, καθ᾽ ὕπερ- 
βολὴν eis bnepB.,—shewing how it is that 
so wonderful a process takes place) we 
know (as in ch. iv. 14,—are convinced, as 
a sure matter of hope) that if (‘supposing ;’ 
—not = κἄν, ‘etiamsi,’ but indefinite and 
doubtful : if this delivering to death con- 
tinually should end in veritable death. The 
case is hypothetical, because many will 
be glorified without the κατάλυσις taking 
place: see 1 Cor. xv, 51, 53) our earthly 
tabernacle-dwelling (τοῦ σκήνους is gen. 
of apposition. The similitude is not de- 
rived from the wandering of the Israelites 
in the wilderness, nor from the tabernacle, 
but is a common one with Greek writers, 
see examples in Wetstein. “The whole 
passage is expressed through the double 
figure of a house or tent, and a garment. 
The explanation of this abrupt transition 
from one to the other may be found in the 
image which, both from his occupation 
and his birthplace, would naturally occur 
to the Apostle,—the tent of Cilician hair- 
cloth, which might almost equally suggest 
the idea of a habitation and of | a vesture.”” 
Stanley. Chrys. observes: εἰπὼν οἰκίαν 
σκήνους, kal τὸ εὐδιάλυτον Kal mpdskaipov 
δείξας ἐντεῦθεν, ἀντέθηκε τὴν αἰωνίαν" τὸ 
γὰρ τῆς σκηνῆς ὄνομα τὺ πρόξκαιρον 
πολλάκις δείκνυσι. Hom. x. p. 506) were 
dissolved (‘mite verbum,’ Bengel: i. e. 
‘taken down, ‘done away with: but 
‘ dissolved, as well as the vulg. ‘dis- 
solvatur, is right), we have in the 
heavens (as Meyer rightly remarks, the 


Vou, HH, 


ins οὐκ bef αχειροποιητον F (non manu- 


present is used of the time at which the 
dissolution shall have taken place. But 
even then the dead have it not in actual 
possession, but only prepared by God for 
them against the appearing of the Lord: 
and therefore they are said to have it in 
the heavens. Chrys., &c., Beza, Grot., al., 
join ἐν tots ovp. with οἰκίαν, which can 
hardly be: it would be either ἐπουράνιον 
or ἐξ οὐρανοῦ. The Εἰ. V. according to 
the present punctuation, yields no sense: 
‘not made with hands, eternal in the 
heavens’) a building (no longer a σκῆνος) 
from God (‘in an especial manner prepared 
by God,’ ‘pure from God’s hands: not as 
contrasted with our earthly body, which, 
see 1 Cor. xii. 18, 24, is also from God), a 
dwelling not made with hands (here 
again, not as contrasted with the fleshly 
body, for that too is ἀχειροποίητος, but 
with other οἰκίαι, which are χειροποίητοι. 
Remember again the Apostle’s occupation 
of a tent-maker), eternal. A difficulty 
has been raised by some Commentators 
respecting the intermediate disembodied 
state,—how the Apostle here regards it, 
or whether he regards it at all. But none 
need be raised. The οἰκία which in this 
verse is said, at the time of dissolution, 
to be ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, is, when we put 
it on, in the next verse, our οἰκητήριον 
τὸ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ. Thus the intermediate 
state, though lightly passed over, as not 
belonging to the subject, is evidently in the 
mind of St. Paul. Some Commentators, 
Photius, Anselm, Thomas Aq. (in Estius), 
Wolf, Rosenm., al., understand these words 
themselves (oik. ἄχειρ. αἰών. ἐν τ. vip.) of 
the intermediate state of absence from the 
body; Usteri and Flatt, of an immediate 
glorified body in heaven, to be united with 
the body of the resurrection. Calvin hesi- 
tates : “Incertum est, an significet statum 
beatze immortalitatis, qui post mortem fide- 
les manet, an vero corpus incorruptibile et 
gloriosum, quale post resurrectionem erit. 
In utrovis sensu nihil est incommodi: 
quanquam malo ita accipere, ut initium 
hujus zdificii sit beatus anime status post 
mortem: consummatio autem sit gloria 
ultimz resurrectionis.” But if this be so, 
(1) the parallel will not hold, between the 
οἰκία in one case, and the οἰκία in the 
other,—and (2) the language of ver. 2 is 
Uv 


6938 


7 
b Rom. viii. 23 TOUTW 


ren. 
e Jude 6 only. 


(Jer. xxxil. 
[xxv.] 30 Ald.) d here bis ouly t+. (-δύτης, John xxi. 7.) 
{ Gal. iii. 4. Eph. iii. 2. iv. 21. Col. i. 23 only. εἰπερ, Rom. viii. 9 reff. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B. 


V. 


΄ , a A > lal 
> σστενάζομεν, TO “ οἰκητήριον ἡμῶν TO ἐξ οὐρανοῦ BCDFK 
> Lal © > \ / 
ἃ ἐπενδύσασθαι " ἐπιποθοῦντες" 2 ἘΠ εἴ ἴ γε καὶ δ ἐνδυσάμενοι 


e w. inf., Rom. i. 11 reff. 
g 1 Cor. xv. 53, 54 reff. 


3. * εἴπερ BDF 17 mss-in-Chr.(rits δέ φασιν, ὃ καὶ μάλιστα ἐγκριτέον, Εἴπερ καὶ 
ρ 2 φ ρ 


ἐνδυσάμενοι. 


So also (ic) Max-cont,: εἰ yap 52: si tamen latt Aug, Pel: st quidem 


Tert, Ambrst: εἰ ye CKLPN rel Clem, Did, Mac, Chr, [Euthal-ms Anteh,] Thdrt 


Damase ΤῊ] (Ec. 


εκδυσαμενοι (see notes) D'{and lat] spee Chr,(explaining it κἂν 


ἀποθώμεθα τὸ σῶμα) [ὑχύ,] Lert, Ambr Paulin, Primas Quest, exAvoauevar expoliati ἘΝ, 


(vestiti vulg with F-lat, expol. is written over the Greek in F.) 


against it, see below. 2. For also 
(our knowledge, that we possess such a 
building of God, even in case of our body 
being dissolved, is testified by the earnest 
desire which we have, to put on that new 
body without such dissolution taking place. 
See the similar argument in Rom. viii. 18, 
19) in this (viz. σκήνει, as Beza, Meyer, 
Olsh., al. The rendering ἐν τούτῳ, ‘ where- 
fore, —some referring it tothe foregoing, — 
‘propter hoc quod dictum est,’ Est., some 
to the following,—is inconsistent with 
ὄντες ἐν τῷ σκήνει, which is parallel with 
it, ver. 4. The stress is not necessarily 
on éy, ‘in this,’ as contrasted with ‘ out 
of this,’ as Meyer, who joins καί with ἐν 
τούτῳ; but see above) we groan (see 
Rom. viii. 23), longing (i.e. because we 
desire, the reason of στενάζομεν. ἐπι- 
ποθ., not ardently desire: the prep. does 
not intensify, but denotes the direction of 
the wish, as ἀνέμου μὴ mpose@ytos, Acts 
xxvii. 7) to put on over this (‘ superin- 
duere :’ viz. by being alive at the day of 
Christ, and not dissolved as in ver. 1:—see 
on ver. 4 below. The similitude is 
slightly changed: the house is now to be 
put on, as an outer garment, over the 
jleshly body) our dwelling-place (“ οἰκία 
est quiddam “magis absolutum,—oi«ynrf- 
ριον, domicilium, respicit incolam:’ Bengel. 
So Eur. Orest. 1113,—s@ Ἑλλὰς αὐτῇ 
σμικρὸν οἰκητήριον) from heaven (i.e. = é« 
θεοῦ ver. 1, but treated now as if hrought 
with the Lord at His coming, and put 
upon us who are alive and remaia then, 
‘Itaque,’ says Bengel, ‘ hoc domicilium 

non est ceelum ipsum’): 3.] seeing 
that (et ye (see var. readd.) is used ‘ de re, 
que jure sumta creditur :’ εἴπερ, when ‘in 
incerto relinquitur, utrum jure an injuria 
sumatur.’ Herm. ad Viger., p. 834. So 
Xen. Mem. ii. 1. 17, ἀλλὰ yap,  &., οἱ εἰς 
τὴν βασιλικὴν τέχνην παιδευόμενοι, ἣν 
δοκεῖς μοι σὺ νομίζειν εὐδαιμονίαν εἶναι, τί 
διαφέρουσι τῶν ἐξ ἀνάγκης κακοπαθούντων, 
εἴ ye πεινήσουσι κ. διψήσουσι, K.T.A.,— 
‘if they are to hunger and thirst, &. 

and for εἴπερ, Asch. Ag. 29 ἢ. εἴπερ Ἰλίου 

πόλις ἑάλωκεν, ὡς ὃ φρυκτὸς ἀγγέλλων 

πρέπει, if, that is, the city, &e.’) we shall 

really (καί, ‘in very truth ? so Soph. An- 


γυμνον D!}, — 


tig. 766, ἄμφω γὰρ αὐτὰ καὶ κατακτεῖναι 
νοεῖς; ‘dost thou intend verily to kill 
them both ?’ and sch. Sept. Theb. 810, 
ἐκεῖθι κῆλθον; ‘have they really come to 
that?’ See more examples in Hartung, 
Partikellehre, i. 132) be found (shall prove 
to be) clothed (‘having put on clothing,’ 
viz. a body), not naked (without a body— 
“ ἐνδυσ., οὐ γυμν., aS γάλα, ov βρῶμα, 
1 Cor. iii. 2 and often, ef. ver. 7.” Meyer. 
See Stanley’s note). ‘The verse asseris 
strongly, with a view to substantiate and 
explain ver. 2, the truth of the resurrec- 
tion or glorified body ; and, with Meyer, I 
see in it a reference to the deniers of the 
resurrection, whom the Apostle combated 
in 1 Cor. xv.: its sense being this: “ For 
Ido assert again, that we shall in that 
day prove to be clothed with a body, and 
not disembodied spirits.” Several other 
renderings have been given :—(1) ‘ Si nos 
iste dies deprehendet cum corpore, non 
exutos @ corpore,—si erimus inter mutan- 
dos, non inter mortuos,’ Grot.: Estius, 
Bengel, Conyb., al. To this there are 
three objections,—that εἴγε should be εἴπερ 
(the force of this objection is however 
much weakened by the amount of autho- 
rity which can be adduced for efrep),—that 
καί is not rendered at all,—and that ἐνδυ- 
σάμενοι, the aor. mid., should be ἐνδεδυ- 
μένοι, the perf. pass. (2) The same objec- 
tions apply to Billroth’s rendering, ‘ Jf we, 
having been once clothed (with the earthly 
body), shall not be found naked’ (without 
the body). (8) De Wette renders: ‘ seeing. 
that when we are also (really) clothed, we 
shall not be found naked :’ i.e. ‘setting 
down for certain as we do, that that hea- 
venly dwelling will also be a body.” To 
this Meyer rightly objects, that it is open to 
the difficulty of making ἔνδυσις and γυμνό- 
τῆς, and that in the very sense in which 
they are opposites, to co-exist ;—no cloth- 
ing but that of a body is thought of here, 
or else οὐ σώματος γυμνοί must have been 
expressed. (4) This latter objection ap- 
plies to the rendering of Chrys., Theodoret, 
Theophyl., Ecum., al., who take ἐνδυσά- 
μενοι = σῶμα ἄφθαρτον λαβόντες, and 
γυμνοί to mean γυμνοὶ δόξης. Similarly 
Anselm explains γυμνοί, ‘nudi Christo ;? 





LPR ab 


9--Ὁ. 


οὐ " γυμνοὶ | εὑρεθησόμεθα. 


ΠΡῸΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B. 


659 


sae ,,\ δὶ e , “- 
4 καὶ γὰρ οἱ ὄντες ἐν τῷ hs Plato, 


Cratyl. p. 
x , b 7 Ϊ / k ᾿ ᾿ se > θέ ] 5 277 « 
σκήνει Ὁ στενάζομεν | βαρούμενοι, * ἐφ w οὐ θέλομεν ' ἐκ- oh ae 
| = μ B ρ ᾽ φ γ1 μ ψυχὴ γυμνὴ 
τοῦ σώμα- 


δύσασθαι, ἀλλ᾽ * ἐπενδύσασθαι, ἵνα ™ καταποθῇ τὸ "θνητὸν 


€ XN A - 
ὑπὸ τῆς ζωῆς. 


TOS. see 


= 1 Cor. iv. 2 


a 4 ΄ \ ΄ a \ ,9¢ A nw 7 reff. 
P rovTo θεός, ὁ δοὺς ἡμῖν τὸν ἃ ἀῤῥαβῶνα τοῦ πνεύματος. 1 ch.i.8 reff. 


12. see Matt. xix.9. Acts iil. 16. 

m = 1 Cor. xv. 54 (reff.), from Isa. xxv. 8. 
here only. p Acts xxiv. 15 reff. 
18, 20 only. 


1 Matt. xxvii. 28, 31 || Mk. Luke x. 30 only. 


Rom. v. 
Gen. xxxvii. 23. 
n Rom. vi. 12 reff. o Rom. ii. ‘ reff. constr., 
qch.i, 22. Eph. i. l4only. Gen. xxxvii. 17, 


4, aft oxnve: ins τουτω DF ἃ [syrr copt goth eth Euthal-ms] Chr, Thdrt, ΤῊ] Orig- 
int,[: pref vulg spee Aug, | Tert, Ambrst : om BCKL[ P|X rel am arm Orig; Kus, (Chr, | 


Thdrtp1, Damase He Tert,. 


ep w) επειδη, with rel: txt BCDFKL P(o) δὲ ὁ Eus,. 


ins tovto F[-gr |(and G-lat spec) copt goth Tert, [ Ambrst ]. 


5. κατεργαΐομενος DF latt(exc fuld) Iren-int, Ambrst. (καταργασ. C.) 
rec ins kat bef Sous (cf ch i. 22), with D?-3!-gr| KLN?* rel syr 


bef θεος δὲ} Orig,. 


βαρυνομενοι D'F Orig-ms, ΤῊ]. Steph (for 
αλλα Ne aft θνητὸν 
ins 6 


goth Iren-gr, Chr, Thdrt Damase(kat 5:50us;Omg ο [as do 17(dous) Euthal-ms |) Ambrst : 


txt BCD! FPN! latt Syr copt eth arm Orig, Iren-int Aug, Pel Sedul Bede. 


DN m o 47. (P [def. }) 


Pelagius, Hunnius, and Baldwin, ‘ vacui 
fide? Erasm, Paraphr. ‘si tamen hoc 
exuti corpore non omnino nudi reperiamur, 
sed ex bone vite fiducia spe immortalitatis 
amicti :’ in part too Calvin,—restricting it 
however to the faithful only,—‘ if at least 
we, having put on Christ in this life, shall 
not be found naked then.’ Olshausen too 
takes οὐ γυμνοί as an expansion of ἐνδυσά- 
μενοι, ‘ provided that we shall be found 
clothed with the robe of righteousness, not 
denuded of it.’ Of all these we may say, 
that if the Apostle had meant by γυμνοί 
to hint at any other kind of γυμνότης 
than that which the similitude obviously 
implies, he would have certainly indicated 
it. (5) The rendering of «i ‘ utinam,’ ‘ uti- 
nam etiam induti, non nudi reperiamur!’ 
as Knatchbull and Homberg, need hardly 
be refuted. (6) Another class of render- 
ings arise from the reading éxduvoduevor in a 
few cursives, which in connexion with εἴπερ 
was evidently adopted in consequence of 
the views of expositors. It stood as a 
conditional sentence,—‘ provided, that is, 
that’ ..., and in the idea that it referred 
to the time after putting off the mortal 
body, ἐν was altered to ἐκ. For much 
of the reference to opinions in this note I 
am indebted to Meyer and De Wette. 
4.) Confirmation and explanation of ver. 
2. For also (a reason, why we ἐπιποθοῦ- 
μεν ἐπενδύσασθαι... .. ἃ5 in ver. 2) we who 
are in the tabernacle (before spoken of, 
i.e. of the body), groan, being burdened 
(not by troubles and sufferings, nor by 
the body itself, which would be directly 
opposite to the sense: but for the reason 
which follows), because (ἐφ᾽ @ as in ref. 
Rom.) we are not willing to divest our- 
selves (of it), but to put on (that other) 
over it, that our mortal part may (not, 
die, but) be swallowed up by life (ab- 


apaBwva 


sorbed in and transmuted by that glorious 
principle of life which our new clothing 
shall superinduce upon us). The feeling 
expressed in these verses was one most 
natural to those who, as the Apostles, re- 
garded the coming of the Lord as near, 
and conceived the possibility of their living 
to behold it. It was no terror of death as 
to its consequences—but a natural reluct- 
ance to undergo the mere act of death as 
such, when it was within possibility that 
this mortal body might be superseded by 
the immortal one, without it. 5. | 
This great end, the καταποθῆναι τὸ θνη- 
τὺν ὑπὸ τῆς ζωῆς, is justified as the ob- 
ject of the Apostle’s fervent wish, seeing 
that it is for this very end, that this may 
ultimately be accomplished, that God has 
wrought us (see below) and given us the 
pledge of the Spirit ;—But (and this my 
wish has reason: for) He who wrought 
us out (prepared us, by redemption, jus- 
tification, sanctification, which are the 
qualifications for glory) unto this very 
purpose (viz. that last mentioned—rd 
καταποθῆναι τὸ θνητὸν ἡμῶν ὑπὸ τ. ζωῆς, 
—not τὸ ἐπενδύσασθαι, a mere accident of 
that glorious absorption: see below) is 
God, who gave unto us (a sign that our 
preparation is of Him: ‘ guippe qui dede- 
rit’ .....) the earnest (reff. and note) of 
(gen. of apposition) the (Holy) Spirit. 
The Apostle in this verse, is no longer 
treating exclusively of his own wish for 
the more summary swallowing up of the 
mortal by the glorified, but is shewing that 
the end itself, which he individually, or in 
common with others then living, wishes 
accomplished in this particular form of 
ἐπενδύσασθαι, is, under whatever form 
brought about, that for which all the pre- 
paration, by grace, of Christians, i8 carried 
on, and to which the earnest of the Spirit 


Udv2 


660 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. V. 
ἊΜ Gr θ Sears ® ΄ \ 5 ' “ s 2 ὃ a 
τ (-pp-) here 5 αρρουντες ουν TTAUVTOTE, KAL ELOOTES OTL “ ἐνθοήμουντέες 
bis. ch. Vil. 
16. 5.1,3° te 5 tom se ) ITC ᾿ lov’ 1 αδιδ γί 
Heb. xi, 6 εν τῳ σώματι ἐκδημοῦμεν απο TOU κυριου διὰ πιιστεος 
Tok saa \ [ον ’ Ν y ᾿ 9 fe εἶ 
mein yap " περιπατοῦμεν, ov “dia ν᾽ εἴδους" ὃ." θαῤῥοῦμεν δὲ 
(xxxi. 11 δὲ ᾽ Ἂς κ᾿ > a ΓΤ τ , 
Ald. [-ρσ- καὶ Σ εὐδοκοῦμεν μᾶλλον 3 ἐκδημῆσαι εκ TOV σώματος καὶ 
AB compl.?) 9 ΝΣ 5 \ , ς 7 \ , 
ly. part. 5 9 | 
only, part. ὃ ἐγδημῆσαι πρὸς τὸν κύριον. 3 διὸ Kal ¥ φιλοτιμούμεθα, 
ii, 5. 2 Pet. . 
iit. Baw. ix: 5. Winer, edn. 6, ὁ 45. 6. ὃ. s here (each 3ce) only +. see ch. viii. 19. tch. xii. 
2,3. Heb. xiii. 3. u Rom. ii. 27 reff. v Rom, vi. 4. Acts xxi. 21 reff. w Luke 
iii. 22. ix. 29. John v. 37. 1 Thess. v. 22 only. Exod. xxiv. 17. x = Rom. xv. 26 reff. 


y Rom. xv. 20. 1 Thess. iv. 11 only t. 

6. for evd., επιδημουντες D! ΕἸ επιλημ.]. 
Chr,. for απο, uo F. 
Cypr,] Tert, Lucif &c). 

7. ins καὶ bef ov F vulg. 

8. θαρρουντες (see ver 6) δὲ 17 
aut autem G) 17: om b! ἃ ο 67? Orig,. 
@cov D}{-gr] 17 am arm Clem Ambrst. 


points forward. Meyer would limit this 
verse entirely to the wish expressed in the 
last: but he is certainly wrong: for it 
forms a note of transition to θαῤῥοῦντες civ 
πάντοτε in the next: see below. 

6—8.] He returns to the confidence ex- 
pressed in ver. 1; that however this may 
be, whether this wish is to be fulfilled or 
not, he is prepared to accept the alterna- 
tive of being denuded of the body, seeing 
that it will bring with it a translation to 
the presence of the Lord. Being con- 
fident then (because it is God’s express 
purpose to bring us to glory, as in last 
verse) always (either under all trials : or, 
alwuys, whether this hope of ἐπενδύσασθαι, 
or the fear of the other alternative, be be- 
Sore us,—which latter I prefer), and know- 
ing (not as the ground of our confidence, 
as Calv., al., nor as an exception to it, 
‘though we know, as Est., Olsh., al.,— 
but correlative with it, and the ground of 
the εὐδοκοῦμεν below) that while in our 
home in the body, we are absent from 
| our home in] the Lord (the similitude of 
the body as our οἰκία being still kept up: 
see similar sentiments, respecting our being 
wanderers and strangers from our heaven- 
ly home while dwelling .in the body, Phil. 
ili. 20; Heb. xi. 13; xiii 14),—for (proof 
of our ἐκδημία ἀπὸ τ. kup.) we Walk (the 
usual figurative sense,—‘go on our Chris- 
tian course,’ —not literal, as of pilgrims) 
by means of (not ‘in a state of,’ nor 
‘through, as the element through which 
our life moves, Meyer; who is thereby 
necessitated to interpret the two preposi- 
tions differently, see below) faith, not by 
means of appearance (εἶδος cannot pos- 
sibly be subjective, as rendered in E. V. 
and by many Commentators; see reff.— 
i.e. ‘faith, not the actual appearance of 
heavenly things themselves, is the means 
whereby we hold on our way,’ a sure sign 
that we are chsent from those heavenly 


Orig, Tert, Ambrst. 


for €xd., αποδημουμεν D ἘΓαπολημ.ἢ 


for κυρ., θεου Ὁ Εἰ not F-lat] old-lat copt (not [vulg 


for δε, ουν F(ovy δε ergo 
for ex, aro m: om δὲ! a2, for κυρ.» 


things),—notwiths‘anding (I say) (he 
resumes the θαῤῥοῦντες, which was appa- 
rently at first intended to belong to evdo- 
koduev,—by the indicative, inserting the 
δέ because the last clause seemed some- 
thing like a dash to that confidence) we 
are confident, and are well pleased rather 
to go from (out of) [our home in] the body 
and come to our home with the Lord; 
i.e.-‘if (as in ver. 1) a dissolution of the 
body be imminent,—even that, though not 
according to our wish, does not destroy 
our confidence: for so sensible are we that 
dwelling in the body is a state of banish- 
ment from the Lord, that we prefer to ‘t 
even the alternative of dissolution, bring- 
ing us, as it will, into His presence.’ 
Meyer regards ἐκδημ. and ἐνδημ. as equiva- 
lent to the putting off of the mortal (but 
how ?) and putting on the immortal body at 
the coming of the Lord:—but surely by this 
the whole sense is destroyed. The Apostle, 
it seems to me, carcfully chooses the words, 
new to the context, ἐκδημεῖν and ἐνδημεῖν, 
to avoid such an inference, and to express, 
as he does in Phil. i. 23, then in the actual 
prospect of death, that τὸ ἀναλῦσαι is — 
equivalent to σὺν χριστῷ εἶναι : for here 
is no hint of the new house from heaven, 
only of a certain indefinite ἐνδημία πρὸς 
τὸν κύριον, which is all that is revealed 
to us, and it would seem was all that was 
revealed to him, of the disembodied state 
of the blessed. I may remark that Meyer, 
whose commentary on this Epistle is most 
able and thorough, has been misled in this 
passage by an endeavour to range the 
whole of it under the specific wish of vv. 
2-- 4, 9, 10.] Wherefore (this being 
so,—our confidence, in event whether of 
death, or of life till the coming of the 
Lord, being such)— it is also (besides our 
confidence) cur aim, whether present 
(dwelling in the body) or absent (from 
the body at the time of His appearing), 





6—11, 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


661 


εἴτε ὃ ἐνδημοῦντες εἴτε ὅ ἐκδημοῦντες, “ εὐάρεστοι αὐτῷ * Rom. xii.1, 


- 
ELVaL. 


0479s yap ὅ᾿ πάντας ἡμᾶς ὃ φανερωθῆναι “ δεῖ 
1 ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ 4' βήματος τοῦ ἃ χριστοῦ, ἵνα ! κομίσηται 


- a Rom. xi. 32 
reff. 


b = (see note). 
Col. iii. 4. 
1 Pet. v. 4. 


1 John ii. 28. 


“ 8 A ὃ \ a) ΄ h \ ἃ ” y 
ἕκαστος ὅ Ταῦ «διῶ TOU owyaTtos, ἢ πρὸς, a ἔπραξεν, «εἶτα , 1%ghni.% 


» Ν v ’ 
ἀγαθὸν εἴτε κακόν. 


΄ = ss , ie ff, 
11 Kidores οὖν tov ἢ φόβον τοῦ J κυ- a λοις xviii.17. 


e Acts xii. 21 


ρίου, ἀνθρώπους * πείθομεν, θεῷ δὲ ᾿Ἰπεφανερώμεθα" ἐλπίζω "νιν. 


al. Ps. xxxix.15. 2 Macc. viii. 33. 


xii. 41. Gal. ii. 14. 


1: Mark iv. 322. John iii. 21 al. 


10. ΝῚ has written ¢ bef κομισηται, but marked it for erasure. 
for κακὸν, φαυλον CR ἃ m 17 Orig,[-c,] Eus, 


προς a, D'F.—om τα δ. τ. σ. L. 


i ποῦ = Rom. xiii. 3. 
Rom. iii. 18. ch. vii. 1. @. χριστοῦ, Eph. v. 21. 


Col. ii. 25 
g constr., Eph. Col. as above (f). = Luke 
j Actsix.3lonly. φ. θεοῦ, 
k = Acts xii. 20. Gal. i, 10. 1 Kings xxiv. 8. 


a 
for τα, ἅ, omg 


Ephr, Ath, Bas, Cyr[-p Euthal-ms] Damasc,: txt BDFKLP rel Clem, Orig,{-c, | Eus, 


Chr, [Bas, Antch,] Thdrtsepe Damasey,, 
[11. πειθωμεν P Gc-comm(altern). 


to be well pleasing to Him, i.e. ‘whether 
He find us évinu. or ἐκδημ., to meet with 
His approval in that day. ‘That this is 
the sense, the next verse seems to me to 
shew beyond question. For there he 
renders a reason for the expressions, and 
fixes the participles as belonging to the 
time of His coming. But this meaning 
has not, that I am aware, been seen by 
the Commentators, and in consequence, 
the verse has seemed to be beset with 
difficulties. The ordinary rendering is 
represented by Chrys., p. 508, τὸ... ζητού- 
μενον τοῦτό ἐστι, φησίν. ἄν τε ἐκεῖ ὦμεν, 
ἄν τε ἐνταῦθα, κατὰ γνώμην αὐτοῦ ζῆν᾽--- 
the objection to which of course is, that 
when there with Him, there will be no 
striving to be εὐάρεστοι αὐτῷ, the accept- 
ance having taken place. Nor is De 
Wette’s interpretation free from objection 
—‘ whether we live till His coming, or we 
die: because no sufficient account is 
given of the present participles. Of 
all renderings, Meyer’s is in this place the 
most absurd, misled as he is by his inter- 
pretation of ver.8. He would make ἐνδη- 
μοῦντες and ἐκδ. here merely literal, the 
similitude being dropped :—‘ whether at 
home, or on travel.’ But, all else aside, 
can he tell us where Paul’s home was, sub- 
sequently to Acts ix.? For this would be 
necessary, though he shrinks from any 
‘geographifdhe Beftimmung.’ 10. ] 
For (explanation and fixing of εὐάρεστοι 
αὐτῷ εἶναι, as to when, and how testified) 
we all (and myself among the number) 
must be made manifest (not merely 
‘appear’ = παραστῆναι [which is a most 
unfortunate rendering of the E. V., giving 
to the reader merely the idea of “ appear- 
ing before” as when summoned to a 
magistrate], but ‘appear in our true 
light,’ appear as we have never done 
before, as in reff., where the word is used 
of our Lord Himself: see also 1 Cor. iv. 5) 
before the judgment-seat (on βῆμα, see 


for πεφαν., φανερουμεθα K: φανερωμεθα m. | 


Stanley’s note) of Christ, that each may 
receive (the technical word for receiving 
wages) the things (done) through the 
body (as a medium or organ of action. 
Meyer cites τῶν ἡδονῶν ai διὰ τοῦ σώμά- 
Tos εἶσιν, Plato, Phedo, p. 65, and αἰσθή- 
σεις ai διὰ τοῦ σώματος, Pheedr. p. 250), 
according to the things which he did (in 
the body), whether (it were) good, or bad 
(singular, as abstract). I may observe that 
no more definite inference must be drawn 
from this verse as to the place which the 
saints of God shall hold in the general 
judgment, than it warrants ; viz. that they 
as well as others, shall be manifested and 
judged by Him (Matt. xxv. 19): when, or 
in company with whom, is not here so much 
as hinted. I cannot pass on, without 
directing the student to the passage on this 
verse in Chrysostom’s tenth Homily, p. 510 
ff., as one of the grandest extant efforts of 
human eloquence. 11—138.] Having 
this φιλοτιμία, ---δοίηγχ a genuine fearer 
of God (see below)—he endeavours to 
make his plain dealing EVIDENT TO MEN, 
as it 15 EVIDENT TO GOD. He will give 
the Corinthians whereof to boast concern- 
ing him in reply to his boastful adver- 
saries: this his conduct being, whatever 
construction may be put on it, on behalf 
of God and them. 11.) Being then 
conscious of (‘no strangers to:’ so Homer 
freq., 6. g. ἀθεμίστια εἰδώς) the fear of 
the Lord (not, as Chrys. and most of the 
ancient Commentators = τὸ φοβερὸν τ. 
kup,,—so also Beza and Estius, ‘ tevrorem 
Domini,’ and E. V., ‘the terror of the 
Lord ;’—but as Vulg., ‘ timorem Domini,’ 
—this wholesome fear of Christ as our 
Judge: see reff. The expression is par- 
ticularly appropriate for one who had been 
suspected of double dealing and insin- | 
cerity: he was inwardly conscious of the 
principle of the fear of God guiding and 
leading him),—we persuade men (the 
stress on ἀνθρώπους, ‘it is MEN that we 


662 ΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. V. 
ev \ , “ m ὃ ΄ . a ] »“" θ 19 > 
m 1 Cor. iii. 7, ce Kal ἐν ταῖς αὶ συνειδήσεσιν ὑμῶν 'πεφανερῶσθαι. οὐ ΒΟΟΕΝ 
&e. reff. y e , os ae ‘ Ra 
neh. {1.1 τοῦ. πτάλιν © ἑαυτοὺς "ὁ συνιστάνομεν ὑμῖν, ἀλλὰ Pi ἀφορμὴν «ἀετκᾳ 
" ; - -“ »" 4 h k | m n 
“ e / e “4 lj 
P (Fim. a P διδόντες ὑμῖν ᾿ καυχήματος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἵνα " ἔχητε πρὸς ο 17. 47 
only. olyod. \ 5) ͵΄ \ « a 
Ἐπί δ, le.) ποὺς ἐν ᾿προφώπῳ καυχωμένους, καὶ ‘ov ἱκαρδίᾳ. 15 ὃ εἴτε 
ap. ACEP ss \ es a ” a Ci. ς \ 
. vii. 8 v .ὖὸ w . 14 
Rom.vi.8 γὰρ " ἐξέστημεν, θεῷ Yeite “σωφρονοῦμεν, υμῖν ἢ yap 
bove 
3 ἴδ ch. xi. 12 (bis). Gal. ν. 13 only. P. Ezek. v.7 only. r Rom. iv. 2 reff. 5 see 
σχῶ τί γράψω, Acts xxv. 26. t 1 Thess. ii. 17. uconstr.,ch.i.6. 1 Cor. xii. 26, 


vy Paul, here only. = Mark iii. 21. 


Acts viii. 11. x. 45. xii. 16. Jer. ii. 12. 


w Rom. xil. 3 reff. 


12. rec aft ov ins yap, with D°[-gr] KLP rel Damase Th! Cc: [et non exth:] om 
BCD'FR® [latt syrr copt goth arm Euthal-ms] Chr, Thdrt Ambrst Pel Bede. 


for 2nd vuiv, nuw B', nobis D-lat. 


vuwv BX 17 G-lat eth. 


for ov, μὴ εν 


ΒΝ m 17 [Euthal-ms]: οὐκ εν D'F: txt CD®KLP rel syr goth Chr Damase. 


attempt to persuade.’ Of what? Beza, 
Grot., al., of the truth of Christ’s reli- 
gion; win them to Christ, which however 
suits the rendering ‘terrorem Domini,’ 
better than the right one :—Chrys., Theo- 
doret, Theophyl., ‘of our own integrity,’ 
and so in the main, Estius, Bengel, Olsh., 
De Wette,—and Meyer, though he seems 
to object to it, for he connects the words 
with the φιλοτιμία of ver. 9:—Erasm., 
Luther, Wolf, Hammond, al., understand 
πείθομεν of the endeavour to make our- 
selves acceptable to men; Cornel.-a-La- 
pide, Le Clerc, al., ‘eundem hune ti- 
morem hominibus suademus.’ But from 
the context, it must have reference to our- 
selves; and I therefore agree with Chrys., 
al., as above [I may remind the English 
reader that there are few texts so much 
perverted as this one, owing to the ren- 
dering of the E. V. It is frequently 
understood and preached upon, as if it 
meant, “ Knowing how terrible God is, 
we persuade others to fear Him:” a 
meaning as far as possible trom the 
Apostle’s mind]), but to God we are 
already manifested (we have no need to 
persuade Him of our integrity, for He 
knows all things) ;—and I hope (am con- 
fident) that we have been manifested 
(Meyer remarks, that ἐλπίζω in the N. T. 
elsewhere has only the inf. aor.; here 
however the inf. perfect is logically neces- 
sary. He hopes, that the manifestation is 
complete. Cf. Acts xxvii. 13, δόξαντες 
τῆς προθέσεως κεκρατηκέναι, and Hom. 1]. 
ο. 110, ἤδη γὰρ νῦν ἔλπομ᾽ "Αρηΐ γε πῆμα 
τετύχθαι) in your consciences also. 

12.] We are not recommending ourselves 
again to you (see ch. iii. 1), but [are] 
giving you an occasion for matter of 
boasting (καύχημα,---οῦ = καύχησις as 
De W.,—‘a source, whence matter of 
boasting may be derived’) on our behalf 
(of us, as your teachers, and to the up- 
holding of our ministry), that ye may 
have it (viz. καύχημα, matter of boasting) 
against those who boast in face (fair 
outward appearance), and not in heart 


(i.e. in those things which they exhibit, 
and are outwardly = κατὰ τὴν σάρκα, 
ch. xi. 18, not in matters which are iz 
their hearts: implying that their hearts 
are indifferent about the matters of which 
they boast). 13.] For (ye have good 
reason to boast of me as your teacher ; 
seeing that) wh: ther we have been mad 
(there is no need to soften the meaning to 
‘inordinately praise ourselves, as Chrys., 
al.; or ‘act foolishly, as others; or 
‘ultra modum agimus, as _ Bengel, 
Luther :--- μαίνῃ, Παῦλε, was once said, 
Acts xxvi. 24, and doubtless this charge 
was among the means taken to depreciate 
his influence at Corinth), it was to God 
(in God’s work and to His glory): [or] 
whether we be of sound mind, it is for 
you (on your behalf). ‘So that you have 
reason to glory in us either way; if you 
will ascribe to us madness, it is a holy 
madness, for God : if you maintain and are 
convinced of our sobriety, it is a soundness 
in your service.’ On the interpreta- 
tion of Chrys. above, he explains the last 
clause,—&y τε μέτριόν τι κ. ταπεινὸν 
(φθεγξώμεθαν, δι᾽ ὑμᾶς, ἵνα μάθητε ταπεινο- 
φρονεῖν. Hom. xi. p. 513. But he gives 
our interpretation also, as an alternative : 
μαίνεσθαί τις ἡμᾶς φησί; διὰ τὸν θεὸν 
τοιαῦτα μαινόμεθα. 

14—19.| And his constraining motive 
is the love of Christ ; who died for all, , 
that all should live to Him; and accord- 
ingly the Apostle has no longer any mere 
knowledge or regards according to the 
Jlesh, seeing that all things are become 
new in Christ by means of the reconcilia- 
tion effected by God in Him, of which 
reconciliation Paul is the minister. 
14.) For (reason of his devotion under all 
reports and circumstances, θεῷ and ὑμῖν, 
as in last verse) Christ’s love (not, Jove 
to Christ, as (Ες., Beza, al..—but Christ’s 
love to men, subjective, as most Commen- 
tators; as shewn in His Death, which 
is the greatest proof of love, see Rom. 
v.6—8. Meyer remarks that the gen. of 
the person after ἀγάπη is with Paul always 





12—16. 


ΠΡΟΣ. KOPINOIOTS B. 


663 


΄, a A , e “ - 
χ ἀγάπη τοῦ “ χριστοῦ ἡ συνέχει ἡμᾶς, 152 κρίναντας x = Rom. viii. 


“ any SO. Ger, ; ane ee ea eee 19 

τοῦτο, OTL εἷς ὑπερ πάντων ἀπέθανεν, *apa “οἱ πάντες . 3" 
\ ΄, 5 7 vA e n 

ς ἀπέθανον. Kal ὑπὲρ πάντων ἀπέθανεν, ἵνα ot ζῶντες 
/ d ΄ A " “ , 4 d na "Ὁ \ Ψ - >’ θ ͵΄ 

μηκέτι ἃ ἑαυτοῖς ζῶσιν, ἀλλὰ “ τῷ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἀποθανόντι 


καὶ " ἐγερθέντι. 


8 1 σον. xv. 14. Gal. iii. 29. see Rom. vii. 3, 25. 
ἃ dat., Rom. vi. 2,10, 11. xiv. 7 al. 
xviii. 6 (Paul) reff. 


e 1 Cor. xv. 4, and passim. 


Eph. iii. 


y = Luke xii. 


(L.P., exc. 
Matt. iv. 24). 
Job xxxi. 23. 


16 ὥ e a f > Ν fal “ "ὃ / Lo 
STE NMELS “ATO TOV νυν OQUOEVA OLOALLED - = Acts xv. 
19. 


b ver. 10. c = Rom. vi. 8. 


Isa. xxvi. 19, f Acts 


14. for χριστου, θεου CP 17. 39. 42-6. 120. 238 syr Chr Thdrt,(txtp1,) Thl-marg. 


15. κριναντες Εἰ: -vovtas 17. 


rec ins et bef εἷς, with C!N? rel vulg(and F-lat) 


copt arm Ath-mss Chr, Cyr [-p Bas,-ms, Euthal-ms] Th] Aug,(elsw mss vary) Bede : 
om B(sic: see table) ΟΕ KLPN! ἃ 61 17. 47 syrr goth eth Ath-edd, Chr, Cyr,[-p 


Bas-edd, | Thdrt Damasc. 


for απεθανον, απεθανεν &}, 


aft 2nd απεθανεν ins 


χριστος F vulg(not am harl [fuld tol) arm Cypr, Ambrst]}. 


subjective,— Rom. v. 5, 8; viii. 35, 99 ; ch. 
viii. 24; xiii. 13; Eph. ii. 4; Phil. 1. 9 al. 
(but see his own note on 2 Thess. iii. 5, 
where he maintains the objective sense), 
whereas with John it is not always so, 
1 John v. 3. Paul usually expresses love of, 
1. 6. towards, by εἰς, Col. i. 4; 1 Thess. iii. 
12) constraineth us (a better word could 
not be found: the idea of συνέχω is that of 
Sorcible limitation, either in a good or a 
bad sense,—of confining to one object, 
or within certain bounds, be that one 
- object a painful or glorious one,—those 
bounds the angustiz of distress, or the 
course of apostolic energy, as here. “ Con- 
straineth us,’ generally :—limits us to one 
great end, and prohibits our taking into 
consideration any others. ‘ Metaphora est 
in verbo constringendi: qua notatur, fieri 
nov. posse, quin, quisquis mirificum illum 
amorem quem testatus est nobis Christus 
morte sua, vere expendit et reputat, quasi 
ei alligatus, et arctissimo vinculo constric- 
tus, se in illius obsequium addicat.’ Calv. 
The varieties of interpretation, some as 
Meyer, urging more the sense cohibendz, 
others as Chrys., that exrcitandi, οὐκ adi- 
now ἡμᾶς ἡσυχάζειν, all in fact amount 
to one—that of the forcible compression 
of his energies to one line of action), 
15.] [having judged this (i.e.] because 
we formed this judgment, viz. at our 
conversion :—learned to regard this as a 
settled truth) that One died on behalf of 
all (not only, for the benefit of all, as 
Meyer, —but instead of all, suffered death 
in the root and essence of our humanity, 
as the second Adam. This death on be- 
half of all men is the absolute objective 
fact: that all enter not into the benefit of 
that Death, is owing to the non-fulfilment 
of the subjective condition which follows), 
—therefore all cied (i. e. therefore, in the 
death of Christ, all, the all for whom He 
died, of πάντες, died too: i.e. see below, 
became planted in the likeness of His 
death,—died to sin and to self, that they 


might live to Him. This was true, objec- 
tively, but not subjectively till such death 
to sin and self is realized in each : see Rom. 
vi. 8 ff). . The other renderings,—‘ ought 
to die, as Thomas Aq., Grot., Estius, al., 
—‘were under sentence of death, as Chrys., 
Theodoret, Beza, al. ;—‘as good as died, 
Flatt ;—are shewn to be erroneous by 
carefully noticing the construction, with or 
without «i. The verd is common to both 
members of the sentence ; the correspon- 
dent emphatic words in the two members 
being (1) εἷς ὑπὲρ πάντων, (2) πάντες : 
‘(One on behalf of all) died, therefore (αἰ) 
died: if One died the death of (belonging 
to, due from) all, then all died (in and 
with Him).’ Meyer’s rendering of ὅτι 
because, can hardly be right as it would 
leave κρίναντας τοῦτο standing awkwardly 
alone. And He died for all, in order that 
they who live (in this life, see ἡμεῖς of 
ζῶντες, ch. iv. 11; = in sense, ‘as long 
as they are in this state,’ as De W.:—not, 
‘those who live spiritually,’ as Beza, Flatt, 
which would altogether strike out the 
sense, for it is, that they may live spiritu- 
ally, &c.: nor, ‘superstites,’ they whom 
He left behind at His death, ζῶντες in 
contrast with Him who ἀπέθανεν, as 
Meyer ;—for, not to insist on the more 
general reference to all time, many to 
whom the Apostle was now writing were 
not born at the time of His Death) 
should no longer (now that His Death 
has taken place: or, as they did before 
they apprehended that Death as theirs,— 
but I prefer the former, see ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν 
below) live to themselves (with se/f as 
their great source and end of action, to 
please and to obey) but to Him that died 
and rose again for them (ὑπέρ, not mere- 
ly even as connected with ἐγερθέντι ‘for 
the benefit of, as Meyer again; but 
strictly ‘in the place 97: as the Death of 
Christ is our death, so His Resurrection is 
our resurrection). 16.] So that (ac- 
cordingly,—consistently with our judg- 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS Β. 


Υ. 


Ν , εὖ ’ ΄ 
ὃ κατὰ ὃ σάρκα" εἰ καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν © κατὰ ὃ σάρκα χριστόν, 


1? σ΄ v h > A 
@STE €l TLS EV χρίστῳ, 


> H -“ a > [4 , 
ixawn ἱκτίσις" τὰ "ἀρχαῖα ᾿'᾿ παρῆλθεν, ἰδού, γένονεν 


ξ Rom.1.3 
reff. > \ “- + ” , 
ΒῚ Cor-i.30 GAA νὺν οὐκ ETL γινώσκομεν. 
i Gal. vi. 15. 
k Acts xv. 7 
reff. = Isa. 
xliii. 18. 1 = Matt. v. 18. xxiv. 35 al. see Acts xxvii. 9 reff. 


16. rec aft εἰ ins δε, with C? D?-3[-gr] (K)LPN? rel syr (copt goth) Chr, [Cyr-p, 
Euthal-ms] Thdrt, Damasc: καὶ bef εἰ F latt [Syr Orig-intajie Dind-int, Ambrst 
Augsepe]: txt B D'{-gr] ΝὲῚ 17 [arm] Orig, Eus, [Nys,]. (ΟἹ uncert.)—om καὶ K 115 


copt goth [Cyr, Orig-int, ]. 


χριστον bef κατα σαρκα D eth Orig,(-intsepe) JePatic« 


aft γινώσκομεν ins kata σαρκα D! [and lat] F Jer,. (not vulg F-lat.) 


ment expressed ver. 15) we (in opposition 
to our adversaries, the false teachers: not 
general, of all Christians, as De W.,—but 
as yet spoken, as the emphatic position of 
ἡμεῖς sShews, of the Apostle himself (and 
his colleagues?)) from this time (since 
this great event, the Death of Christ) 
know no man according to (as he is in) 
the flesh (Meyer well remarks: “Since all 
are (ethically) dead, and each man is bound 
to live only to Christ, not to himself, our 
knowledge of others must be altogether 
independent of that which they are kara 
oapxa,— must not be regulated κατὰ σάρκα. 
And the connexion of ver. 16 with ver. 
15 shews that we must not take κατὰ 
σάρκα asthe subjective rule of οἴδαμεν, ---- 
so that the explanation would be, ‘ accord- 
ing to mere human knowledge,’ ‘apart 
from the enlightening of the Holy Spirit,’ 
ef. ch. i. 17; 1 Cor. i. 26,—but as the 
objective rule, cf. ch. xi. 18 ; John viii. 15 ; 
Phil. 111. 4,—so that εἰδέναι τινὰ κατὰ 
σάρκα = ‘to know any one according to 
his mere human individuality, —‘to know 
him as men have judged him by what he 
is in the flesh,’ not by what he is κατὰ 
πνεῦμα, as a Christian, as καινὴ κτίσις, 
ver. 17. He who knows no man κατὰ 
σάρκα has, e.g. in the case of the Jew, 
entirely lost sight of his Jewish origin,— 
in that of the rich man, of his riches,— 
in that of the learned, of his learning, — 
in that of the slave, of his servitude, &c., 
cf. Gal. iii. 28”): if even we have (εἰ 
καί concedes what follows: πόλιν μέν, 
εἰ καὶ μὴ βλέπεις, φρονεῖς δ᾽ ὅμως, οἵᾳ 
νόσῳ ξύνεστι, Soph. Ed. Tyr. 302,—but 
also, as distinguished from καὶ εἰ, intro- 
duces no climax, and distributes the force 
of the καί over the whole concessive clause, 
whereas in καὶ εἰ it is confined to the con- 
ditional particle ei,—see Hartung, Parti- 
kellehre, i. 139) known Christ according 
to the flesh, now however we know Him 
(thus) nolonger. The fact alluded to in 
the concessive clause, is, not any personal 
knowledge of the Lord Jesus while He was 
on earth, but that view of Him which Paul 
took before his conversion, when he knew 
Him only according to His outward ap- 
parent standing in this world, on/y as Jesus 
of Nazareth. χριστόν is not = τὸν χρισ- 


τόν, ‘the Christ,’ but merely as a proper 
naive designating Him whom he now knew 
as Christ. Observe, the stress is not on 
χριστόν, α. 4. ‘If we have known even 
Christ after the flesh,’ &e., as usually un- 
derstood ;—the position of xp. forbids this, 
which would require εἰ καὶ χριστὸν ἐγν. k. 
odp.,—but on ἐγνώκαμεν, as belonging to 
the past, contrasted with our present know- 
ledge. Observe likewise, that the position 
of κατὰ σάρκα, as above also, forbids its 
being taken as the subjective qualification 
of ἐγνώκαμεν, as = εἰ καὶ κατὰ σάρκα 
ἐγν. χρ., or εἰ kK. ἔγν. Xp. K. σάρκ., and 
fixes it as belonging to χριστόν,--- Christ 
according to the flesh.’ St. Paul now, since 
his conversion, knew Him no longer as 
thus shewn, but as ὁρισθέντα υἱὸν θεοῦ 
ἐν δυνάμει, κατὰ πνεῆμα ἁγιωσύνης. At 
that time, εὐδόκησεν 6 ἀφορίσας ue... - 
ἀποκαλύψαι τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐν ἐμοί, Gal. 
i. 15, 16. See by all means Stanley’s re- 
marks, on the absence of all local and 
personal recollections of our Lord’s life, 
in the apostolic age. 17.) So that 
(additional inference from what has gone 
before: hardly as Meyer, from ver. 16 
only: the death of ver. 15, as well as the 
new knowledge of ver. 16, going to make 
up the καινὴ κτίσι5) if any man is in 
Christ (far better than ‘whoever is in 
Christ.’ See note on Phil. iv. 8. ‘In 
Christ, i.e. in union with Him: Christ 
being ‘the element in which by faith we 
live and move,’ as Meyer), he is a new 
creature (κτίσις, ‘creation,’—the act, im- 
plying here the result of the act. See ref. 
and Col. iii. 10, 11; Eph. ii. 10; iv. 23. 
‘ He has received,’ ‘passed into,’ ‘a new 
life,” John iii. 3): the old things (of his 
former life—‘all the old selfish and im- 
pure motives, views, and prejudices,’—De 
Wette) have passed away (there does not 
appear to be any allusion, as in Chrys., 
Theophyl., to the passing away of Judaism, 
but only to the new birth, the antiqua- 
tion of the former unconverted state, with 
all that belonged to it); behold (a remi- 
niscence of Isa. xliii. 18, 19—pH μνη- 
μονεύετε τὰ πρῶτα, καὶ Ta ἀρχαῖα pw 
συλλογίζεσθε: ἰδοὺ, ἐγὼ ποιῷ καινά), they 
have become new (see var. readd.). The 
arrangement of the sentence followed by 


BCDFK 
LPxrab 
cdefg 
hkimn 
0 17, 47 


17—20. ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS B. 665 


καινά. 18 τὰ dé™ πάντα πὶ ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ " καταλλάξαν- m1 Cor. ai. 12 
ren. 


a el \ a / a \ 
Tos ἡμᾶς ἑαυτῷ διὰ χριστοῦ Kai δόντος ἡμῖν τὴν 5 Rom.y.10 


~ nw “ Ν iy Acts . 24 
ο διακονίαν τῆς P καταλλαγῆς, 19 «ὡς «ὅτι θεὸς ἣν * ἐν “ τε: fe 
p here bis. 

Rom. .1] 


“ ’ n / e A \ 8 / 
χριστῷ κόσμον "KaTaddAdoowY ἑαυτῷ, μὴ * λογιζόμενος xi. 15 only. 
a. ix. 5. 


= 7, Ἂν \ , > hey 
αὐτοῖς τὰ ἱπαραπτώματα αὐτῶν, καὶ " θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν Psat.’ 20 


\ y / lal A 90 ς + nw => only. 
Tov ‘Xoyov τῆς Ρ καταλλαγῆς. ὑπὲρ χριστοῦ οὖν 4 - here (ch.xi. 
r 1 Cor. xv. 22 reff. : 


2 Thess. 
s = Rom. ii. 26. iv. 4, 8 al. fr. 
u Ps. civ. 27. (Amos vy. 7.) 


ii. 2) only. Num. xviii. 27. 
v Acts xili. 26 reff. 


t Rom. iv. 25 reff. 

17. rec aft kava ins τὰ παντα, with D?-3[-gr] KLP rel syr goth eth-pl [arm-mss] 
Orig, Constt,; Did, Chr, Damasce Tert,: bet xawa bd fk ο 17. 46. 67? vulg-ed (Syr) 
Ath,!-ed,] Dial, Meth, Cyr{-p, Ephr, Euthal-ms] Thdrt Procl, Orig-int, [Ambr, ] 
Ambrst Jer Salv: om BCD‘FX latt copt eth-rom arm(1805) Clem, Ath-ms, Cyr[-p, 
Ambr,] Hil, Aug, Promiss. 

18. om Ist του DIF. rec ins τἡσου bef χριστου, with D3[-gr} KL rel Thdrt 
Damasc: om BCD!FPX 17 latt syrr copt goth eth arm Chr, [Kuthal-ms] Hil 
Aibrst Aug). 

19. ins o bef θεος FK b! o Chr, Thdrt. καταλασσωνί(ϑιο) Ne fh! k. add 
ev D'{corrd eadem manu]. for Aoy., αστιζομενος F. [εαυτοις (but corrd) D}.] 

om 2nd εν Καὶ f ἢ 1! n 47. ins (Tov) evayyeAtov bef τὸν Aoyov D! Εἰ ποῦ 
F-lat]: adnuntiationem D-lat, evangeliz G-lat(and so over the greek in F).—om tov F, 
20. for ὑπερ xp. ουν, ov ὑπερ χριστου D! ΕἾ -οΥ]}; pro quo Christo D-lat; quod pro 


the Vulg., al., ‘Si qua ergo in Christo 
nova creatura, vetcra transierunt,’ is in- 
admissible, because the second member 
would be a mere reassertion of the first. 

18.] And all things (in this new 
creation : he passes to a more general view 
of the effects of the death of Christ—viz. 
our reconciliation to God) are from God 
(as their source), who reconciled us (all 
men, from next verse, where κόσμον is 
parallel with it) to Himself by means of 
Christ (as an atonement, an expiatory 
sacrifice, ver. 21, for sin which made us 
ἐχθροὶ θεοῦ, see Rom. v. 10), and gave 
(committed) to us (Apostles, not mankind 
in general; for had it been so,—in the next 
verse, which is parallel, ἐν αὐτοῖς, not ἐν 
ἡμῖν, must have stood, after αὐτοῖς and 
αὐτῶν just preceding) the ministration of 
the reconciliation (the duty of ministering 
in that office, whose peculiar work it is 
to proclaim this reconciliation : so διακονία 
τῆς δικαιοσύνης“, ch. 111. 9. Observe, that 
the reconciliation spoken of in this and the 
next verse, is that of God to us, absolutely 
and objectively, through His Son: that 
whereby He can complacently behold and 
endure a sinful world, and receive all who 
come to Him by Christ. This, the subjec- 
tive reconciliation,—of men to God,—fol- 
lows as a matter of exhortation, ver. 20), 

19.] how that (the ὡς imports that 
the proposition following it, introduced by 
ὅτι, is matter of indirect reference. So 
Xen. Hell. iii. 2. 14, εἰπὼν τῷ Φάρακι ὡς 
ὅτι Oxvoin μὴ 6 Τισσαφ. κ-τ.λ., and argum. 
Isocr. Busir. p. 520 (cited by Winer, edn. 
6, § 65. 9), κατηγόρουν αὐτοῦ, ὡς ὅτι καινὰ 
δαιμόνια εἰσφέρει) God in Christ was re- 
c<onciling the world to Himself (qv κατ- 


αλλάσσων not exactly = κατήλλασσεν, 
any more than ἦν κηρύσσων Luke iv. 44 
= ἐκήρυσσεν : in both cases the habitual 
state is more emphatically implied than 
could be done by the imperfect merely : 
the shade of difference can, however, hardly 
be expressed in English. ἦν cannot, as 
in Erasm., Luther, Calv., Beza, al., and 
E. V., belong to ἐν χριστῷ, ‘God was in 
Christ, reconciling’ &c.,—partly on ac- 
count of the position of ἐν xp., which 
would thus probably be before ἦν, but prin- 
cipally (Meyer) because of incoherence 
with θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν x.7.A.: for in that 
case the two latter clauses must express 
the manner of reconciliation by Christ, 
which the second of them does not. 
kéopov,—without the article, as governed 
words placed for emphasis before their 
verbs often are—it would not be καταλ- 
λάσσων κόσμον, but τὸν κόσμον,---[ΠὩ8 whole 
world,—man, and man’s world, entire, 
with all that therein is, see Col. i. 20, but 
considered, cf. αὐτῶν below, as summed up 
in man),—not reckoning to them their 
trespasses (present : on the expression see 
reff.), and having placed in us (past :— 
not merely = ‘ committed to us,’ but ‘ laid 
upon us, as our office and charge, and, 
besides, ‘ empowered us for, ‘put in our 
souls by His Spirit’ ‘Us,’ viz. Apostles 
and teachers) the word of the recon- 
Ciliation (as 6 λόγος ὁ τοῦ σταυροῦ, 1 Cor. 
i. 18). 

20, 21.) He describes his office as that 
of an ambassador for Christ, consisting 
in beseeching them, ON THEIR PART, to be 
reconciled to God; and that, in consi- 
deration of the great Atonement which 
God has provided by Christ. On Christ's 


666 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B. 


Wee; 


lal “ lal , ~ 
wEpn.vi.20 Υ̓ πρεσβεύομεν, * ὡς τοῦ θεοῦ Y παρακαλοῦντος δι’ ἡμῶν" 


only τ. \-€la, 
Luke xiv. 32.) 

x w. gen. abs., 
1 Cop iv. 18 
reff. 

y absol., 1 Cor. 
iv. 13 reff. 

z — Eccles. viii. 
5 


a = Rom. i. 17 reff. (Phil. iii. 9.) 


Christo G-lat. 


’ 4 e Ν “-“ n [4 -. ~ 
δεόμεθα ὑπὲρ χριστοῦ, " καταλλάγητε τῷ θεῷ. 
As , e / ΄ Ν < lal c / , , t/ 
μὴ “γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν, Wa 

a / i δ he: > lal 
ἡμεῖς γενώμεθα * δίκαιοσύνη " θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ. VI. 10 συνερ- 


b Mark xvi. 206. Rom. viii. 28. 
only +. 1 Mace. xii. 1. Esdr. vii. 2 only. (~yos, 1 Cor. iii. 9.) 


21 τὸν 


1 Cor. xvi. 16. James ii. 22 


δεόμενοι D'(and lat) F[-gr] Chr-ms Hil, Ambrst(not [Orig-int, 
Jer, | Augsepe) 3 orantes aut obsecrantes G-lat. 
F-lat] syr-mg goth, reconciliart G-lat [ Hil, Ambrst Augsspe |. 

21. rec aft τὸν ins yap (see note), with D3, -gr 


καταλλαγήναι D'(and lat) ΕἸ ποῦ 
om Tw F, 
| KUPRS rel syrr goth eth arm 


Chr, Euther, Thdrt; Damase: om BCD!FR! 17 latt copt Orig, Eus, Ath, [Cyr-p, 


Euthal-ms] ‘{hdrt, Did{-int,] Hil, Ambrst Aug Pel Alcim. 


rec ytywueba: txt 


BCDKPR® rel Orig, Eus,[-ms, Cyr-p,] Chr, Thdrtsepe Damase Thl Ce, [yevou. 1 


Euthal-ms, ] evauia ΕΝ 
Thdrt,: om θεου 46. 114 Thdrt,. 


behalf then (i. 6. in pursuance of the impo- 
sition on us of the λόγος τῆς κατ.) We are 
ambassadors, as if God were exhorting by 
us: we beseech (‘ you,’ but not uttered as 
an integral part of the present text, not a 
request now made and urged, as Rom. xii. 
1; he is describing the embassage; we 
are ambassadors, and in our embassage it 
is our work to beseech—‘ Be ye,’ ἄς.) on 
Christ’s behalf, Be reconciled to God :— 
καταλλὰ. strictly passive: ‘God was the 
RECONCILER —let this reconciliation have 
effect on you—enter into it by faith.’ Our 
E. V., by inserting the word ‘ye,’ has given 
a false impression, making it appear as if 
there were an emphasis on it, correspond- 
ing to God being reconciled to us, as if it 
had been καταλλάγητε καὶ ὑμεῖς τῷ θεῷ .--- 
whereas it is the simple being reconciled in 
that reconciliation in which God was, in 
Christ, the Reconciler. 21.] States 
the great fact on which the exhortation to 
be reconciled is grounded :—viz. the un- 
speakable gift of God, to bring about the 
reconciliation. It is introduced without 
a ydp (which has been supplied), as still 
forming part of the λόγος τῆς καταλλαγῆς. 
Him who knew not sin (τὸν οὐ γνόντα 
would merely assert the fact, that up to the 
time of ἐποίησεν, He was ignorant of sin. 
But μή with a participle, as has been ob- 
served since the doctrine of the particles 
has been more accurately studied, always 
denies subjectively, i.e. in reference to the 
view of some person who is the subject, or 
to the hypothesis of some person who is the 
direct or indirect utterer of the assertion. 
Cf. note on ch. iv.18. | With what refer- 
ence then is the particle here used ? Fritz. 
(in Meyer) thinks, to the Christian’s neces- 
sary idea of Christ, “quem talem virum 
mente concipimus, qui sceleris notitiam 
non habuerit :᾿ Meyer, and Winer, edn. 
6. § 55. 5. B, to God’s judgment of Him. 
I much prefir to either regarding it as 


θεου bef δικαιοσυνη KP ἃ 99. 109. 219 Kus, (txt,) Sev Chir 


subjective with reference to Christ Him- 
se/f, Who said, John viii. 46, tis ἐξ ὑμῶν 
ἐλέγχει me περὶ ἁμαρτίας; He was thus 
6 μὴ γνοὺς ἁμαρτίαν (see Hartung, Parti- 
keilehre, 11. 181, who gives among other 
examples, one very similar, from Thucyd, 
i. 118, ἡσύχαζόν τε τὸ πλέον τοῦ χρόνοι", 
ὄντες καὶ πρὸ τοῦ μὴ ταχεῖς ἰέναι ἐς τοὺς 
πολέμου»), --- knew not,’ i.e. by contact, 
by personal experience, ‘sin.’ See, for 
the sense, 1 Pet. ii. 22; Heb. vii. 26), on 
our behalf (or, instead of us: 1 prefer 
here the former, because the purpose of 
the verse is to set forth how great things 
God has done for us :—the other, though 
true, does not seem so applicable. The 
words ὑπὲρ ju. are emphatic) He made 
(to be) sin (not, ‘a sin-offering, as 
Augustine, Ambros., (cum., Erasm., 
Hammond, Wolf, al., for the word seems 
never to have the meaning, even in the 
LXX (see however the remarkable read- 
ing of the Codex A at Lev. vi. 25); 
and if it had, the former sense of the 
same word in this same sentence would 
preclude it here: nor = ἁμαρτωλός, as 
Meyer, al.: but, as De Wette, al., SrN, 
abstract, as opposed to RIGHTEOUSNESS 
which follows ; compare κατάρα, Gal. iii. 
13. He, on the Cross, was the Represen- 
tative of Sin,—of the sin of the world), 
that we might become (the present, γινώμ. 
as in rec., would signify, as Stallbaum, 
Crito, p. 43 (Meyer)—‘ id quod propositum 
fuerit, nondum perfectum et transactum 
esse, sed adhuc durare.’ The aor., which 
is supported by all the Mss., also yields 
the best sense, as joining the whole 
justification of all God’s people, as one act 
accomplished, with the Sacrifice of Christ) 
the righteousness of God (see above: re- 
presentatives of the Righteousness of God, 
endued with it and viewed as in it, and 
examples of it) in Him (in union with Him, | 
and by virtue of our standing in Him). 


BCDFK. 
LPR ab 
cdefg 
hklwna 
ο 17. 47 





VI. J—3. 


γοῦντες δὲ Kal “ παρακαλοῦμεν, μὴ ἃ εἰς 
τοῦ θεοῦ δέξασθαι ὑμᾶς 2 (λέγει yap ΚΚαιρῷ ' δεκτῷ ὅ ἐπ- 
ἠκουσά σου, καὶ ἐν ἃ ἡμέρᾳ σωτηρίας ἱ ἐβοήθησά σοι. 
νῦν καιρὸς Ἰεὐπρόςδεκτος, ἰδοὺ νῦν " ἡμέρα σωτηρίας") 
ὃ μηδεμίαν * ἐν ὃ μηδενὶ | διδόντες τὶ προςκοπήν, ἵνα μὴ 


35. Phil. iv. 18 only. 
i Acts xvi. 9 reff. 
11 Cor. ix. 12. 

Rom. ix. 32.) 


j Rom. xv. 16 reff. 


Cuap. VI. 1. παρακαλουντες D}[and lat] ΕἾ ποὺ F-lat] goth. 


ἡμᾶς CR!(txt δὲ -οοΥ 1.5) 4. 17. 89 eth. 


2. καιρω yap λεγει D'(and lat) F(not F-lat) [goth] Sedul. 
for σοι, gov F(not G). 


supplied by N-corr?.) 


Cuap. VI. 1—10.] He further describes 
his apostolic embassage, as one of earnest 
exhortation not to receive the grace of God 
in vain (vv. 1, 2), and of approving him- 
self, by many characteristics and under 
various circumstances, as the minister of 
God (vv. 3—10). 1.1] συνεργοῦντες, 
viz. τῷ θεῷ, Whose representatives they 
were, and Whose grace they recommended. 
This is implied not only in what went 
before, but in the τοῦ θεοῦ of our verse 
itself. Meyer makes it τῷ χριστῷ, refer- 
ring it to the ὑπὲρ xp. above: Chrys., Theo- 
doret, Bengel, Olsh,, al., ὑμῖν, which cer- 
tainly would have been expressed, and does 
not suit the sense, nor Paul’s habit of 
speaking of the ministry, see 1 Cor. iii. 9. 
Flatt and Emmerling would make the σύν 
imply, working with our exhortations, aid- 
ing them by our example: which sense, 
though occasionally belonging to σύν and 
πρός in composition, could hardly have 
place here without some plainer indication 
in what went before, of that to which the 
preposition refers,—and would not suit the 
καί, which severs ouvepy. from παρακαλ. 

The δέ is one of transition, introducing 
a new feature. Moreover, while working 
with God, we also exhort, that you 
(when preaching to you,—or others, when 
preaching to others: he still is describing 
his practice in his ministry. not using a 
direct exhortation to the Corinthians) re- 
ceive not (‘recipiatis ;—not ‘ receperitis,’ 
‘that ye will not have received,’ i. 6. “ will 
not by apostasy shew that ye have received 
. . . as Erasm., al., and De Wette. This 
mistake arises mainly from regarding the 
words as directly addiessed to the Corin- 
thians instead of a description of his apos- 
tolie practice) the grace of God (i.e. the re- 
conciliation above spoken of) to no purpose 
(i.e. unaccompanied by sanctification of 
life; so Chrys., iva . . μὴ νομίσωσιν ὅτι τοῦ- 
τό ἐστι καταλλαγὴ μόνον, τὸ πιστεῦσαι τῷ 
καλοῦντι, ἐπάγει ταῦτα, τὴν περὶ τὸν βίον 
σπουδὴν ἀπαιτῶν. Hom. xii. p. 521.) 
2.1 Ground of the exhortation: viz. the 


IPO KOPINOIOTS B. 


g here only I. c. 


667 


de κενὸν τὴν a Ly c Rom. xii. 1 
) χ ρ 4 reff. ; 


d Gal. ii. 2. 
Phil. ii. 16 
bis. 1 Thess. 


> \ 

ἰδοὺ iii. 5 only 
Isa. Ixv. 23. 

e 1 Cor. xv. 10 
reff. 

flsa xlix. 8. 
Luke iv. 19, 
24. Acts x. 
h = 1 Cor. i. # reff. 

Amos i. 4. see ver. 4. 


Ps. xix. 1: 


Kehs wit. 9 Phil: 7. 28: 


m here only+. διδόναι ἀφορμὰς προςκοπῆς, Polyb. xxvii. 6.10. (-Koupa, 


om vuas Ὁ}: 


(κτω of δεκτω are 
for evmposdextos, δεκτος ΚΕ, 


importance of the present time as the day 
of acceptance,—shewn by a Scripture cita- 
tion. For he (God, with whom we συνερ- 
γοῦμεν and whose grace we recommend) 
saith, ‘In an accepted time (Heb. ᾿Ξ nya, 
‘in a season of grace’) I heard thee, and 
in the day of salvation I helped thee:’ be- 
hold (inserted for solemnity—to mark the 
importance of what follows), Now is the 
favourably accepted time (cimpdsdexros, 
a far stronger term than δεκτός, q. d. the 
very time of most favourable acceptance, 
said from the fulness of his feeling of the 
greatness of God’s grace),—behold, now 
is the dayof salvation. 6 yap ἐν τοιούτῳ 
καιρῷ ἀγωνιζόμενος, ἐν ᾧ τοσαύτη κέχυται 
δωρεά, ἐν ᾧ τοσαύτη χάρις, εὐκόλως ἐπιτεύ- 
ξεται τῶν βραβείων. Chrys. Ρ. 522. The 
prophecy is one directly of the Lord Jesus, 
as the restorer and gatherer of his people; 
and the time of acceptance is the interval 
of the offer of the covenant to men, con- 
ceded to Him by the Father. 3—10. | 
And this doing, he approves himself as 
the minister of God by various churac- 
teristics, and under manifold circum- 
stances in life. 9,1 διδόντες, resumed 
from συνεργοῦντες, ver. 1: ver. 2 being 
parenthetic. It, and all the following 
participles, vv. 9, 10, qualify παρακαλοῦμεν, 
shewing the pains and caution used by him 
to enforce this exhortation by his example 
as well as his precept. So Grot.: ‘ostendit 
enim, quam serio moneat, qui, ut aliquid 
proficiat, nullis terreatur incommodis, nulla 
non commoda negligat.? But evidently, 
before the list is exhausted, he passes be- 
yond the mere confirmation of his preach- 
ing, and is speaking generally of the cha- 
racteristics of the Christian ministry. ἐν 
μηδενί, in nothing, compare ἐν παντί, 
below : not, ‘in no man’s estimation,’ as 
Luther. μηδεμ.,-- μηδενί, are not = οὐδεμ. 
- οὐδενί, but, see on ch. v. 21, subjectively 
said—we exhort, being such as give, &c.: 
so 1 Cor. x. 33, ἐγὼ πάντα πᾶσιν ἀρέσκω, 
μὴ (ntay κιτ.λ. προςκοπή -- σκάν- 
δαλον, or mpéskouua, Rom. xiv. 13. 


008 


ἢ a A e ο ὃ / 
n ch, viii, 20 μωμηθῃ ἢ ° Olaxovia, 
only. Prov. 
Wisd. 
x. 14 only. 
ἔ-μος, 2 Pet. 
ii. 13.) 
oS rea ic dds 
xx. 24 (reff.). 
Rom. xi. 19 τ. 


ψέσιν, ἐν 
ἐν ὃν φυλακαῖς, ἐν 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


4 ἀλλ᾽ 
\ fal ΄ wn “Ὁ ’ , 

4 ἑαυτοὺς ὡς θεοῦ διάκονοι, ἐν ὑπομονῇ πολλῇ, ἐν ὃ θλι- 
, 2 

t ἀνάγκαις, ἐν 


Vt. 


’ \ , 
Pey Pqravtt 9 cuvioTtavTes 


ὁ στενοχωρίαις, ὃ ἐν “Y πληγαῖς, 


, " , > 9 
“ ἀκαταστασίαις, ἐν δ κόποις, ἐν ¥* aypu- 


p “ΞΘ. αν. Β : 25, ya / 6 gy Ὁ ἡ ) 2 ¢ ‘ σ sy ἃ 
ea τὶ TTVLALS, EV VNUTTELALS, εν QAyvoT?)Tt, εν γνω ει, EV μα- 
4 ch. iii. 1. iv. - 
2. Sule Waly 11. πα. Bee r Rom. ii. 7 reff. s Rom. ii. 9 (reff.). t — 1 Cor. vii. 26 reff. 
u Acts xvi. 23. v ch. xi. 23. w 1 Cor. xiv. 33 reff. x as above (v). 1 Cor. iii. 
8. xv. 58 al. Gen. xxxi. 42. y ch. xi. 27. z as above (y) only +. 2 Macc. ii. 26. (-mvetv, 
Eph. vi. 18.) a as above (y) (1 Cor. vii. 5 v. r.) only in Paul. {Matt. xvii. 21 || Mk.) Luke ii. 37. Acts 
xiv. 23. xxvii. 9 only. 2 Kings xii. 16. bch. xi. 3 only τ. (-v0s, ch. vii. 11.) ¢ =, 1 Cor. 
i. 5. xii. 8 al. d Rom. ii. 4 (reff.), 


3. uwOy(sic) BI f: μωμωθη 1)}. 


aft ἢ διακονία ins nuwy DF ἃ 66?. 73 latt syrr 


sah [goth] Chr, Thdrt [Antch,(pref)] ΤῊ] Gic-comm Ainbrst Aug, Pell, ὑμῶν eth). 


4. rec συνιστωντες, with DIKL 3 rel Chr, 
txt CD! FR} 17 Clem, Cyr; [ Kuthal-ms]. 


διακονους D![-gr] vulg [F-lat Ambrst Aug, ] : 


f: συνιστανοντες BP 31. 73 Damase, : 


μωμηθῇ} μωμᾶσθαι, ‘to reproach’ (see 
Winer, edn. 6, § 38. 7. a, and Moulton’s 


note), is one of those deponent verbs 
which have an aorist passive: so d:a- 
λέγεσθαι, βούλεσθαι, δύνασθαι, σπλαγ- 


χνίζεσθαι, &e, The διακονία, the office 
itself, would be reproached, if cause of 
offence were found in the character of 
its bearers. 4.) Meyer well remarks 
the position of συνιστ. ἑαυτούς. When 
the words signified ‘to recommend our- 
selves, in a bad sense, ch. iii. 1, v. 12, 
—éavt. preceded the verb: but here and 
ch. iv. 2, where used in a good sense, and 
without any stress on ἑαυτούς, it follows 
the verb. ‘This is only one of continually 
occurring instances of the importance of 
the collocation of words with regard to the 
emphasis. διάκονοι not διακόνους : 
recommending ourselves, as ministers 
of God should do. The ambiguity of 
the Εἰ. V. might have been avoided by 
a different arrangement of words: ‘in 
all things, as the ministers of God, ap- 
proving ourselves.’ The following 
datives are a specification of παντί; but 
not all of the same sort: some signify 
instruments by which, some, situations 
in which, some both these. Bengel re- 
marks: “Insignis gradatio. Sequuntur 
ter tria patienda (i.e. from θλίψεσιν 
to vnoreias), quibus patientia (ὑπομονή) 
exercetur ; pressure,— plage, —labores. 
Primus ternarius continet genera, se- 
cundus, species adversorum: tertia spon- 
tanea” (but qu?: see below). So that 
the ὑπομονὴ are: belongs to vv. 4, 5, 
and ver. 6 goes on to other points. 
otevox.| See ch. iv. 8, note. 

5.] On πληγ.; see reff. φυλακ.} 

At Philippi only as yet, as far as we 
know from the narrative of the Acts; 
—but there must have been many other 
occasions, see ch. xi. 23. He may have 
been imprisoned at Antioch in Pisidia, 


Thdrt [Antch, | Damasep..: συνιστοντες 


ministros ἀν -i G-lat. 


Acts xiii. 50, and at Lystra, xiv. 19, and 
at Corinth, xviii. 12, 14: and we cannot 
tell what may have befallen him during 
his journeys, Acts xv. 41; xvi. 6; xviii. 23. 
ἐν dkataot.] in tumults, see Acts 
xill. 50; xiv. 5,19; xvi. 22; xvii. 53 xviii. 
12, and above all, xix. 28 -- 41, The sense 
given by Chrys. (p. 522), al., τὸ μηδαμοῦ 
δύνασθαι στῆναι ἐλαυνόμενον, is _philo- 
logically allowable, cf. Demosth. 383. 7, 
ἀκατάστατον ὥςπερ ev θαλάττῃ πνεῦμα, 
and James i. 8, and Polyb. xxxi. 18. 6, 
ὑποδεικνύων αὐτοῖς THY ἀκαταστασίαν τῆς 
βασιλείας,-- θαῦ not found in N. T. 
ἐν κόποις) usually, and here, signifies 
‘labour in the Lord, for his sake, see 
reff. So also κοπιάω, Rom. xvi. 6, 12 
(bis), and reff. Chrys., al., interpret it of 
his manual work, 1 Cor. iv. 12; and 
ἀστατοῦμεν and κοπιῶμεν occurring there 
together certainly gives some semblance 
to the view: but see ch. xi. 23, where 
this can hardly be; it is most probable 
that the weariness of his excessive apos- 
toliec labour was in his mind. 
ἀγρυπνίαις] Chrys. says, Ὁ. 529, τὰς νύκτας 
ἐν αἷς ἐδίδασκεν, ἢ ὅτι καὶ ἐν αὐταῖς εἰργά- 
ζτο. But I would rather believe the 
aypurvia to have been watchings through 
anxiety for the churches. ἐννηστείαις] 


This is generally, and by De W. against. 


Meyer, taken to refer to involuntary hun- 
ger and thirst. But, as the latter remarks, 
the word does not appear to be ever so 
used ; and in ch. xi. 27, Paul himself dis- 
tinguishes ἐν νηστείαις from ἐν λιμῷ kK. 
δίψει. The meaning of fastings must 
therefore be retained. So Chrys., Theo- 
doret, and Calvin. 6.1 The nine pre- 
ceding datives (see on ver. 4) have ex- 
panded ὑπομονῇ. We now resume the 
main catalogue, with ἐν ἁγνότητι, in 
purity: which is variously explained: ot 
bodily chastity, Grot.:—of unselfishness, 
Theodoret, and Chrys., as an alternative (ἢ 


BCDFK 
LPNab 
edetg 
hkimn 
ο 17. 47 


4---, 
κροθυμίᾳ, ἐν ἃ χρηστότητι, 
© ἀνυποκρίτῳ, 7 ἐν fro 
pity, 7 ἐν troy 
on τῶν ὅπλων τῆς 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS Β. 


Γἀληθείας, ἐν ὃ δυνάμει 8 θεοῦ, 
δικαιοσύνης 


669 


ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ, ἐν ἀγάπῃ pao xii. 9 


f Eph i. 13. 
2 Tim. ii. 15, 
James i. 18. 


TOV i δεξιῶν Kal 5 pee i. 18 


™ ἀριστερῶν, ὃ διὰ 1 δόξης καὶ τ ἀτιμίας, dia ® δυςφημίας h = ch. x. ἅ, 


Kab “εὐφημίας, ὡς Ῥ πλάνοι καὶ “ ἀληθεῖς, 9 ὡς τ ἀγνοού- 


iii. 3. i (see note.) Matt. vi.3. Mark x. 37. 


k N. T. as above (i) only. Gen. xiv. ἰδ. 
n here only+. 1 Mace. vii. 38. 
Ὁ here only+. Ps. xcix. 2 Symm. 

(bis) only, Job xix, 4. 
r1 Cor, xiv. 38. Gal. i, 22. 


Jer. xxiii. 32 only. 
2 Pet. ii, 12 al. 


σωφροσύνην... ἢ τὴν ἐν ἅπασι καθαρότητα, 
ἢ τὸ ἀδωροδόκητον, ἢ καὶ τὸ δωρεὰν τὸ 
εὐαγγ. κηρύττειν. ib.):—I prefer the second 
of Chrys.’s meanings, general purity of 
character, εἰλικρίνεια, ---- unblamableness 
of life, and singleness of purpose. ἐν 
γνώσει} knowledge of the Gospel, in ἃ 
high and singular degree; see 1 Cor. ii. 
6 ff. So Chrys.: σοφίᾳ τῇ παρὰ τοῦ 
θεοῦ δεδομένῃ. χρηστότητι) kind- 
ness: a kind and considerate demeanour. 
ἐν wv. ἁγίῳ] in the Holy Spirit, 

as the Power by Whom ali these motives 
are wrought. The omission of the article, 
aft. ἐν, constitutes no objection to this ren- 
dering, as Bp. Middleton (in loc.) sup- 
poses: cf. διὰ mv. ἁγίου τοῦ δοθέντος 
ἡμῖν, Rom. v. 5,—and the very same words 
as these, 1 Thess. 1. 5,—in both which 
places the meaning is undoubted; sieither 
of which, however, is noticed by Middleton. 
The words do not appear to hold any logi- 
cal place in the list, any more’than ἐν δυν. 
θεοῦ below. 7. ἐν Ady. ἀληθ.] is taken 
by De W., Meyer, al., as subjective,—‘ in 
speaking, or teaching truth’—‘in dis- 
course, the contents whereof were truth :’ 
but their objection against the sense in the 
word of truth, = ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῆς ἀλη- 
θείας, as it is expressed Col. i. 5, is not 
valid, on account (1) of the government 
by a preposition, which would make the 
insertion of the article optional,—(2) of the 
whole catalogue being anarthrous, which 
would cause the article to be omitted for 
uniformity’s sake. ἐν Suv. θεοῦ] 
viz. the Power spoken of ch. iv. 7,— 
the power manifested in every part of 
our apostolic working,—not merely in 
miracles. διὰ τ. ὅπλ. τ. Six. | By 
means of (ἐν is changed for διά, first ap- 
parently on account of τὰ ὅπλα, marking 
them more distinctly as instruments,—and 
then continued) the weapons of righte- 
ousness (belonging to,—or as Meyer, fur- 
mished by, the righteousness which is of 
faith. That panoply, part of which only 
in the more particular specification of Eph. 
vi. 13—17, viz. the θῶραξ, is allotted to 
δικαιοσύνη,---ἰθ here all assigned to it. 
Some of the ancient Commentators,— 


John xviii. 3 
(Rom. vi. 13 
bis. xili. 12) 
only. Nah. 
Luke xxiii. 33 only. 1 Chron. xii. 2. 
1 = John ν. 41, 44 al. m Rom. i. 26 reff. 


Esdr. i. 43 [40] Ald, (δυσσέβεια, AB &c.) only. (-μεῖν, 1 Cor. iy. 13.) 
(-sLos, Phil. iv. 8.) 


p Matt. xxvii. 63. 1Tim.iv.1. 2 John7 
q subj., Mutt. xxii. 16. John iii. 33. Rom. iii. 4f. 


Chrys., @eum., al., and Grot., Estius, al., 
understand by ὅπλα, ‘ instruments,’ as in 
Rom. vi. 18, and interpret these instru- 
ments to be, situations and opportunities 
of life, whether prosperous, δεξιά, or ad- 
verse, ἀριστερά: but the other interpreta- 
tion is in better accordance with the 
Apostle’s habit of comparison,—see ch. 
x. 4; Eph. vi. 13 ff. ; 1 Thess. v. 8). 

τῶν Sef. x. ἀριστ.] which are on the 
right and left: i.e. encompassing and 
guarding the whole person. Grot., Bengel, 
and most recent Commentators, even De 
W. and Meyer, explain it, both right- 
handed,—i. e. of attack, the sword and 
spear,—and left-handed,—i. 6. of defence, 
the shield: but it seems to me that this 
would require τῶν δεξιῶν καὶ τῶν ἀριστε- 
ρῶν: whereas now, no article being in- 
serted before ἀριστ., it is implied that the 
panoply (τὰ ὅπλα) is on both sides (δεξιὰ 
k. ἀριστερά) of the person. On the in- 
terpretation prosperity and adversity, see 
above. 8.} Perhaps the instrumental 
signification of διά need not be strictly 
retained. ‘The preposition, once adopted, 
is kept for the sake of parallelism, though 
with various shades of neaning. I would 
understand it in διὰ 60é., &., as in διὰ 
πολλῶν δακρύων, as pointing out the 
medium through which. Thus understood, 
these two pairs in ver. 8 will form an easy 
transition from instrumental, through me- 
dial, to the passive characteristics which 
follow. ὡς πλάνοι] From speaking 
of repute, he passes to the character of 
the repute. In all these capacities and 
under all these representations or misre- 
presentations, we, as ministers of God, re- 
commend ourselves. Butin these following 
clauses a new point is perhaps brought out, 
viz. the difference of our real state from our 
reputed one. That this is the case with 
ὡς ἀποθν. κ. ἰδοὺ ζῶμεν and all following, 
is of course clear. But is it so with the 
two clauses preceding that one? Do they 
mean, ‘as deceivers, and yet true, as un- 
known, and yet well known,’ or,—‘ as de- 
ceivers. and as true men, as unknown, and 
as well known ?? Lown I am not clear on 
this point. The words καὶ ἰδοὺ ζῶμεν 


670 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


VI. 


ἃ ’ ΄ , \ A 
Ὁ Acts xxiii. 28 EVOL Kal " ἐπιγινωσκόμενοι, ὡς ἀποθνήσκοντες καὶ ἰδοὺ 


reff. 

t Luke xxiii. 
16,22. Heb. 
xii. 7, 10. 

2 Chron. x. 
ll. Prov. 
xix. 18. 

u Rom. vii. 4 
16 

ν ch. ii. 2 reff. 

w 1 Cor. i. 5. 
ch. ix. ll only. Gen. xiv. 23 al. 

i z pres., 1 Cor. xvi. 9. 


9. αποθνησκομυντεενοι(510) F. 


may be an indication how the Apostle would 
have the previous two clauses understood ; 
but they also may be a transition, altering 
the previous reference of the second mem- 
ber of the clause, now that the subject is no 
longer matter of rumour, as πλάνοι and 
ἀγνοούμενοι, but matter of fact, as ἀπο- 
θνήσκοντες, and the following. If the 
latter alternative be taken, the two clauses 
will serve as a transition to the subsequent 
ones, thus: having said, διὰ duspyulas κ. 
εὐφημίας, he proceeds ὡς πλάνοι (answer- 
ing to Susp.) καὶ ἀληθεῖς (answering to 
evd.),—@s ἀγνοούμενοι (still having dus. 
in view,—as ‘unknown,’ of obscure reputa- 
tion), καὶ ἐπιγινωσκόμενοι (still looking 
back at εὐφ., seeing that the ἐπίγνωσις 
would lead to good repute): then, having 
by the participles of the latter clause ex- 
pressed more a matter of fact than did the 
adjectives of the former one, he passes to 
ὡς ἀποθνήσκοντες, which has no longer its 
main reference to the repute of others, but 
to the fact, see ch. iv. 7 ff.,as exhibited in 
himself. “1 confess that on the whole this 
rendering recommends itself to my mind. 
9.] καὶ ἰδοὺ ζῶμεν is much stronger, 
more triumphant, than καὶ ζῶντες. There 
is something still of the idea of one reputed 
dead and found to be alive ; though I would 
not say with Meyer that ὡς ἀποθν. alto- 
gether refers to a supposd triumph of his 
adversaries, “ Now it is all over with him! 
His course is ended!” ὡς παιδ.] 
Surely we must now drop altogether the 
putative meaning of the ὧς. The sense has 
been (see above) some time verging that 
way, and in the clauses which follow, the 
ὡς expresses just what it does in ὡς θεοῦ 
διάκονοι, viz. ‘ quippe qui simus.’ Ps. 
exvii. 18, LX X, seems to have been in his 
mind: παιδεύων ἐπαίδευσέ με ὁ (om ὁ &) κύ- 
ριος, καὶ τῷ θανάτῳ οὐ παρέδωκέμε. .. 
10.] Here even more clearly than before, 
the first member of the clause ὡς Aum. ἀεὶ 
δὲ yalp. cannot express the opinion of his 
adversaries. For however παιδευόμενος 
might be wrested to signify ‘a man under 
the chastisement of God’ as a ground of 


x = 1 Cor. vii. 30. Josh. i. 11. 


for i5ou, ert F. 
μενοι D! F{-gr | (temptati D-lat G-lat [eth] Ambrst). 
11. ins w bef κορινθιοι F vulg [copt Orig-int,(om Orig,) ]. 


ζῶμεν, ws tmadevopevot, καὶ μὴ " θανατούμενοι, 1 ὦ 

μεν, μενοι, μὴ μενοι, 10 ὡς 
’ ‘ 

ἡ λυπούμενοι ἀεὶ δὲ χαίροντες, ὡς πτωχοὶ πολλοὺς δὲ 

W σλουτίζοντες, ὡς μηδὲν ἔχοντες καὶ πάντα * κατέχοντες. 

11 Τὸ ἡ στόμα ἡμῶν 55 ἀνέωγεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, Κορίνθιοι 

ra μ Pd 4 


y see Eph. vi. 19. Sir. 


for παιδευομενοι, πειραζο- 


for 2nd ἡμων, υμων BR. 


reproach, λυπούμενος will surely not bear 
the meaning‘ folcher der nach gewodbhnlicher 
πιο ον Anficht trauvig feyn mufte,’ 
‘one in such a situation, that according to 
ordinary human estimation he must be 
wretched,’ as De Wette,—but must point 
to the matter of fact, that he is really 
‘afflicted. See reff. πτωχοί again 
can hardly have been a reproach, but sets 
forth the fact—as poor men, but enrich- 
ing (not by distribution of alins, as Chrys., 
Theodoret, Estius, but by imparting spiri- 
tual riches, see 1 Cor. i. 5) many :—as 
having nothing (in the sense in which of 
ἔχοντες are ws μὴ ἔχοντες, 1 Cor. vii. 29, 
—in the improper seuse of ‘ to possess’ in 
which we here use the word—thus, we have 
nothing, are destitute), but possessing 
(finally and as our own, our inheritance 
never to be taken away; in that sense of 
the word ‘to possess’ which this world’s 
buyers are not to use—oi ἀγοράζοντες, ὡς 
μὴ κατέχοντες, 1 Cor. vii. 30) all things. 
See a similar ‘ possession of all things,’ 
1 Cor. iii. 22: though this reaches further 
than even that,—to the boundless riches of 
the heavenly inheritance. 

11—VII. 1.] Earnest EXHORTATIONS 
TO SEPARATION FROM UNBELIEF AND IM- 
PURITY. 11—13.} These verses form 
a conclusion to the preceding outpouring 
of his heart with regard to his apostolie 
ministry, and at the same time a transition 
to the exhortations which are to follow. 

11.] Our (my) mouth is open (not 
past: the use of avémya for ἀνέῳγμαι 
is common in later Greek: see Palm and 
Rost’s Lex., and ref.1 Cor. Riickert takes 
it as past, and renders, ‘ I have begun to 
speak with you, I have not concealed my 
apostolic sentiments—I cannot shut my 


BCDFK 
LPN ab 
edefg 
hkimn 
ο 17. 47 


mouth, but must goon speaking to you yet 


further.’ The word seems to refer to the 
free and open spirit shewn in the whole 
previous passage on the ministry, in which 
he had so liberally imparted his inner feel- 
ings to them) towards you, Corinthians 
(καὶ 7 προςθήκη δὲ τοῦ ὀνόματος φιλίας πολ- 
λῆς, καὶ διαθέσεως καὶ θερμότητος" καὶ γὰρ 


10---14, 
ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν * πεπλάτυνται' 
ἡμῖν, 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ Β. 


ζ > 
12 οὐ 


b a θε δὲ ’ a c λά id ace 
OTEVOXWPELT δ΄͵, ΟΕ -€V ΤΟΙ OTT ayxXvoals υμῶὼν 


671 


, 
El) a here bis, 
Matt. xxiii, 5 
only. Psa. 
exviii. 32. 

1 Kings ii. 1. 


b στενοχωρεῖσθε 


15 τὴν δὲ αὐτὴν ἃ ἀντιμισθίαν (© ὡς τέκνοις λέγω) ὃ πλα- vhee be eh. 


΄ δι ue an 
τύνθητε Kal ὑμεῖς. 
20. xlix. 19 only. 
i. 27 only +. e Acts xvii. 22. 
iii. 2. Mic. ii. 1. see Acts ii. 5 reff, 
h = 1 Cor. vi. 6 reff, 


12. om δε Cal. 


14. ins kat bef μη F(and F-lat G-lat) D-lat Syr eth arm [Ambr,] Ambrst. 


14 Μὴ ‘yiveoOe 8 ἑτεροζυγοῦντες © ἀπί- 


6 = ch. vii. 15. 


iv. 8 only. 


Josh. xvii. 15, 
Isa. xxviii. 
Phil. i. 8. Philem. 20. Prov. xii. 10. d Rom. 
1 Cor, x. 15. f w. particip. = Heb. v.12. Rev. 


g here only+. (-γος, Lev. xix. 19.) see 1 Cor. xiv. 21. 


13. vuas F. 
for 


απιστοις, μετα αἀπιστων F latt [Cypr Lucif Ambr Ambrst Aug]. 


εἰώθαμεν TOY ἀγαπωμένων συνεχῶς γυμνὰ 
τὰ ὀνόματα περιστρέφειν, Chrys. Hom. xiii. 
p. 530 f. See Phil. ἵν. 15; Gal. iii. 1, which 
last is written under a very different feel- 
ing),—our (my) heart has become en- 
larged. These last words are very vari- 
ously explained. Chrys., Theodoret, Cc., 
a]., understand them of the expansive effect 
of love on the heart: Luther, Estius, al., 
of dilatio gaudii, which does not how- 
ever agree with πλατύνθητε καὶ ὑμεῖς be- 
low : nor with the general context, either 
of what precedes or of what follows: for to 
refer it to ch. vii. 4, as Estius, is evidently 
far-fetched, the intermediate matter being 
of such a different character. Alii aliter. 
Meyer holds with Chrys., and refers it to 
the preceding passage, during which his 
heart became expanded in love to them. 
De Wette takes it, “1 have poured out, en- 
laurged and diffused, my heart to you,’ viz. 
by speaking thus open-hearted to you. 
1 believe the precise sense will only be 
found by taking into account the πλατύνθ. 
x. ὑμεῖς below, and the occurrence of the 
expression in the Psalm (reff.: cf. ἐν 
πλατυσμῷ, ib., ver. 45). Some light is 
also thrown upon it by χωρήσατε ἡμᾶς, 
ch. vii. 2. The heart is considered as a 
space, wherein its thoughts and feelings 
are contained. We have seen the same 
figure in our expressior ‘ narrow-minded.’ 
In order to take in a new object of love, 
or of desire, or of ambition, the heart 
must be enlarged: ὅδὸν ἐντολῶν σου 
ἔδραμον, ὅταν ἐπλάτυνας Thy καρδίαν μου. 
The Apostle has had his heart enlarged 
towards the Corinthians: he could and 
did take them in, with their infirmities, 
their interests, their Christian graces, 


their defects and sins: but they did not. 


and could not take him in (χωρῆσαι αὐ- 
τόν) : he was misunderstood by them, and 
his relation to them disregarded. This he 
here asserts, and deprecates. He assures 
them of their place in his heart, which is 
wide enough for, and does contain them ; 
and refers back to this verse in ch. vii. 3, 
thus, προείρηκα ὅτι ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν 
tote .... He tells them, ver. 12.] that 
they are not straitened in him, i.e. that 


any constraint which they may feel towards 
him, any want of confidence in him and 
persuasion of his real appreciation of their 
state and interests, arose, not from Ais being 
really unable to appreciate them, and love 
them, and advise them,—but from their 
own confined view of him, of his love, his 
knowledge of and feeling for them. 
13.] τὴν αὐτὴν ἀντιμ., as τὸν ὅμοιον τρό- 
πον, Jude 7, κλισίας, Luke ix. 14. not 
governed by κατά understood, but in fact 
an accus. of a remoter object, answering in 
many cases exactly to the further removed 
of the two accusatives in the double ac- 
cusative government. The sense seems 
to be compounded of τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον, 
and ἀντιμισθίαν, In the same manner, as 
a return for my largeness of heart to you. 
ὡς τέκνοις A. explains ἀντιμισθίαν, --- 
it being naturally expected of children that 
they should requite the love and care of 
their parents, by corresponding love and 
regard. 14—VII. 1.] Separate your- 
selves from unbelief and impurity. On 
the nature of the connexion, Stanley has 
some good remarks. He now applies to 
circumstances which had arisen among the 
Corinthians the exhortation which in ver. 
1 he described himself as giving in pur- 
suance of his ministry of reconciliation. 
The following exhortations are general, and 
hardly to be pressed as applying only to 
partaking of meats offered to idols, as 
Calv., al., or to marriage with unbelievers, 
as Estius,—but regard all possible con- 
nexion and participation,—all leanings 
towards a return to heathenism which 
might be bred by too great familiarity with 
heathens. Become not (‘ne fiatis, molli- 
ter pro: ne sitzs,’ Bengel : rather, perhaps, 
as expressing, ‘do not enter into those re- 
lations in which you must become’) incon- 
gruous yokefellows (the word and idea 
from ref. Levit. Hesych.: érepd(uyor of 
μὴ συζυγοῦντες. τοῦ. explains it, ‘ alte- 
ram partem jugi trahere,’ but this does 
not give the force of €repo- :—Theophyl., 
μὴ ἀδικεῖτε τὸ δίκαιον ἐπικλινόμενοι κ. 
προςκλινόμενοι οἷς οὐ θέμις : so making the 
simile that of an unequal balance: but this 
could hardly be without more precise uoti- 


. 


ν 


672 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOT® B. VI. 15—18. 


k 


i here only. 
Ps. cxxi. 3N 
Ed-vat. Ε ἄς. 
‘not A. Bdef. 
only. (-xos, 
Heb. i. 9.) 

k Rom. iv. 7 
reff. 

δι Cori. 9. x. 
16. -Galfi. 9 
al. Lev. vi. 2. 

m here only +. 
(-vos, 1 Cor. 
vii. 5.) ΟῚ τ i? \ > Aw. , 

nhere only. αὐτῶν θεός, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἔσονται μοι λαὸς. 
see note. 

Φ 3 Kings xii. 16. 

Exod. xxiii. 1. 


; \ ΄ Ν 
otros’ τίς yap ἱ μετοχὴ δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ 
] / \ Ν , 15 7 δὲ m , 
κοινωνία φωτὶ πρὸς σκότος ; 1ὅ τίς δὲ ™ συμφώνησις 

ral \ n / X oO / op \ q a \ re / 
χριστοῦ πρὸς " βελίαρ, ἢ ° τίς “Ὁ μερὶς 4 πιστῷ μετὰ © ἀπί- 
στου; ris δὲ ᾿ συγκατάθεσις " ναῷ " θεοῦ μετὰ " εἰδώλων; 
e a \ 5 x 8 ΟΝ t a θὰ - € θ \ 
ὑμεῖς γὰρ "ναὸς " θεοῦ ἐστε " ζῶντος, καθὼς εἶπεν ὁ θεὸς 
ὅτι ἃ ἐνοικήσω ἐν αὐτοῖς καὶ ‘ ἐμπεριπατήσω, καὶ ἔσομαι 
17 διὸ ἡ ἐξέλθατε 


rhere only τ. (-τίθεσθαι, 

1 Cor. x. 19 

Col. iii. 16. 2 ‘Tim. i. 5, 14 only. (notl.c.) Lev. xxvi. 
w Acts xvii, 33. Isa. lii. 11 (free). 


p Acts viii. 21 reff. q Acts x. 45 reff. 
Luke xxiii. 51.) s = 1 Cor. iii. 16. vi. 19. Jer. vii. 4. 
reff. Acts xiv. 15 and note. u Rom. viii. 11. 
32 al. vy here only. Levir. xxvi. 12. 


δικαιοσυνης Kat αδικιας Ὁ], also (but -v7 κ. -1a) D3: δικαιοσυνης μετα (και Orig, [Tert, 
Cypr, ]) avouias F latt arm Orig,(and int,) [Lucif Ambrst Augatic ]. rec (for ἡ Tis) 
τις δε, with K rel syr eth Chr, Thdrt Cosm, Thl (c Tert, : txt BCDFLPN ἃ m 17 
latt Syr syr-mg copt goth arm Clem, Orig,(and int,) [Ephr, Bas, Euthal-ms] Damasc, 
Cypr Lucif Ambrst Jer. φωτος (addg 7) D!{and lat] Cypr Lucif, Hil. 

15. rec χριστω (prob corrn for conformn to φωτι preceding), with D-gr F-gr KI 
rel [G-lat syrr goth] Clem-ed, Orig,(and int,) Can-apost-ed [Chr, Nys, Bas, Euthal-ms 
Thdrt Damase,| Tert,: txt BCP 17 vulg(and F-lat) D-lat copt Clem,(-ms,) Orig, 
Can-apost-mss, Damasc{p1. Ephr, Procop, Lucif, Ambrst Augatic }. elz βελιαλ, 
with vulg [F-lat] G-lat Clem,{-ed] Tit-ed, Orig-int, Tert, Lucif,: βέλιαν D-gr Καὶ 
m 47 syr-mg-gr goth(Bel/iam) many-mentioned-by-Jer(“ corrupte’’) Thdrt,: βελιαβ 
F{-gr] D-lat: txt BCLPX rel fuld(and harl!) syr copt zth arm Orthod, Clem,[-ms, ? ] 


Orig, Nys, [Cyr-p,] Bas, Ephr, Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt, Damase. 


8-pe copt. 


πιστου Β 17 


16. ἡμεῖς and ἐσμεν BD!LPN? 17 D-lat copt [eth] (Clem,) Did, Aug, : txt C D°[-gr] 
FK(°) rel vulg syrr goth arm Ath, Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase Orig-int, Lucif, 


Tert, 


F(and G-lat) P Orig,. 


{ Ambrst ].—vaot δὲ! Clem,.—earte bef θεου δὲβ 
Di(and lat) ΕἸ ποῦ F-lat], décit enim G-lat goth Tert, Aug). 


for καθως e:mev, λέγει yap 
for αὐτων, avtos 


for μοι, μου ΒΟΡΝ m 17 arm [Clem, Orig, | Ens, Damasc : 


txt DFKL rel [latt syrr copt goth] Orig,[-ms,-int, Eus,] Ath, Cyr-jer, Thdrt [Tert 


Lucif}. 


wT. (εξελθατε, so BCFR 17. 47 [Euthal-ms] Damasce.) 


fication) with unbelievers (Winer explains 
the construction, edn. 6, § 31. 10, Remark 
4, thus, μὴ γίν. ἑτεροζυγοῦντες, kal οὕτως 
ὁμοζυγοῦντες ἀπίστοις : better, as De W., 
μὴ γίν. duo. ἀπίστοις x. οὕτως ἑτεροζυ- 
γοῦντεΞ5). μετοχή) ‘share in the 
same thing,’ community. δικαιοσ. 
is the state of the Christian, being 1 π501Π04 
by faith: he is therefore excluded from 
ἀνομία, the proper fruit of faith being 
obedience. φωτί, of which we are the 
children, 1 Thess. v. 5, and not of dark- 
ness. Meyer remarks, that the fivefold 
variation of the term to express partner- 
ship,—perox7h, κοινωνία, cunpeorvnors, μερίς, 
συγκατάθεσις, shews the Apostle’s com- 
mand of the Greek language. The con- 
struction of κοινωνία with a dat. and πρός, 
is illustrated by Wetst. from Stobzeus, S, 
28, εἰ δέ τις ἔστι κοινωνία πρὸς θεοὺς ἡμῖν, 
—and Philo, leg. ad Caium, ὃ 14, vol. ii. 
p- 561, τίς οὖν κοινωνία πρὸς ᾿Απόλλωνα, 
τῷ μηδὲν οἰκεῖον ἢ συγγενὲς ἐπιτετηδευ- 
κότι; 16.1 After a question begin- 
ning with πῶς, τίς, and the like, a second 
question is regularly introduced by δέ. 


Thus Hom. Od. a. 225, ris dats, ris δὲ 
ὅμιλος, ὅδ᾽ ἔπλετο; see Hartung, Parti- 
kellehre, i. 169. Bediap] Heb. ἡ», 
“contemptibleness, ‘wickedness: found 
1 Sam. ii. 12 al., and variously translated 
by the LXX. Theod. has retained the 


> Ral / 
ἀνομίᾳ, ἢ τίς BCDFK 


LPN δῦ 
cdetg 
hklmn 
017.47 


original form in Judg. xix. 22. It appears _ 


to have been subsequently personified, and 
used, as here, for a name of the Evil One 
(see Stanley). The termination -ap is 
stated by Meyer to have arisen from the 
frequent permutation of A and p in the dia- 
lect of the Grecian Jews. 16.] ovy- 
κατάθ., ‘agreement in opinions ;’ see reft., 
and ef. Plato, Gorg. § 122, σὺ δὲ δὴ πότε- 
pov συγκατατίθεσαι ἡμῖν περὶ τούτων τὴν 
αὐτὴν δόξαν ἢ ἀντιφῇς:; ναῷ θεοῦ, 
between you, the Church of God,—see 
below, and 1 Cor. iii. 16 ;-εἰδώλων, idols, 
as the lords and ἐπώνυμοι of the heathen 
world. ὑμεῖς γάρ] explanation of vag 
θεοῦ as applying to them, and justification 
of it by a citation from the prophetic 
Scriptures. The words cited are com- 
pounded of Levit. xxvi. 12, and Ezek. 
XxXvii, 26, 27, 17.] The necessity of 


Vil. J, 2. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


675 


w2 f 3: Διὶ Δ oy , a) / , \ ᾿ 
ἐκ μέσου αὑτῶν καὶ * ἀφορισθὴητε, λέγει κύριος, καὶ x Acts xix. 9 
? ρ ᾽ reff. 
Υ θά Ny δέ εν θ ὶ Sty ἈΞ δέ (ΜΗ Le 18 \ y = Acts x. 14 
akxaVaptou μὴ ἀπτεσῦε' Kayw * εἰφόέξομαι vas. Καὺ " veff. 1 


BY yy id “ a ’ , \ e lal a x” 0 / 8 > CA 
ETOMAL υμιν “ ELS TTATEPA, και UMELS “ EDEDVE μου “ ELS υιοὺυς 


Kat θυγατέρας λέγει κύριος ὃ 


τας οὖν ἔχοντες τὰς ° ἐπαγγελίας, ἃ ἀγαπητοί, “ καθαρί- 
σωμεν f ἑαυτοὺς ἀπὸ παντὸς μολυσμοῦ " σαρκὸς καὶ 
ματος, ' ἐπιτελοῦντες J ἁγιωσύνην ἐν * φόβῳ * θεοῦ. 

21 Χωρήσατε ἡμᾶς" οὐδένα ἠδικήσαμεν, οὐδένα ™epOei- 4. 


c Acts i. 4 reff. 
e Acts xv. 9 reff. 


ich. viii. 6 reff 


= Matt. xix. 11,12. (Gen. xiii. 6.) 


παντοκράτωρ. VII. 1 ταύ- 


f Ist pers., ch. iii. 1 reff. 
viii. 83 (80). 2 Mace. v. 27 only. (-ὕνειν, 1 Cor. viii. 7.) 
j Rom. i. 4 (reff.). 1 Thess. iii. 13 only. 
m 1 Cor. iii. 17 reff. 


acs 

z here only. 
EZzEK. xx. 

34. Zeph. 
iii. 20. 

a Matt. xix. 5 
\|. Luke iii. 5, 
(Rev. xxi. 7.) 

, 2 KINGS vii. 

Wvev- 14. Jer. 

xxXxviii. 
(xxx1.) 33. 
b here only, 


h 


exc. Rev.i. 8 
2 KINGS 
vii, 8. 
ἃ Rom. xii. 19. ch. xii. 19, Phil. iv. 1. 1 Pet. ii. 11. 1 John ii.7 al. 
ghere only. Jer. xxiii. 15. Esdr, 


h so Matt. xxvi. 41 || Mk. 
k Rom. iii. 18 (reff.). 


Cuap. VII. 2. υμας F[-gr](not G) [add fratres met Syr]. 


separation from the heathen enforced by 
another citation,—Isa. li. 11,—freely 
given from memory; κἀγὼ eisdét. tu. 
being moreover substituted, from Ezek. 
xx. 34, for προπορεύσεται γὰρ πρότερος 
ὑμῶν κύριος, x. ὃ ἐπισυνάγων ὑμᾶς θεὸς 
Ἰσραήλ. The ἀκάθαρτον must be under- 
stood of the pollutions of heathenism 
generally, not of any one especial polluted 
thing, as meat offered to idols. 18. | 
The citation continues, setting forth the 
blessings promised to those who do thus 
come out from heathendom. Various 
passages of the O. T. are combined. In 
2 Kings vii. 14 (LXX), we have ἐγὼ 
ἔσομαι αὐτῷ εἰς πατ., K. αὐτὸς ἔσται μοι 
εἰς vidv'—the expression οἱ υἱοί μου and ai 
θυγατέρες μου is found Isa. xliii. 6: and 
τάδε λέγει κύριος παντοκράτωρ begins the 
section from which the former clauses are 
taken, 2 Kings vii. 8 (LXX). VIET] 
Inference from the foregoing citations : 
—seeing that we have such glorious 
(ταύτας in the position of emphasis) pro- 
mises, we are to purify ourselves (not 
merely, ‘keep ourselves pure: purifica- 
tion belongs to sanctification, and is a 
gradual work, even after conversion). 
σαρκός, as the actual instrument and sug- 
gester of pollution: πνεύματος, as the re- 
cipient through the flesh, and when the 
recipient, the retainer and propagator, of 
uncleanness, ‘The exhortation is general : 
against impure acts and impure thoughts. 

ἐπιτελ. ἅγιωσ., as De ὟΝ. remarks, 
gives the positive side of the foregoing 
negative exhortation: every abnegation 
and banishing of impurity is a positive 
advance of that sanctification, in the fear 
of God (as its element) to which we are 
called. 

2—16.] CoNCERNING THE EFFECT ON 
THEM, AND RESULTS IN THEIR CONDUCT, 
WHICH HIS FORMER EPISTLE HAD PRO- 
DUCED. 2—4.]| He introduces the 
subject by a friendly assurance of his love 


Vou. II. 


and bespeaking of theirs, as before in ch. 
vi. 11—13. 2.) χωρήσ., see above on 
ch. vi. 13; δέξασθε ἡμᾶς πλατέως, κ. μὴ 
στενοχωρώμεθα ἐν ὑμῖν. Theophyl. De 
Wette, after Bengel, al., renders it, ‘under- 
stand us rightly,’ referring to ret. Matt. : 
but even there the meaning is ‘ to take in,’ 
and only ‘to understand rightly,’ because 
τὸν λόγον τοῦτον follows. And as Meyer 
observes, there could not well be any mis- 
understanding as to what he here says. 

οὐδένα ἠδ.. κ 7.A.| Reasons why they 
should make room for him in their hearts : 
We (when he dwelt among them,—the 
aorists refer to a set time, not to his course 
hitherto) wronged no man (in outward 
acts, namely,—in the exercise of his apos- 
tolie authority, or the like)—we ruined 
no man (this probably also of outward con- 
duct towards others, not as Calv., al., of 
corrupting by false doctrine),—we cheated 
no man. To understand, with Riickert, 
these verbs as applying to the contents of 
the former Epistle, is very forced. If ἤδικ. 
had really referred to the severe punish- 
ment of the incestuous person,—eOeip. to 
the delivering him over to Satan,—and 
émAcov. to the power which Paul gained 
over them by this act of authority,—surely 
we should have found more express indica- 
tion of such reference in the text. But 
no allusion has as yet been made to the 
former Epistle; and therefore it is much 
better to understand the words generally 
of the time when he resided among them. 
“In how many ways of which history 
says nothing, may such ruining of others 
have been laid to the charge of Paul? 
How easily might his severe visitation 
of sin, his zeal for eleemosynary collec- 
tions, his habit of lodging with mem- 
bers of the churches, and the like, have 
been thus unfavourably characterized !” 
Meyer: who remarks, that the emphatic 
position of οὐδένα thrice repeated is no 
confirmation of Rtickert’s view. 

X xX 


074 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B. 


VIL. 


ὺὃ , n ’ δ. / 3 ra) \ p 7 > 
nch. ii, 1 reff. ρᾶμεν, οὐδένα " ἐπλεονεκτήσαμεν. πρὸς ὃ κατάκρισιν οὐ 


o = 1 Cor. vil. 
35 reff. 


/ / \ ec » lal r Ρ̓ δί ε a ΕῚ 
λέγω" “ προείρηκα yap OTL ἐν Tals ᾿ KaPOLAls ἡμῶν ἐστε 


4 πολλή μοι δ᾽ παῤ- 


Ρ ch. 11,9. hy : δ: < i 
ai δὲ, ἣν 5 εἰς τὸ ᾿ συναποθανεῖν καὶ ἃ συνζῆν. 
i capl. \ a 7 7 ς \ ΄ Be 
{Montf. (not ῥησία προς ὑμᾶς, πολλὴ μοι * καύχησις ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν 
Fd.)i. 

q ch. xiii. 2 
reff. 


r Phil: i. 7. 
s Rom. iy. 11 
reff. 


tMark xiv. 31. ἡμῶν εἰς Μακεδονίαν οὐδεμίαν ° ἔσχηκεν 
-" ’ ΜᾺ , ᾽ / 
ἡμῶν, ἀλλ᾽ “ἐν παντὶ ᾿θλιβόμενοι: ὃν ἔξωθεν ἱ μάχαι, 


2 Tim. ii. 11 


only +. Sir. 
xix. 10 only. 
u Kom. vi. 8. 
2 Tim. ii. 11 only +. v = Rom. v. 1 reff. 
14. 1Cor. xv. 31. (Rom. iii. 27 reff.) 
z=ch.i. 3, ἄς. reff. 
ech. i. 9 reff. d Acts xxiv. 23 reff. 
ch. v. 6 reff. g Matt. xxiii, 25, 27, 28 al. 
ii. 23. Tit. iii.9. James iv. 1 only. = Gen. xiii. 7. 


a Rom. v. 200nly+. (-#s, Mark vii. 37.) 


a / 3 / A 

Υ πεπλήρωμαι τῇ “παρακλήσει, * ὑπερπερισσεύομαι τῇ 
»- τς “~ a \ XN > , 

χαρᾷ "ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ θλίψει ἡμῶν. ὃ καὶ γὰρ ἐλθόντων 


4 ἄνεσιν ἡ σὰρξ 


w ch. iii. 12 reff. x = ver. 

y constr., Luke ii. 40. Rom.i.29 only. 2 Mace. vii. 21. 
b = ch. iii. 14 reff, 
e ch. iv. 8 reff. f ch. i. 6 reff. part. constr., 
h see Deut. xxxii. 29. i2 Tim. 


3. rec ov bef προς κατακρισιν, with DFKL rel vss [Chr, Thdrt Damase Ambrst] : 


txt BCPX 17(appy, from the space after kataxp: . .) [Euthal-ms]. 
vuwy ἐξ, 


εστε (but marked for erasure) N?. 

4. aft προς vuas ins ἐστιν D}'(and lat). 
47. | 
πολλὴ D1[-gr]. 


ins ev bef τη xapa B(sic¢ in cod). 
for nuwr, υμων F[-gr](not 6) Καὶ Ὁ ὁ o. (so F[-gr] K ver 5.) 


aft oT: ins 
om ἐστε Β. 

[υπερπερισσευμαι (for -evoua) L de 

om 3rd τη F: aft πασὴ τη ins 


δ. for ἐσχῆκεν, εσχεν BFK: txt CDLPR rel Chr, [Euthal-ms} Thdrt, Damase,. 


aveow bef exx. CF ἃ [17 syrr] latt Thdrt, [Tert, Ambr, Ambrst]. 


μενος D!}| tributatio D-lat]. 


3.] I do not say it (ver. 2) for condemna- 
tion (with a condemnatory view, in a 
spirit of blame: there is no ὑμῶν ex- 
pressed, nor should it be supplied. He 
means, ‘I do not say ver. 2 in any but a 
loving spirit’): for (and this shews it) I 
have said before (viz. ch. vi. 11 f. see note 
there) that ye are in our hearts (this was 
implied in ἡ καρδίᾳ ἡμῶν πεπλάτυνται, Vi. 
11, In the qualifying words, εἰς τὸ συν. 
x.T.A., Paul, as Meyer says, is his own 
commentator), to die together and live 
together. This is ordinarily understood, 
‘so that I could die with you or live with 
you, —as Hor., ‘Tecum vivere amem, 
tecum obeam libens,’ Od. iii. 9. 24: which 
Meyer controverts, owing to ὑμεῖς being 
the subject of the sentence, and renders, 
‘in order to die and to live with us:’ 1. 6. 
‘if our lot is to die, in death,—and if our 
lot is to live, in life, never to be torn from 
our hearts.’ But to this I would reply, 
that though ὑμεῖς is the subject of ἐν ταῖς 
Kapd. nu. ἐστε, it is but an accidental and 
secondary subject as regards the whole sen- 
tence ; that they are present in Ais heart, 
is a sign, not of their state of mind, but of 
his: therefore the purpose, eis τό, must 
refer logically to him, the main subject, of 
whom only the purposes can come into 
consideration. 4.| παῤῥησία, as in 
reff., confidence, which leads to and justi- 
fies καύχησις : not here liberty of speech,’ 
as Chrys., al. καύχ., to others, in 
speaking of them. ἢ παρ., the 
consolation (which JI have received), viz. 
that furnished by the intelligence from you. 
Though this is anticipating what follows 


θλιβο- 


vv. 7, 9, I cannot but believe it to have 
been already before the Apostle’s mind, 
and to have been referred to by the articles 
before παρακλ. and yap. On the con- 
struction of πληρόω with an instrumental 
dative, see reff., and Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 31. 
7. Se Kurip. Here. Fur. 372, πεύκαισιν 
χέρας mAnpovyres,—and Bacche 18, μι- 
yaow Ἕλλησι βαρβάροις θ᾽ ὁμοῦ πλήρεις 
ἔχουσα καλλιπυργώτους πόλεις. 

ὕπερπ.] I am made exceedingly to 
abound, see Matt. xiii. 12. ‘The pres. in- 
dicates the abiding of the effect. τῇ 
χαρᾷ, with the joy; see above. ἐπὶ 
waco. τῇ OA. ἥμ., in (reff.) all our tribula- 
tion: refers to both preceding clauses. 
What θλῖψις he means, is explained in the 
next verse. πάσῃ here not of all tri- 
bulation, at all times, which the special 
reference of παρακλ. and χαρά forbids: 
but of various sorts of tribulation as speci- 
fied (ἐν παντί) below. 5—7.] The 
intelligence received from them through 
Titus, and its comforting effect on the 
Apostle’s mind. 5.] γάρ gives a 
reason for θλίψει above: καί connects 
with ch. ii. 12, 18, where he has spoken of 
the trouble which he had before leaving 
Troas. For also, after our coming to 
Macedonia, our flesh had no rest (there 
is a slight, but very slight, distinction from 
οὐκ ἔσχηκα ἄνεσιν τῷ πνεύματί pov, ch. 
ii. 12, Titus was now present, so that 
that source of inquietude was removed; 
but the outward ones of fightings gene- 
rating inward fears (but see below), yet 
remained. No further distinction must 
be drawn—for ἔσωθεν φόβοι evidently 


BCDFK 
LPrabk 
edefg 
hklmn 
017, 47 





3—8. 


8 ἔσωθεν φόβοι. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ Β. 


675 


φ', «Κ a 
6 ἀλλ᾽ ὁ "', παρακαλῶν τοὺς "" ταπεινοὺς κ = 2.i.4 


reff. 
Isa. xlix. 13. 


7 ς lal c μ᾽ > “A / / 
Κ παρεκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς ὁ θεὸς "ἐν τῇ ° παρουσίᾳ Titov: ie Ss. 


7 οὐ μόνον δὲ " ἐν τῇ 5 παρουσίᾳ αὐτοῦ, ἀλλὰ καὶ " ἐν τῇ 
παρακλήσει. ἣ " παρεκλήθη Ὁ ἐφ᾽ ὑμῖν, ἃ ἀναγγέλλων ἡμῖν 
\ lal , lal : / \ lal 
τὴν ὑμῶν τἐπιπόθησιν, τὸν ὑμῶν " ὀδυρμόν, TOY ὑμῶν 
ἰζῆλον ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ, ὥςτε με ἂν μᾶλλον * χαρῆναι. 

‘ow 3 ΄ e A 2 Χ ans) A > y , » 
καὶ “ ἐλύπησα ὑμᾶς ἐν * τῇ ἐπιστολῇ, οὐ " μεταμέλομαι, εἰ 
\ y , B / \ c 9 x > / > \ 
καὶ ἡ μετεμελόμην᾽ βλέπω γὰρ ὅτι ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐκείνη εἰ καὶ 


|. Judg. xxi. 15 Β Ald. 
ryer. ll only+. Ezek. xxiii. 11 Aq. (-etv, Rom.i.11. -τος, Phil. iv. 1.) 


p = 1 Cor. xiii.6. xvi. 17. 1 Thess. iii. 7. 


from Jer. xxxviii. (xxxi.} 15. 2 Macc. xi. 6 only. 
Acts xxv. 10 reff. v ver. 13. 
y here bis. 


6. om 2nd o C 4. 

7. nv παρεκληθην D!{ -gr |. 
om ὑπὲρ εμου 
14 lect-13. 

8. aft ἐπιστολὴ ins pov D!{and lat] F. 


for nu., ὑμας F[-gr](not 6). 
for eg, ev L. 
με aft μαλλον D Thdrt: aft χαρηναι F: om K τὴ 31-5-9. 109- 


Luke i. 52. 
Rom. x11. 16. 
ch. x. 1. 
James i. 9. 
iv.6 & 1 Pet. 
v. 5 (from 
Prov. 1ii. 34) 
er only. 
8 OTL εἰ n= ch. 1v. 8. 
o = 1 Cor: xr 
11. SPhil. ἃ 
26. ii. 12 al.t 
2 Macc. vin. 
12. xv. 21 ᾿ 
only. 
q Acts xiv. 27 xelf. 
s Matt. ii. 18 only, 
ucompir., 
x see 1 Cor. v. 9 reff. 


t = Rom. x. 2 reff. 
w ch. ii. 2 reff. 


Matt. xxi. 29,32. xxvii. 3. Heb. vii. 21 (from Ps. cix. 4) only. Prov. xxv. 8. see ver. 10. 


for ev, em: C Chr, Thl-marg. 
for nu., υμιν DIX? (01 9). 


for 2nd εἰ και, εἰ δε και B. om yap 


B D'(and lat) Ambrst-ms: videns quod vulg. (The varr arise from attempts to clear 
the constr, making εἰ δε καὶ μ. the beginning of a new sentence, and βλεπω, without 


yap, the apodosis,—or βλεπων κιτ.λ. a qualifying clause: see also notes.) 


shews that σάρξ must be taken in a wide 
sense); Without, fightings (the omission 
of ἦσαν renders the description more 
graphic), within, fears. Chrys., ew. 


μάχαι: παρὰ τῶν ἀπίστων ἔσωθ. φόβοι" 


διὰ τοὺς ἀσθενεῖς τῶν πιστῶν. Hom. xiv. 
p. 539. So Calv., Grot., Wetst., al., 


slightly varying in their assignment of 
each class. But it is better, as Paul speaks 
of ἢ capt ἡμῶν, to understand ἔξωθεν of 
the state of things without him [person- 
ally |], contentions with adversaries either 
within or without the church, and ἔσωθεν 
of that within [him personally |, fears, for 
ourselves, for others, or for you, how you 
might have received our letter. 
6.] τοὺς ταπεινούς, generally, those that 
are low: ἡμᾶς, as belonging to that class. 
It was [the] not finding Titus which 
had given him such uneasiness in Troas, ch. 
li. 12. ἐν, not ‘dy,’ but in, as the condi- 
tional element or vehicle of the consolation. 
So also [twice] in next verse. 7. ἀλλὰ 
kal... .] notonly. . .. but also with 
the comfort with which he was comforted 
concerning you: i. e. ‘we shared in the 
comfort which Titus felt in recording to 
us your desire,’ &c. see ver. 13. He re- 
joiced in announcing the news: we in 
hearing them. ‘There is no inaccuracy of 
construction, as De W. supposes. 
ἐπιπόθησιν, either longing to see me, or 
longing to fulfil my wishes. The former 
is the more simple. ὀδυρμόν,---ἐπὶ 
τῇ ἐπιτιμήσει μου τῇ ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ ἐπιστολῇ, 
as (Ecum. ζῆλον ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ) The 
art. is omitted after ζῆλον, as in τῶν 
ἀδελφῶν μου τῶν συγγενῶν κατὰ σάρκα, 
because the words ζῆλον ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ cohere 
in the sense, and form as it were but one, 


om 7 F. 


—see Col. i. 4 (iv. 13, v. r.): and Winer, 
edn. 6, § 20. 2. μᾶλλον, viz. ‘than 
before, at the mere coming of Titus.’ The 
emphasis is on μᾶλλον from its position. 
8—11.] He expresses his satisfac- 
tion at the effect produced on them, as 
superseding his former regret that he had 
grieved them. 8.1 For (reason of the 
χαρῆναι) though I even grieved you in 
(by means of) my epistle, I do not (now) 
repent (having written it), though I even 
did repent it (before the coming of Titus). 
Erasm., al., take εἰ καὶ μετεμ. for ‘ even 
supposing I repented it before, which was 
not the case: Calv., al. think ‘verbum 
poeenitendi improprie positum pro dolorem 
capere. The reason of these departures 
from grammatical construction and the 
meaning of words, is, for fear the Apostle 
should seem to have repented of that which 
he did under the inspiration of the Holy 
Spirit. But there is no difficulty even on 
the strictest view of inspiration, in con- 
ceiving that the Apostle may have after- 
wards regretted the severity which he was 
guided to use; we know that Jonah, being 
directed by inspiration to pronounce the 
doom of Nineveh, endeavoured to escape 
the unwelcome duty: and doubtless St. 
Paul, as a man, in the weakness of his affec- 
tion for the Corinthians, was tempted to 
wish that he had never written that which 
had given them pain. But the result 
shewed that God’s Spirit had ordered it 
well, that he should thus write: and this 
his repentance was repented of again. 
βλέπω yap κ.τ.λ.} For I see that that let- 
ter, though but for a time, did grieve you. 
This seems the only admissible rendering 
of the words. Chrys. sees in them the 


XS 2 


676 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


VII. 


Ζ Ν Ὁ Ww Av e val τ 9 fa) id » .“ 
z(=)Johny. ἦπρος Wpav ἐλυπησει ULAS νυν χαίρω, οὐχ OTL 
- 1 


35, Gal. il 


15 only. 
1 Thess. ii. 17 


866 


W ἐλυπήθητε, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι * ἐλυπήθητε * εἰς μετάνοιαν" © ἐλυπή- 


4 


a 
BCDFE 
LPR al 
cdefy 
kim: 


, fal “~ h 
aNatuiiit. θητε yap ὃ κατὰ θεόν, ἵνα ° ἐν © μηδενὶ ἃ ζημιωθῆτε ἐξ ἡμῶν. 017. 47 


Rom. x. 10 Ν \ - 
8]. 10 ἡ b 

b = Rom. viii. | yap κατα θεὸν 
27. see ch. 
xi. 17. 

ς ch. vi. 3 reff. * , 

d 1 Cor. iii. 15 κατεργάζεται. 


reff. 
e= Ma 


,ὔ e / ’ / 
λύπη μετανοίαν εἰς σωτήριαν 


f > / 8 ’ / «ς δὲ a“ / ΄ θ / 
ἀμεταμέλητον & ἐργάζεται, ἡ δὲ TOD κόσμου λύπη θάνατον 
ll ἐδοὺ γὰρ ' αὐτὸ i τοῦτο "τὸ ” κατὰ 


- Μαικτ 4 Θεὸν ἡ λυπηθῆναι [ὑμᾶς] πόσην " κατειργάσατο ὑμῖν 


£ Rom. xi. 29 
> only t. 


g = Rom. ii. 10 reff. 
15 reff. 


“k = Rom. viii. 26 reff. 


vuas bef ελυπησεν F. 
9. om νυν D'(and lat) Syr. 


h = Rom. iv. 15. v. 3. ch. iv. 17 al. 


i Acts xxiv. 


OM αλλ οτι ελυπηθητε N*(ins N-corr! 901} tol!, 


10. ree κατεργαζεται, with FKLN3 rel Orig, [Bas, Antch,] Thdrt Thl Ge: txt 
BCDPN' m Clem, (Orig,) Chr-mss [Cyr-p, Euthal-ms] Damasc. (om last clause 


(homeotel) K 17. 31. 108!-14-78.) 


11. om vuas (as unnecessary, υμιν occurring below: and to express, as above, the 
abstract and not the concrete) BC F[not F-lat] δὲ! 17 [Bas, Euthal-ms] Ambrst: ins 


DKL[P]83 rel Clem, Bas, Chr, Thdrt Damase ΤῺ] (ec. 


katnpy. BD k! m. 


ins ev bef υμιν CFP? ¢ ἃ 47 vulg [Syr] syr Bas,[-2-mss,] Chr Thdrt ΤῺ] [Ambrst]: 
om BDKLN' rel [arm (copt Euthal-ms)] Clem, Damase Cc, 


reason of ov μεταμέλομαι, and adds (Hom. 
xv. p. 543) τὸ μὲν yap λυπηρὸν βραχύ, τὸ 
δὲ ὠφέλιμον διηνεκές. It appears then 
that he would render εἰ καὶ πρὸς ὥραν, ‘if 
even for a season, = ‘scarcely for any 
time.” Rinek (lucubr. crit. p. 162) would 
begin a new sentence with εἰ καὶ μετεμε- 
Adunv, and parenthesizing βλέπω... .. 
ὑμᾶς, regard νῦν χαίρω, x.T.A. as the apo- 
dosis. But this is very unnatural, with 
so abrupt a beginning as ef καί. It would 
certainly have been εἰ δὲ καί: and the 
present, βλέπω, would give no reason for 
the past, μετεμελόμην, which had passed 
away. The best sense, as well as the most 
legitimate rendering, is to regard βλέπω 
. ὑμᾶς as the epexegesis of ἐλύπησα, as 
above. 9.1 νῦν, emphatic, as dis- 
tinguishing χαίρω from μετεμελόμην : now 
that I know not only of your grief, but of 
its being grief which worked repentance. 
κατὰ θεόν] as Εἰ. V., after a godly 

sort: ‘with reference to God, see ref. 
Rom. and note : ‘‘ secundum, hic significat 
sensum animi Deum spectantis et se- 
quentis,” Bengel. αὕτη yap 7 καλὴ λύπη, 
ὡς τό γε κατ᾽ ἄνθρωπον λυπεῖσθαι κακόν. 
(Ecum. Cf. κατὰ ἄνθρωπον, 1 Cor. xv. 82. 
ἵνα, κιτ.λ.7 in order that ye might 

in nothing be damaged by us: not ἐκ- 
βατικῶς, so that ye did not... ., as many 
Commentators :—the divine purpose of 
their grief is indicated; ‘ God so brouglit 
it about, in order that your grief occasioned 
by me might have, not an injurious, but 
a beneficial effect.’ 10.] How ‘grief 
according to God’ produces such an effect. 
For grief according to God works 
(brings about, promotes, see ref.) repent- 
ance unto salvation never to be regretted. 
ἀμεταμέλητον best belongs to 


σωτηρίαν, as Vulg., Theophyl., Aug., Est., 
Fritzsche, Meyer, De Wette; not to 
μετάνοιαν, as most Commentators :—not 
necessarily however from the position of the 
words, as Meyer and De Wette maintain: 
for what more common than for the predi- 
cate of a substantive (eis σωτηρίαν) to be 
paced between it and a qualifying adjec- 
tive P—but on account of the sense, and 
the fact that not ἀμετανόητον, but aueta- 
μέλητον is chosen, so that the play in E. V., 
‘repentance not to be repented of, does 
not seem to have been intended. De W. 
well explaius σωτηρία ἀμεταμέλητο---- 
‘salvation which none will ever regret’ 
having attained, however difficult it may 
have been to reach, however dearly it may 
have been bought. ἣ τ. κόσμου 
λύπη] τί δέ ἐστι, κατὰ κόσμον ; ἐὰν λυ- 
πηθῇς διὰ χρήματα, διὰ δόξαν, διὰ τὸν 
ἀπελθόντα. Chrys. ib, τοῦ Koop. is sub- 
jective; ‘the grief felt by the children of 
this world, θάνατον) Death eter- 
nal, as contrasted with σωτηρίαν : not 
‘deadly sickness, or ‘suicide,’ as Theo- 
phyl. (a part, πάντως μὲν τὸν ψυχικόν, 
πολλάκις δὲ καὶ τὸν σωματικόν), al. The 
grief which contemplates nothing but the 
blow given, and not the God who chastens, 
can produce nothing but more and more 
alienation from Him, and result in eternal 
banishment from His presence. So that 
épyal. is rather works, ‘contributes to, 
aud «atepyal., works out, ‘results in.’ 
11. The blessed effects of godly 
grief on themselves, as shewn by fact. 
αὐτὸ τοῦτο, this very thing, of 
which I have been speaking. σπου- 
δήν, earnestness, as contrasted with your 
former carelessness in the matter. 
ἀλλά} nay, not σπουδήν merely,—that is 





9g—13. 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 677 


™ ἀλλὰ 

\ 

™ ἀλλὰ 
Ὁ \ 

ἐσυνεστήσατε ἃ ἑαυτοὺς 


σπουδήν, τ ἀλλὰ " ἀπολογίαν, 
π ἀλλὰ φόβον, τ ἀλλὰ 
τ ἀλλὰ 1 ἐκδίκησιν. 


Ὁ “ Ν ᾿. 
αγανακτῆήσιν, 1 ἘΣ 
q ζῆλον 1 Ξ ΤΟΝ 111. 
᾽ 2. 


nm == Gori. 
(Acts xxv. 16 


f 
P ἐπιπόθησιν, 
8 | s \ 
ἐν ὃ παντὶ 


reff.) Wisd- 
Wit \ 3 w A Ww / 12 BLA ’ \ 3 10 ] 
ayvous €lvat “τῷ πραγματι. apa € Kat τυ ἘΣ ‘only ¥. 


5 ’ \ , ᾿ 
χ ἀδικήσαντος οὐδὲ ἕνεκεν τοῦ (re ΒΝ 
p ver. 7 only +- 
g =- ver..7. 
r Rom. xii. 19 


{ ater Ψ A 
ὑμῖν, οὐχ ἕνεκεν τοῦ 
* ἀδικηθέντος, ἀλλ᾽ ἕνεκεν τοῦ boast let τὴν ᾿σπου- 


A ς ~ A ς \ e ~ ‘ e A 
δὴν ὑμῶν THY ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν πρὸς ὑμᾶς 2 ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ. sche. ae 
« a ΄ ch. vi. 4 
13 διὰ τοῦτο ὃ παρακεκλήμεθα. ἐπὶ δὲ τῇ ὃ" παρακλήσει ἡ ref: 
usn .᾽ 
Matt. 11. 9. Rom. vi. 11, 13, 16. xii. 19. ch. xiii. 5. vch. xi. 2. Phil. iv. 8. 1 Thess. νυ. 02. Tits 


1 Pet. iii. 2. _1 John iii. ᾿ἐίϑοῖν, Prov. χχ. 9. (- νῶς, Phil. i.17. -νότης, ch. vi. 6.) 


x Eur. Med. y = ch. ii. 14. iii. 3, &c. constr., here only. 
ἘΞ sale reff. Ὁ ch. i. 3, ἄο. reff. 


ανακτησιν (so 17) and επιποθιαν XN’. (αλλα (last), so BD'FLPX abdf mo 17. 
47 {Clem, Bas, Thdrt ].) rec ins ev bef tw πραγματι, with D?-4{and lat] KLP rel 
[arm Bas,] Chr, Thdrt Ambrst : txt BC D![-gr] FX 17 vulg goth Clem, {Euthal-ms ] 
Damasc, Pel Bede. 

12. (evexev (866), so BCDFK L(2nd and [3rd]) PX a ἃ Εἰς 17.) [ D!-gr 
trausposes αδικησαντος and αδικηθεντος.] ins add’ bef ovde BR* m 73. elz 
μων τὴν ὑπερ ὑμων (see notes), with ἃ 47 vulg(and F-lat) goth arm-use Chr, Thdrt 
Ambrst: vu. τ. um. vu. D)[-gr] F-gr δὲ: nu. τ. um. nu. nostram que est pro nobis G 
[ D'-lat]: txt BCD? 3KLP rel D?-lat E-lat syrr copt eth [arm-zoh Euthal-ms] Damasc. 


ii. 5. James iii. 17. 
w see l Thess. iv. 6. 
z= Actsiv. 19 reff. Rom. xii. 17. 


saying too little;—but... ἀπολο- 
γίαν] viz. to Paul by means of Titus,— 
asserting their innocence in the matter; 
see below. ἀγανάκτησιν πρὸς τὸν 
πεπορνευκότα. Theophyl. φόβον] “πο 
eum virga venirem, Bengel: fear of 
Paul: not here of God. The context is 
brought out well by Chrys. and Theophy]l. 
The latter says, on ἐπιπόθησιν, .---πρὸς 
ἐμέ. εἰπὼν δὲ φόβον, ἵνα μὴ δόξῃ αὐθεντεῖν, 
συντόμως διωρθώσατο, ἐπυπόθησιν εἰπών" 
ὅπερ ἐνδεικτικὸν ἀγάπης, οὐκ ἐξουσίας. 
ζῆλον] on God’s behalf, to punish 
the offender ;---ἐκδίκησιν being the inflic- 
tion of justice itself. Bengel remarks, 
that the six accusatives preceded by ἀλλά 
fall into three pairs: ἀπολογ. and ἀγανάκτ., 
relating to their own feelings of shame,— 
φόβ. and ἐπιπόθ. to Paul,—Cr. and ἐκ- 
dix. to the offender. ἐν παντί must be 
understood only of participation of guilt : 
by their negligence, and even refusal to 
humble themselves (1 Cor. v. 2), they bad 
in some things made common cause with 
the offender. Of this, now that they had 
shewn so different a spirit, the Apostle 
does not speak. συνεστήσατε]) have 
commended yourselves by proving that 
ye are; a pregnant construction. τῷ 
ap., the dat. of regard: see Rom. vi. 20, 
and Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 31. 1. 4,—the matter, 
—perhaps, as in ref., not only, ‘ of which 
I have been speaking,’ —but with allusion 
to the kind of sin which was in question. 
ayvovs, pure of stain. 12.] He 
shews them that to bring out this zeal in 
them was the real motive of his writing to 
them, and no private considerations. 
ἄρα, accordingly,—‘in accordance with 


the result just mentioned.’ εἰ καὶ 
ἔγραψα tp. is parallel with εἰ καὶ ἐλύπησα 
ὑμᾶς, ver. 8,—though (i. 6. assumed that) 
I wrote (severely) to you. The ἀδικη- 
θείς would be the father of the incestuous 
person, who γυναῖκα τοῦ πατρὸς εἶχεν, 
1 Cor. v. 1 Theodoret imagines it to 
mean the stepmother, who was the adul- 
teress; and thinks that the father was 
dead. But there is no ground for this in 
1 Cor. v., and the masculine participle, 
though not decisive against it, is at least 
more naturally explained on the other 
view. Others (as Wolf, Bleek, al.) suppose 
Paul himself to be meant, which however 
would be in direct contradiction to ch. 11. 5: 
Bengel, al., the Corinthians, ‘singularis pro 
plurali, per euphemiam,’ which is forced : 

Theophyl., al., both the persons concerned 
(---ἀμφότεροι yap ἀλλήλους ἠδίκησαν) :— 
and Neander, al., take τοῦ ἀδικηθέντος 
as = τοῦ ἀδικήματος, ‘the fault com- 
mitted :'—which however would not be 
true, for the Apostle certainly did write on 
account of the committal of the fault. 

It would be easy for any of the Apostle’s 
adversaries to maintain that the reproof 
had been administered from private and 
interested motives. ἀλλ᾽ ἕνεκεν . . . | 
But he wrote, in order to bring out thet 


- zeal on his behalf (i.e. to obey his com- 


mand), and make it manifest to themsel: ves 
in God’s sight. The other reading, ἡμῶν 
τὴν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, has been an alteration 
owing to not understanding τ. σπουδ. vu. 
τ. tw. Hu., and is inconsistent with the 
fact: it was not to exhibit to them his 
zeal for them that he wrote, but to make 
manifest to (πρός ‘among, ‘chez’ them, 


678 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. VII. 14—16. 


cch.i 12 reff. ἡμῶν “ὃ περισσοτέρως ἃ μᾶλλον * ἐχάρημεν “ ἐπὶ TH χαρᾷ 
double com- 5 ᾿ 
par., Mark 


ΠΝ Ὁ 8 > / \ 8 fal > A h 
par, Mark | Lutou, oT’ ὅ ἀναπέπαυται To ὃ πνευμα αὐτου 


i. 23, 


ἀπὸ πάντων 
e lal ὲ 14. “ ” i > A i ΄ \ ΄ lal i , > 
avert. ὑμῶν ὅτι εἴ τι ‘avT@ ᾿ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἱ κεκαύχημαι, ov 
e 1 Cor. xiii. hs Η δ ate ᾽ ' 5 β β ᾿ 
off. kK 
ea eS κατῃσχύνθην, ἀλλ’ ὡς πάντα ἐν ἀληθείᾳ ἐλαλήσαμεν 


q “ ¢ \ ΄ ς A ὃ \ , ᾽ ΄ 
eee. ὑμῖν, οὕτως καὶ ἡ ' καύχησις * ὑμῶν ἡ αὶ ἐπὶ Τίτου ἀλήθεια 
18 reff. ᾽ 7 ~ 7 
h= λοις ἢ. 85. ἢ ἀγενήθη, 18 καὶ τὰ “σπλάγχνα αὐτοῦ “ περισσοτέρως 
ren. 
᾿ : 9 - \ / a 
iconstrch- it Pele ὑμᾶς ἐστιν ἃ ἀναμιμνησκομένου τὴν πάντων ὑμῶν 
k Rom. v. 5 rs 7 τ Ὁ Nat / δεν , 286 θ ea 
x33. x11 1 ὑπτακοήν, ὡς " μετὰ ‘ φόβου καὶ ‘ τρόμου ἐ ἐξἕξασθε αὐτον. 
al. 5. ylll. 
116 16 / Ὁ“ u οἰ ΠῚ Ν Vv SCL ’ ΄ A 
Pag χαίρω, ὅτι ἃ ἐν ἃ παντὶ " θαῤῥῶ ἐν ὑμῖν. 
m w. gen. = 


Acts xxiii. 30 reff. 
q 1 Cor. iv. 17 reff. 
t 1 Cor. ii. 3 reff. 


n = 1 Cor. i. 30. 
r Rom. i. 5 reff. 
u ch. iv. 8 reff. 


o = ch. vi. 12 reff. p = ch. viii. 13, 14 reff. 
s = Matt. xxviii. 8. Markiii.5. 1 Chron. xxix. 22. 
γ᾿ ch. v. 6,8 reff. 


13. rec places δὲ aft περισσοτερως (appy to conform to the exapnuev em below, by 
joining παρακεκλ. ert: then also the change of nu. into vu. became necessary), with rel 
eth (Ec: ome 32-6-9. 71 [arm Euthal-ms} Thdrt: txt BCDFKLPR ἃ 17 latt syrr 
copt goth Chr-comm,(and Mtt’s ms,) Damasc(has ἐπειδὴ for em δε) ΤῊ], [Ambrst]. 


rec vuwy, with F-gr KL rel syr-w-ast copt Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damasce ] 
Bede: txt BCDGKPR 17 latt syrr goth eth arm Ambrst Pel. 


14. αυὐτων &. 
αλλα C. 


κεκαυχημαι bef ὑπερ vuwy ΕἾ (not F-lat) Syr copt] Chr, ΤῊ]. 
παντοτε C F/-gr]syr copt Chr[-txt, ], omnia aut omnino G-lat. 


υμιν bef ev ad. edad. CDP vulg goth (eth) [Ambrst]: om vay X1(txt R-corr! bl), 
* rec ἡμῶν (see note), with DGKLPN rel latt syrr goth [arm Euthal-ms] Chr, Thdrt 


[Damasc] Ambrst: vuov B F-gr ὁ copt Thi. (Ὁ def.) 


[ Euthal-ms }. 
Damasce. 

15. om παντων XR}, 

16. elz aft xa:pw ins ovy, with m syr-mg 
copt [ Euthal-ms Thdrt Damase Ambrst]. 


to bring out among them, their zeal to 
regard and obey him. 13.] On this 
account (on account of the fulfilment of 
this purpose) we are comforted: but in 
addition to (or, on the occurrence of) our 
comfort, we rejoiced very much more 
(reff.) at the joy of Titus, because his 
spirit has been refreshed by you all. 
A similar declaration to that in ver. 7, 
where not only the arrival of Titus, but 
his comfort wherewith he was comforted 
by them, is described as the ground of the 
Apostle’sjoy. | According to the received 
reading, the sense is: ‘ Therefore we are 
consoled on account of your consolation 
(either gen. subj., ‘ that which you feel on 
account of the good issue of the affair,’— 
or gen. object., ‘the consolation received 
from you’): but we rejoiced very much 
more, &c. This however would hardly 
represent the real state of things. 

14.| This increased joy was produced by 
the verification which my former boasting 
of you to Titus now received. εἴ τι. .] 
see one particular in which he boasted of 
them, ch. ix. 2. ov Katyox.| I was 
not put to shame, viz. by being shewn, on 
Titus’s coming to you, to have boasted in 
vain. GAN ὡς... .1 ‘But truthfulness 
was shewn to be my constant rule of 
speech, to whomsoever I spoke.’ But as 


om last ἡ BX! 115-9! 


for emt τίτου [so syr-mg], προς τιτόν ad Titum DFP m [latt syrr] 


goth arm: om BCDFKLPN rel latt Syr 


we spoke (gezerally, not merely in our 
teaching, as Theodoret, al.) all things in 
truth(truthfully) to you, so also our boast- 
ing concerning you (gen. obj.: the rec. ἡμῶν 
agrees better with the comparison, of ‘ our 
words’ in general, with ‘ owr boasting’ in 
particular : but on that very account it is 
probably an alteration: and this is the im- 
plied meaning at all events) before Titus 
was (was proved to be: was, as shewn by 
proof) truth. De W. suggests that the 
Apostle had described (by anticipation) to 
Titus in glowing terms the affection and 
probable prompt obedience of the Corin- 
thians, as an encouragement to his some- 
what unwelcome journey. 15.] en- 
larges ἀλήθεια ἐγενήθη. And his heart 
is more abundantly (turned) toward you, 
remembering as he does the obedience 
of you all, how (i.e. which was shewn 
in the fact, that) with fear and trembling 
ye received him. ‘ear and trembling,’ 
i. e. ‘lest ye should not pay enough regard 
to my injunctions, and honour enough his 
mission from me.’ 16.] I rejoice 
(more expressive than with a connecting 
particle) that in every thing I am (re)- 
assured by you; ‘am of good courage, in 
contrast to my former dejection, owing to 
your good conduct.’ The ordinary ren- 
dering, ‘I can have confidence in you,’ 


BCDFK 
LPNab 
cdefg 
hklmn 
ο 17. 47 


VIII. 1—5. ΠΡΟΣ 
VIII. 1 ἡ Γνωρίζομεν δὲ 


ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ Β. 


679 


ς A » Γ A ,ὔ 
ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, τὴν * γάριν wiCor.xii.3 
μ ᾽ φ y 7) xX p be τ. xii 


a} mY. ἢ: 


A “ S / lal / nw = < 
τοῦ θεοῦ τὴν *Y δεδομένην ¥ ἐν ταῖς 5 ἐκκλησίαις τῆς Μακε- * 1 Cor. i. 4 


y ve r. 16 reff. 


“ a a / ς 
δονίας, 5 ὅτι ἐν πολλῇ 5 δοκιμῇ θλίψεως ἡ περισσεία ἴ ταν Rom. 


xvi. 16 reff. 


Py A a \ ς \ έ a 
τῆς χαρᾶς αὐτῶν Kal ἡ °Kata “ βάθους “ πτωχεία αὐτῶν 5 Romy. 4reff 


f > U f ᾽ \ g r, fol “ 
ἐπερίσσευσεν ‘eis τὸ ὅ πλοῦτος τῆς 
- a \ / 
ὃ ὅτι ixata δύναμιν * μαρτυρῶ καὶ |™ παρὰ ™ δύναμιν, 
A A , 
2 avOaipetot, 1. μετὰ πολλῆς παρακλήσεως 


e 


Ὁ Rom. v. 17. 
h ch.cxio; 
James i. 21 
only. Eccles. 
i. 3 al. 
c here only, 


, 5 
Seomevor Fyre, 
edn. 6, ἢ 51.2. 


΄ , 9 ~~ 
GATROTHTOS αὐτῶν, 


4 \ \ / an A 4 
ἡμῶν THY “χάριν καὶ THY " κοινωνίαν τῆς " διακονίας τῆς « Rom. αὶ. 33 


re 


Cit \ 5) , ὅτις, 
t εἰς τοὺς ἃ ἁγίους, © καὶ οὐ καθὼς ἠλπίσαμεν, GAN ἑαυτοὺς © "ε:.9. Rev. 


ii. 9 only. 
Job xxx. 27. 


A ~~ / \ [4 wn \ la σι 
ἔδωκαν πρῶτον τῷ κυρίῳ. καὶ ἡμῖν " διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ, τ Rom δ 


g neut., Eph. i. 7. ii. 7. iii. 8, 16. Phil. iv. 19. Col. i. 27. ἡ... 2. 
1 i k Rom. x. 2. 

Ps. exxxiv. 5. 
n ver. 17 only+. Exod. xxxv. 5 Sym. 
= Rom. xii. 8 reff. 


xxv. 15. 1 Chron. xxix. 2. 
2,4. Rom. xiv. 5. Heb. xi, 11. 
iii. 54. ὑπὲρ 6., ch. i.8. 
o = ch, vil. 15 reff, 
rch. vi. 14 reff. 
v Rom. xv. 32 reff. 


s Acts vi. 1 reff. 


Cuap. VIII. 2. βαθος (for -θου5) D! [(k)] o. 


rel: txt ΒΟΡΝῚ 17. 31. 


: h Rom. xii. 8 reff. i Matt. 
Gal. iv. 15. Col. iv. 13. 1 = Luke xiii. 
m here only. παρὰ δύν. μετέχειν, Thucyd. 
(-τως, 2 Mace. vi. 19.) 
q = Acts xxiv. 27. xxv. 3,9. Sir. xxx. 6. 

t = 1 Cor. xvi. 1 reff. u = Acts ix. 13 reff. 


rec Tov πλουτον, with DF KL? 


3. rec (for mapa) ὑπερ (see ch i. 8), with KLP rel Chr, Thdrt [ Damasc]: txt BCDFX 
17 { Euthal-ms ]|.—homeeotel in 47 δυν. to Suv. 


4. ins rns bef παρακ. Cappy). 


rec at end adds δεξασθαι ἡμας, with [b?] hk: 


aft kowwviay ins δεξασθαι c: om BCDFKLPX rel latt syrr copt [eth Chr, Euthal-ms 


Thdrt Damase Orig-int, Aug, ]. 
5. ηλπικαμεν B 80. 


is wrong in not giving the indic. θαῤῥῶ, 
and still more, in making θαῤῥεῖν ἐν mean 
‘to have confidence in,’ which is unexam- 
pled. Meyer, who remarks this, does not 
notice, that the strongest reason against it 
is not mere want of usage, but the psycho- 
logical meaning of θαῤῥεῖν, which is not 
like πεποιθέναι, descriptive of a relative, 
but of an absolute state of mind,—to be 
of good courage: and this admits only 
of qualification as to the ground of that 
good courage ; thus we have θαῤῥεῖν ὑπέρ, 
περί, ἐπί, in the sense of ‘rejoicing at,’ 
‘feeling confident concerning :’ but θαῤ- 
ῥεῖν ἐν for ‘ to trust in,’ as πεποιθέναι ἐν, 
would, I think, be inadmissible. Meyer 
quotes ἐν σοὶ πᾶσ᾽ ἔγωγε σώζομαι, Soph. 
Aj. 519, where, as here, ἐν gives the ground 
of the verb as zz the person spoken of. 
Cuap. VIII. 1—IX. 15.] Szconp part 
OF THE EPISTLE: CONCERNING THE COL- 
LECTION FOR THE SAINTS. 1—6.] He 
informs them of the readiness of the 
Macedonian churches to contribute for 
the poor saints (at Jerusalem), which led 
him also to beg of Titus to complete the 
collection at Corinth. See some interest- 
ing geographical and historical notices in 
Stanley’s introduction to this section, edn. 
2, pp. 479 f. 1.] δέ is transitional,— 
passing on to new matter: so 1 Cor. vii. 
1 ; viii. 1 al. fr. χάριν] For every good 
gift and frame of mind comes by divine 
grace, not by human excellency : and this 
occasion was most opportune for resting 


αλλα CD! 17: και 47. 


the liberality of the Macedonian churches 
on God’s grace, that he might not be ex- 
tolling them at the expense of the Corin- 
thians, but holding out an example of the 
effusion of that grace, which was common 
to the Corinthians also, if they sought and 
used it.. It is a mistake, with Orig., 
Erasm.,.al., to understand ἐμοί or ἡμῖν after 
δεδομένην “quemadmodum adfuerit mihi 
Deus. in ecclesiis:’ see the construction 
διδόναι ἐν, in reff.:—given among,—shed 
abroad in, the churches of Macedonia. 

2.] how that (depends on γνωρίζομεν) in 
much proof of tribulation (though they 
were put to the proof by much tribulation) 
(was) the abundance of their joy (i. e. 
their joy abounded), and their deep 
poverty (κατὰ βάθους“, lit. ‘down into the 
depth, as καθ᾽ ὅλου, ‘throughout the 
whole’) abounded to (‘abunde cessit in,’ as 
Meyer, &c. or rather perhaps, ‘ abounded,’ 
produced abundant fruit, ‘so as to bring 
about’... .) the riches (τὸ 7A. the riches 
which have actually become manifest by the 
result of the collection of their liberality 
(see ref. Rom. and note). 38—5.] Proof 
of this. There is no difficulty, and no 
ellipsis, in the construction. For aceord- 
ing to their power, I testify, and beyond 
their power, voluntarily, with much 
exhortation beseeching of us the grace 
and fellowship of the ministry to the 
saints (i.e. to allow them a share in that 
grace and fellowship), and not as we ex- 
pected (i.e. far beyond our expectation), 


680 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


VIII. 


«ς A 4 A 
w—ch.vii.s. ὁ Γ᾽ εἰς τὸ * παρακαλέσαι ἡμᾶς Τίτον, * ἵνα καθὼς." προενήρ- BcpFK 


Heb. xi. 3. 
x 1 Cor. i. 10 


ee \ 2 / > ¢ a \ A a ΄ 
ἕατο, OUTWS Kal ETLTENETH εἰς υμᾶς καὶ Τὴν Xap 


reff. 
᾽ . , ‘\ , 7 
7 τ ταύτην. Τὺ ἀλλ᾽ ὥςπερ " ἐν “ παντὶ ἃ περισσεύετε, πίστει 
Gal. ui. 3, r , \ ΄ - \ a 
Phi.i6. καὶ “ λόγῳ καὶ “ γνώσει καὶ ‘macy Samovdn καὶ τῇ ἐξ 
x Rom. xv. 28. oe ΡΞ , “ \ - t τὶ 7 
ἐμ. νη. ὑμῶν "έν ἡμῖν ἀγάπῃ, wa καὶ ἐν ταύτῃ TH ὃ χάριτι 
il. i, 6. ’, > 3. 5 \ ΄ 3 \ \ a 
Ikingstiaz, ἢ περισσεύητε. 8. ov κατ᾽ ‘émuTaynv λέγω, ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς 
a=1Cor.xvi. ¢ , a Oe pre AN e , ae ety kl ὗ 
2 γον. ἴ,. ἑτέρων ὃ σπουδῆς, καὶ * τὸ τῆς ὑμετέρας ἀγάπης "' γνήσιον 
- — 7 , ‘ \ 4 cal / γ΄ A 
τ Ati Ἦ δοκιμάζων 9 (γινώσκετε yap τὴν χώριν TOD κυρίου ἡμῶν 
6. x. 20. a A ¢ ? - ΄, ΄ ” 
xxviis. Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ, ὅτι dv ὑμᾶς " ἐπτώχευσεν πλούσιος ὦν, 
c ν. em, 
d Ξ Πστενν: 58. Col. ii.7. 1 ΤΏΘΕΒ, iv. 1. e 1 Cor. i. 5. f = Acts xx. 19 reff. 
z Rom. xii. 8, 11 reff. hsee 1 Johniv.9. (John xvii. 26?) i Rom. xvi. 26 reff. 
k neut.. 1 Cor. i. 25, &c. reff. 1 Phil. iv. 3. 1Tim.i.2. Tit.i.4only+. Sir. vii. 18 only. (-ws, 


m Rom. xiv. 22 reff. 
Tobit iv. 21. 


Phil. ii. 20.) 
8. Prov. xxiii. 21. 


6. for προεν., evnptato B: mponpé. 47. 
7. περισσευητε CP Chr-montf,. 


n here only. = Judges vi.6. Ps. xxxiii. 10. Ixxviii, 


ins ev bef πιστει N'(N3 disapproving). 


ef ἡμῶν ev υμιν Ba Ὁ m 81. 73-4. 80. 238 Syr (copt) arm Orig-int,: εξ uu. ev uu. no: 
εἴ uuwy eis nuas 17: txt CDFKLPR rel [latt syr goth eth Chr Euthal-ms Thdrt 


Aimbrst-mss Aug]. 


[with k!(?)]: txt BCDFKLPX rel. 
9. om xpicrov B Ambr,. 
15. 238 arm-mss Orig,(-int,) Eus,. 


but themselves they gave first (i.e. above 
ail: asthe inducing motive: not first in 
point of time, but in point of importance, 
see Rom. ii. 9, 10) to the Lord, and to us 
by the will of God (the Giver of grace, 
who made them willing to do this: not = 
κατὰ τὸ θέλ. τ. θ., which only expresses 
(whatever it may imply) consonance with 
the divine will: διὰ τοῦ θελ. τ. @ makes 
the divine will the agent). 6.] So 
that we besought Titus (not, Titus be- 
sought ws, see ver. 17), that (the aim, and 
purport as well, of our request), as he had 
previously (before the Macedonians began 
to contribute: ‘during his visit from which 
he had now returned’) begun it, so he 
would also complete among you (the con- 
struction is pregnant—éAé@y εἰς ὑμᾶς καὶ 
ἐπιτελέσῃ) this grace also (this act of 
grace or mercy, reff. kal,—as well as 
other things which he had to do among 
them, It does not belong to ταύτην, ‘this 
grace also, as well as other graces,’ but to 
τὴν χάριν ταύτην altogether). 7—15. | 
Exhortations and inducements to perform 
this act of charity. 7.] ἀλλά marks 
the transition to an exhortation, as in reff. 
It at the same time implies, as Herm. ad 
Viger. p. 812 (in Meyer), ‘satis argumen- 
torux allatum esse.’ πίστει, see ch. 
i. 24, λόγῳ κ. γνώσει, see ref. and 
for yv., 1 Cor. viii. 1. πάσῃ σπου- 
δῇ, because σπουδή may be manifold 
even in a good sense. Grot. well ex- 
plains it, ‘studium ad agendas res bo- 
nas.’ τῇ ἐξ tp. ἐν Hp. ay.] your 
love to us;—the love which, arising 


περισσευσητε DIF. 

8. δια τὴν er. σπουδὴν D: propter D-lat G-lat Ambrst Aug). 
δοκιμαζω D}[-gr] F[-gr] Chr-ms. 

quas CK ak]! mo 19. 41. 55. 65. 74. 89. 93. 109- 


elz ἡμετερας 


from you, has us for its object: see 
reff. According to the reading, ἐξ ἡμῶν 
ev ὕμ., the only meaning agreeing with 
the context is, ‘the love (to God and man) 
which, arising from our teaching, is 
planted in you.’ ἵνα καὶ «.7.A.] the 
sense is imperative,—rerAevw, or βούλομαι, 
—(or βλέπετε, see 1 Cor. xvi. 10,)—being 
omitted. So Soph. Cd. Col. 156, ἀλλ᾽ 
ἵνα τῷδ᾽ ἐν ἀφθέγκτῳ, μὴ προςπέσῃς 
νάπει. See Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 
148, 9. ταύτῃ is emphatic here, 
although ταύτην is not in ver. 6: ‘this 
grace also;—other graces having been 
enumerated. Grotius remarks, ‘non 
ignoravit Paulus artem rhetorum, movere 
laudando.’ 8.] Lest his last words 
should be misunderstood, he explains the 
spirit in which they were said: not as a 
command, but by way of inducement, by 
mention of the earnestness of others, and to 
try the genuineness of their love. 

Kat ἐπιτ.] not, ‘in consequence of a com- 
mand from God,’ as Dr. Burton,—but, by 
way of command (1 Cor. vii. 6). διὰ 
τῆς is not = διὰ τήν, “ by occasion of, as 
E. V.:—but treats the ἑτέρων σπουδή as 
the instrument by which, in the way of emu- 
lation, the effect was to be produced. 

The participial construction is as in 1 Cor. 
iv. 14, 9.1 Explanation of ‘trying 
the genuineness of your love,’ by uphold- 
ing His example in the matter, Whom we 
ought to resemble. τ. χάριν, the 
(act of) grace :—the beneficence. 

ὅτι] consisting in this, that... mh. 
ov] The participle refers to the time when 


LPN at 
cdefg 
hklimn 
ο 17.47 


6—11. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 68] 


ZA € al ee , Oo ΄ Ρ / 10 \ ar , 
Wa ὑμεῖς TH ἐκείνου “πτωχείᾳ ἢ πλουτήσητε) 10 καὶ 4" γνώ- ο ver. 2 reff. 
, , pe Ἢ e = = ev. lll. d 
μην ἐν τούτῳ * δίδωμι. τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν " συμφέρει, ᾿ οἵτινες 18. Lukexi. 
» ΄ \ a ? \ \ A Ui iv. 8.) 
οὐ μόνον TO ποιῆσαι ἀλλὰ καὶ TO θέλειν ἃ προενήρξασθε « " 1 Cor. i. 10 
sets , \ ν \ = 2 (τ68.). 
‘amo " πέρυσι" ' νυνὶ δὲ καὶ τὸ ποιῆσαι ™ ἐπιτελέσατε, τ Cor. vi. 25. 
reff. ; t = Acts x. 41 reff. Rom. i. 25 al. u ver. 6, v ch. ix. 2 
only+. πρὸ πέρυσι, Demosth. 467. 14. w ver. 6 reff. 


[τὴ ex. wr. bef vuers D3 F latt Ambrst. for εκεινου, αὐτου D-gr F-gr Orig, Eus,, 
allius latt. ] 
10. for o:tives, ort F Syr. for mpoev., ενηρξασθε DIF. 


the historic act implied in the aorist yourselves so willing.’ A command from 
ἐπτώχευσεν took place. He, being rich, me would be a lowering of you, and depre- 
became poor :—not, as De W., merely by _ ciation of your zeal) began before them (the 
His renunciation of human riches during Macedonian churches, see below) not only 
His life on earth, but by His exinanition of the act, but also the mind to act, from a 
His glory (Phil. ii. 6,7), when, as Athanas. year ago: 1. 6. ‘not only were you before 
(contra Apol. ii. 11, vol. ii.(Migne), p. 757), them in the deed itself, but also in the will 
τὴν πτωχεύσασαν φύσιν ἐν ἑαυτῷ ἀνελά- ἴο do it.’ The sense has been missed 
Bero. The stress is on δι᾿ ὑμᾶς, to raise by many of the Commentators, from not 
the motive of gratitude the more effec- observing the comparison implied in προ- 
tually in them. τῇ ἐκ. πτωχ. πλουτή- ενήρξασθε, and applying it only to the Co- 
onte | that by His poverty (as the efficient rinthians themselves beginning. In that 
cause) ye might become rich: viz. with case, as the will comes before the deed, to 
the same wealth in which He was rich,— say, you began not only to do, but also to 
the kingdom and glory of Heaven, includ- wid/, would be unmeaning. Some, in con- 
ing τὰ μυρία ἅπερ παρέσχεν ἡμῖν ayabd,as sequence, as Grot., al., and the Peschito, 
Chrys. (Hom. xvii. p. 559): who had just have arbitrarily assumed an inversion 
before said, εἰ μὴ πιστεύεις, ὅτι ἡ πτωχεία of terms, so that ‘non solum facere, 
πλούτου ἐστὶ ποιητική, ἐννόησόν σου τὸν sed velle’ should =‘ non solum velle, sed 
δεσπότην, καὶ οὐκέτι ἀμφιβάλῃς- (al. -Aezs). facere.” Others, as Chrys., Theodoret, al., 
See the various possible meanings discussed LErasm., Calv., Beza, al., Billroth, Olsh., 
in Stanley’s note. 10.] ver. 9 was’ Riickert, al. m., have taken θέλειν = “ to 
parenthetic: he now resumes the οὐ κατ᾽ dowitha good will, which is certainly not 
ἐπιταγὴν Aéyw .... And I give my _ its sense in ver. 11. The above explana- 
opinion [not ‘judgment, as rendered in tion is that of Cajetan, Estius, De Wette, 
the Version of the Five Clergymen, which Winer, Meyer, and Wieseler, and puts the 
is objectionable here, as conveying the very climax in its right order, making it a back- 
idea which the Apostle wishes tonegative, ward one of comparison. For as Wieseler 
that of an authoritative decision] in this remarks (Chron. Apost. Zeit. p. 364, note), 
matter, the stress being on γνώμην, as_ there are three steps in the collection for 
distinguished from ἐπιταγήν. τοῦτο the saints,—the wishing it (θέλειν), the 
yap ....] For this (viz. ‘my giving setting about it (ποιῆσαι), and the com- 
my opinion, and not commanding, —as pletion of it (ἐπιτελέσαι). And the Co- 
Billroth and Meyer. De Wette con-  rinthians had begun not only the second, 
troverts this, and would make τοῦτο refer, but even the first of these, before the 
to the proof of their love in the act of Macedonians. Long employed as they 
charity, contending that τοῦτο must refer had then been in the matter, it was more 
to the same 85. ἐν τούτῳ. But Meyer creditable to them to receive advice from 
rightly answers that this need not be, for the Apostle, than command. “θέλειν is 
ἐν τούτῳ is altogether unemphatic and in- ποῦ a historic act like ποιῆσαι, but a per- 
significant, and the whole sense of the manent state: hence the pres. inf.’ Meyer. 
clause is in the words γνώμην δίδωμι) In saying ἀπὸ πέρυσι ‘from last 
is expedient for you (better than “‘be- year,’ it seems probable that Paul would 
fitting,’ or “suitable,” as suggested by speak as a Jew, regarding the year as 
Bloomf. after the Schol. ἁρμόζει, cvvdder. beginning in Tisri. 11.] But (con- 
This sense of συμφέρει is not found in the — trast of your former zeal with your present 
N. T., and is very doubtful elsewhere. See need to be reminded of it) now complete 
Palm and Rost’s Lex.), seeing that you the act itself also (καί can hardly apply to 
(‘quippe qui;’ οἵτινες is decisive for the the whole τὸ ποι. ἐπιτ., as De Wette, but 
above meaning of τοῦτο. ‘My giving my must be taken with ποιῆσαι; now shew 
opinion, rather than commanding, is expe- ποῦ only the completion of a ready will in 
dient for you, who have already shewn the act begun, but complete the act also,— 


682 


x Rom, iv. 6 
reff. r 

y Acts xvi. 

" 11. ver. 19. 
ch. ix. 2 
only τ. Sir. 
xly. 23 only. 
(-μος, Rom. 
i. 15.) 

2 constr., Acts 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΊΟΥΣ B. 


ς : a / / Ἁ 

ὅπως "καθάπερ ἡ γ᾿ προθυμία * τοῦ θέλειν, οὕτως καὶ τὸ 
, wn / 

W ἐπιτελέσαι ὃ ἐκ τοῦ ἔχειν. 
c AG 5Ἂ A d ᾽ 4 ὃ > c alc ὐκ ὙΜ 

κειται, ° καθὸ ἐὰν ἔχη “ εὐπρόςδεκτος, ov “ καθὸ οὐκ ἔχει. 
a \ a > ’ 

13 οὐ yap ἵνα ἄλλοις “ ἄνεσις, ὑμῖν [δὲ] θλῖψις, ἀλλ᾽ 1 ἐξ 

᾿ a A A \ ΓΞ - τ 
8 ἰσότητος, ἐν τῷ "νῦν ἃ καιρῷ τὸ ὑμῶν ' περίσσευμα * εἰς 


ΜΗ 


12 εἰ yap ἡ ¥ προθυμία ὃ πρό- 


xiv. 9 reff. 
[τῇ πὶ “ Ν Ἀν σον ὧν 1 / 
asm ti. πὸ ἐκείνων ὑστέρημα, 18 ἵνα καὶ τὸ ἐκείνων ' περίσσευμα 
Ὁ Heb. vi, 18. ’ tee Cte A 1.£ / 74 ΄ ot F_¥: 
ee : γένηται εἰς TO υμῶν “VOTEPHNMA, OTWS YEVNTAL © LOOT. 
oer ye ς \ \ 5) 5) t We 
Lent. xxiv. 15 καθὼς γέγραπται ™ O τὸ πολὺ οὐκ ™ ἐπλεονᾶσεν, καὶ ὁ 
c here bis. Ἀπ 7 > 0 » ΄ 
Rom. vii.26. TO Ολύγον οὐκ NNATTOVNGED. 
tia ‘Levit. ix. 5B. d Rom. xv. 16 reff. e Acts xxiv. 23 reff. f = 1 Cor. vii. 
5 reff. g here bis. Col. ἵν. 1 only. Job xxxvi. 29. Zech. iv. 7 only. h Rom. iii. 26 reff. 
iepp., here bis only. Matt. xii. 34|| LL. Mark viii. 8 only. Eccles. ii. 15 (only ?). k = Rom. iii. 22. Gal. 
iii. 14. Eph. i. 8. iii. 2. 11 Cor. xvi. 17 reff. m anc constr., Exon. xvi. 18. Winer, 
edn. 6, ἢ 64. 4. n Rom. v. 20 reff. o here only.1.c. trans., Prov. xiv. 84, 


11. for του, το D!. 


12. for εαν, αν DIF LN f Chr-ms Damasc. 


for exn, exer L f [Euthal-ms]. 


rec adds tis, with ΟΣ], rel [syr-w-ast copt Chr,]: om BC!DFKPN 17 latt [syr-txt] 
goth eth arm Clem, [Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damase Cypr, Ambrst]. (so D[-gr] F 


[not F-lat] aft exe.) 


13. om δε BCR! 17 D-lat eth [Euthal-ms]. 
14. (the τ of 1st τὸ is written over the line by N}(appy).) 


om νυν F[-gr(and G2) ]. 
euov Κ. 


15. om 2nd ὁ Fb οἱ ἢ Καὶ ὁ 47. 80. 93. 106-14-15-22. 238. 


as Meyer), that, as (there was) (with 
you) readiness of will, so (there may) 
also (be) completion according to your 
means (ἐκ τοῦ ἔχειν, not ‘out of that 
which ye have, as E. V., but ‘ after the 
measure of your property,’ as in ref. The 
verbs substantive must be supplied, as in 
ver. 13). 12.] Explanation of ἐκ Tov 
€xew,—that on it, προθυμία being pre- 
supposed, and not on absolute quantity, 
acceptability depends. For if a willing 
mind is present,—according to what it 
may happen to possess, it is acceptable, 
not according to what it possesseth not. 
The construction of the sentence is sim- 
ple enough: προθυμία being the subject 
throughout, quasi-personified : readiness in 
God’s service is accepted, if its exertion 
be commensurate with its means,—and is 
not measured by an unreasonable require- 
ment of what it has not. 13—165. | 
Further explanation that the present col- 
lection is not intended to press the Co- 
rinthians καθὸ οὐκ ἔχουσι. For (it is) 
not (the collection is not made) that 
there may be to others (the saints at 
Jerusalem) relief, and to you distress (of 
poverty): 14. but that by the rule 
of equality (ἐξ as in ἐκ τοῦ ἔχειν, above), 
at this present time (of their need: 
the stress is on ἐν τῷ νῦν καιρῷ as suggest- 
ing that this relation may hereafter be 
altered) your abundance may subserve 
(γένηται, see next clause. γίνεσθαι εἰς, 
‘to be extended to,’ see ref. Gal.) their 
deficiency; that also (supposing circum- 
stances changed) their abundance may 
subserve your want. The reference is 
still, as is evident from the next verse, to 


the supply of temporal wants, in respect of 
which there should be a mutual relieving 
and sharing among Christians. But the 
passage has been curiously misunderstood 
to mean, ‘that their (the Jewish Chris- 
tians’) abundance in spiritual things may 
be imparted to you to supply your de- 
ficiency” Thus Chrys., al.,—the ancients 
regarding this imparting as the Gospel- 
benefit received from them by the Gentiles 
(which however was past, not future, and 
is urged as a motive for gratitude, see 
Rom. xv. 27), and the modern Romanists 
introducing the monstrous perversion of 
the attribution of the merits of the saints 
to others in the next world. So Estius: 
“ Locus hic apostoli contra nostre etatis 
heereticos ostendit, posse Christianos minus 
sanctos meritis sanctorum adjuvari etiam 
in futuro seculo. Denique notanda virtus 
eleemosyne, que facit hominem participem 
*meritorum ejus in quem confertur.” 

15.] that there may be equality, as it is 
written (i.e. according to the expression 
used in the Scripture history: παράγει 
παλαιὰν ἱστορίαν, Chrys.,—of the gathering 
of the manna) He that (gathered) much, 
did not exceed (the measure prescribed by 
God) : and he that (gathered) little, did 
not fall short (of it). The fact of equality 
being the only point brought into compa- 
rison as between the Israelites of old and 
Christians now, it is superfluous to enquire 
minutely how this equality was wrought 
among the Israelites. The quotation is 
according to the reading of the LXX 
generally supported by MSS.; except 
that ἔλαττον appears for ὀλίγον in A ὦ 
secunda manu. Grabe (not F) and the 


BCDFR 
LPRab 
edefg 
hktmn 
ο 17, 47 


12—19. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


683 


16 » Χάρις δὲ τῷ θεῷ τῷ 4 διδόντι τὴν αὐτὴν ᾿ σπουδὴν p= Rom τι 
ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν “ἐν τῇ κα δίᾳ Τίτου, 17 ὅτι τὴν μὲν ὃ παρά- q constr, John 
p op ὴν μ ρ 


“Ano 


petos “ ἐξῆλθεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 


t ἐδέξατο, ΠΥ πΟῸν ΡΎΣΥ os δὲ "ὑπάργων 
ρ ρχ 

18 y ay eee 

συνεπέμψαμεν O€ μετ 


ili. 35. ch. i Ms 
22. ver. 1. 


¥ αὐθαί- Ezra vii. 10 


YWVeulgitte 


a ΕἸ , va ς »" a - 
αὐτοῦ τὸν ἀδελφόν, ov ὁ 5 ἔπαινος δ ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ διὰ " 5 ἤν. τα. 


"πασῶν τῶν ὃ" ἐκκλησιῶν" 
Ν la) 
“ χειροτονηθεὶς ὑπὸ τῶν 


v Acts viii. 16 reff. 
y ver. 22 only +. 
vii. 17. xiv. 33. ch. xi. 28. 
e Acts xiv. 23 only +t. 
o. LiGors xu. a. 


z Rom. ii. 29 re 


h ch. iii. 3 reff. 


194 οὐ μόνον δέ, 

© ἐκκλησιῶν 

᾽ a g / 7 a h § ῇ ς > ς a 

ἐν τῇ © χάριτι ταύτῃ τῇ ™ διακονουμένῃ ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν, 

w ver. 2 only (reff.). 
ff. 


c plur., Rom. xvi. 16 reff. 
f Acts xix. 29 only t. 


t = John iv. 45 
ἃ ἀλλὰ καὶ υ ver. 22 (bis). 


f - at es 2 Tim. i. 17 
συνέκδημος ἐάβοὴ 


only. Ezek. 

xli. 25. (-ως 
Luke vii. 4, 
ἱπρρὸς Phil. ii. 28. 
Tit. iii. 13.) 

= but w. εἰς, Acts xi. 25 reff. 

ἜΤ Ochi ule b1Cor, 

ἃ Rom. vy, 3. viii. 23 al. 

(ἐκδημεῖν, ch. v. 6, 8, 9.) 


ξεν: δὲ 
i= Acts iii. 10. ‘ch. x. 4.;xi. 8.. 1 Tim.1. 16 al: 


16. for διδοντι, δοντι DF LN? 47 syrr [arm] Chr,, dedit vulg D-lat: danti G-lat. 


C tol! copt add nu. 


18. τον adeApov bef μετ αὐτου PR! ὁ [copt]. 


19. for lst ἡμων, vuwy ΕἾ -οΥ |(not G). 


add eyevero D[-gr] b 91.177 arm. 


rec (for ev) συν, with Ὁ F[not F-lat] KLN rel goth [Clem,] Thdrt Aug: txt BCP dm 


LG 47 vulg copt eth [arm Euthal-ms] Damase Ambrst Aug Pel. 


up υμων C b? 1 55. 73. 177. 238. 
ver to vp’ υμων in next. 


Aldine edition have @ τὸ πολύ and ᾧ τὸ 
ὀλίγον, probably a correction. The con- 
text supplies σύλλέξας from the συνέλεξαν 
in the preceding verse,—and is presumed 
by the Apostle to be familiar to his read- 
ers. 16-- 94.) Of Titus and two other 
brethren whom Paul had commissioned to 
complete the collection. 16.] The 
sense is taken up from ver. 6. διδόντι 
ἐν, see reff. τὴν αὖτ. om., viz. ‘as in my- 
self? This is evident from ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν. 

17.] Proof of this; that Titus received 
indeed (μέν) Paul’s exhortation to go to 
them (said, to shew his subordination,— 
or perhaps to authenticate his authoriza- 
tion: by the Apostle), but in reality (δέ) was 
too ready to go, to need any exhortation ; 
—and therefore went forth (the past tense 
of the epistolary style——as ‘dabam,’ &c., 
indicating things which will have passed 
before the letter is received) of his own 
accord to them. 18—21.| Commenda- 
tion of a brother sent with Titus. 18. | 


ὁ ἀδελφός cannot surely be, as some Com-. 


mentators (Heumann, Riickert) have un- 
derstood, ‘ the brother of Titus: the deli- 
cate nature of the mission would require 
that there should be at least no family 
connexion between those sent to fulfil it. 
This and the other are called in ver. 23, 
ἀδελφοὶ ἡμῶν, and were unquestionably 
Christian brethren in the usual sense. 
Who this was, we know not. Chrys., 
Theodoret, Gicum., Luther, Calvin, sup- 
pose Barnabas to be meant; but there is 
no historical ground for this, and we can 
hardly suppose him put under Titus. 
Baronius and Estius suppose, Silas; to 
whom this last objection would also apply ; 
besides that he was well known to the 


om Ist τη C. 
homeotel in 17 from ὑφ᾽ υμων in this 


Corinthians, and therefore would not need 
this recommendation. Orig., Jerome, τινές 
in Chrys., Ambrose, Pelagius, Primasius, 
Anselm, Cajetan, Grot., Olsh., al., suppose 
Inuke :—and of these all before Grot. (who 
pointed out the mistake; which however 
I see reproduced in Mr. Birks’s Hore 
Apostolic, p. 242 f.) suppose οὗ 6 ἔπαινος 
ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ to refer to his gospel,-—— διὰ 
τὴν ἱστορίαν ἥνπερ ἔγραψε, Chrys. Hom. 
Xvill. p. 564 ;—but this is altogether with- 
out proof, as is the assumption that it was 
Mark (Lightfoot, Storr). It may have 
been Trophimus, who (Acts xx. 4) accom- 
panied Paul into Asia, and (xxi. 29) to 
Jerusalem: so De Wette, Wieseler. If 
the expression whose praise in (the matter 
of) the Gospel is throughout all the 
Churches, is to be compared with any 
similar eulogium, that of’ Gaius in Rom. 
xvi. 23 seems to correspond most nearly : 
Γάϊος 6 ξένος μου Kat ὅλης τῆς ἐκκλη- 
σίας : but he was resident at Corinth, see 
1 Cor. i. 14. A Gaius, a Macedonian, is 
mentioned Acts xix. 29, as one of the 
συνέκδημοι of Paul, as here, together with 
Aristarchus, which latter we know accom- 
panied him to Jerusalem (but see below 
on ch. ix. 4). It must then rest in un- 
certainty. 19.] parenthetical (see on 
ver. 20) adding to his general commenda- 
tion a particular qualification for this office. 

ov pov. S¢é,—and not only so (i.e. 
praised in all the churches), but who was 
also appointed (‘suffragiis designatus,’ see 
ref. and note; and Stanley here) by the 
churches (of Macedonia? see ver. 1) as 
our fellow-traveller (to Jerusalem, from 
what follows) in (the matter of) this 
charity which is being ministered by us, 


684 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. VIII. 20—24. 
kw. χὴν τοῦ κυρίου δόξαν καὶ ὃ προθυμίαν ἡμῶν" 359 στελ- 
ΒΑ iii. 6 λό a / bbc ag oleae ri) n nie a ° Go , TL 
only wai. λόμενοι τοῦτο, μή τις ἡμᾶς ™ μωμήσηται " ἐν τῇ " ἁδρότη; 

ll. ὃ. ἣν A Le) ζ Le 

meh visto. ταύτῃ TH POiaKovouperyn vp ἡμῶν. 21 P προνοοῦμεν yap 
Ὦ -- im. τ. 

10. Ἠεδ. χ. P καλὰ οὐ μόνον Ρ ἐνώπιον κυρίου, ἀλλὰ καὶ Ὁ ἐνώπιον 


ο here only t. 


ς ΄ > -“" Ν > \ 
(pés, Jen. ἀνθρώπων. 32  συνεπέμψαμεν δὲ αὐτοῖς τὸν ἀδελφὸν 
5. as e a ἃ r 25 , s2 a , t 

pRom. sii 17 MOV, ὃν " ἐδοκιμάσαμεν * ἐν πολλοῖς πολλάκις * oTrOU- 


iii. 4. 


δαῖον O L δὲ AV ᾿σπουδαιότερον ἃ πεποιθήσει 
qittisomy. δαῖον ὄντα, νυνὶ δὲ πὸ που ρο ἡ 


= 2 Cor. iil. aA ΄ lal ς e \ 7, ἃ, 
Ὶ Ἰϑτοῦς ἃ Cor. πολλῇ τῇ " εἰς ὑμᾶς" *3 Κ εἴτε ὑπὲρ Τίτου, ¥ κοινωνὸς 
V1. o. 

ΒΥ 8. 5 ateeo Res FE es ἤτω Woe 2 > epee Meee 
vie 3 reff ἐμὸς καὶ Y εἰς ὑμᾶς * συνεργός" “ εἴτε ἀδελφοὶ ἡμῶν, * ἀπό 
t ver. 17 5 a ΄ a 9 \ 9 Υ 
uchilsre®, στόλοι ἐκκλησιῶν, » δόξα χριστοῦ. 3" τὴν οὖν “ ἔνδειξιν 
y= ch. ii. 9, 

: 12, ix. 8. Gal. v. 10 al. w so 1 Cor. xiii. 8. xv. 11. x ch. i. 8 reff. y | Cor. 
x. 18, 20 reff. z Rom. xvi. 3 reff. a = John xiii. 16. Phil. ii. 25. (3 Kings xiv.6 A, 


ἄς. [Β def.]) only. b = 1 Thess. ii. 20. c Rom. iii. 25, 26. Phil. i. 28 only +. 

rec ins αὐτου bef του κυριου, with D?3[-gr] KX rel syrr Chr Thdrt Damase: αὐτὴν P 
a 6. 43, 672. 74 [fuld]: om BCD'FL ἃ latt copt goth «th arm [Euthal-ms Ambrst 
Aug, |. rec (at.end) υμων, with F[-gr] d: txt BCDGKL[P]RX rel latt syrr copt 
goth [eth arm Chr Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc]. add τελουσιν D!. 

20. vrooreAAomeva: F: συστελλ. 93: devitantes latt. 
73. for μωμησηται, μωμηται C2(C! uncert). 

21. rec mpovoovpevor, with CKL rel copt goth Clem, Chr-ms [Cyr, Euthal-ms] 
Thdrt Damase: txt BDFPR f latt syrr arm Chr, [Ambrst Aug, ]. rec om yap, 
with KL rel Thdrt Damase ΤῊ]: ins BCDFPN mm 17. 47 latt syrr copt goth arm Clem, 
Chr [Cyr, Euthal-ms Ambrst Aug]. (Meyer thinks mpovoovpevar to have been a mere 
mistake originally, arising from στελλόμενοι above : and thus the yap which was at 
first retained from oversight, as in C, was at last erased. Probably προνοουμενοι was 
introduced from Rom xii. 17, where the same words occur.) om 2nd evwmov &!. 

22. vuwy F(not G: so ver. 23). om 7oAAy F[not F-lat] 672-9: pref δε B. 


vuas F[-gr] bg hmo 


for eis, προς Καὶ c. 


23. cuvepyos bef εἰς vuas Ὁ [Syr]| copt goth Ambrst. 


dei tol]. 


—in order to subserve the glory of the 
Lord and our readiness (this clause refers 
not to διακον. 5p ju. as usually inter- 
preted, but to the fact related, the union 
of this brother with Paul in the matter 
of the alms, which was done to avoid 
suspicions detrimental to Christ’s glory, 
and to the zeal of the Apostle) : 20. | 
taking heed of this (‘devitantes, Vulg.— 
ὑποπτεύσαντες κ. δεδοικότες, Theophyl. : 
—the participle belongs to συνεπέμψαμεν, 
ver. 19 being parenthetical) that no one 
blame us (ref.) in the matter of this 
abundance (of contributions) which is 
being ministered by us. On ἁδρότης, 
Meyer observes, “from ἁδρός, ‘ compact,’ 
“solid ;—is used in Homer (Il. x. 363, 
π. 857, w. 6) of a firm and succulent habit 
of body. Later, we have it in all the 
various references of the adjective, e.g. 
of abundance—of plants and fruits 


(Theophr.), of discourse (Diog. Laért. 


x. 83), of tone (Athen. x. p. 415 a), &e. 
What kind of abundance is meant, 
the context therefore alone determines.” 
Wetst. says, “ἁδρότης apud Zosimum 
quater pro ingenti largitione.” 21. ] 
“And such caution is in aceordance with 
our general practice.’ See reff. Rom. and 


for xp., κυριου CF [eth : 


Prov. 22.}| Still less can we determine 
who this second brother is. Every pos- 
sible person has been guessed. Several 
would answer to the description, ‘ whom 
we have many times in many. matlers 
proved to be earnest. By our uncer- 
tainty in these two cases, we may see how 
much is required, to fill up the apostolic 
history at all satisfactorily. πεποι- 
θήσει .. .7 through the great confidence 
which he has towards you: belongs to 
σπουδαιότερον, and to the brother, not to 
συνεπέμψαμεν and to Paul. The brother 
had, by what he had heard from Titus, 
conceived a high opinion of the probable 
success of their mission. 23.] General 
recommendation of the three. εἴτε 
ὑπ. Τίτου] Whether concerning Titus 
(we may supply λέγω or γράφω, or as in 
E. V., ‘any enquire’ or we need not 
supply any thing), he is my partner and 
(especially) my fellow-worker towards 
you: whether our brethren (be in ques- 
tion :—viz. the two mentioned—but gene- 
ralized by the absence of the article— 
‘whether [any] brethren of ours’), they 
are Apostles (in the more general sense of 
Acts xiv. 14; 1 Thess. ii. 6; Phil. ii. 25) 
of the churches (i.e. ‘are of the churches, 


BCDFK 
LPN ab 
cdefg 
hkimn 
ο 17, 47 


ee a a, a ... 


ΙΧ. 1—3. 


τῆς ἀγάπης ὑμῶν, καὶ ἡμῶν ἃ 
αὐτοὺς 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B. 


685 


καυχήσεως ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, εἰς ἃ Rom. τη.» 
© ἐνδεικνύμενοι Seis ἱπρόξφωπον τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν. “τι Romi 
IX. 1 περὶ & μὲν γὰρ τῆς ὃ" διακονίας τῆς 
ous ἱπερισσόν μοι ἐστὶν τὸ γράφειν ὑμῖν' 


tes, i ee a (Gen. 1. 15, 
ELS TOUS ~ AYt- 17.) constr., 
9 δ x wag fe meen ᾿ 
“ = here(cn. x 
oLoa yap THV 20) only. see 
Num. xx. 6. 


a ἃ e X e A a ἢ 
K προθυμίαν ὑμῶν ᾿᾿ ἣν ™ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ' καυχῶμαι ™ Μακεδό- ς «οὐ Gor. v.3. 


σιν, ὅτι ᾿Αχαΐα 


[? ἐξ] ὑμῶν 4 ζῆλος τἠρέθισεν " τοὺς "πλείονας. ὃ ἔπεμψα δὲ 


k ch. viii. 11, 12 reff. 

1 Cor. xiv. 8. 

p = ch. viii. 7. see Luke xi. 13. ch. v. 2. 
s 1 Cor. ix. 19 reff. 


(not A) &c. 
m constr., ch. vii. 14. 
viii. 10 only (ref.). 
r Col. iii. 21 only. Prov. xix. 7. 


n here bis. 


£4. (v of την is written above the line by N! or -corr!.) 


n , 0 Aare 
πταρεσκευᾶσται ΟἼΤΟ 


h xi. 18, 
ch. viii. 4. 
καὶ ὁ = Matt. v. 47. 
ΕΝ xiv. 23. 
2 Macc. xii. 
44 B,F 
Prov. xxvii. 1, 
o ch. 
q Rom. x. 2 reff. 


° πέρυσι 


1 constr., ch. xi. 30, 
Acts x. 10 only. Jer. xii. 3. 


ὑπερ ἡμων D![-gr] G. 


rec (for evderxvupevor) ενδειξασθε, with CD? 3K LPN rel vulg(and F-lat) syrr copt 


arm [zth Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damase Ambrst ] : 
om BCDFKLPNX rel latt syrr copt goth eth arm 


rec ins καὶ bef εἰς mposwror : 


gr-lat-ff. 


Cuap. IX. 1. om yap C 2. 41. 115 arm. 

yuw (not G). 
for 6, το BN 17. 
om εἰ BCP a 17 vulg(and F-lat) Syr copt arm 


109 Thdrt-ms Damasc. 
2. παραεσκευασται(θαῦ corrd) δὲ. 
περισυ D? [6] 17. (simly ch viii. 10.) 


txt B D}(and lat] F[-gr] 17 goth. 


εμοι Β. om to ( 17. 78 : του F 


for περυσι, περσυ DIF: 


[ Euthal-ms ]} Orig-int, Ambrst Pel: .ns D ΕἾ -οῦ ) KL rel fuld eee Chr Thdrt Damasc. 
3. ἐπεμψαμεν D-gr arm [demid copt Pel] Aug, 


what we are of the Lord’—persons sent 
out with authority), the glory of Christ 
(i. 6. men whose work tends to Christ’s 
glory). 24.) Shew then to them 
the proof of your love (‘to us,’ or perhaps, 
‘to your poor brethren’ (Meyer) :—but 
the word has not been so used throughout 
this passage, see verse 7: χάρις has been 
the word), and of our boasting concern- 
ing you, in the sight of the churches. 
I may remark, (1) that the participi-l 
construction is elliptic, as in Rom. xii. 16 
al. (2) That mposwrov τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν 
does not actually import ‘ the representa- 
tives of the churches,’ as Meyer (which 
would be τὸ πρόξωπον or τὰ mpdswra, with- 
out εἰς), but as above, it being implied 
that they, being the ἀπόστολοι τ. ἐκκλ., 
are such representatives. And this is all 
that Theodoret seems to mean, whom 
Meyer quotes in support of his view :— 
τὸ mpéswrov yap τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ἐπ- 
έχουσιν οὗτοι τῶν πεμψασῶν αὐτούς. 

1X. 1—5.] He recurs to the collection 
itself, and prays them that they would 
make good before the brethren his boast- 
ing of them, agd prepare it before his own 
coming. 1.1 The μὲν γάρ connects 
with the last verse, thus, ‘I beseech you 
to receive the brethren whom I send, 
courteously ; for concerning the duty of 
ministration to the saints, it is surely 
superfluous for me to write to you who are 
so prompt already.’ No new subject be- 
gins, as some have supposed ; nor is there 
any break in the sense at all. Some ob- 
security has been introduced unnecessarily, 
by taking τῆς dian. τ. εἰς τ. ay. for merely 
this collection which is now making: 


re the ee chooses such general 
terms as a mild reproof to the Corinthians, 
who, well aware as they were of the duty 
of ministering to the saints, were yet 
somewhat remiss in this particular example 
of the duty. There is an emphasis on 
γράφειν : * nam testes habebitis preesentes,’ 
Bengel. Theophyl. wellremarks: τοσαῦτα 
καὶ “πρότερον εἰπὼν καὶ πάλιν μέλλων 
εἰπεῖν, ὅμως περιττὸν αὐτῷ λέγει τὸ περὶ 
τούτων γράφειν. σοφῶς δὲ τοῦτο ποιεῖ, 
ὥςτε μᾶλλον αὐτοὺς ἐπισπάσασθαι. αἰσ- 
χυνθήσονται γὰρ εἴ γε τοιαύτην ὑπόληψιν 
περὶ αὐτῶν ἔχοντος τοῦ Παύλου, ὅτι οὐ 
δέονται συμβουλῆς πρὸς τὸ ἐλεεῖν, εἶτα 
φανῶσιν ἐλάττους Tis ὑπολήψεως. 

2.] For (ground of περισσόν ἐστι) I am 
aware of your readiness of which (reit.) 
Iam in the habit of boasting concerning 
you to Macedonians (Bengel remarks on 
the pres., ‘adhue erat Paulus in Mace- 
donia’) that Achaia (not duets—he relates 
his own words to the Macedonians) h:s 
been ready (viz. to send off the money: 
καὶ οὐδὲν λείπει εἰ μὴ τὸ ἐλθεῖν τοὺς 
δεξομένους τὰ χρήματα, Theophyl. The 
Apostle, judging by their readiness, had 
made this boast concerning them, sup- 
posing it was really so. That this is the 
sense is shewn by ἀπαρασκευάστους below, 
ver. 4) from last year (reff.):—and the 
zeal which proceeds from you (‘ which has 
its source in you and whose influeuce goes 
forth from you: so 6 ἐκ Πελοποννήσου 
πόλεμος, of ἐκεῖθεν, and the like) stirred 
up the greater number of them (but not 
only the example of your zeal: see ch. 
viii. 1). 8.1 But (contrast, not to 
μέν in ver. 1, but to καυχῶμαι above; 


686 


t Rom. iv. 2 
reff. 

u Rom. iv. 12 
reff. 

y ch. 1ii, 10 reff. 
w constr., Acts 
xxv. 10 reff. 
x) Cor ix. τ! 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


XI. 


\ a) / “4 Ἁ Ν t 4 ς A A ς \ ¢ an 
τοὺς ἀδελφούς, Wa μὴ τὸ tKavynua ἡμῶν TO ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν 
u On Vv > Vv “Ὁ vy , , ivf θὰ EX, uw 

κενωθῇ " ἐν ‘TO " μέρει τούτῳ, ἵνα καθὼς ἔλεγον ἣν παρ- 
’ Ww 5 4. Χ ΄ Χ 2 Ve, \ » θ \ 4 \ 

εσκευασμένοι δ᾽ ἦτε, ἘΣ μή ἔπως, ἐὰν ἔλθωσιν σὺν ἐμοὶ Μακε- 

doves καὶ εὕρωσιν ὑμᾶς " ἀπαρασκευάστους, * καταισχυν- 


y He only t+. θ ray = Fy ff : xr f . a 5 ae ara { 
7 bere ay ὦμεν ἡμεῖς (ἵνα μὴ λέγωμεν ὑμεῖς) ἐν TH * ὑποστάσει 
» € A 5 ς ΄ , \ 
hereoniy,? Ταύτῃ. ©” ἀναγκαῖον οὖν “ἃ ἡγησάμην © παρακαλέσαι τοὺς 
a= ch. αὐ. ͵ rn \ 
Heb 12 8) si ἀδελφούς, ὃ ἵνα ἱ προέλθωσιν εἰς ὑμᾶς, καὶ ὃ προκαταρτί- 
, ; / ¢€ n 4 
only. Ps. cwow τὴν * Tr poet neh Hay , εὐλογίαν ἐρῶ: ταύτην 
b Acts xil. 46 
ref τς ἑτοίμην etvars οὕτως 1 ὡς ἷ εὐλογίαν καὶ μὴ ws * πλεονεξίαν. 
5 2 Maaco. oa 21. d = Acts xxvi. 2 reff. e 1 Cor. i. 10 reff. t Acts xx. 5, 


13. .Gen. xxsiii. 14. 
Ezek. xxxiv. 26. 


g here only +. 
29. xvi. 18. 
for μων, vuwy B'(see table) 
eAcyer(appy: but corrd) δὲ}. 
4. om πως D! [latt Ambrst Aug, ]. 


CD F{not F-lat} goth Ambrst Aug 
[Euthal. ms ]. 


21: 


21 Cor. iii. 15 reff. 


om εαν BD? Syr: ay D!. 
ins ka bef καταισχυνθωμεν D1:2(and lat) L (Syr) arm. 
: Om wa un Aey. vu. K. 
rec at end adds της καυχησεως (see ch xi. 17), with D3K LPR? rel 


i= Rom. xv. 
(Rom. i. 29 al.) 


h Rom. i. 2 only +. 
k = here only. 


om τὸ ὑπερ vuwy ΕἾ ποῦ F-lat] 45 Chr,. 


evoovow Ε΄, 
for λεγωμεν, Aeyw 
for vues, ἡμεῖς BI 


syrr goth arm [Chr Thdrt Damasc]: om BCD!FX? 17 latt copt eth [Euthal-ms] 


Ambrst Aug, Pel. 
5. προξελθωσιν F[-gr] 48 Thdrt-ms. 


{Kuthal-ms] Thdrt Damase ΤῊ] Cc. (P uncert.) 


for εἰς, προς BDF τὴ: txt CKL® rel 
rec προκατηγγελμενὴν (0c- 


casioned probably by προκαταρτ. above), with KL rel Thdrt Damase ec: txt BCDFPX 


d 17 vulg arm [Euthal-ms] Thl Ambrst Aug Pel. 
om tavtnv ΕἾ ποῦ F-lat}] arm (Chr). 


[spec] Pel. 
Chr-comm, {Ambrst Aug, ]. 
rel [ Chr Euthal- ms Thdrt Damasc ]. 


implying fear lest he should have been 
making a vain boast concerning them) 
I sent (epistolary past, as in ch. viii. 
18, 22) the brethren, in order that our 
matter of boasting concerning you (καύ- 
χήμα, our whole ‘ materies gloriandi,’ aot 
= καύχησις) May not in this particular 
be proved empty (ἐν τῷ μέρει τούτῳ does 
not belong to καύχημα, but to κενωθῇ--- 
‘that our boast of you, so ample and 
various—ch. vii. 4, may not break down 
in this one department.’ Estius, in marg., 
well calls it ‘acris cum tacita laude exhor- 
tatio apostolica’); that, as I said (when ? 
in ver. 2? or, in his boasting to the Mace- 
donians ἢ or, in 1 Cor. xvi. 1 ? Most 
naturally, 7n ver. ὦ. If he had meant, to 
the Macedonians, it would probably have 
been λέγω. as καυχῶμαι above: if in 1 Cor. 
xvi., it would have been more clear ly ex- 
pressed, If so, ἔλεγον refers merely to 
the word παρεσκ.), ye may be prepared, 
(see above on ver. 2), 4.| lest per- 
chance if Macedonians should come with 
me (to you :—to bring me on my way, or 
to bear the Macedonian collection. We 
may infer from this expression, that neither 
of the two brethren above mentioned, ch. 
vill. 18, 22, was a Macedonian), and should 
find you unprepared (with your collection, 
see ver. 2) we (who have boasted), not 
to say you (who were boasted of), should 
be put to shame, in the matter of this 


om vuwy D}(and lat) vulg 
om καὶ FN? 52 latt Syr 


rec (for 2nd ws) wsmep, with b1: txt BCDFKLPX 


confidence {respecting you. ὑπόστασις, 
as elsewhere in N.T. and LXX, see 
reff., subjective: the attempt to give it 
here the meaning of ‘foundation,’ ‘ matter 
boasted of,’ as Chrys., Theophyl., Erasm., 
Grot., al., Riick., Olsh., is unnecessary, 
and has probably been induced by the 
gloss τῆς καυχ. inserted from ch. xi. 
17: but see there also). 5.] I 
therefore (because of ver. 4) thought it 
necessary to exhort the brethren (Titus 
and the two others) that they would 
go before (my coming) to you, and pre- 
viously prepare your long announced 
beneficence (i. e. long announced by me to 
the Macedonians, ver. 2. εὐλογία, 
blessing; not used only of a blessing in 
words, but of one expressed by a present, as 
Gen. xxxiii.11; Judg. i. 15. (See Stanley.) 
But beware of the blunder of connecting 
it with ed and λογία, ‘a good collection, 

This sense of Slessing, combined with the 
primitive sense, affords the Apostle an op- 
portunity for bringing out the true spirit 
in which Christian gifts should be given), 
that this same may be ready (the con- 
struction is unusual: ταύτην refers back 
to evA. and the inf. must have ὥςτε sup- 
plied. De W. compares Heb. v. 5. Per- 
haps the nearest is Col. iv. 6) in such sort 
as beneficence, and not as covetousness 
(i.e. as the fruit of blessing, poured ont 
from a beneficent mind, not of a sparing 


BCDFK 
LPNab 
edefg 
hkimn 
ο 17. 47 


4—8, 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINGIOTS B. 


687 


6 Ι nr , ς n 7 , n “ ; ise 
τοῦτο δέ, ὁ “omeipwy " φειδομένως " φειδομένως Kat 1 see 1 Cor. vi. 


/ e , > / ᾽ 
™ θερίσει, καὶ ὁ '" σπείρων 5 ἐπ᾽ εὐλογίαις “ ἐπ᾽ εὐλογίαις 


καὶ '' θερίσει. Ἷ ἕκαστος καθὼς 


m 1 Cor.ix. ll. 
Gal. vi. 7. 
Ρ , T a en 5 7 Ere. 8. 
17 pO ταῦ ; ta, nhere bis 
pone” 1 por’ only +. (-vos, 


\ ’ f x r 5 r ᾿Ξ ͵ A Ἐν ; x \ t / Job a ; 
μὴ "ἐκ λύπης ἢ VEE τ ἀνάγκης" “ιχαρὸν yap δότην Πρ γ᾿ <8 


a, (ἃ nye ς \ n ‘ / 
ἀγαπᾷ ὁ θεός. 8" δυνατεῖ δὲ ὁ θεὸς πᾶσαν Y χάριν ™ περισ- 


q = 1 Cor. vii. 5 reff. 
xii, 8.) 
v Acts xi. 23 reff. 


r Heb. vii. 12 only. 
't here only.'1. c. only, 
w trans., ch. iv, 15. 


p here only. 
Prov, xxi. 25 
al. 

shere only. Prov. xxii.8. (-ότης, Rom. 

u Rom. xiy. 4. ch. xiii. 3 only +. 


Eph. i. 8. 1 Thess. iii. 12 only f. 


6. for Ist ew evAoyiats, ev evdoyia in benedictione D'[and lat] F[(not F-lat) spec] 


fuld copt goth Orig-int,[ (txt Orig,) Ambrst Aug, ]. 


for 2nd em eva., εἰ evAoyias 


D}(and lat) fuld goth Orig-int,[(txt Orig,) Ambrst] Cypr,: em evaoyia F(not F-lat) 


copt Aug. 


om [last] καὶ D)[-gr | eth. 


7. ree προαιρεῖται, with D[-gr] KL rel Chr, [Euthal-ms Antch,] Thdrt Damasc,: 
txt BC(FP)& (17) Chr-ms(Wtst) (προειρεται ΕἾ, προειρητ. ΕΠ 17: mponpit. P): 
proposuit [D-lat spec Cypr, Aug,, destinavit vulg F-lat, propositum habet Jer, |. 

8. rec δυνατος (see notes), with C2D?3KLP rel [Chr] Thdrt Damase [ potens est 


latt(not G-lat) Ambrst Aug,]: txt BC! D!FR. 


tol Syr. 


covetous spirit which gives no more than it 
need. There is no need to alter the primi- 
tive meaning, or to make the word signify 
‘ tenacity,’ as Calv., De Wette, al.: he who 
defrauds the poor by stinting them πλεον- 
εκτεῖ, in the literal sense. Still less must 
we with Chrys., al., refer πλεονεξ. to the 
Apostle,—uy νομίσητε, φησίν, ὅτι ὡς πλεον- 
εκτοῦντες αὐτὴν λαμβάνομεν, Hom. xix. 
p- 573,—which is inconsistent with the 
interpretation φειδομένως below, and with 
εὐλογίαν, the corresponding word, which 
applies to the spirit of the givers). 
6,7.] He enforces the last words by an as- 
surance grounded in Scripture and partly 
cited from it, that as we sow, so shall we 
reap. τοῦτο] Some supply φημί, as in 
ref.: others, as Meyer, would take it as 
an accus. absol., ‘as regards this, viz. 
what has gone before. But I would rather 
take it as an imperfect construction, in 
which τοῦτο is used merely to point at the 
sentiment which is about to follow :—But 
this—(is true), or But (notice) this . 
ἐπ᾽ εὐλογίαις) with blessings: ἐπί 
denoting the accompanying state or cir- 
cumstances, as in ref.: not, ‘ with a view 
to blessings, which will not suit the second 
ἐπ᾽ evA.: nor as Theophyl., Gc., and E.V. 
μετὰ δαψιλείας, bountifully: which gives 
indeed the sense, but misses the meaning 
of the expression : see above. It refers to 
the spirit of the giver, who must be iAapds 
dé7ns, not giving murmuringly,.but wth 
blessings, with a beneficent charitable 
spirit: such an one shall reap also with 
blessings, abundant and unspeakable. The 
only change of meaning in the second use 
of the expression is that the evAoyia are 
poured on him, whereas in the first they 
proceeded from him: in both cases they are 
the element in which he works. So, we 
bestow the seed, but receive the harvest. 


for δε, yap D}[-gr] 109-78 demid 


The spirit with which we sow, is of our- 
selves: that with which we reap, depends 
on the harvest. So that the change of 
meaning is not arbitrary, but dependent on 
the nature of things. 7. | Not, as Meyer 
and De W., a limitation of the foregoing, 
or else it would be expressed by some con- 
necting particle,—but a continuation of the 
thought :--- φειδομένως and ἐπ᾽ εὐλογίαιν 
referred to the spirit of the giver ; so does 
this verse,—éx λύπης ἢ ἐξ av. correspond- 
ing to φειδομένως, --ἰλαρός, to ἐπ᾽ εὐλο- 
γίαις. καθὼς προήρηται] as he hath 
determined in his heart; supply, ‘ so let 
him give:’ i.e. let the προαίρεσις, the full 
consent of the free will, go with the gift ; 
let it not be a reluctant offering, given ἐκ 
λύπης, out of an annoyed and troubled 
mind at having the gift extorted, nor ἐξ 
ἀνάγκης, out of necessity,—because com- 
pelled. Such givers,—that is implied,— 
God does not love. δότης is not a clas- 
sical word. δότηρ, δωτήρ and (Hes. Op. 
353) déTns, are used (Meyer). 8 — 
11.] He encourages them to a cheerful 
contribution by the assurance that God 
both can (vv. 8, 9), and will (vv. 10, 11) 
Surnish them with the means of perform- 
ing such deeds of beneficence. 8. ] 
δυνατεῖ has the emphasis. I adopt the 
reading because after all it is difficult to 
imagine how so easy a construction as 
δυνατὸς 6 θεός, should have been altered 
to δυνατεῖ, as Meyer supposes, or why 
the transcriber need have written δυνατός 
ἐστιν if the latter were a correction for 
δυνατεῖ, seeing that the verb substantive 
is just as frequently omitted in such clauses: 
as inserted. πᾶσαν χάριν, ‘etiam in 
bonis externis,’ Bengel, —to which here the 
reference is: not excluding however the. 
wider meaning of ‘ αἰΐ grace.’ περισ- 
σεῦσαι, to make to abound,—reff. 


688 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. IX, 


x = ch. ii, 9,12. σεῦσαι * εἰς ὑμᾶς, ἵνα " ἐν Υ παντὶ πάντοτε 
SAO al. % 
y ch. iv. 8 reff. 


Ζ 7 a yrds 
πᾶσαν " αὐτάρ- 
κειαν ἔχοντες Ὁ περισσεύητε ὃ εἰς πᾶν “ ἔργον ee 


ene 9 καθὼς γέγραπται Δ᾽ σκόρπισεν, ἔδωκεν τοῖς “ πένησιν, 
τα, (κῆρ, ἡ δικαιοσύνη αὐτοῦ ἴἽ μένει ἶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. 10 ὁ δὲ 8 ἐπι- 
-κεῖν, Deut χορηγῶν σπέρμα τῷ ἱ σπείροντι Kat ἄρτον εἰς * βρῶσιν 

Εἰ pe ' χορηγήσει καὶ ™ πληθυνεῖ τὸν ; σπόρον ὑμῶν καὶ ° αὐξήσει 

seh is apy TA Ρ γενήματα τῆς δικαιοσύνης ὑμῶν. 114 ἐν 4 παντὶ " πλου- 
si aeonig. Τ τιζόμενοι εἰς "πᾶσαν ‘amdoTnTa, " ἥτις ᾽ κατεργάζεται Ov 
2 Kings xxii 


> / a a 7 a 
ἡ εὐχαριστίαν τῷ θεῷ, 13 ὅτι ἡ * διακονία τῆς Y λει- 
f John viii. 35 bis. xii. 34. Heb. vii. 24. 


165 Ῥελ ΟΣ, ῶ 
i ἡμῶν 


e here only. l.c. Exod. xxiii. 6 al. fr. 


1 phe: i. 25, from Isa. 


xl. 8. 1 John ii. 17 only. g Gal. iii.5. Col. 11. 19. 2 Pet. i.5,llonly+. Sir. xxv. 22 only. ( -γία, 
Eph. iv. 16. Phil. i. 19.) iver. 6. Isa. lv. 10. k Rom, xiv. 17 reff. Isa. l. ec. 
11 Pet. iv. ll only. 3 Kingsiv.7. Sir. xxxix. 33. m Acts vi. 7 reff, nepp., here only. Mark ιν. 
26, 27. Luke viii. 5,11 only. Deut. xi. 10. o trans., 1 Cor. iii. 6,7 reff. p (yevv.) Matt. 


iii. 7 || L. xii. 34. xxiii. 33. xxvi. 29 || Mk. L. Luke xii. 18 only. 
rch. vi. 10. 1 Cor. i. 5 only. 
t Rom. xii. 8 reff. 
x Acts vi. 1 reff. 


Deut. xiv. 22. Hosea x. 12. ch. iv. 
Gen. xiv. 23 al. participial constr., Acts xxiv. 10 reff. 
Ὁ — Acts x. 41 reff. v = Rom. iv. 15 reff. 


y Lukei. 23. Phil. ii. 17,30. Heb. viii. 6. ix. 21 


8 reff. 

8 = Acts xx. 19 reff. 

w = Acts xxiv. 3 reff. 
only. Num. viii. 22. 


om παντοτε F(not F-lat) 7. 

9. at end ins Tov a:wvos FK 238 vulg(not am demid [fuld]) eth. 

10. for σπερμα, σπορον (corrn from σπορον below) BD'F. σπειραντι Lm 47. 
rec χορηγῆσαι πληθυναι αὐξησαι (prob, as Meyer, corrns, in the idea that a wish was 
intended, and so the futures have been changed to optatives: for such they are, not 
infinitives: ef 1 Thess iii. 11,12; 2 Thess ii. 17; ili. 5,—and var readd, Rom xvi. 20), 
with D'{-gr| KX rel syr goth Chr [Cyr, Ἴ Thart Damase: χορηγῆσαι and πληθυναι 
F[-gr]: χορηγησαι and αὐξησαι L: txt BCDIPN! mn 17 [latt] copt eth arm [ Euthal-ms ] 
Cypr, Ambrst Aug). rec yevvnuata, with ο k: txt BODFKLPR® rel Chr-mss 


[ Cyr, Euthal-ms ]. 
11. ins wa bef εν παντι F Chr,{(and-2 
119-20 syr-mg Damase. 


ἵνα x.7.A.] in order that, having at all 
times in every thing all sufficiency (of 
worldly substance ; αὐτάρκ. is objective ; 

not contentedness, subj.) ye may abound 
towards (‘ have an overplus for ;? which is 
not inconsistent with αὐτάρκεια, seeing 
that adr. does not exclude the having 
more, but only the having less than is 
sufficient: the idea of a man’s having at 
all times and in all things a sufficiency, 
would presuppose that he had somewhat 
to spare) every good work: 9.] 
as it is written (i.e. fulfilling the cha- 
racter described in Scripture),—He scat- 
tered abroad (metaph. from seed: μετὰ 
δαψιλείας ἔδωκε, Chrys.), he gave to the 
poor: his righteousness remaineth for 
ever. In what sense is δικαιοσύνη used ? 
Clearly in the only one warranted ‘by the 
context—that of ‘goodness proved by be- 
neficence, —‘ a righteous deed, which shall 
not be forgotten,—as a sign of righteous- 
ness in character and. conduct.’ To build 
any inference from the text inconsistent 
with the great truths respecting δικαιοσύνη 
ever insisted on by P Paul (as Chrys., p. 574, 
καὶ yap δικαίους ποιεῖ (n φιλανθρωπία), τὰ 
ἁμαρτήματα καθάπερ πῦρ ἀναλίσκουσα, ὕταν 
μετὰ δαψιλείας ἐκχέηται) is ἃ manifest 
perversion. 10.] Assurance that God 
will do this. But (introduces the new as- 


-mss) Aug, ]. 
tor Tw 6., θεου B: om tw DI. 


vuwy C2P 662-7. 71-4. 91. 


surance) He that ministers seed to the 
sower and bread for eating (in the phy- 
sical world :—from ref. Isa., LXX. The 
Vulg., E. V., Luther, Calv., Grot., al., 
commit the mistake of joining κ. ἄρτον eis 
βρῶσιν with xopnynoa, or -ει. βρῶσις, 
the act of eating: not = βρῶμα), shall 
supply and multiply your seed (i.e. 
the money for you to bestow,—answer- 
ing to σπέρμα τῷ σπείροντι), and will 
increase the fruits of your righteous- 
ness (from ref. Hos.—the everlasting re- 
ward for your bestowals in Christ’s name, 
as Matt. x. 42;—answering to ἄρτον εἰς 
βρῶσιν, which is the result of the sower’s 
labours). 11.1 Method in which you 
will be thus blessed by God. In every 
thing being enriched (the construction is 
an anacoluthon, as in ref. and in ch. i. 7 
al.: nothing need be supplied) unto all 
liberality (i.e. in order that you may 
shew all liberality. On ama. see note, 
Rom. xii. 8), which (of a sort which) 
brings about by our means (as the dis- 
tributors of it) thanksgiving (from those 
who will receive it) to God. 12. | 
Explanation of the last clause. Because 
the ministration (not on ow part who 
distribute, though it might at first sight 
seem so: the next verse decides διακονία to 
mean, ‘your administering by contribu- 


BCDFK 
LPN ab 
cdefg 
hkimn 
o 17. 47 


OO a ee 


9---Ἰῦ, 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINGIOTS B. 


059 


, \ rf Ν 
τουργίας ταύτης οὐ μόνον " ἐστὶν ἃ προςαναπληροῦσα TA zconstr., ser 


b 


΄ 7 “ c ς , ᾽ \ \ d / 5 \ 
ὑστερήματα τῶν °ayl@Vv, ἀλλὰ καὶ “ περισσεύουσα διὰ 


Acts il. 5 reff. 
ach. xi. 9 
only +. Wisd. 
only. 


nr A n an \ ral ΄-“ -“ xix. 4 y 
πολλῶν " εὐχαριστιῶν τῷ θεῷ" 1 διὰ τῆς “ δοκιμῆς τῆς v1Cor. νὴ 
: 7ὕ \ \ Nie in ς a See 
* διακονίας ταύτης ! δοξάζοντες τὸν θεὸν ' ἐπὶ τῇ 8 ὑποταγῇ © Acts ix 13 


a h e / e lal i » A ’ / na 
τῆς "ομολογίας ὑμῶν ' εἰς TO εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ χριστοῦ 


καὶ ἁπλότητι τῆς 


, 14 \ > a ὃ ΄ ς \ ς al Ὦ 2 θ Ve 
πάντας, 13 καὶ αὐτῶν δεήσει ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν " ἐπιποθούντων 
an 4 lal “ Free la 
ὑμᾶς διὰ τὴν 5 ὑπερβάλλουσαν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ ἐφ᾽ ὑμῖν. 
15 Ud A A q 3 \ aay > , ’ As A 

Ρ χάρις τῷ θεῷ Vert τῇ " ἀνεκδιηγήτῳ αὐτοῦ " δωρεᾷ. 


h (=) 1 Tim. vi. 12,13. Heb. iii. 1. iv.14. x. 23 only. Ῥ.ΗῚΣ 
Ἂς : 


i == Acts xx. 21. j ver. 11 
m 1 Cor. xvi. 1 reff. 
exviii. 174. 

q so ver. 13 reff. 
25. 2 Mace. iv. 30 only. 


o eh. iii. 10 reff. 
r here only +. 


n Rom. i. 11 reff. James iv. 5. constr., Phil. i.8, ii. 26. 


- ἃ Acts xvi. 5 
reff. 
e Rom. v.4 reff. 


> -- 
ΕἸ κοινωνίας '™ εἰς αὐτοὺς καὶ ™ εἰς f Luke ii. 20. 


Acts iv. 21. 
participial 
constr., ver. 
ll al. 
g Gal. ii. δ. 
1 Tim. ii. 11. 
111. 4 only +. 
(-τάσσειν, 
Rom. x. 3.) 
(Deut. xii. 17.) gen. of reference, Rom. vii. 2 reff. 
k Rom. xv. 26 reff. ἘΡΉΠ τ a. 
Wet. το ἢ Ὁ Ῥο, 
1 Cor. xv. 57. ch. ii. 14. viii. 16. 
Acts 1i. 38 al.t Wisd. vii. 14 xvi. 


p Rom. vi. 17. vii. 25. 
s John iv. 10. 


(Dan. ii. 6. y. 17 Theod.) 


12. for θεω, χριστω B 46: in Domino vulg [F-lat]. 


13. ins καὶ bef δια B. εαυτ. P. 


14. for ὑμων, nuwy B &}(but with v written above) Γιμὼων F-gr(not G)]. 


vuas ins Louw δὲβ [ Ambrst, pref ev 17 |. 


aft 


15. rec aft xapis ins δε, with C? D*-3[-gr] KLPX$rel [syrr copt arm Chr, Euthal- 
ms] Ambrst Sedul: om BC!D!FX! a 17 latt goth Aug, Pel Bede. 


tion,’ as in ver. 1) of this public service 
(Aer. here seems to approach more nearly 
to its proper sense, serving the public by 
furnishing the means of outfit for some 
necessary purpose) not only serves the end 
of supplying by its help the wants of 
the saints, but of abounding (περισσ. 
may be transitive as in ver. 8, not only 
filling up, but ‘ causing to overflow,’ what 
were ὕστερήματα. But the usual intran- 
sitive sense is preferable. The emphasis 
is ON mposavamA. and περισσεύουσα) by 
means of many thanksgivings to God 
(τῷ θεῷ with edyxap., as in ver. 11, not 
with περισσεύουσα, which would not, as 
Meyer observes, give the sense of abound- 
ing towards God,—this would be εἰς τ. 
θεόν, see Rom. v. 15, or eis τ. δόξαν τ. 
θεοῦ, as in ch. iv. 15,—but the objection- 
able one of περισσεύει μοί τι, as John vi. 
13; Luke ix. 17) ; 18.1 they (the 
recipients) glorifying God (the participle 
as in ver. 11, an anacoluthon) by means 
of (the proof, &c., is the occasion, by means 
of which) the proof (i. e. the tried reality 
-——the substantial help yielded by) of this 
(your) ministration, for the subjection of 
your confession as regards the Gospel of 
Christ (i. 6. that your ὁμολογία, ( = * you 
who confess Christ,’) ‘is really and truly 
subject in holy obedience, as regards the 
gospel of Christ.’ But eis must not be 
joined with ὑποταγῇ, as ‘ obedience to,’ or 
(E. V.) ‘subjectzon unto, —which is un- 
exampled, and would more naturally have 
the art., τῇ eis: it is towards, ‘ in refer- 
ence to,’ as in ref.) and liberality of your 
contribution as regards them and as re- 
gards all men (the same remarks apply to 


Vou. IT. 


eis asabove). Meyer would renderamAdrnre 
τῆς κοινωνίας, ‘the genuineness of your 
fellowship :’ but see note on Rom. xii. 8, 
and Rom. xv. 26. He also makes τῇ ὑὕπο- 
ταγῇ τῆς ὅμολ., ‘your subjection to your 
confession,’ which perhaps may be, but 
disturbs the parallel of ἁπλότητι τ. κοιν. 

14] The construction is very difti- 
cult. δεήσει may depend on περισσεύουσα, 
ver. 12 (but then we should expect διά as 
there),—or on δοξάζοντες (but then it 
should also depend on éri—and they could 
not be said to glorify God for their own 
prayers. If on δοξάζοντες as the instru- 
ment whereby, it seems strange that αὐτῶν 
should be expressed), or αὐτῶν δεήσει 
ὑπὲρ bu. ἐπιπ. bu. may be (as Meyer) a 
gen. absol., ‘while they desire you in 
prayers for you’ (but this, seems forced, 
and as De W. observes, would require 
τῇ either before or after δεήσει). In thie 
midst of these difficulties I see no way 
but this: the datives preceding, ὑποταγῇ 
and ἁπλότητι, have occasioned this also 
to be expressed in the dative, as thongh 
it depended on ἐπέ, whereas it is in reality 
parallel with διὰ πολλῶν εὐχαριστιῶν and 
dependent on περισσεύουσα. Again, the 
words in another point of view are pa- 
rallel with τῇ ὑποταγῇ and ἁπλότητι, 
inasmuch as these are ὑμῶν, and this 
δέησις is αὐτῶν. Amidst such compli- 
cated antitheses and attracted construc- 
tions, it may suffice if we discover thie 
clue to the original formation of the 
sentence: the meaning is obvious enough, 
viz. that glory also accrues to God by 
the prayers of the recipients, who are 
moved with the desire. of Christian love 


¥ ¥ 


690 


t Rom. xii. 1 
reff. 

u | Cor. iv. 21 
reff. 

v Acts xxiv. 4 
(reff.) only +. 

wver.7. Luke 
i. 31. Acts ili. 
13. 2 Chron. 
xiii. 8. 

a constr.,1 Cor. iv. 6. 


x Rom. xii. 16 reff. 
Phil. ii. 6. 


Cuap. X. 1. rec mpaornros, with CDKLN?3 rel: txt BFP! 17.. 
for εἰς umas, ev υμιν P [in vobis latt]. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


Winer, edn. 6, 3 44. 3. ὃ. 


X. 


rT > \ Δ": \ la a “ 
X. 1 Αὐτὸς δὲ ἐγὼ Παῦλος παρακαλῶ ὑμᾶς "διὰ 
lol ΝΑ . \ a a 
τῆς “mpaitynTos καὶ Y ἐπιεικείας τοῦ χριστοῦ, ὃς “ κατὰ 
τῇ 4 \ x Ν > Ὁ “ y ? \ δὲ Ζ θ 9 δ δὰ ? 
πρόςωπον μὲν * ταπεινὸς ἐν ὑμῖν, Υ ἀπὼν δὲ 5 θαῤῥῶ εἰς 
ξ δον δ ὃ , ὃ \ a \ \ y \ Ζ θ γε. a b 
ὑμᾶς" 3 δέομαι δὲ ὃ τὸ μὴ Y παρὼν * θαῤῥῆσαι τῇ ὃ πεποι- 


y 1 Cor. ν. 3 reff. 


zch. vy. 6, 8 reff. 
Ὁ ch, i. 15 reff. 


for εἰς, δι᾽ B. 


2. aft τη πεποιθησει ins Tavtn C*(hence to orAa της, ver 4, C is rewritten) copt. 


(reff-) to you, on account of the grace 
of God which abounds eminently to- 
wards (over) you (ἐφ᾽ tp. belonging to 
ὕπερβ. not to χάριν, which would, but 
not of absolute necessity, require τήν). 

15.] Having entered, in the three 
last verses, deeply into the thankful 
spirit which would be produced in these 
recipients of the bounty of the Corinthians, 
he concludes with an ascription, in the 
spirit also of a thankful recipient, of un- 
feigned thanks to Him, who hath enriched 
us by the gift of His only Son, which brings 
with it that of all things else (Rom. viii. 
32), and is, in all its wonders of grace and 
riches of mercy, truly ineffable, ἀνεκδιήγη- 
τος. [Ὁ 15 impossible to apply such a term, 
so emphatically placed as here, to any gift 
short of THAT ONE. And the ascription, 
as coming from Paul’s fervent spirit, is very 
natural in this connexion. This interpre- 
tation is preferred by Chrys. Hom. xx. p. 
579 f. (δωρεὰν δὲ ἐνταῦθα λέγει καὶ τὰ 
τοσαῦτα ἀγαθὰ τὰ διὰ τῆς ἐλεημοσύνης 
γινόμενα καὶ τοῖς λαμβάνουσι καὶ τοῖς 
παρέχουσιν" ἢ τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα ἀγαθὰ τὰ διὰ 
τῆς παρουσίας αὐτοῦ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ πάσῃ 
μετὰ πολλῆς δωρηθέντα τῆς φιλοτιμίας" ὃ 
καὶ μάλιστά ἐστιν ὑποπτεῦσαι. ἵνα γὰρ καὶ 
καταστείλῃ, καὶ δαψιλεστέρους ἐργάσηται, 
ὧν ἔτυχον παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ, τούτων αὐτοὺς 
ἀναμιμνήσκει. καὶ γὰρ μέγιστον τοῦτο εἰς 
προτρυπὴν ἀρετῆς ἁπάσης' διὸ καὶ ἐν- 
ταῦθα τὸν λόγον κατέκλεισεν), and Thi. 
(who, after beginning as Chrys., proceeds: 
n Kal τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἀναμιμνήσκει ὧν ἠξιώ- 
θημεν διὰ τῆς σαρκώσεως τοῦ χριστοῦ, 
@savel τοιαῦτα λέγων Μηδὲν» μέγα νομί- 
oOnTe ὑμεῖς ποιεῖν." ἀνεκδιήγητα γάρ εἶσι 
τὰ ἀγαθὰ ἃ ἐλάβομεν παρὰ θεοῦ καὶ εἰ 
ὀλίγα καὶ φθαρτὰ δῶμεν, τί μέγα;) It is 
also given by Bengel (“ Deus nobis dedit 
abundantiam bonorum internorum et ex- 
ternorum, que et ipsa est inenarrabilis, et 
fructus habet consimiles”’), Meyer, al. 
The other explanation (see Chrys. above) 
is that of Calv., Grot., Est., al. 

Cuap. X. 1—XIII. 18.] Turrp Part 
OF THE EPISTLE. DEFENCE OF HIS APOS- 
TOLIC DIGNITY, AND LABOURS, AND SUF- 
FERINGS, AGAINST HIS ADVERSARIES: 
WITH ANNOUNCEMENT OF HIS INTENDED 
COURSE TOWARDS THEM ON HIS ENSUING 


VISIT. X. 1—6.] He assures them of 
the spiritual nature, and power, of his 
apostolic office: and prays them not to 
make it necessary for him to use such au- 
thority against his traducers at his coming. 

1.1 δέ marks the transition toa new 
subject,—and αὐτός points on to the 
personal characteristics mentioned below, 
‘ Ego idem Paulus, qui . . . ;? the words ἐγὼ 
Παῦλος setting his Apostolic dignity in 
contrast with the depreciation which fol- 
lows. Sometimes however we have αὐτός 
used, where the only object seems to be to 
bring out the personality more strongly : 
so 1 Thess. iii. 11; iv. 16; v.23; 2 Thess. 
ii. 16; iii. 16. See also Rom. vii. 25: and 
ch. xii. 13 :—and such may be the case 
here:—but the és rather favours the 
former interpretation. διὰ τ. πρ. κ. 
ἔπ.7 as in Rom. xii. 1, using the meekness 
and gentleness of Christ (Matt. xi. 29, 30) 
as a motive whereby he conjures them. 
And most: appropriately: he beseeches 
them by the gentleness of Christ, not to 
compel him to use towards them a method 
of treatinent so alien from that gentleness : 
“Remember how gentle my Master was, 
and force not me His servant to be other- 
wise towards you.” ** πραὔτης, lenitas, 
virtus magis absoluta: ἐπιείκεια, equitas, 
magis refertur ad alios,’” Bengel. See 
many examples in Wetst. ὃς κατὰ 
πρός.) Who in personal appearance in- 
deed (am) mean among you (he appro- 
priates concessively, but at the same time 
with some irony,—so Chrys. Hom. xxi. p. 
583, κατ᾽ εἰρωνείαν φησί, τὰ ἐκείνων φθεγ- 
yéuevos,—the imputation by which his 
adversaries strove to lessen the weight of 
his letters. κατὰ mp. is not a 
Hebraism: Wetst. quotes several instances 
of its usage by Polybius), but when absent 
am bold (severe, outspoken in blame) 
towards you; 2.1 but (however this 
may be, assuming this character of me to 
be true or not, as you please ;—or, not- 
withstanding that I may have been hitherto 
ταπεινός among you) I pray (you) (not, 
God, as Bengel (1), al.) that I may not 
(τὸ μή sets the object of δέομαι in a 
stronger light, see reff.) when present 
(‘as I intend to be :᾿---- at my next visit’) 
have to be beld (see above) with the con- 


BCDFK 
LPNab 
cedefg 
hkimn 
017.47 








1---Ο. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


691 


7 ? fal 
θήσει 7) ° λογίζομαι ἃ τολμῆσαι ἐπί τινας τοὺς ° λογιζομέ- «- here only. 


νους ἡμᾶς “ ὡς ἴξ κατὰ ®% σάρκα περιπατοῦντας. 
h σαρκὶ γὰρ ' περιπατοῦντες οὐ ὃ κατὰ ὃ σάρκα 1 στρατευό- 
μεθα: * τὰ yap " ὅπλα τῆς ' στρατείας ἡμῶν οὐ ™ σαρκικά, 
ἀλλὰ δυνατὰ "τῷ θεῷ “ πρὸς Ῥ καθαίρεσιν 4“ ὀχυρωμάτων' 
ὅ τλογισμοὺς " καθαιροῦντες καὶ πᾶν "ὕψωμα " ἐπαιρόμε- 


Kings 
XVill, 25, 
λογιζόμενοι 
ἥξειν ἅμα 
ἡλίῳ δύνον- 


95." ἐν 


e Rom. Vili. 36. 


\ - , ν nr a \ w 5 ͵ 1 Cor. iv. Ll. 

νον κατὰ τῆς γνώσεως " τοῦ θεοῦ, Kat * αὐχμαλωτίζον- 1 Or ir} 

n x , ’ \ y ς \ a ~ 6 \ f Rom. viii. 4. 

TES πᾶν VOHMA ELS Τὴν UTTAKONV TOU χριστου, Kal ε Rom. 1.9 

h = Gal. ii. 206. Phil. i. 22, 24. Col. ii.1. 1 Tim. iii. 16. Philem. 16. i ch. iv. 2 reff. 
j 1 Cor. ix. 7 reff. k = ch. vi. 7 (reff.). 11 Tim. i. 18 only +t. m 1 Cor, iii. 3 reff. 
n dat., Acts vii. 20 reff. o = ch. viii. 19 reff. p ver. 8 reff. q here only. Proy. 
xxi. 22. 1 Mace. v. 65. τ Rom. ii. 15 only. Prov. vi. 18. Jer. xi. 19. s= Acts 
xix. 27. Lam. ii. 2. τ Rom. viii. 39 only. Job xxiv. 24. Judith x. 8. xiii. 4 only. 
u=ch.xi.20. Ezraiv.19. Dan. xi. 14 Theod. v gen. object., ch. ii. 14. w Rom. vii. 23 


reff. x ch. ii. 11 reff. 


om τινας C?, 
3. περιπατουντας Ε΄. 


y and constr., Rom. i. 5 


reff. 


4. στρατιας (for -e.as) [B'?(Tischdf)] CDFKLPS e 11 m n 47: txt B[-corr(appy, 


Tischdf] 17. 


5. καθαιρουντων D! Orig,[? ]{and int, : txt,) Meth,. 
at end ins αγοντες 1) ΕἸ ηοῦ F-lat] goth. 


D-lat spec }. 


fidence (official peremptoriness, and re- 
liance on my authority) with which I 
reckon (am minded: not passive, ‘am 
reckoned, as Vulg., Luther, Beza, Estius, 
Bengel, al., which, as Meyer remarks, 
would naturally require ἀπών with τολμῆ- 
σαι) to be bold towards [against] some, 
(namely) those who reckon (of) us as 
walking according to the flesh (περιπα- 
τεῖν κατὰ σάρκα is well explained by 
Kstius, ‘hoc est, secundum carnales et 
humanos affectus vitam et actiones in- 
stituere Putabant enim Paulum, 
quando presens erat, sive captande gratiz 
causa, sive quod timeret offendere, vel 
simili affectu humano prohibitum fuisse, 
ne potestatem exerceret, quam absens per 
literas venditabat’). 8.1] The yap here 
shews that this verse is not the refutation 
of the charge κατὰ σάρκα περιπατεῖν, but 
a reason rendered for the δέομαι above ; 
and ἐν σαρκί and κατὰ σάρκα allude only 
to the charge just mentioned. This indeed 
is shewn by the use, and enlargement in 
vv. 46, of στρατευόμεθα, instead of περι- 
πατοῦμεν :—they who accuse us of walking 
after the flesh, shall find that we do not 
war after the flesh: therefore compel us 
not to use our weapons. ἐν gap. γ. 
περιπ.} Although we walk in the flesh, 
i. e. are found in the body,—yet we do not 
take our apostolic weapons from the flesh 
—do not make its rule our rule of warfare. 
4.| Enlargement of the idea in 
στρατευόμεθα. If the warfare were ac- 
cording to the flesh, its weapons would be 
carnal ; whereas now, as implied, they are 
spiritual, δυνατὰ τῷ Oe¢,—powerful in 
the sight of God (i.e. ‘in His estimation,’ 
‘after His rule of warfare. It is nota 
Hebraism ; see on ref. Acts; and for the 
᾿ 4 


om 2nd και ΕἾ (not F-lat) 


dat., Winer, edn. 6, § 31.4. Some ren- 
der it, ‘dy means of God, —Beza, Grot., 
Estius, Bengel, 4]. : others, ‘for God, — 
God’s means of shewing his power,—Bill- 
roth, al., but wrongly) in order to pulling 
down of strongholds (see ref. Prov. So 
Philo de Abrah. ὃ 38, vol. 11. p. 32, τὸν 
ἐπιτειχισμὸν τῶν ἐναντίων δοξῶν καθαιρεῖν, 
—see also de Confus. ling. § 26, vol. i. 
p- 424. Cf. Stanley: who thinks that 
recollections of the Mithridatic- and 
piratical wars may have contributed to 
this imagery. The second of these, 
not more than sixty years before the Apos- 
tle’s birth, and in the very scene of his 
earlier years, was ended by the reduction 
of 120 strongholds, and the capture of more 
than 10,000 prisoners). 5.] The nom. 
καθαιροῦντες refers to ἡμεῖς, the implied 
subject of ver. 4;—this verse carrying on 
the figure in ὀχυρωμάτων. By λογισμούς 
he means, as Chrys., p. 585, τὸν τῦφον 
τὸν Ἑλληνικόν, καὶ τῶν συφισμάτων κ. 
τῶν συλλογισμῶν τὴν ἰσχύν :-ὀυυὖ not 
only these :—every towering conceit κατὰ 
σάρκα is also included. K. πᾶν UW. | 
And every lofty edifice (fortress or 
tower) which is being raised (or, raising 
itself) against the knowledge of God 
(i.e. the true knowledge of Him in the 
Gospel; not subjective here, but taken 
objectively, the comparata being human 
knowledge, as lifted up against the know- 
ledge of God, i.e. the Gospel itself), 
and leading captive every intent of the 
mind (not ‘ thought, as E. V.: not i- 
tellectual subjection here, but that of tbe 
will, is intended) into subjection to Christ 
(in the figure he treats 7 ὑπακοὴ τ. χριστοῦ, 
the new state into which the will is brought 
by its subjection, as the country into which 
¥ 2 





692 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. X 

vhere only. 7 ἐν ὅ ἑτοίμῳ 5 ἔχοντες ὃ ἐκδικῆσαι πᾶσαν ὃ παρακοήν, ὅταν BCDFK 
ὁ [ως ἔχειν ς πληρωθῇ ὑμῶν ἡ ἃ ὑπακοή. c ἄντα 

Jet) ag 1 Τὰ “κατὰ "πρόςωπον βλέπετε; εἴ tis “ποηοιθὲν οἸΤΗ͂Σ 


reff. ς a g a > ‘ 
Ὁ Rom. vy. 19. EAaUTW χρίστου ELL al, 


Heb. ii. 2 


τοῦτο "' λογιζέσθω ‘madkw jad’ 


wt ἑαυτοῦ, " ὅτι καθὼς αὐτὸς χριστοῦ, οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς. 
9... ΄ cS Ul , / 
myer 8 ἐάν * [τε] " γὰρ "ἢ περισσότερόν ™ τι καυχήσωμαι περὶ 


c = John iii. 29, 


al. fr. Dan. vili. 23. t 
dat., Phil. i. 14. Philem. 21. Prov. xiv. 16. 
h constr., Rom. ii. 3 reff. i = 1 Gor. xii. 21. 


Ἰ ch. ii. 7 reff. m Luke xii. 4 only. 


6. for ev ετοίμω, ετοιμως D! Orig,. 


d w. gen. subj., Kom. v. 19, xv. 18. xvi. 19 al. 
Isa. xxviii. 17, inf., Rom. ii. 19. 


e ver. 1. f constr. 
g = 1.Cor. i, 12. iti. 23. 


j ch. iii. 5 reff. k = Rom. i, 26. vii. 7. 


aft mAnpw6n ins προτερον C 39 fri Aug,. 


1 
ἢ ὑπακοὴ bef vuwy D} 3 ΕΓ (not F-lat) Ambrst Aug].—yuev D! F(not G). 


1%. for πεποιθεν, δοκει πεποιθεναι B. 
ms. παλιν bef λογιζεσθω P [a]. 
intra G-lat. 


aft χριστου ins δουλος DF flor fuld Ambrst- 


for ad, ep BLN; apud vulg D-lat F-lat ; 


rec aft nue:s ins xpiorov, with D3[-gr] KL rel copt-wilk Damase Kc: 


om BCD!FPR 17 latt syrr goth eth arm Chr [ Euthal-ms] Thdrt ΤῺ] Ambrst Pei. 
8. om te BF ἃ 17 [arm] Chr ΤῊ]: ins CDKLPR® rel [syr eth] Thdrt Damasc 


Ambrst. 


rec ins καὶ bef περισσοτερον, with D%[-gr] KL rel Syr syr-mg Chr 


Thdrt Damasc: om BCD!FPR! ¢ latt copt goth eth arm [Euthal-ms Ambrst]. 


τι bef περισσ. ΕΓ (μοῦ F-lat) D-lat] Ambrst Vig, : om 7: m! arm Sedul. 


LPN ecfk Thi: -σωμεθα 17. 


it is led captive: compare Luke xxi. 24). 

6.1 But perhaps some will not thus 
be subjected. In that case we are ready 
to inflict punishment on them: but not till 
every opportunity has been given them to 
join the ranks of the obedient ; when your 
obedience (stress on ὑμῶν) shall have 
been completed. He does not mention 
any persons—not the disobedient, but 
every (case of) disobedience, and throws 
out ὑμεῖς into strong relief, as charitably 
embracing all, or nearly all, those to whom 
he was writing. Lachmann, strangely, and 
as it seems to me most absurdly, puts a 
period at παρακοήν, and joins ὅταν πλη- 
ρωθῇ tu. ἡ ὑπακοή, Ta κατὰ πρόξωπον 
βλέπετε. More complete ignorance of the 
Apostle’s style, and non-appreciation of 
the fine edge of his hortatory irony, can 
hardly be evinced, than this. 

7—XII. 21.] A digression, in which 
he vindicates his apostolic dignity, his 
Sruitfulness in energy and in sufferings, 
and the honour put on him by the Lord 
in revelations made to him. 7—11.] 
He takes them on their own ground. 
They had looked on his outward appear- 
ance and designated it as mean. Well 
then, he says: ‘do ye regard outward 
appearance? even on that ground I will 
shew you that I am an Apostle—I will 
bear out the severity of my letters: I 
will demonstrate myself to be as much 
Christ’s, as those who vaunt themselves 
to be especially His.’ This rendering 
suits the context best, and keeps the 
sense of κατὰ mpéswrov in ver. 1. The 
imperative rendering of Vulg., Ambrose, 
Theophyl., Billr., Riick., Olsh., De Wette, 
al.,—‘ look at the things before your eyes,’ 


καυχήσομαι 


is objectionable (Meyer), (1) from altering 
the meaning of κατὰ mpdswrov: (2) be- 
cause it gives too tame a sense for the 
energy of the passage: (3) because βλέπετε 
generally in such sentences, in Paul’s style, 
comes first, see 1 Cor. i. 26; x. 18; Phil. 
iii. 2 (866) ; Col. iv. 17. Another way, is 
to take it as said without a question, but 
indicatively. So Chrys., Calvin, ‘ Magni 
facitis alios qui magnis ampullis turgent,— 
me, quia ostentatione et jactantia careo, de- 
spicitis.’ Butin that case, surely some fur- 
ther intimation would have been given of 
such a sentiment than merely these words, 
—the break after which, without any con- 
necting particle, would thus be exceedingly 
harsh. Others again fancifully mix up 
with κατὰ mpéswm. the supposed charac- 
teristics of the (?) Christ-party, the having 
seen Christ in the flesh: the being headed 
by James the brother of the Lord, &e. &e. 

εἴτις. .. .7 If any one believes 
himself to belong to Christ (lit. ‘ trusts in 
himself to belong.’ From 1 Cor. i. 12, 
it certainly was one line taken by the ad- 
versaries of the Apostle to boast of a nearer 
connexion with, a more direct obedience 
to, Christ. in contradistinction to Paul: 
and to this mind among them he here 
alludes), let him reckon this again out 
of his own mind (i. e. let him think afresh, 
and come to a conclusion obvious to any 
one’s common sense (ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ) and not 
requiring any extraneous help to arrive at 
it), that as he is Christ’s, so also are we 
(that whatever intimate connexion with or 
close service of Christ he professes, such, 
and no less, is mine). 8.] This is 
shewn to beso. Even more boasting than 
he had ever yet made of his apostolic 


“«ὑμων 


Cc. 
BDFKL 
Prabe 
detgh 
kimno 
17, 47 





portance of the fact. 


7—ll1. 


TIPO KOPIN@IOT®S B. 


693 


~ n2 €,.. τὧὦ ο 2 Ρ 25 cd 7 > q ’ \ Ὶ 
τῆς ἢ ἐξουσίας ἡμῶν 5 ἧς Ῥέδωκεν ὁ κύριος εἰς οἰκοδομὴν n see 1 Cor. ix. 


\ > ᾽ r / (s “ ᾽ ς ] θ ΄ 9 vd 
καὶ οὐκ εἰς ᾿ καθαίρεσιν ὑμῶν, οὐκ ὃ αἰσχυνθήσομαι, 3 ἵνα 


4, and passim. 
= ch. xiii. 10. 
o attr., Acts i. 


, “ἡ A Lal lal »“ 1 ff. 
μὴ δόξω " ὡς "ἂν " ἐκφοβεῖν ὑμᾶς διὰ τῶν ἐπιστολῶν. p so Matt. x.1 
τι 


al. fi 


" / ~ \ > / * 
10 ὅτι ai μὲν ἐπιστολαί ἡ φησιν δ᾽ βαρεῖαι καὶ * ἰσχυραί, ἡ 9; Rom. xiv. 
: Pi ei , δ pe oe One 2 ver. 4. ch. 
δὲ Yqrapovalia τοῦ σώματος 2 ἀσθενὴς καὶ ὁ λόγος ὃ ἐξουθε- "ὯΝ to ony +. 
, ll b an b ΄ θ ΠΣ a bi ea y Macc. ill. 
νημένος. τοῦτο ὃ λογιζέσθω °o " τοιοῦτος, ὃ ὅτι οἷοί ἌΣ 
-ρεῖν, ὑ 
5.) s Luke xvi. 3. Phil. i. 20. 1 Pet. iv. 16. lJohnii. 28 only. Ps. xxxiv. 4. Ὁ { we fins 
here only. μεγάλα χρήματα ws ἂν εἶναι “Podwmtos, Herod. ii. 135. τ here only. Levit. 


xxvi.6. (-Bos, Mark ix. 6.) 
x1 Cor. i. 25 reff. iv. 10. 


xiv. 3 reff. Ὁ ver. 7. 


om ἡμων ΟΡ [115-9] Syr copt Chr. 
G-lat fri [Vig]. 


Vv see note. 
y 1 Cor. xvi. 17 reff. 
c Acts xxii. 22 reff. 


w = Matt. xxiii. 23. Acts xxv. 7 (reff.). 
z see 1 Cor. i. 25, a Rom. 


for kupios, Geos D'(and lat) F(-gr and lat) 


rec adds μιν, with D3[-gr] F[-gr] KL? rel goth Thdrt [ Damasc]: 


μοι Syr copt Chr, Thi: pref ημιν P 73 [vulg-clem F-lat am* syr arm Ambrst Vig]: om BC 


D\(and lat) &' 17 am}(with tol al) wth [ Huthal-ms ]. 
9. δοξωμεν D}{and lat] F(not F-lat) Ambrst. 


εκφοβουντες D G-lat(altern): εκφοβων P. 
10. emir. bef μεν ΒΝ]. 


power, would not disgrace him, but would 
be borne out by the fact. For if we were 
to boast (ἐάν is not concessive, but hy- 
pothetical, as in 1 Cor. xiii. 1. τε γάρ 
generally has a corresponding clause fol- 
lowing, with τε, καί, δέ, or 7, as Eur. 
Phoen. 1313, ἐμός τε yap παῖς γῆς ὄλωλ᾽ 
ὑπερθανών,. . .. βοᾷ δὲ δῶμα πᾶν, so in 


reff. and Thucyd. i. 12 bis,—but some-. 


times the corresponding clause is wanting, 
being understood, or, as apparently here 
and in Heb. ii. 11, allowed to pass out of 
mind while following out the thought of 
the first clause. See Hartung, Parti- 
kellehre, i. 115. 5) somewhat more abun- 
dantly (than we have ever done: or than 


in vv. 3—6) concerning our power | 


which the Lord has given for building 
you up and not for pulling you down (καὶ 
πῶς φησι, λογισμοὺς καθαιροῦντες; ὅτι αὐτὸ 
τοῦτο μάλιστα οἰκοδομῆς εἶδός ἐστι, τὸ τὰ 
κωλύματα ἀναιρεῖν, καὶ τὰ σαθρὰ διελέγ- 
χειν, καὶ τὰ ἀληθῆ συντιθέναι ἐν οἰκοδομῇ. 
Chrys. Hom. xxii. p. 589), I shall not 
be put to shame (οὐ δειχθήσομαι ψευ- 
δόμενος οὐδὲ ἀλαζονευόμενος, Chrys. ib.). 

9.7 follows on ver. 8, but requires 
some clause to be supplied such as ‘ And 
I say this,’ or the like. Meyer would join 
it immediately to αἰσχυνθ., and regard it 
as the purpose to be served by the fact 
verifying his boast. But as De W. ob- 
serves, a particular result like this can 
hardly be bound on to a general assertion 
like that of ver. 8. To suppose the pur- 
pose of Pani’s boast of apostolic power 
being borne out, to be merely ἵνα μὴ δόξω, 
&c., would be out of keeping with the im- 
So that ἵνα μὴ 
δόξω is much better taken subjectively—l1 
say this, because I wish not to seem, &c. 
ὡς av,—as Vulg. ‘tanquam terrere vos.’ 
It takes off the harshness of ἐκφοβεῖν. “ὡς 
ἄν in later (? see ref.) Greek, has the sense 


φασιν B latt(exc D-lat) syrr goth. 


for υμ., ἡμων F[-gr](not G). 
om ws av D'[-gr]. 


εξουδενημενος Β. 


of ‘ quasi, tanquam,’—&y losing its proper 
force, in a commonly current expression ; 
and the sense is much the same as that of 
ὡς alone.’ Meyer. Winer takes as ἂν 
ἐκφοβεῖν as = as ἂν ἐκφοβοῖμι, edn. 6, 
§ 42. 6 (but see Moulton’s note, p. 390, 
1, who prefers the account given above), 
and is followed by Olsh., but this, in 
the presence of the above idiom, is un- 
necessary. διὰ τῶν ἐπιστολῶν" 
He had written ¢wo before this, see 
1 Cor. v. 9; but this is not necessarily 
here implied: for he may reckon this 
which he is now writing. Still less can 
we infer hence that a third had been 
written before this (Bleek). 10.] 
φησίν, taken by Winer (edn. 6, ὃ 58. 9. 
ὃ. [B.]), De W., and Meyer, as impersonal 
—heift e8, ‘men say? but why should not 
the tis of ver. 7, and 6 τοιοῦτος of ver. 
11, be the subject ? βαρεῖαι} see 
in Wetst., definitions from the rhetori- 
cians of βαρύτης in discourse. Among 
other illustrations of it, Aristides mentions 
ὅταν τι ἄτοπον ἑαυτῷ καταράσῃ" οἷον, 
τεθνάναι μᾶλλον ἣ ταῦτ᾽ εἰρηκέναι βούλο- 
μαι (see 1 Cor. ix. 15), and ὅταν εἰς κρίσιν 
ἀγάγῃς τῶν τεθνεώτων ἐνδόξων, . .. .. 
οἷον, πηλίκον ἂν στενάξαιεν οἱ πρόγονοι 
(see 1 Cor. xv. 18). Tapovgia.... 
ἀσθενής] No countenance 15. given by 
these words to the idea that Paul was of 
weak physical constitution, or short in 
stature. His own explanation of them is 
sufficient as given in 1 Cor. ii. 1 ff. It is, 
that when he was present among them, he 
brought, not the strength of presence or 
words of the carnal teachers, but abjured 
all such influence and in fear and trembling 
preached Christ crucified. It was this, 
and not weakness of voice, which made his 
λόγος to be ἐξουθενημένος. - At the same 
time, the contrast being between his ep/s- 
tles. and his werd of mouth, his.authority 


691 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. x. 


3 πὶ - , ὃ ’ DI] a e > , rf \ 
d Rom.xv.1s. €OMEV TO λόγῳ ι ἐπιστολὼν ξ“ἄποντες, τοιοῦτοι Καὶ BDFK 


Col. ii. 17. 


ε 7 ~ » ¢ a“ Lal LP’ 
| Join ii. 18. © qrapoytes ἃ τῷ ἔργῳ. 15 od yap ' τολμῶμεν ξ ἐγκρῖναι ἢ ς ἃ 


(see 1 Cor. iv. 
19, 20. 
1 Thess. 1. 5.) 
e 1 Cor. v.3 > Ἢ > \ k? e = e \ ΕἸ Ἔ Loh 
reff. : ἀλλα αυτοὶι εν εαὐτοις EAVUTOVS μέτρουντες, Kab avy- 
f = 1 Cor. vi. 1 ‘ z 2 " : yi Σ Η͂ ‘ ; 
g here only τ. KpLVvovVTes E€AUTOVS EAVUTOLS OV ™ guvliacly. 13 NMELS δὲ ουκ 
os. B. J. ii. 
8. 7, εἰς τὸν ὅμιλον ἐγκρίνεται. 
18 i Ist pers., ch. iii. 1 reff. j 
las above (k). Lukei. 38. 


h here bis. 1 Cor. ii. 13 only $. Gen. xl. 8 al. = Wisd. vii. 29. xv. 
j ch. iii. 1 (reff.) k Matt. vii. 2 bis. Mark 


)- 


iv. 24 bis only. Rey. xi. 1, 2. xxi. 15, 16,17 only. Exod. xvi. 18. 


m Rom. xv. 21 reff. 

12. toAuw (for -uwuev) B: τολμων τη. for εγκρ., κριναι F n. add eautous 
D}/ and lat]. om τισιν D}[-gr]. αλλ᾽ 11, a m 17 [Chr,]. om 3rd 
εαυτους N}(ins N-corr! °>!). 2nd eavros bef 4th eavtrovs DK m Chr, Thdrt. 
ree συνίουσιν, with DIKLP rel: cumoacw δξὶ [93]: txt B X-corr!3 m 17 [Euthal-ms] 
Thdrt-ed.—om ov συνιασιν ques δε D'(and lat) F vulg[ but ins nu. δε] Ambrst Sing- 
cler, Sedul Vig,. (Perhaps the transcriber’s eye passed from ov above to ovr follg, and 
so omitted all between: or perhaps on acct of the difficulty of the words. See the 


-“ s 4 \ A . . m 
2 συγκρῖναι | ἑαυτοὺς τισὶν τῶν 1 ἑαυτοὺς J συνιστανόντων" 1017.47 


readings discussed in Stanley’s note.) 
13. om ἡμεῖς δε [see above] D'F. 


as unaccompanied or accompanied by his 
presence, it must be assumed, that there 
was something (see on ch. xii. 7) which 
discommended his appearance and delivery. 
See the traditional authorities for the 
Apostle’s personal appearance, in Winer’s 
Realw. vol. ii. p. 221, note. 11.} λογι- 
ζέσθω, as in ver. 7. ὁ τοιοῦτος, ViZ. Who 
thus speaks. The introduction of the verse 
without any connecting particle gives force 
and emphasis. After παρόντες supply 
ἐσμεν, not ἐσόμεθα. Not only the conduct 
of the Apostle on his next visit, but his 
general character, is in question. 
12—18.} The difficulty of this passage 
is universally acknowledged. In early times 
Theodoret wrote: ἀσαφῶς Grav τὸ χώρημα 
τοῦτο γέγραφεν, and adds asa reason, évap- 
ya@s ἐλέγξαι τοὺς αἰτίους οὐ βουλόμενος. 
He substantiates what has just been said, 
by shewing how unlike he is to those vain 
per ons who boast of other men’s labours ; 
—for he boasts of what God had really 
done among them by him, and hopes that 
this boast may be yet more increased. 
12. disclaims resemblance to those 
fulse teachers who made themselves their 
only standard. For we do not venture 
(ironical ;—“ dum dicit quod non faciat, 
notat quid isti faciant.” Bengel) to number 
ourselves with (συναριθμῆσαι, Theophyl., 
(Ecum., ‘inserere, Vulg.: see examples 
ot this usage, with eis principally, but 
also with μετά and ἐπί w. gen., in Wetst.), 
or compare ourselves with (συγκρίνειν is 
properly, in classical Greek, ‘to com- 
pound,’ or ‘unite: but in later Greek, ‘ to 
compare : 6 συγκριτικὸς τρόπας, with the 
grammarians, is the comparative degree) 
some of those who commend themselves 
(the charge made against him, ἑαυτὸν 
συνιστάνει, see ch. iii. 1; v. 12, he makes 
“sa true one against the false teachers) ;— 
but (they), themselves measuring them- 


rec ovxt, with D% rel ec: txt BD'FKLPR> 


selves by themselves, and comparing 
themselves with themselves, are not 
wise. The renderings are very various. 
Chrys. al., read συνιοῦσιν, and make it a 
particip., τουτέστι, μὴ αἰσθανομένοις πῶς 
εἰσι καταγέλαστοι τοιαῦτα ἀλαζονευόμενοι, 
p. 590: and see again below. Others, read- 
ing the same, take it rightly, as = συνιᾶσιν, 
but make μετροῦντες, &e., the object of 
συνιοῦσιν : ‘know not that they are mea- 
suring, &c.: but the corresponding sen- 
tence, ἡμεῖς δὲ «.7.A., shews that this sense 
would be irrelevant ; for the Apostle does 
not oppose their ignorance of their foolish 
estimate of themselves to his own prac- 
tice, but that foolish estimate itself. 
Others again, as Emmerling and Olshausen, 
take ἀλλὰ---συνιοῦσιν (or -aow) to apply 
to the Apostle himself, as contrasted with 
the τινές : ‘ We do not venture, &c.,—but 
we ourselves measure (supply ἐσμεν, ‘are 
in the habit of measuring’) ourselves by 
ourselves (i.e. as ver. 18, by what the 
Lord has really made us to be), and com- 
pare ourselves with ourselves, foolish as 
we are (reputed to be:—ouvmovow being a 
participle). But foolish we are not: we 
will not boast ourselves, &e. 
this rendering would absolutely require 
the article before οὐ συνιοῦσιν, which, 
anarthrous, would imply, not an imputa 
tion, but the fact: (2) the mode of 
expression (αὐτοὶ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ἕαυτ. perp.) 
would be a most extraordinary one te 
convey the meaning supposed:—and (3) 
the meaning itself would be irrelevant when 
obtained. Another variety of this render- 
ing is to take (as Bos, Schrader, al.) éav- 
τοῖς, οὐ συνιοῦσιν, = ἑαυτοῖς, ov τοῖς 
cvviovo.v—with ourselves, not with the 
wise: which is also inadmissible. 

Others again (see var. read.) would omit οὐ 
συνιᾶσιν (or -οὔσιν)" ἡμεῖς 5¢€,—which has 
been au evident correction, on the suppo- 


But (1) . 





Nab 
efg 
] 








12—15. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


695 


n° No 7 n 4 τ \ Ἀ Ν , a 
T . 16, 
εἰς τὰ “ ἄμετρα καυχησόμεθα, ἀλλὰ KATA τὸ μέτρον τοῦ ΒῈ ΜῈ 


. xii. 6. 


Ρ κανόνος «οὗ "ἐμέρισεν ἡμῖν ὁ θεὸς * μέτρου ὃ ἐφικέσθαι ἐπαινεῖν 


t yy \ ς - 
ἄχρι καὶ υὑμων. 


a / ΄ J 
ὑμᾶς " ὑπερεκτείνομεν " ἑαυτούς, 
Ww ’ θ / x 5 A > % / Lal ο ~ = 

ep ασαμεν εν τω ξευῶγΎΞΕ ιῳω του χρίιστ υ 
v.r.) only. Mic. vii. 4. Judith xiii. 6 only. = Job xxxviii. 5 Aq. (σπαρτίον, LXX.) 


7 Rom. xii. 3 (reff.}. 
Ed-vat. compl. 30 Ed-vat. ἄς. (C def. a®. ABN) only- 


(ver. 8.) 1 John il. 25. 


only τ. v lst pers., ver. 12. 


7 Theod. 


e πὶ 17 Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damasc ΤῊ], 


so ver 15) latt. 


καυχωμενοι F Sing-cler: om D!(and lat). 


\ > ’ ἘΡΕ,ὦ »- 
14 οὐ γὰρ ὡς μὴ " ἐφικνούμενοι εἰς Pte ΑἸο. 1, 


o here bis only+. 
ί-τρητος, 
15 Β Isa. xxii. 18.) 
9 οὐκ Pp vv. 15, 16. 
Gal vi. 16. 
(Phil. iii. 16 
: q attr., 
s here bis only+. Sir. xliii. 27C 
_ t= Acts xi. 5 reff. u here 
w Rom. ix. 31 reff. 2 Chron. xxviii.9. Dan. viii. 


t ἢ Ἁ \ e ~ 
ἄχρι yap Kal ὑμῶν 


x Rom. i. 9. ch. viii. 18 al. 


To αμετρον DIF : immensum (and 
οσου M [672]. 


for ἐμερισεν, ἐμετρησεν M ἃ 49. θ4-73. 74 [so latt(exe fri) Sing-cler Vig]. 


om nuw ΕἾ ποῦ F-lat] L. 
[ Epiph, ] Chr-ms. 


14. for ov yap ws, ws yap B 114-6: ov γ. μὴ ws P [Chr]. 
αφικν. K: αφικομενοι F: αφικουμενοι 106: 


X-corr!) d. 


sition that ἀλλὰ αὐτοὶ «.7.A. belonged to 
the Apostle, to expunge words so much 
in the way of such an interpretation. 
I may observe that much of the difficulty 
has arisen from taking αὐτοί with ἀλλά 
as the subject to οὐ συνιᾶσιν, whereas 
it belongs to what follows, ἀλλὰ αὐτοὶ ἐν 
€auT. €auT. μετρ. K.T.A., aS in the version 
given above: the subject of συνιᾶσιν being 
to be supplied, and the construction being 
an inaccurate one. Calvin well illustrates 
the sense, by the reputation which any 
moderately learned man gained among the 
ignorant monks of his day—‘Si quis 
tenuem modo gustum elegantioris litera- 
ture habeat, . . . spargitur de eo mirabilis 
fama, adoratur inter sodales .... Inde 
_precipue monachis insolentissimus 1116 
fastus quod se metiuntur ex se ipsis: quum 
in eorum claustris nihil sit preter bar- 
bariem, illic nihil mirum, si regnet luscus 
inter cecos. Tales erant isti Pauli emuli: 
sibi enim intus plaudebant, non consi- 
derantes quibus virtutibus constaret vera 
laus, quantumque a Pauli et similium ex- 
cellentia distarent.” 13.] But we 
(opposed to those spoken of in last verse) 
will not (ever: will never allow ourselves 
to) boast without measure (lit. ‘ boast as 
far as to things unmeasured” εἰς with 
an adj. and the art. is used to signify the 
extent to which; so Herod. vii. 229, κατ- 
εκέατο ἐν ᾿Αλπηνοῖσι ὀφθαλμιῶντες ἐς Td 
ἔσχατον : as ἐπί with the same denotes the 
direction towards which, as ἐπὶ τὸ μεῖζον 
κοσμοῦντες, ... ἐπὶ TO μυθῶδες ἐκνενι- 
κηκότα, Thucyd. i. 21,—without measure, 
scil. as they do who compare themselves 
with themselves and measure themselves 
by themselves,—for there is no standard 
for, no limit to, a man’s good opinion of 
himself. The plur. τὰ ἄμετρα, instead of τὸ 
ἄμετρον, seems to be chosen to generalize 
the negative—‘ we adopt no such vague 


for Geos, xuptos D Epiph, Vig,. 


αφικεσθαι F 109 


for εφικνουμενοι, 


εφικομενοι Chr. om 2nd γαρ &1(ins 


standard for our boasting ’), but according 
to the measure of the rule (τὸ μέτρ. τοῦ 
kav.—‘the measure pointed out by the 
rule,’ gen. subj.) which God apportioned 
to us as ἃ measure, to reach as far as 
to you—ow ἐμέρισεν ἡμῖν 6 θ. μέτρου = ὃν 
ἐμέρ. ju. 6 θ. μέτρον, Which (κανών) God 
apportioned to us as a measure,—or, 
as De W., τοῦ μέτρου ὃ ἐμέρ. ju. 6 θ., 
in which latter case μέτρου is in appos. 
with κανόνος: but I prefer the former. 
Mr. Green, Grammar of the N. T. dialect, 
p- 269, makes μέτρου governed by ἐφι- 
κέσθαι, aS in οὕτω τάρβους ἀφικόμην, 
Eur. Phen. 361; τοῦ βίου εὖ ἥκοντι, 
Herod. i. 30. My objections to this con- 
struction are, (1) that ἐφικνούμενοι eis 
ὑμᾶς is used absolutely in the very next 
clause, which makes it probable that the 
same usage is found here :—(2) that an un- 
necessary harshness is introduced, which I 
cannot persuade myself that the Apostle 
would have used, and which is apparent 
even in Mr. G.’s English, ‘of advancing in 
standard asfar aseven you.’ See Stanley’s 
note. ἐφικέσθαι is the inf. of the 
purpose, that we should reach : or per- 
haps (but not so well) of the result, ‘so 
that we reach.’ 14, Further expla- 
nation of ἐφικ. ἄχρι x. tu. For we are 
not stretching ourselves beyond (our 
bounds), as (we should be doing) if we 
did not reach to you (not, as if we had not 
reached to you, as Luth., Beza: the pres. 
betokens the allotment of the field of apos- 
tolic work as his own, ‘ut si non pervenia- 
mus.’ The μή shews that the case is only 
a supposed one: so also 1 Cor. iv. 18, but 
compare 1 Cor. ix. 26, ὡς οὐκ ἀέρα δέρων, 
where the case is the real one; see Winer, 
edn. 6, ὃ 55. 1 [a]): for even as far as 
[unto] you did we advance (the proper 
meaning of φθάνω must hardly be pressed 
here: the Apostle would not introduce a 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B. Χ, 10---Ἰ8, 






696 
x 3 .“ ΄ 
πη ene ἄμετρα Υ καυχώμενοι ¥ ἐν 5 ἀλλοτρίοις * κόποις, es 
eff. ie \ b] 4 A / ς a Na 
; Rom. αἰνὰ ἐλπίδα δὲ ἔχοντες ὃ" αὐξανομένης τῆς πίστεῶς ὑμῶν edefg 
reff. ΜΝ \ , ἐν Τὰ 5 mn 
wich. τη πεῖς ae ον Ὁ ν ὅ κανονα ὧν εἰ 
bo Matt, xi, ©Y t pLev μεγαλυνθῆναι κατὰ τὸ ημ ς 017.47 


32. Mark iv. 


trans., 1 Cor. 
111, 8 ref. 
c = Matt. xxiii. 


σασθαι. 


ς ΄ € lal » , 
ὁ περισσείαν, 16 ' εἰς τὰ ἔ ὑπερέκεινα ὑμῶν *evayyehoa- 
il. > 3 Ζ » / d U h ’ x Ge h , 
σθαι, οὐκ ἐν τ ἀλλοτρίῳ ἃ κανόνι Els TA ετοιμα " καυχὴη- 
171 ὁ δὲ καυχώμενος Y ἐν κυρίῳ Y καυχάσθω: 
χ é 


ς / > ate ald οὶ 4 
5. Iukei. 08 18 οὐ γὰρ ὁ ἑαυτὸν * συνιστάνων, | ἐκεῖνος ἐστιν ™ δόκιμος, 


(Acts x. 46 Ε Εν ; Ἁ k ; 
ὃ 
reff.) only: ἀλλ’ ὃν O κύριος * συνίστησιν. 
d ver. 13 reff. v » / / ' > , 
τ Rom. v.17. XI. 1 α Ὄφελον ° ἀνείχεσθέ μου μικρόν P τι 4 ἀφροσύ- 
h. viii. 2. 
Times ν, 2lonly. Eccles. i. 3 al. fl Pet. i. 25. see Heb. ii. 3. g here only t. h ver. 13. 
iJer. ix. 24. 1Cor.i. 31. k -άνειν, ver. 12. -avat, Rom. iii. 5 reff. 150 Mark vii. 
15. John i. 18, 33 al. m = Rom. xiy. 18 reff. n 1 Cor. iv. 8 reff. .Ὁ Ξ- Acts xvill. 
14. 2 Tim.iv. 3. Heb. xiii. 22. Job vi. 26. p ver. 16 only. see Heb. ii. 7. q Mark vii 


22. νυ. 17,21 only. Job iv. 6. 
15. om δε LM cl n. 
18. for ov yap o, o yap (but corrd) δὲ), 

D3KL rel Eus, Dial, Mac, Chr, : 


{Euthal-ms Antch,] Thdrt Damasc[and ms]. 


αλλα B M{[appy]. 


εστιν o δοκ. F. 


for vuwy, nuwy Bd. 
συνισταν ἃ: txt BD!FMPR m 17 Orig 


for nuwy, υμων &. 
rec (for συνιστανωνὴ συνιστων, with 
, Ephr, 
δοκιμὸος bef ecrw DN! [latt]: 


Crap. XI. 1. ὠφελον D3FKL τὰ n 17 [47 Euthal-ms] Chr-ms Cc :. txt B D'(optdor) 


MPR rel Chr, Thdrt Damase ΤῊ]. 


612 ἡνειχεσθε, with Chr-ed, Thl: ἀνεχεσθε 


Κ d mn! Chr-ms [Euthal-ms] Thdrt: txt B(Tischdf, expr) DFLMPR rel Chr-2-mss, 


Damasc (ἔς Thl-ms. 


μου att μικ. τι agp. F latt [Lucif, Ambrst]. 


Steph om 7, 


with F{-gr] KLP rel D-lat(with G-lat fri) Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase He Lucif 


[Ambrst]: ins B D-gr ΜΝ n 17 vulg(and F-lat) goth [syr Chr,] ΤῊ]. 


elz ins τὴς 


bef αφροσυνης, with F ἃ ἃ [Chr,] Thl: om BDPN n 17.—Steph τη αφροσυνη, with 


distinct thought by a word of secondary 
importance in the sentence) in the gospel 
(the element in which our advance was 
made: ‘the gospel’=‘the promulgation 
of the gospel’). 15.] in apposition 
with ov γὰρ x.7.A. ver. 14, and carrying 
out the thought. Not boasting without 
measure in other men’s labours (the 
element of the boasting), but having a 
hope if (or, as) your faith grows, to be 
enlarged (not as many Commentators, 
‘celebrated : the metaphor of measure 
still remains) among you (so Chrys., 
Theophyl., Est., Meyer. ἐν du. is not to 
be joined with αὐξ., as Luth., Calv., Beza, 
Olsh., De W., in which case it would be 
superfluous) according to our rule {i. e. 
our apportionment of apostolic work, for 
we seek not ὑπερεκτείνειν Eavrovs) unto 
abundance (‘so as to abound more than 
we now do,’ viz. as ver. 16 explains), 

10.7 [so as] (with a view) to preach the 
gospel as far as (sce on εἰς τὰ ἄμ., ver. 
15) the parts beyond you (Wetstein 
quotes from: Thomas Magister, ἐπέκεινα 
ῥήτορες Aéyouo..... ὑπερεκεῖνα δὲ μόνοι 
οἱ σύρφακες, ἴα ecanaille),—not (with a 
view) to boast ourselves within another 
man’s line (κανών throughout seems to be 
used of a measuring line: according to 
the metaphor so common among us, ‘in 
his line,’—i.e. ‘within the line which 
Providence has marked out for him’) 


with regard to (or, ‘to the extent of;’ ‘to 
extend our boasting to’) things ready 
made to our hands. 17.| He sets 
forth to them, in contrast (δέ) to this 
boasting themselves in another’s line, 
which was the practice of his adver- 
saries, wherein the only legitimate boast-. 
ing must consist: viz, in the Lord, the 
Source of all grace and strength and suc- 
cess in the ministry; see 1 Cor. xv. 10. 

18.| The reason of this being, that 
not the self-commender but he whom 
the Lord commends, by selecting him as 
His instrument, as He had the Apostle, 
and giving him the ἐπιστολὴ συστατική, 
to be known and read by all men, of souls 
converted and churches founded, is δόκιμος, 
approved, i.e. really and in the end abiding 
the test of trial. ἐκεῖνος brings out 
the distinction of the man who is δόκιμος, 
—see reff. and Winer, edn. 6, § 29. 
4. We have the usage in English in 
affirmative sentences, 6. g. ‘The Lord, he 
is the God, 1 Kings xviii. 89: but not in 
negative ones. XI. His BOASTING 
OF HIMSELF: and 1—4.] apologetic intro- 
duction of it, by stating his motive,—viz. 
jealousy lest they should fall away from 
Christ. 1.1 ἀνείχεσθε is the Hel- 
lenistic form,—jvely. the Attic, not ‘ uti- 
nam tolerassetis,’ as Calv., al.: the imper- 
fect is put after εἴθε, ai, ὄφελον, &e., “αὶ 
optumus cain rerum conditionem, quam non 


ΧΙ. 1--4, ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ Β. 697 
νῆς. ἀλλὰ καὶ 5 ἀνέχεσθέ μου. 3" ζηλῷ yap ὑμᾶς § θεοῦ τ -- Gai. iv. 17 


bis. Zech. i. 
/ E ς / ν Cte Lib We a) ath vs ‘ 14, 
Ξ ζήλῳ ᾿ἡρμοσάμην yap υμαᾶς E€Vt ἀνδρὶ παρθένον ΦὙΡΏΨΝ 5 Rom. x. 2. see 


, Acts xxii. 3. 
τῇ a a τς Ee +r Ν᾽ ΣΥ xy ὡς tl ly. 
παραστῆσαι τῷ χριστῷ φοβοῦμαι δὲ Ἢ μή ἢ πως, ὡς Prov. αὐ πιά, 
b ΄ 3 sy Usee Rey. xiv. 
πανουργίᾳ αὐτου, ς (1 Cor. 
fs ͵ \ vii. 25 reff.) 
ATROTNTOS καὶ ¥ = Tit. ii. 5. 


1 Pet. iii. 2. 
4: > \ \ c 
εἰ μὲν yap o 


5) 5) ΄ ΠῚ b2 A 

ὁ *ddis " ἐξηπάτησεν Kvay ὃ ἐν τῇ 
A \ ,ὕ ς A > \ a 

“φθαρῇ ta “νοήματα ὑμῶν “ ἀπὸ τῆς 
an $: t a >? Ν / 

τῆς Sayvotntos τῆς ὃ εἰς τὸν χριστόν. 


Prov. xix. 13. 
(ch. vii. 11 


oy erent: 
x ch. xii. 20. Gal. iy. 11. 


w = Luke ii.22. Rom. vi. 13,.16, 19. xii. 1. ch. iv. 14. Ps. v. 3. ; 
y 1 Cor. ix. 27 reff. z Rey. xii. 9. xx. 2. GeEn. iii. 1 ff. a Rom. vii. 11 reff. b = 1 Cor. 
iii. 19 (reff.). c i Cor. iit. 17 reff. d ch. ii. 11 retf. e = Rom. vii. 2. ix. 3 
(reff.). f Rom. xii. 8 reff. g ch. vi. 6 only +. ἢ = ch, viii, 22. Eph, i. 15 al, 
KL rel copt [Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damase (ic ]}. (M def.) ανασχεσθε ᾿ξ. 
3. om de L. for πως, ποτε F a Chr-comm,/ txtatic] : om D!(and lat) vulg fri 


Clem, Lucif, [Ambrst Jer, ]. om ws L. rec evav bef εξηπατησεν, with DKL 
rel vulg(and F-lat) fri syr [goth arm] Clem, (Chr, Thdrt] Orig-int, Lucif, [Ambrst] : 
txt BFMP() m 17 (Syr) copt eth Clem, Orig,(-int,) Eus, Damase [ Euthal-ms Gand, | 
Jer,.—for εὐαν, υμιν &', but evay written above by δὲ! oF 5, om ev D!-gr vulg 
F-lat fri Orig-int, Lucit [Ambrst Augszpe |. rec ins ovtw bef φθαρη, with D?-3[-gr | 
KLM rel vulg(and F-lat) syrr Orig,(-int;) Chr, Thdrt Damase Archel, [Ambrst 
AUgsepe]: om BD!FPRN old-lat copt [goth] arm Clem, Eus, [ Euthal-ms] Gaud, Lucif,. 

rec om Καὶ Ths αγνοτ., with D3KLUMP rel vulg(and F-lat) Syr Clem, Orig,(-int,) 
Eus, Chr, Thdrt (Euthal-ms (Lucif, Ambrst) Jer,]: ins BF &1(N3 has it in brackets) 
a 17 tol syr-w-ast copt goth wth Archel, [Damasc] Augsepe, and (but transp aA. and 
ayy.) D'(with lat) Epiph,. (Ze omission appy arose from the similarity of endgs. 
Meyer and De Wette suppose ayv. to have been a gloss, to explain απλ., and after- 
wards to have found its way into the text.) om tov FMN d 80-9. 


esse sentimus :’? Klotz ad Devar. p. 516, 
cited by Meyer. μου and ἀφροσύνης 
are not both genitives after μικρόν τι, as 
Meyer : nor is it so in the passage quoted 
by him, Job vi. 26, LXX: οὐδὲ yap ὑμῶν 
φθέγμα ῥήματος (φθέγματος ῥήματος ὑμῶν, 
A) ἀνέξομαι. In both cases the personal 
pronoun is governed by the verb, as indeed 
here in ἀνέχεσθέ μου immediately fol- 
lowing—and μικρόν τι ἀφροσύνης is the 
accusative of remote reference, as in 
the double accus. construction. 
ἀλλὰ κι But (why need I request this ὃ 
for (you really (see note, ch. v. 3) do 
bear with me. The indicative is much 
better than the imperative rendering (as 
Vulg., Beza, Calvin, Grot., Estius, Bengel, 
al.),—which, after ὄφελον ἀνείχ., is very 
flat, and gives no account of the καί. He 
says it, to shew them that he does not 
express the wish as_ supposing them 
void of tolerance for his weakness, but 
as having experienced some at their 
hands, and now requiring more. 2. 
‘That forbearance which you do reall 
extend to me, and for more of which I 
now pray, is due from you, and I claim 
to have it exercised by you, because I 
have undertaken to present you to Christ 
as a chaste bride to her husband, and 
(ver. 3) I am jealous for fear of your fall- 
ing away from Him.’ θεοῦ ζήλῳ] 
. 80 εἰλικρινείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ, ch. 1. 12: a godly 
jealousy: see note there. Meyer after 
Chrys., Estius, al., would render it, ‘ with 
God’s jealousy, ‘with such a jealousy 
as God has.” But though θεοῦ ζήλῳ 


and τῷ τοῦ θεοῦ ζήλῳ are for most pur- 
poses identical, I cannot but think that 
the latter expression would have been 
chosen to express such an idea as ‘ with 
the zeal which God has.’ And the ren- 
dering, ‘ with a godly zeal, i.e. one which 
has God’s honour at heart, satisfies well 
what follows: see below. ἥρμο- 
σάμην] I betrothed you (viz. at your 
conversion: προμνήστωρ ὑμῶν ἐγενόμην 
καὶ τοῦ γάμον μεσίτης, Theodoret. Or- 
dinarily, the father, or the bridesman 
(παρανύμφιοΞ) is said ἁρμόζειν : the middle 
voice is used of the bridegroom only. 
So among other examples in Wetst.,— 
εἶχεν ἐν δόμοις Αἴγισθος, οὐδ᾽ ἥρμοζε νυμ- 
φίῳ τινί, Eur. Electr. 24,—and apuoca- 
μένου Λευτυχίδεω Πέρκαλον τὴν Χίλωνος 
θυγατέρα, καὶ σχὼν yuvaika..., Herod. 
vi. 65. But in Philo we have γάμος ὃν 
ἁρμόζεται ἡδονή, de Abr. § 20, vol. ii. p. 15) 
to one husband, to present (i.e. in order 
that I may present in you[, present you 
as |) a chaste virgin to Christ (viz. at His 
coming : ὃ μὲν οὖν παρὼν καιρὸς μνηστείας 
ἐστίν" 6 δὲ μέλλων τῶν γάμων, ὅτε κραυγὴ 
γίνεται, ἰδοὺ ὁ νυμφίος. Theophyl.) τῷ 
Χρ. is not in constructive apposition with 
ἑνὶ ἀνδρί, but explains and fixes it: the 
emphasis being on παρθένον ἁγνήν. 

3 | But he fears their being seduced from 
their fidelity to Christ. ὁ ὄφις) He 
tukes for granted that the Corinthians re- 
cognized the agency of Satan in the (well- 
known) serpent: see vv. 13—15, where his 
μετασχηματισμός for the sake of deceit is 
alluded to. ἐν τῇ παν. αὐτοῦ] in 


698 


i particip., 
Gal. v. 8 


δὲ ee 

1 Thess. v. 24. ἢ l 
k Acts ix. 20 

reff. 


/ , ἃ 
γέλιον τὰ ἕτερον ὃ 


1 Acts yill. 15 
reff. 


IPOs KOPIN@IOTS B. 


i ἐρχόμενος ἄλλον * Ἰησοῦν ὃ 


XI. 


κηρύσσει, Ol οὐκ ἐκηρύξαμεν, 


πνεῦμα ™ ἕτερον 'ἱ λαμβάνετε ὃ οὐκ ἐλάβετε, ἢ εὐαγ- 
οὐκ 


ἐδέξασθε, καλῶς 5 ἀνέχεσθε. 


"- \ ΄ a Ι 
το τ 61.1.6 αι. > ὃ λογίζομαι Ρ γὰρ μηδὲν 4 ὑστερηκέναι τῶν * ὑπερλίαν 


n ver. 1. : 
o constr., Rom. xiv. 14 reff. 


p Acts xxiy. δ. 
rch. xii. 11 only +. 


4. for ino., χριστον F 41 vulg arm Ambrst Pel. 
in δὲ the 2nd erepoy is written twice, but marked for erasure by X! or corr’. 


λαμβανετε ΕἾ not F-lat]. 


2 Tim. ii. 7. 


q constr., Rom. iii. 23. (ch. i. 7 reff.) 


for edaBere, εδεξασθε F. 
add 


rec ἡνεύχεσθε (see ver 1), with rel Chr,-ed Thdrt-ed : 


αιειχεσθε D3GKLMPR b! ὁ f g mo Chr-ms, [Euthal-ms] Damase, everxeora: F: txt 


B[D!] 17 Cyr,, patimini fri. 
5. for yap, δε Bb 178 arm. 


(i.e. by means of, as the element in which 
the deed was done) his versatility (or 
subtlety),— $0 (οὕτω has been a gloss from 
the margin) your thoughts (‘ sentiments,’ 
ref. and ch. x. 5) be corrupted from (preg- 
nant construction. = be corrupted, and 
seduced from) your simplicity (singleness 
of affection) and your chastity towards 
Christ (eis xp. is not = ἐν χριστῷ, as 
Vulg., E. V., Beza, Calvin, al.). 

4, 5.| The thought here seems to be 
this :—‘If these new teachers had brought 
with them a new Gospel, superseding that 
which I preached, they might have some 
claim to your regard. But, since there is 
but one gospel, that which I preached to 
you, and which they pretend to preach 
also, I submit that iz that one no claim to 
regard is prior to mine.’ Observe, that 
the whole hypothesis is ironical : it is fixed 
und clear that there can be no such new 
gospel: therefore the inference is the 
stronger. For (the whole sentence is 
steeped in irony :—‘ the serpent deceived 
Eve by subtlety: I fear for you, but not 
because the new teachers use such subtlety 
— if they did, if the temptation were really 
formidable, there would be some excuse.’ 
All this lies in the γάρ) if indeed (εἰ μέν 
introduces a reality, and is full here of 
deep irony. Cf. Il. a. 135, ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μὲν 
δώσουσι γέρας μεγάθυμοι ᾿Αχαιοί : ‘if the 
Achzans shall really give me another οἰ; 
and μ. 138—142, εἰ μὲν δὴ ᾿Αντιμάχοιο 
δαΐφρονος υἱέες ἐστὸν . . « νῦν μὲν δὴ τοῦ 
πατρὸς ἀεικέα τίσετε λώβην. .., “af ye 
really are, &., . . . ye verily will? 

See Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 414) he 
that cometh (viz. the false teachers gene- 
rically thus designated: but here too per- 
haps there is irony: 6 ἐρχόμενος was a 
ῥῆμα σεμνόν) is preaching (the indicative 
pres. caries on the ironical assumption, 
_ so λαμβ. below) another Jesus whom we 
preached not, or ye are receiving a dif- 
ferent Spirit (ἄλλος, distinctive of indi- 
viduality, ἕτερος of kind), which ye re- 
ceived not (from us), or another gospel 
which ye accepted not (ἐλάβ., 25€¢.,— 
‘verba diversa, rei apta. Non concurrit 


aft υστερήκεναι ins εν υμιν D1 (and lat) fri(with fald tol). 


voluntas hominis in accipiendo Spiritu, 
ut in recipiendo evangelio.’ Bengel. But 
singularly enough, in English, usage has 
attached the voluntary act to the verb 
‘ accept’) ye with reason bear with him 
(irony again: for they not only bore with, 
but preferred them to their father in 
the faith. The sense is: “there seems 
to be some excuse in that case,—but even 
in that, really there is none,—for your 
tolerating him.’ — On the rec., Bengel 
remarks: ‘ Ponit conditionem, ex parte rei, 
impossibilem: ideo dicit in imperfecto, 
toleraretis: sed pro conatu pseudaposto- 
lorum, non modo possibilein, sed plane 
presentem: ideo dicit in presenti, pre- 
dicat.’ Similarly Meyer. See Winer, edn. 
6, § 42. 2. That the rendering above 
given is right, seems to me beyond ques- 
tion. It is the only one which reaches 
the depth of the exquisite irony of the sen- 
tence, at the same time that it satisfies all 
grammatical requirements. δ.) See 
above. ‘Seeing that there is but one 
gospel, and they and I profess to preach 
one Jesus and impart one Spirit, they have 
no such claim: mine is superior’): for I 
reckon that in no respect do I fall short 
of (the perf. sets forth the past and pre- 
sent truth of the fact) these overmuch 
Apostles. τῶν ὑπερλίαν ἀποστ. has 
very commonly been taken to mean bona 
fide ‘the greatest Apostles,’ i. e. Peter, 
James, and John, or perhaps the Twelve: 
but (1) this hardly seems to suit the ex- 
pression ὑπερλίαν, in which I cannot help 
seeing, with De W., some bitterness: (2) 
it would be alien from the spirit of the 
passage, in which he institutes no com- 
parison whatever between himself and the 
other Apostles, but only between himself 
and the false teachers. (3) had any such 
comparison been here intended, the ‘ punc- 
tum compurationis’ would not have been, 
personal eminence in fruits of apostolic 
work and sufferings, still less, seeing that 
the other Apostles were unlearned also, 
the distinction which immediately follows, 
between an ἰδιώτης, and one pretending 
to more skill,—but priority of arrival and 


BDFKL 
MPNab 
edefg 
hkima 
017. 47 





5—8. 


» lA 
αἀποστολων. 

" / 
ἡ γνώσει, ἀλλ᾽ Υὶ 


tas. 127 ae 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


ἐποίησ a, ἐμαυτὸν 


699 


6 εἰ b δὲ καὶ " ἰδιώτης τῷ ᾿ λόγῳ, " ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τῇ 5 Στὴ ι3 


παντὶ * φανερώσαντες δ ἐν" πρᾶσιν εἰς “Goons 
ἘΠ. cd reff. 


ταπεινῶν ἵνα v = 1 Cor: xii. 
8 


ad a @ rn o b] es Pa ϑ νι 
ὑμεῖς “ ὑψωθῆτε, ὅτι ἴ δωρεὰν τὸ τοῦ § θεοῦ ὅ εὐαγγέλιον * «ἰν ἰν.8 τοῦ. 


" εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν; 8 ἄλλας Ἰἐκκλησίας * ἐσύλησα λαβὼν 


12. Heb. xiii. 4. zso 1 Cor. vi. 2. 
iii. 4, 8, 9. 3 Kings xvi. 19. 
bis. Luke xiv. 11 bis. xviii. 14 bis. 
(c). Matt. xviii. 4. 
23. xiii. 7 al. Deut. xvii. 20. 
h constr., 1 Cor xv. 1 reff. 


Acts xix. 31. Rom. ii. 22. Col. ii. 8. 


6. om δε oo Jat) am(with demid [tol] F-lat G-lat) copt goth arm. 
WiwTys ins εἰμι D'(and lat) G-lat [demid (Ambrst) ]. 


James iv. 10. 
Luke iii. 5, from Isa. xl. 4. ch. xi. 21. 


i plur., Kom. xvi. 16 reff. 
(-εὐειν, Exod. iii. 22 Symm.? [rather Aq.]} 


= Col. iv. 4. 


y masc., 1 Cor, 

viii. 7. see 

Phil. iv. 

a John viii. 34. James v.15. 1 Pet. ii. 22. 1John 
bso 1 Cor. vi. 18. Gen. xxxix. 9. c Matt. xxiii. 12 
WPetive 6.) Ps χα σύ 15: d as above 
Phil. ii. 8. iv. 12 only. e Acts ii. 
f — Rom. iii. 24 reff. Rom. xv. 16 reff. 


Ξ 
k here only+. Ep. Jer. 18 only. see 


aft 
rec φανερωθεντες, with 


D3{-gr] KLUP rel fri syrr copt Chr, Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damasc] Sedul(manifesti 


sumus [50 vulg-clem harl tol ]): 


G-lat(altern) am(with demid flor F- lat) lat-ff: 
and, adding eavrovs, M 1082 8-pe goth arm: gavepwoat eavtovs 67°. 


φανερωθεις (manifestus or -status sum) D'-?(and lat) 


-ρωθεντι 1. 108: txt Β F[-gr] δὲ 17 
(The variety 


appears to have arisen from the difficulty of φανερωσαντες, which became φαν. eavtous, 


and then -gwevtes.) 
7. aft ἤ ins μη F vulg fri [Ambrst Pel]. 


teaching in Corinth. (4) the expression 
ψευδαπόστολος ver. 13, seems to me to 
refer to, and give the plain sense of, this 
ironical designation of ὑπερλίαν ἀπόστολοι. 
(5) the same expression ch. xii. 11 appears 
even more plainly than here to require this 
explanation. The above explanation is 
that of Beza, Michaelis, Schulz, Fritzsche, 
Billroth, Riickert, Olsh., Meyer, De Wette. 

ὑπερλίαν is not found in classic Greek: 
but Wetstein cites from Eustath. Od. a. 
p- 27, 35: ἔστι γάρ ποτε καὶ τῷ λίαν 
κατὰ τὴν τραγῳδίαν χρᾶσθαι καλῶς, καθ᾽ 
ὃ σημαινόμενον λέγομέν τινα ὑπερλίαν 
σοφόν. Meyer instances as analogous, 
ὑπεράγαν (2 Macc. x. 34), ὑπέρευ (ὑπέρευ 
πεπολίτευμαι, Demosth. 228. 17), and the 
frequent use by Paul of compounds of 
ὑπέρ. It has been the practice of Pro- 
testant Commentators (e. g. Bengel, Mac- 
knight) to udduce this verse against the 
primacy of Peter, and of the Romanists 
(e. g. Corn.-a-Lapide) to evade the in- 
ference by supposing the pre-eminence to 
be only in gifts and preaching, not in 
power and jurisdiction. All this will fall 
to the ground with the supposed reference 
to the other Apostles. 6.] Explains 
that, though i one particular he may 
fall short of them, viz.in rhetorical finish 
and word-wisdom, yet in real knowledge, 
not so. ἰδιώτης a laic,—a man not 
professionally acquainted with that which 
he undertakes, see reff. The Apostle dis- 
claims mere rhetorical aptitude and power 
in 1 Cor. ii. 1 ff. ἀλλά brings out the 
contrast, see reff. :—e% To: σύ γε σεωῦτοῦ 
μὴ προορᾷς, ἀλλ᾽ ἡμῖν τοῦτό ἐστι ov 
περιοπτέον, Herod. v. 39. τῇ γνώσει] 
the depth of his knowledge of the mystery 
of the gospel, see Eph. iii. 1—4. 


om ev πασιν F vulg fri Syr Ambrst [Pel]. 


for ἐμαυτον, εαυτον DFLP h 93. 


ἀλλ᾽ ἐν παντί] But in every matter we 
made things manifest (1. 6. the things of 
the gospel, thereby shewing our γνῶσις ; — 
not, τὴν γνῶσιν. Meyer and De W. sup- 
pose φανερώσαντες to have been a gloss 
for φανερωθέντες, especially as it is fol- 
lowed in some mss. by ἑαυτούς, and to 
have been the more readily received into 
the text, because it might easily be taken 
with γνῶσιν. But how improbable that 
the easy φανερωθέντες should have been 
replaced by the harsh -cayres. Much 
rather would the latter be replaced by 
φανερωθέντες from ch. v. 11) before all 
men (ἐν πᾶσιν, being separated from ἐν 
παντί by the verb, cannot be coupled with 
it, as in ref. Phil., but must mean among 
all) unto you (i.e. with a view to your 
benefit: not = ‘to you,’ in which sense 
the dative is always found after φανερόω : 
see Rom. iii. 21, πεφανέρωται ΣΟ τ εἰς 
πάντας κ. ἐπὶ πάντας... .). 7.] 
Another particular in which he was ποῦ 
behind, but excelled, the ὑπερλίαν ἀπό- 
στολοι; viz. the gratuitous exercise of his 
ministry among them. On the sense, see 
1 Cor. ix.1 ff. and notes. Thesupposition 
is one of sharp irony. ἐμ.. ταπεινῶν] 
See Acts xviii. 3. The exaltation which 
they received by his demeaning himself 
was that of reception into the blessings 
of the gospel, which was more etfectually 
wrought thereby : not merely, their being 
thus more favoured temporarily, or in 
comparison with other churches. ὅτι 
δωρ., &c., is epexegetical of ἐμαυτὸν τα- 
πεινῶν ;—in that I gratuitously, &c. :— 
not, as Meyer, ἅμαρτ. ἐποίησα ὅτι, making 
ἐμαυτὸν. . . ὕψωθ. parenthetical. It was 
his wish to preach to them gratuitously, 
which necessitated his ταπεινοῦν ἑαυτόν, 


700 


] Tuke iii. 14. 
Rom. vi. 23. 
1 Cor. ix. 7 
onlyt+. Esdr. 
iy. 56. 
1 Macc. iii. 
28. xiv. 32 
only. 
m = ch. viii. 
reff. 
n = 2 Tim. iv. 
11. Heb.i 14. 
o Acts xii. 20. 
Gal. iv. 18, 
20 only. 
=: Luke xv. 
14. Phil. iv. 
12. Heb. xi. 37. 
r 1 Cor. xvi. 17 reff. 
u here only +. 
7. 1Johni. 8. 


\ 

ἀπὸ Μακεδονίας)" καὶ 
\ / 

Υ ἐτήρησα καὶ * τηρήσω. 


5 / e/ e / 
ἐμοὶ, OTL ἡ " καυχησις 


Sir. xiii. 4. 


v0 Tim. v.22. 
x see Rom. iii. 7. xv. 8. 


xi. 33 only. Hos. ii.6. (ἐμφράττ., Dan, vi. 22 Theod.) 


32 reff. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


ΧΙ, 


, 4 ΄ - A \ 
léxhwviov ™ πρρὸς τὴν ὑμῶν ὃ" διακονίαν, καὶ “παρὼν ° πρὸς 
“ ΄, \ 
ὑμᾶς καὶ P ὑστερηθεὶς οὐ ἃ κατενάρκησα οὐθενὸς 3 (τὸ yap 
ὑστέρημά μου ὅ προςανεπλήρωσαν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ ἐλθόντες 


’ t \ u b] fel 9 \ ¢ . 
ἐν 'qavtt ἃ ἀβαρῆ ἐμαυτὸν ὑμῖν 
10 ἔστιν * ἀλήθεια * χριστοῦ ™ ἐν 


.“ » Z / > > \ b] 
αὕτη ov * φραγήσεται εἰς ἐμὲ ἐν 
a a 7 of \ / -“ > > lal 
τοῖς ὃ κλίμασιν τῆς ᾿Αχαΐας. 110 διὰ τί ; OTL οὐκ ἀγαπῶ 


q ch. xii. 13, 14 only+. (ναρκᾷν, Gen. xxxii. 25, 32. Job xxxiii. 19.) 
s ch. ix. 12 only t. 
James i. 27. 


Wisd. xix. 4 only. t ch. iy. 8 reff. 


Wisd. x. ὍΣ w Acts xiii. 15. 1 Cor. viii. 
y Rom. iii. 27 reff. z Rom. iii. 19. Heb. 
a Rom. xv. 23 reff. b Rom. ix. 


8. (ovBevos, so BMPX m 17 [Euthal-ms] Damasc(appy).) 
9. rec vuw bef εμαυτον, with D-gr FLX? rel [goth arm Thdrt Damase]: om vu 
K m! Syr: txt BMPR* m? 17 vulg D-lat [F-lat Euthal-ms]. 


10. Steph (for φραγησεται) σφραγισεται, 
for εἰς ewe, ev εμοι F : 
om ὁ D! Thdrt. (M uncert.) 


FKLM PX rel. 
11. om o7: B 


i.e. not exercising the apostolic power 
which he might have exercised, but living 
on subsidies from others, besides (which 
he does not here distinctly allude to) his 
working with his own hands at Corinth. 
See Stanley. 8.1 The ‘ other churches’ 
were the Macedonian, cf. ver. 9. Among 
them the Philippians were probably con- 
spicuous, retaining as doubtless they did, 
their former affection to him ; see Phil. iv. 
15, 16. ἐσύλησα is hyperbolic, to 
bring out the contrast, and shame them. 
ὀψ., see reff., wages; more pro- 
perly here subsidy. πρὸς τ. Up. 
διακ.} in order to (to support me in) my 
ministration to you, gen. obj. 
ἄλλας and ὑμῶν stand in the emphatic 
positions, as contrasted. In the former 
sentence, he implied that he brought with 
him from Macedonia supplies towards his 
maintenance at Corinth: λαβὼν... πρὸς 
τ. bu. diax.: here, he speaks of a new supply 
during his residence with the Corinthians, 
when those resources failed. κατ- 
evapxynoa] apparently = κατεβάρησα, ch. 
xii. 16. Hesych. interprets it ἐβάρυνα. 
Jerome, Ep. exxi. (cli.) ad Algasiam, quest. 
10, vol. i. p. 879, says, ‘ multa sunt verba, 
quibus juxta morem urbis et provincie suze 
familiarius Apostolus utitur: e quibus ex. 
gr. pauca ponenda sunt. . . . Et, οὐ κατ- 
ενάρκησα ὑμᾶς, hoe est, non gravavi vos... 
quibus et aliis multis usque hodie utuntur 
Cilices.’ Theophylact and Gcum. mention 
a rendering, οὐκ ἠμέλησα, ἢ ῥᾳθυμοτέρως 
πρὸς τὸ κήρυγμα γέγονα : and Beza, follow- 
ing the etymology, interprets οὐκ ἐνάρκησα 
κατ᾽ οὐδενός, ‘cum cujusquam incommodo.’ 
But the former meaning suits the context 
better. The word is found no where else 


Ww 


ith d: σφραγησεται 14. 74, 238: txt BD 
12.12 


0. om τὴ F. 


in Greek. ἀποναρκάω occurs in Plutarch, 
de Liber. Educatione, p. 8, F (Wetst.), ἀπο- 
ναρκῶσι κ. φρίττουσι πρὸς τοὺς πόνους. 
On the government of the genitive by verbs 
compounded with κατά, see Matthie, § 376. 
9.1 For (reason why he burdened 
no one) the brethren (who, he does not 
say: their names were well known to 
the Corinthians. Possibly, Timotheus and 
Silas, Acts xviii. 5) when they came from 
Macedonia (not as Εἰ. V., ‘ which came,’ oi 
ἐλθόντε5) brought a fresh supply of my 
want (or perhaps mposav. is used without 
the idea of additional supply, as in ch. 
ix. 12, the πρός merely denoting direc- 
tion): and in every thing I kept myself 
(‘during my residence: not, ‘have kept 
myself, as E. V.) unburdensome to you, 
aud will keep myself. 10.1 The truth 
of Christ is in me, that...; i.e. ‘I speak 
according to that truth of which Christ 
Himself was our example, when I say, 
that... ;’—there is no oath, nor even as- 
severation, as E. V. and most Commenta- 
tors introduce. The expression is exactly 
analogous to Rom. ix. 1. ἡ καύχ. 
....] this boasting (not = καύχημα, 
here or any where else) shall not be 
stopped (supply τὸ στόμα, which is not 
expressed, because καύχησις being itself a 
matter of utterance, suits the sense of the 
verb without it) as regards (or against) 
me (καύχ. is as it were personified —shall 
not have its mouth stopped as regards me) 
in the regions of Achaia (where the καύ- 
xnois is imagined as being and speaking). 
11.] He presupposes, and negatives, 
a reason likely to be given for this resolu- 
tion ; viz. that he loves them not, and there- 
fore will be under no obligation to them : 


BDFKL 
MPxRab 
cdefg 
hkIlmn 
017.47 





9-- 19. 


ὑμᾶς ; ὁ θεὸς Coder. 13 ὃ δὲ 


1 ἐκκόψω τὴν “ ἀφορμὴν τῶν θελόντων 

ᾧ 8 καυχῶνται "εὑρεθῶσιν καθὼς καὶ ἡμεῖς. 

Ι ἐργάται ™ δόλ 
ργάται ™ δόλιοι, 


= »“" ~ / 
i τοιοῦτοι * ψευδαπόστολοι, 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS B. 


701 


ποιῶ. καὶ ποιήσω, ἵνα ς ch. xii. 2, 8. 


fe Josh. xxii. 22. 
d Rom. xi. 22 

"ἀφορμήν, | iva, *8 ἐν 4 Rom. xi. 2, 

e Rom. vii. 8 

f aia Matt. 


Xx; 23 al. 
g Rom. ii. 17 


18 igg yap 
" μετασχη- 


reff. h =1 Cor. iv. 2 reff. i Acts xxii. 22 reff. k here only +. see Rev. 
ii. 2. 1 Matt. ix. 37 al.t Wisd. xvii. 17 al. = Phil. iii. 2. m here only. Prov. xii. 
6. (-tovv, Rom. iii. 13.) nhere 3ce. 1Cor.iv.6. Phil. iii. 21 only+. 1 Kings xxviii. 8 


Symm. Jos. Antt. vii. 10. 5. 


12. vues F[-gr(not G) } d. 
18. for οἱ, ov F[-gr]. 


for we willingly incur obligations to those 
whom we love. οἶδεν, scil. ὅτι ὑμᾶς 
ἀγαπῶ. 12.] The true reason :— 
But that which I do, I will also con- 
tinue to do (καὶ womowd#must not, as 
Erasm., be coupled to ποιῶ, and διὰ τοῦτο 
ποιῷ supplied before fva,—because it is for 
his resolution respecting the future that 
the reason is especially given) in order 
that I may cut off the occasion (τήν, 
which would be furnished if I did not so) 
of those who wish for an occasion (viz. 
of depreciating me by misrepresenting my 
motives if I took money of you). Many 
(Chrys., Theophyl., Calv., Grot., Billroth; 
al.) take this occasion to be one of aggran- 
_ dizing themselves above Paul ἐγ all took 
money, assuming that the false teachers, 
as well as Paul, took none: which is ex- 
tremely unlikely, from the prominence 
which he gives to the boast of his own 
abstinence in this point,—and seems di- 
rectly opposed to ver. 20 and to 1 Cor. ix. 
12. ἵνα ἐν © x.7.A.j that, in the 
matter of which they boast, they may be 
found even as we. Such appears gene- 
rally acknowledged to be the rendering ; 
but as to the meaning, there is great 
variety of opinion. (1) Many of the an- 
eient Commentators assume that they 
taught gratis, aud were proud of it,—and 
that Paul would also teach gratis, to put 
both on an equality and take this occasion 
of boasting from them. This would suit 
the sense of the present verse, but seems 
(see above) at variance with the fact. (2) 
Theodoret, whom Meyer, al., follow, sup- 
poses them to have pretended to the credit 
of self-denial, while really making gain, 
and that Paul means, that he will reduce 
them from pretended to real self-denial. 
But this tco is inconsistent with the con- 
text. Paul’s boast of disinterested teach- 
ing was peculiarly is own, and there is 
ucthing to shew that the false teachers 
ever professed or made any boast of the 
like. His resolution did not spring out of 
an actual comparison instituted by them 
between their own practice and what they 
might fulsely allege to be his, but was 
adopted even before his coming to Corinth, 


ψευδοαπ. D}, 


om es Ε΄, » 


arguing ὦ priori that it was best to cut off 
any possible occasion of such depreciation 
of him from his probable adversaries. (3) 
Others, Cajetan, Estius, after Aug. de 
Serm. Dom. in Monte ii. 16 (54), vol. iii. 
Ρ. 1292,—also Bengel, —join ba... 

ἡμεῖς with apopunv,—‘ occasion that they 
may be found even as we, and explain 
ἐν @ Kavx. as a parenthesis, ‘that they 
may be found (a point in which they 
boast) even as we? i. e. ‘that in point of 
selfishness and covetousness, we mey be 
both on a level.” But this meaning would 
require rather εὑρεθῶμεν καθὼς καὶ αὐτοί, 
‘we may be reduced to ¢heir level.’ (4) 
Olsh., adopting in the main the last . 
interpretation, would understand ἐν 6 
καυχῶνται of the taking of money of which 
they boasted, accounting it an apostolic 
prerogative. But to this the last stated 
objection applies even more forcibly : and 
besides, the supposition is wholly arbitrary. 
(5) De Wette, believing the second ἵνα to 
be parallel with the first, as in (1) and (2), 
understands ἐν @ καυχῶνται as applying 
to their boast of apostolic efficiency: ‘that 
they may, in their apostolic work which 
they vaunt with such pretension, be found 
even as we,’ and thinks the transition to 
what follows thus madeeasy. But the ob- 
jection to this is, that the punetum compa- 
vationis in the rest of the chapter is not 
apostolic efficiency, but ‘rather matters 
κατὰ σάρκα. (6) I cannot adopt any one 
of the above accounts of the sentence, for 
the negative reasons already given, and be- 
cause all of them seem to me to have missed 
the clue tothe meaning which the chapter 
itself furnishes. This clue I find in vv. 18 
ff. The καυχῶνται is there taken up, de- 
scribed as being κατὰ σάρκα: the καθὼς 
καὶ ἡμεῖς is taken up by Ἑβραῖοί εἶσιν ; 
κἀγώ: ἄς. From this it is manifest to me, 
that his meaning in our present clause is, 
‘that in the matter(s) of which they boast 
they may be found even as we;’ i.e. ‘we 
may be on a fair and equal footing :’ ‘ that 
there may be no adventitious comparisons 
made between us arising out of misrepre- 
sentations of my course of procedure among 
you, but that in every matter of boasting, 


702 


o Rey. xvii. 6 
only. Job 
xvVil. 8. xviii. 
20 only. 

p see Eph. τ. 8. 
1 Thess. v.5al. 
= 1 Cor. ix. 
11 only. 

Gen. xlv. 28. 
Isa. xlix. 6. 
Υ see Gal. ii. 17. 


> 4 ce r 
αὐτὸς yap ὁ σατανᾶς 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B. 


ματιζόμενοι εἰς ἀποστόλους χριστοῦ. 


XI. 


14 καὶ οὐ ° θαῦμα’ 


" μετασχηματίζεται εἰς ἄγγελον 
Ρ φωτός: 15 οὐ «μέγα οὖν εἰ καὶ οἱ διάκονοι αὐτοῦ " μετα- 
σχηματίζονται ὡς " διάκονοι " δικαιοσύνης, ὧν τὸ * τέλος 
ἔσται " κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν. 


16 Πάλιν λέγω, μή τις με 


Υ δόξη ἡ ἄφρονα εἶναι" “ εἰ * δὲ * μήγε, ἡ κἂν ὡς ἡ ἄφρονα 


21 reff. 
ap , , (vA > \ / , ἃ 
uRomii6. ΖΦ δέξᾳσθέ με, ἵνα κἀγὼ ὃ μικρόν ὅτι ἢ καυχήσωμαι. | 0 
ib ae θα. a \ ΄ὔ a > > ¢ > > , 
avis λαλῶ, ov " κατὰ " κύριον λαλῶ, GAN ἃ ὡς “ ἐν © ἀφροσύνῃ, 
ἘΞ ΩΝ w Luke xi. 40. Rom. ii. 20 al. L.P., exc. 1 Pet. ii. 15. Prov. passim. x Matt. vi. 
1. ix. 17. Luke v. 36, 37. x. ?. xiii. 9. xiv. 32 only. y Acts v. 15 reff. z see Matt. x. 14. ch. 


a ver. 1. 
e ver. i reff. 


vii. 15 al. 
d so John vii. 10. 


Σ y 
Ὁ absol., 1 Cor. i. 29. iv. 7 al. 


c see ch. vil. 9—11. 


14. rec (for @avua) θαυμαστον, with D?°KLM rel: txt BD'FP/R|® a 17 Orig, 


[Euthal-ms Damasc-ms]. 
Cypr Lucif, Ambrst { Promiss}. 


15. om ovv D!(and lat) spee Syr goth arm Lucif). 


for εἰς αἀγγελον, ws ayyeAos D}(and lat) Orig-int-mss, 


om διακονοι K. εαυτου K. 


for eta, εστιν D}(and lat) [spec] Lucif. 


16. om γε D!. 


[Euthal-ms ]}. 


rec wixpov τι bef καγω, with syr Ec: txt BDFKLMP[RI& 
rel latt Syr goth eth arm [Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc}. 


kavxnoouat DKELP{ ΙΝ] d! 


17. rec Aadw bef κατα κυριον, with DLM rel vulg(not F-lat) fri syr copt goth : txt 
BFKP[R]8 ad (m[k. av@pwrov]}) 17. 47 Syr eth arm [Bas,] Chr, Damasc. 


we may be fairly compared and judged by 
facts.’ And then, before the γάρ of ver. 
.13 will naturally be supplied, ‘And this 
will end in their discomfiture: for realities 
they have none, no weapons but misrepre- 
sentation, being false Apostles,’ Ke. 
.18.7 For (see above: the γάρ implying also 
that the choice of the above line of conduct 
has been made in a conviction of their 
falsehood and its efficacy to detect it) such 
men are false Apostles (not, as Vulg. and 
most expositors, ‘such false Apostles are 
épy. 56X.,’ which destroys the whole empha- 
sis of the sentence, wherein the ὑπερλίαν 
ἀπόστολοι of ver. 5 are pronounced now to 
be ψευδαπόστολοι: and besides, suggests 
an irrelevant comparison between oi τοιοῦ- 
τοι ψ. and ψ. of some other kind. On 
the sense, see Rev. ii. 2. 6 TOLOUTOS 
is a familiar designation with the Apostle, 
see reff.),—dishonest workmen (in that 
they pretend to be teachers of the Gospel, 
and are in the mean time subserving their 
own ends),— changing themselves into (in 
appearance: the pres. participle indicates 
their habit and continual endeavours to as- 
sume the shape) Apostles of Christ. Bya 
fair comparison between us, this mask will 
be stript off;—by the abundance of my 
sufferings, and distinctions vouchsafed by 
the Lord, my Apostolicity will be fully 
proved, and their Pseudapostolism shewn. 
14, 15.] οὐ @atpa—so Aristoph. 
Plut. 99, καὶ θαῦμά γ᾽ οὐδέν, οὐδ᾽ ἔγὼ yap 
ὁ βλέπων. αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ σ.} If any 
definite allusion is here intended, it is per- 
haps to Job i. 6, &c.: but I would rather 
suppose the practice of Satan in tempting 
and seducing men to be intended, 


14. ayy. φωτός] God is light, and inhabits 
light, and His angelic attendants are sur- 
rounded with brightness, see Acts xii. 7 ; 
Ps. civ. 4: whereas Satan is the Power of 
darkness, see reff. and Luke xxii. 53. 
15.] εἰ καί, if also, i.e. as well as him- 
self, or perhaps better applying to the 
whole sentence, if, also... μετασχ. 
ὡς, i.e. μετασχ. καὶ γίνονται ws:—so 
Rom. ix. 29, ὡς Γόμοῤῥα ἂν ὡμοιώθημεν. 
αὐτός, the father of falsehood and 
wrong (John viii. 44), is directly opposed 
to δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ, Matt. vi. 33, that 
manifestation of God by which He is 
known to us in the Gospel, Rom. i. 17. 
ὧν τὸ τέλ. Of whom (notwith- 
standing this disguise) the end shall be 
correspondent to their works (not to their 
pretensions). 16—21.| Excuses for 
his intended self-boasting. 16.] 
wahiv—referring to ver. 1, not repeating 
what he had there said, but again taking 
up the subject, and expanding that re- 
quest. The ἀνέχομαι of ver. 1 in fact 
implies both requests of this verse :—the 
not regarding him as a fool for boasting, 
or even if they did (ei δὲ μήγε after a 
negative sentence implies ‘ but if it cannot 
be so, ‘if you will not grant this,’ see 
reff. κἄν elliptical : the full construc- 
tion would be κἂν ὡς ἄφρονα δέξασθαι 
δέῃ, δέξασθέ we: so in reff.) as a fool (i. 6. 
yielding to me the toleration and hearing 
which men would not refuse even to one of 
whose folly they were convinced) receiving 
him. κἀγώ, as well as they. 17.] 
Proceeding on the ὡς ἄφρονα, he disclaims 
for this self-boasting the character of inspi- 
ration—or of being said in pursuance of his 


[R xi. 
14 


BDFKL 

MP[R]s 

abcde 

tgh kl 

mnolj7, 
47 


Nis(appy) 49 ; 
IR.) 19 i 


14—21. 


΄ A 7, “"» / 
. ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ ὑποστάσει τῆς ὅ καυχήσεως. 


nw \ \ 
"καυχῶνται "kata ἢ τὴν ἢ 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOTS B. 703 


\ 
18 ἐπεὶ πολλοὶ toch in 


΄ ἣν ἂρ δ τ: : 
oapkKa, Kay@ > καυχήσομαι. 111. 14. xi. 


lonly. Ps. 
xxxviil. 7. 


ἡδέως γὰρ * ἀνέχεσθε τῶν δ᾽ ἀφρόνων, | φρόνιμοι ὄντες" g Rom. ii. 27 


e Lal nw ren. see 
20 Κ ἀνέχεσθε yap, εἴ τις ὑμᾶς ™ καταδουλοῖ, εἴ τις © κατεσ - © John viii.15 


only. see 
Rom. i.3 reff. 


’ ’ » 7 rs yy ᾽ 
θίει, εἴ τις ° λαμβάνει, εἴ τις Ῥ ἐπαίρεται, εἴ τις 4 εἰς «πρός- Gat νἱ 8. 


i Mark vi. 20. 


ὠπον ὑμᾶς * δέρει. 31 " κατὰ ᾿ ἀτιμίαν λέγω ἃ ὡς ἃ ὅτι ἡμεῖς xi. 37 only. 


24. ἰχ. 11. (-διστα, ch. xii. 9.) k ver. 1. 
iv. 10. m Gal, ii. 4only. Gen. xlvii. 21, 


Ὁ = ch. xii. 16. 


only. Isa. ix, 12. h 
s = 1 Cor. vii. 6. 


r Acts v. 40 reff. 


18. for πολλοί, ολοι P!. 


Prov. iii. 
1 Rom. xi. 25 al. Prov. xv. 21. iron., 1 Cor. 
n Mark xii. 40||L. Gal. v.15. Rev. xi. 5 
p = ch. x. 5 reff. q see Matt. xxvi. 67. 
t Rom. i. 26 reff. uch.v.19. 2 Thess, ii. 2. 


om την D'F[R)X! 17 Chr, Damase. 


20. rec ὑμας bef εἰς προεώωπον, with D2[-gr] KLM rel am[iz vos faciem(sic, Tischdf) ] 
Syr goth arm Chr, Thdrt: txt BD!3FPX mo 17 latt syr φῦλ [Euthal-ms] Damase 


Orig-int, [ Ambrst ]. 


mission from the Lord. κατὰ kvp.] as in 
reff., after the (mind of the) Lord, in pur- 
suance, i. 6. 7m thes case, of θεοπνευστία 
from above: not asin 1 Cor. vii. 10, 25, 40. 
ὡς ἐν adp. | as it were in folly, i.e. 
‘putting myself into the situation, and 
speaking the words of a foolish man vaunt- 
ing of himself,’ ὑποστάσει, as ch. ix. 
4,in this present confidence, not as Chrys. 
‘ subject, —‘ this subject of boasting,’ iva 
μὴ νομίσῃς πανταχοῦ ἀνοηταίνειν αὐτόν, 
(Hom. xxiv. p. 607)—and so al.: but the 
sense would be insipid in the last degree : 
nor could such a meaning well be expressed 
without ye,—ev ταύτῃ ye TH ὑπ. De Wette 
also renders im. ‘subject-matter,’ and 
understands, ‘ since we are come to boast- 
ing ;? but here again ye would be more 
naturally found. He objects to ‘confidence,’ 
that the boasting was not begun: but as 
Meyer replies, it is conceived of as having 
begun in Paul’s mind, by the use of the 
present λαλῶ, I am speaking. 
18.| Since many (viz. the false teachers, 
but not only they :—‘since it is a common 
habit,’—for he is here speaking as εἷς τῶν 
ἀφρόνων, see Job ii. 10) boast according to 
the flesh (not = ἐν σαρκί, as Chrys., al., 
but ‘in a spirit of fleshly regard,’ —‘having 
regard to their extraction, achievements, 
&c.’ as below vv. 22 ff.), I also will boast 
(scil. κατὰ τὴν σάρκα. Rickert thinks 
these words are omitted purposely, thereby 
to imply that the Apostle’s boasting was 
not fleshly ; but this is distinctly contra- 
dicted by the context: he is speaking as 
one of the πολλοί of of ἄφρονες, see next 
verse), 19.] Bitterly ironical. They 
were φρόνιμοι--ἂβ 1 Cor. iv. 8, κεκορεσ- 
μένοι----80 full of wisdom as to be able to 
tolerate complacently, looking down from 
the ‘sapientum templa serena,’ the follies 
of others. This, forsooth, encourages him 
to hope for their forbearance and patron- 
age. Compare the earnestness of 1 Cor. 
iii. 1—4, And the irony does not stop 
here: it is not only matter of presump- 


tion that they would tolerate fools with 
complacency, but the matter of fact testi- 
fied it: they were doing this: and more. 

20.| for (proof that they could 
have no objection to so innocent a man as 
a fool, when they tolerated such noxious 
ones as are adduced) ye endure (them), if 
(as is the case) one brings you into 
slavery (the mere abstract act as regarded 
them, not the man’s own selfish view, 
being in the Apostle’s mind, the active, not 
the middle, is used. Thucyd. iii. 70, uses 
the active similarly : λέγοντες τοὺς ᾿Αθη- 
ναίους τὴν Κέρκυραν καταδουλοῦν. But 
the enslaving understood, is to the man 
himself, not to the law :—-see ref. Gal.), if 
one devours you (by exaction on your pro- 
perty, see reff. Mk. L. So Hom. Od. γ. 
315: μή τοι κατὰ πάντα φάγωσι κτήματα, 
and Plaut., Ter., and Quintil., in Wetstein), 
if one catches you (as with a snare, ref.: 
not, ‘takes from you’), if one uplifts 
himself (so freq. in Thucyd., e. g. vi. 11, 
χρὴ μὴ πρὸς τὰς τύχας τῶν ἐναντίων 
ἐπαίρεσθαι. See other examples in Wetst.), 
if one smites you on the face (in insult, 
see 1 Kings xxii. 24: Matt. v. 59; Luke 
xxll. 64; Acts xxiii. 2. This is put as the 
climax of forbearance. “That such vio- 
lence might literally be expected from the 
rulers of the early Christian society, is also 
implied in the command in 1 Tim. iii. 3, 
Tit. i. 7, that the ‘bishop’ is not to be ‘a. 
striker.’ Even so late as the seventh cen- 
tury the council of Braga (c. 7), A.D. 675, 
orders that no bishop at his will and 
pleasure shall strike his clergy, lest he lose 
the respect which they owe him.” Stanley). 

21.] By way of disparagement 
(κατ᾽ ἄτιμ.,---80 κατὰ ληΐην ἐκπλώσαντες, 
Herod. ii. 152; κατὰ θέαν ἧκεν, Thucyd. 
vi. 31) I assume that (ὡς ὅτι, see ch. v. 19, 
note,——does not positively state a fact, but 
assumes one, or states the import of a say- 
ing) WE (emphatic) were weak (when we 
were among you). An ironical reminis- 
cence of his own abstinence when ameng 


704 


v -- Rom. iv, 
19 reff. 

w ver. 12. 

x = ch. x. 2. 

y ver. 17. 

z Acts vi. 1. 
Phil. ii. 5 
bis only. 
Gen. xxxix. 
14 al. 

a John i. 48. Acts ii. 22. Rom. xi. 1 al. 

ἃ here only. Zech. vii. 11 only. (-vta, 2 Pet. ii. 16.) 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


b Rom. ix. 7 reff. 


ΧΙ. 


ec Col. ἱ. 7. 1 Tim. iv. 6. see ch. vi. 4. 


e as adv., here only. Winer, edn. 6, ᾧ 50; Remark 2. 


21. ησθενησαμεν bef ques Εἰ ποὺ F-lat]: ησθενηκαμεν BX m [17(Griesb)] 80 
[Euthal-ms ].—add ev tovrw tw μερει D vulg-ed [demid ](not am fuld [tol]) Ambrst. 


om δ᾽ D}(and lat) vulg syrr Ambrst. 


F-lat].—om 2nd Aeyw N!(ins X-corr! 901), 


them from all these acts of self-exaltation 
at their expense, q. d. (ironically), ‘ I feel 
that Iam much letting myself down by the 
confession that J was too weak ever to do 
any of these things among you. This I 
believe with Schrader, De Wette, and 
Meyer, to be the only satisfactory render- 
ing. See also Stanley. Most expositors 
(1) refer λέγω back to ver. 20, ‘I say it,’ — 
‘I speak, as E. V. So Chrys., Theo- 
phyl., Theodoret, Pelag., Erasm., Calv., al. 
(Chrys. remarks on ὡς ὅτι,--ὠσαφὲς τὸ 
εἰρημένον. ἐπειδὴ yap φορτικὸν ἦν, διὰ 
τοῦτο οὕτως αὐτὸ τέθεικεν, ἵνα κλέψῃ τὴν 
ἐπάχθειαν τῇ ἀσαφείᾳ, p. 609), and (2) 
understand κατὰ atim., ‘to your shame,’ 
and (3) ὡς ὅτι, ‘as though.” But (1) can 
hardly be, seeing that λέγω below and 
λαλῶ ver. 23 have a forward reference: 
(2) would require ὑμῶν, and even then 
would be exceedingly harsh,—ef. the simi- 
lar meaning 1 Cor. xv. 34, where we have 
πρὸς ἐντροπὴν ὑμῖν λαλῶ : and (3) it may 
be doubted whether ὧς ὅτι ever can mean 
‘as though, even in ref. 2 Thess., where 
Winer, edn. 6, § 65. 9 (see German 
edn.), renders it by wie daf: it is pleo- 
nastic, answering to our expression ‘ how 
that’—I told him, how that’.... 
Winer, in a former edition, instances the 
use of wie Daf in a somewhat similar way: 
wie das id) gehort habe, .... where either 
wie or δαβ would be enough. Besides the 
instances given on ch. v. 19, Meyer quotes 
from Dion. Hal. ix. (with no further ref.) 
ἐπιγνούς, ὡς ὅτι ἐν ἐσχάτοις εἰσὶν of κατα- 
κλεισθέντες. ἐν ᾧ δ᾽ ἄν] But in 
whatsoever matter any one (the τις of 
ver. 20) is bold (the ἄν signifies habit, 
recurrence: so Soph. Philoct. 290, ταῦτ᾽ 
ἂν ἐξέρπων τάλας éunxaveunv' εἶτα πῦρ 
ἂν οὐ παρῆν, and Eur. Phen. 412, ποτὲ 
μὲν ἐπ’ ἦμαρ εἶχον, εἶτ᾽ οὐκ εἶχον ἄν, 
where see Porson). Throughout this pas- 
sage, compare by all means Stanley’s in- 
teresting notes. ἐν adp.] see ver. 
bye 22.| “The three honourable 
appellations with which the adversaries 
magnified themselves,—resting on their 
Jewish extraction, are arranged so as to 
form a climax: so that Ἑ βραῖοι refers to 


ToAuw καγω bef ev app. Aeyw ΕἾ ποῦ 


the nationality,—Icpanatra to the theo- 
cracy (Rom. ix. 4 th), and σπέρμα ’ABp. 
to the claim to a part in the Messiah 
(Rom. ix. 7; xi. 1, al.).” Meyer. The 
interrogative form of the sentence is much 
more lively and consistent with the spirit 
of the context than the affirmative, as given 
by Erasm., Luther, Estius, al. 23. | 
Meyer remarks, that all three points. of 
Judaistic comparison, of so little real con- 
sequence in the matter, were dismissed 
with the short and contemptuous κἀγώ, --- 
‘that am I too. But that is not enough, 
now that we are come to the great point or 
comparison; the consciousness of his real 
standing, and their nullity as ministers of 
Christ requires the ὑπὲρ ἐγώ, and the hely 
earnestness of this consciousness pours 
itself forth as a stream over the adver- 
saries, so as to overwhelm their conceited 
aspirations to apostolic dignity. 

παραφρ. A. | stronger than ev ἄφροσ. λέγω: 
—TI say it as a madman. Hardly, as 
Meyer, spoken from a consciousness of the 
verdict mapappovet which the opponents 
would pronounce on this ὑπὲρ éyé,—but 
rather, as De W., from a deep sense of his 
own unworthiness, and conscious how ut- 
terly untrue was ὑπὲρ ἐγώ, in any boasting 
sense. He therefore repudiates it even 
more strongly than the τολμῶ κἀγώ. 

ὑπὲρ ἐγώ must not be misunderstood. He 
concedes to them their being didk xp., and 
assumes (παραφρονῶν) for himself, some- 
thing more, if more abundant labours and 
sufferings are to be any criterion of the 
matter. That this is the sense is obvious 
from the comparison being in the amount 
of labours and sufferings,—and not (as 
Meyer), that he denies to them the διάκ. 
xp. and merely puts it hypothetically. 
‘Well, then, if they are to be considered 
dick. χρ., L must be something more. If 
so, the comparison would be not in the 
degree of ministerial self-sacrifice, but in 
the credentials of the ministry itself. 
Both are now assumed to be ministers: 
but if so, Paul is a minister in a much 
higher degree, more faithful, more self- 
denying, richer in gifts and divine tokens, 
than they.. The preposition is used ad- 


Y ἠσθενήσαμεν" “ev ᾧ δ᾽ av τις * τολμᾷ, (" ἐν ¥ ἀφροσύνῃ ΒΡΡΚΙ, 
/ x ς A eel: 99 2° A099 31 Lae a? PRab 
λέγω) * τολμῶ κἀγώ. “25: KRpatot εἰσιν; κἀγώ. * lopanr- cae fg 
a / > 3 > / b / "A / , > , Wes / 
irat εἰσιν; Kayo. σπέρμα Αβραάμ εἰσιν; Kayo. ιάκο- 
c “~ > a d A an e « \ > ee > 
vou “ χριστοῦ εἰσιν; (* παραφρονῶν λαλῶ) " ὑπὲρ ἐγώ" ἐν 


hkimn 


ο 17.47 





ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


705 


, , ~ “ 
Γ κόποις " περισσοτέρως, ἐν ἢ φυλακαῖς " περισσοτέρως, ἐν τ ch. νἱ. 5. 


fk πληγαῖς 


᾿ ὑπερβαλλόντως, ἐν ™ θανάτοις 


g 1 Cor. iii. 8. 
xv. 58 al. 
Gen. xxxi. 42, 
ch. i. 12 reff. 


πολλάκις. 


ὍΝ ΒΞ, | 5 / ΄ n , Ἂ \ ᾽ h 
UTTO OVOALWY TEVTUKLS TECOOEPAKOVTA Tapa MLD i Matt. xxv. 36, 


ἔλαβον, 35 τρὶς PépaBdicOnv, ἅπαξ « ἐλιθάσθην, τρὶς 35. 


r 2 7 5 ‘¢ 5 
ἐναυάγησα, “νυχθήμερον ἐν 


we / A 
26 ν ὁδοιπορίαις πολλάκις, “ κινδύνοις * ποταμῶν, 


only. (- βάλλειν, ch. iii. 10 ) 


&c. Heb. xi. 
k Luke x. 30. 


ied a 4 xii. 48. Act 
τῷ ᾿βυθῷ "πεποίηκα: Ἐπ 
Deut. xxv. 2. 

Ww Κιν- Vhere only. 

Job xv. 11 


m= ch.i.10. Ps. ly. 13. see 1 Cor. xv. 31. προαπο- 


θνήσκω πολλοὺς θανάτους ὑπομένων ἀνθ᾽ ἑνὸς τοῦ τελευταίου, Philo, Flacc. ᾧ 20, vol. ii. p. 542. 


nellips. of πληγ.; see Luke xii. 47, 48. 
xvi. 22 only}. Judg. vi. 11. 

s here only t. 
xv. 33 reff. 


i. 2, ῥαντ. atm. 


23. for λαλω, Aeyw DF e Did). 
bef εν φυλακαῖς περισσ., with D?{-gr] 


q Acts v. 26 reff. 

t here only. Exod. xv. 5. Ps. evi. 24. (-θίζειν, Luke v. 7.) 
v John iv. 6 only +. 1 Mace. vi. 41, (-ρεῖν, Acts x. 9.) 

(8 times) and Rom. viii. 35 only. Ps. exiv. 3. (-νεύειν, 1 Cor. xy. 30.) 


kovots F(not G). 
KLMRN? rel syrr copt arm Orig, Chr, Thdrt 


o = here only. Herod. ix. 33. p Acts 
rl Tim. i. 19 only +. 
u — Acts 

w here 


x gen., = 1 Pet. 


rec ev πληγαις ὑπερβ. 


Damase, and F{-gr(and G-lat)] δὲ! Orig, [Hil,], which (and P) put περισσ. with mAny. 
and ὑπερβ. with ovA.: om ev TA. υπ. Clem [Euthal-ms] Tert: txt B D!(and lat) (P) 


[17] vulg(and F-lat) goth eth Orig, [Ambrst Aug, ]. 


πολλοις D}j -gr 


25. rec eppaBd., with M rel Chr (Thdrt Damasc]}: txt BDFKLPX [acd fkmn o | 


17. 47 Orig, Eus, Chr-ms Thi Cc. 


26. for πολλακις (and in next ver), πολλαὶς D}(with lat) ; so also vulg [F-lat Syr] in 


ver 27 [twice]. 


verbially, see reff. ἐν κόποις TeEpLG. | 
By (the év is instrumental [in (the matter 
of’) or, by (virtue of) ]:—the direct dative 
is adopted ver. 26 :—these facts are proofs 
of the ὑπὲρ ἐγώ, ποῦ as KEstius, al., 
parallel with it, which would only apply 
to the comparatives and not to ἐν θανάτοις 
πολλάκις) labours (occurring) more abun- 
dantly (the adverbs belong to the sub- 


stantives in each case and are used 
adjectively; so τὴν ἐμὴν ἀναστροφήν 
πότε, Gal. i. 13: τῆς ἐμῆς παρουσίας 


πάλιν, Phil. i. 26),—by prisons (impri- 
sonments) more abundantly (but ove such 
is mentioned in the Acts (xvi. 23 ff.) pre- 
vious to the writing of this Epistle. 
Clement, in the celebrated passage of his 
1st Epistle to the Corinthians (6. v. p. 220) 
on the labours of Paul, describes him as 
ἑπτάκις δεσμὰ popécas. ‘This whole cata- 
logue should shew the chronologists of the 
Apostle’s life and epistles how exceedingly 
unsafe it is to build only on the history 
in the Acts for a complete account of his 
journeys and voyages), by stripes more 
exceedingly (particularized below), by 
deaths often (see reff. and ch. iv. 10. 
Such was the danger escaped at Damascus, 
Acts ix. 23, at Antioch in Pisidia, xiii. 50, 
at Iconium, xiv. 5, 6, at Lystra, ib. 19, at 
Philippi, xvi., at Thessalonica, xvii. 5 f., at 
Berea, ib. 13, and doubtless many others 
of which we know nothing. See below). 
24, 25.] are parenthetical, explain- 
ing some of the foregoing expressions: 
the construction is resumed, ver. 26. 
At the hands of the Jews five times re- 
ceived I forty save one (in Deut. xxv. 3, 
it is prescribed that not more than forty 


Vou, If, 


stripes should be given, ‘lest thy brother 
should seem vile unto thee.” For fear of 
exceeding this number, they kept within it. 
This seems a more likely account of the 
thirty-nine stripes than that given by 
Wetst.,—that thirteen were inflicted on 
the breast, and the same number on each 
shoulder, and the fortieth omitted, lest one 
part of the body should receive more than 
another. See the Rabbinical authorities 
in Wetst., and ef. Joseph. Antt. iv. 8. 21 
and 28, and Stanley’s note here. He calls 
it τιμωρία αἰσχίστη : and Meyer remarks 
that Paul might well number it among the 
θάνατοι, for it was no rare occurrence for 
the criminal to die under its infliction. 

None of these scourgings are mentioned in 
the Acts),—thrice was I beaten with rods 
(scil. by the Roman magistrates, see Acts 
xvi. 22, 28, which is the only occasion 
mentioned in the Acts), once was I stoned 
(Acts xiv. 19), thrice I suffered shipwreck 
(not one of these shipwrecks is known to 
us. ‘Thus we see that perhaps three, per- 
haps two, voyages of Paul, but certainly ~ 


-one,— previous to this time, must be some- 


where inserted in the history of the Acts: 
see Prolegg. ch. iii. § v. 5), a night and 
day have I spent (reff.) in the deep (i.e. 
the sea: probably on some remnant of a 
wreck after one of his shipwrecks alone or 
with others. To understand 6 βυθός, as 
ΤΊ]. (τινὲς δέ φασιν ἔν τινι φρέατι μετὰ 
τὸν ἐν Λύστροις κίνδυνυν κατακρυφθείς, βύθῳ 
λεγομένῳ, νῦν τοῦτο λέγει), seems to be 
taking it out of its connexion here. Wetst. 
gives from lian, H. An. viii. 7, ἀθέατον 
νήχεσθαι ἐν βυθῷ. Still less must we 
think of the characteristic interpretation 
ZZ 


706 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. eB 
yEpp.,here δύνοις Ἧ λῃστῶν, “ κινδύνοις ἐκ 7 γένους, “ κινδύνοις ἐξ BDFKL 
only. ΒΡ :9 “Ἂς " ὃ 7 3 , ΄ 3 a2 7 MPxrab 
xu si ἐθνῶν, “ κινδύνοις ἐν πόλει, “ κινδύνοις ἐν * ἐρημίᾳ, « ἀ οἴᾳ 
Vii. al. , , b) hkl 

2 ictsavii, “ κινδύνοις ἐν θαλάσσῃ, “ κινδύνοις ἐν ὃ ψευδαδέλφοις, 017. 47 


2 reff. absol., 


ὡς ΟΥ̓ cd , \ , > > ' / > 
2Mace. xii, “ἱ © ce d 
“ay acc. XU KOTT@ Kat μόχθῳ, εν αγρυπνίιαις πολλάκις, εν 
Matt. xv. fe ἊΝ λ f 2 / ΄ ΡΝ, , \ 
aise Heb. [5 λιμῷ καὶ 8" δίψει, ἐν ἃ νηστείαις πολλάκις, ἐν } ψύχει καὶ 
xi. 38 only. 
De ΦΘΊΟΜΑΥ͂. fok , 98 1 \ a m \ Cin pee / 
Ezek. xxxv.4. *© ULVOTNTL. ~ l K 
bGaLiv4d δ μ ” X@pP S TMV παρε TOS) δ ETT LOTAGLS 
only +. ΟἹ Thess. ii. 9. 2 Thess. iii. 8 only. ἃ ch. vi. 5 (reff.). e as above (c) 
only. Num. xsiii. 21. f Deut. xxviii. 48 only. g Rom. viii. 35. h here 
only. kxod. xvii. 3. i John xviii. 18. Acts xxviii. 2 only. Gen. vii. 22. k as above 
(f,g). Rev. iii. 18 only. 1 = Matt. xiv. 21. (Heb. iv. 15.) Gen. xxvi. 1. m Matt, v. 
32. Acts xxvi. 29only+. Deut. i. 36 Aq. constr., here only. n Acts xxiv. 12 onlyt. = 2 Mace. 


vi. 3? (only.) ἐπισύσ., (Acts as above, vy. r.) Num. xxvi. 9. 


27. rec ins ev bef κοπω, with KLMP X-corr'(?)3 rel vulg(and F-lat) Orig,(-int,) 
[Bas, Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damase Ambrst Aug,]: om BD F/-gr] &! goth. 
διψὴ ΒΙ g? 1 (Orig, ]. 

28. ree εἐπισυστασις, with KLMP rel Chr,(explaining it: of θόρυβοι, ai tapaxal, ai 
πολιορκίαι τῶν δήμων καὶ τῶν πόλεων ἔφοδοι. So also Thdrt al) Damase: txt BDER 





of Estius: “Subjunxit aliud periculum 
marinum longe gravius, nempe quod de- 
mersus fuerit ex naufragio in profundum 
maris, ubi tamen divina ope fuerit servatus 
incolumis noctem et diem, atque inde 
postea liberatus ”). 26.] The construc- 
tion is resumed from ver. 23, but now 
with the instrumental dative without the 
preposition. By journeys frequently, 
by perils of rivers (the genitives denote 
the material of the perils; rivers and rob- 
bers being the things and persons actually 
attacking. Winer, edn. 6, § 30. 2 [a], 
renders it perils on rivers, justifying it 
by κ. ἐν πόλει: but in my view a distinc- 
tion is pointed out by the variety of con- 
struction. Wetst. quotes κινδ, θαλασσῶν 
from Heliod. ii. 4. The ‘perils of rivers’ 
might arise from crossing or fording, or 
from floods. ‘The crossing of the rocky 
and irregular torrents in Alpine districts 
is to this day attended with danger, which 
must have been much more frequent when 
bridges were comparatively rare. And this 
is the case with a road, among others, fre- 
quently traversed by Paul, that between 
Jerusalem and Antioch, crossed as it is by 
the torrents from the.sides of Lebanon. 
Manudrell says that the traveller Spon lost 
his life in one of those torrents: see Cony- 
beare and Howson, edn. 2, vol. i. p. 502, 
note: and Stanley’ in loc.), by perils of 
robbers (see note on Acts xiii. 14), by 
perils from my kindred (the Jewish na- 
tion, ἐκ, arising from: they not being 
always the direct agents,—but, as in mapy 
cases in the Acts, setting on others or 
plotting secretly: or yévouvs,—and ἐθν. 
below,—imports generically the source, or 
quarter whence the danger arose), by 
perils from the Gentiles (not merely 
“from Gentiles,” as Stanley: this would 
be ἐξ ἐθνικῶν. The art. is omitted after 
the preposition, the word being thus cate- 
govized in Greek; but it must be supplied 


in our English idiom), by perils in the 
city (in Damascus, Acts ix. 23 f.,—Jeru- 
salem, ib. 29,—Ephesus xix. 23 ff., and 
many other places), by perils in the desert 
(the actual desert ? or merely the solitude 
of journeys as contrasted with ‘ the city ἢ’ 
but any how, not ‘in solitude: the art. 
must be supplied as in ἐν πόλει), by perils 
in the sea (not, as De W., a repetition 
from ver. 25: there are many perils in the 
sea short of shipwrecks), by perils among 
false brethren (who were these? Grot., 
al., suppose, ‘qui Christianos se simula- 
bant, ut res Christianorum perdiscerent, 
deinde eos proderent,’—and so apparently 
Chrys., &. But Paul’s use of this com- 
pound leads us rather to persons who bona 
fide wished to be thought ἀδελφοί, but 
were not, scil. in heart and conduct, and 
were opponents of himself personally, 
rather than designed traitors to the Chris- 
tian cause. Cf. ψευδαπόστολοι above, ver. 
13) ; 27.] by labour and weariness, 
by watchings (see on ch. vi. 5) frequently 
(the ἐν is here resumed, perhaps arbi- 
trarily, perhaps also because κόπος and 
μόχθος are more directly instrumental, 
—aypumv., &c., more conditionally), by 
hunger and thirst, by fastings frequently 
(voluntary fastings, ‘ad  purificandam 
mentem et edomandam carnem,’ as Es- 
tius, see also ch. vi. 5 note. De W. here 
too (see also Stanley) holds to ‘involun- 
tary fastings;’? but he is clearly wrong, 
for vnor. is distinguished from Am. κ. 
δίψ.), in cold and nakedness (insuffi- 
cient clothing :—or, literally, when thrust 
into prison after his scourgings,—or 
after his shipwrecks). 28.) He 
passes from particulars, omitting others 
which might have been specified, to the 
weight of apostolic care and sympathy 
which was on him. Not to mention those 


(afflictions) which are besides (these) (the 


Vulg., E. V., Beza, Estius, Bengel, under- 





27—30. 


ΠΡῸΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


107 


΄ ᾿] ΄ ,ὔὕ ς ,ὔ lal »“ nn os 
μοι ἡ ° καθ᾽ ἡμέραν, ἡ Ρ μέριμνα 1 πασῶν TOV 4 ἐκκλησιῶν. ° Acts ti 4 


/ » lal \ > a 
29 τίς τ ἀσθενεῖ, Kal οὐκ 1 ἀσθενῶ; τίς " σκανδαλίζεται, 


καὶ οὐκ ἐγὼ " πυροῦμαι ; 80 Ki ἡ καυχᾶσθαι δεῖ, YY τὰ ν᾿ τῆς 
4 ch. viii. 18 reff. 

t 1 Cor, vii. 9 reff. 

w constr., ch. ix. 2. 

rec (for μοι) μου, with D[-gr] KLMPN% rel vulg[(and F-lat) 
Ambrst]: txt B F[-gr] 8! 17 [Euthal-ms, in me D-lat Augs]. 


only. Sir. xlii. 9, 
s 1 Cor. viii. 13 reff. 
Rom, xiv. 19 al. 


k 17 [Euthal-ms]. 


(not G), for καθ. nu. ἡ, καθημερινὴ F. 
stand παρεκτός as = ἔξωθεν, ‘the things 
that are without,—a meaning which it 
never has, always implying exception, see 
reff. Chrys., a., join xwp. τ. παρεκτ. 
with the foregoing, and put a period after 
mapekr., interpreting it rightly, πλείονα τὰ 
παραλειφθέντα τῶν ἄπαριθμηθέντων, Hom. 
xxv. p. 613:—but this seems to break the 
connexion too abruptly, besides giving a 
strange and unlikely termination to the 
long sentence preceding),—my care (ἐπίστ. 
_ may be either “ delay,’ ‘hindrance,’ as Soph. 
Antig. 225, πολλὰς γὰρ εἶχον φροντίδος 
ἐπιστάσεις, and Xen. Anab. ii. 4. 26, ὅσον 
᾿ἂν χρόνον τὸ ἡγούμενον τοῦ στρατεύματος 
ἐπιστήσειε, τοσοῦτον ἦν ἀνάγκη χρόνον BL 
ὅλου τοῦ στρατεύματος γίγνεσθαι τὴν ἐπί- 
στασιν,---ΟΥὉἃ as very frequently in Polybius, 
see Schweigh., Lex. Polyb.,—< care,’ ‘ at- 
tention,’ ‘ matter of earnest thought :᾿ e. g. 
τὴν ὑπὲρ τῶν ὅλων ἐπίστασιν κ. διάληψιν, 
viii. 20. 13, ‘curam summe ΤῸ], -τοοὺκ ἐκ 
παρέργου, ἄλλ᾽ ἐξ ἐπιστάσεως, ili. 58. 3,— 
ἄγειν τινὰ εἰς ἐπίστασιν, ‘attentionem ali- 
cujus excitare,’ ix. 22. 17, al. The ree. 
reading, ἐπισύστασις (which has perhaps 
been introduced from ἐπίστασις not being 
understood (see digest here and on ref. 
Acts) and then wo has been altered to 
μου as easier; but substantives derived 
from verbs which govern a dative are 
sometimes followed by this case, see 
Winer, edn. 6, § 31. 3, and Moulton’s 
note), can only mean coneursus, in a 
hostile sense, see ref. and examples in 
Wetst.: and so Chrys. (see var. readd.), 
&c., take it here: others metaphorically, 
as Beza, ‘agmen illud in me quotidie con- 
surgens, i.e. sollicitudo de omnibus eccle- 
5118 :-—somewhat similarly De W.,—*‘ that 
which sets upon me, importunes me, daily :’ 
and so E. V. Stanley, with Est. al., ren- 
ders it, the concourse of people to see me:’ 
but this is doubtful, as departing from the 
hostile sense. In Beza’s sense, there is 
something Pauline in the rec., ‘the daily 
outbreak against me,’ and the reading 
cannot be considered certain) day by day, 
(viz.) my anxiety for all the churches 
(the construction is an anacoluthon: not, 
as Meyer, ἐπίστ. the subject and μέριμνα, 
the predicate, which would be a very flat 
sentence,—‘ my daily care is, anxiety Xe. 
As it stands, ἡ ἐπίστ. is general, and 


p and constr., 
Matt. xiii. 


22 || (Luke 
xxi. 34. 
1 Pet. v. 7) 
r = Acts xx. 35, or Rom. xiv. 1. 
u absol., vv. 16, 18. y constr., 


Proy. xxvii. 1. 
om Ist 7 F! 


ἢ μέριμν. particularizes it. Nothing need 
be supplied. ἡ ἐπίστ. occurs to the Apos- 
tle’s mind, and is uttered, in the nomina- 
tive, the construction being disregarded), 

29.] ‘Cura certe συμπάθειαν ge- 
nerat: que facit, ut omnium affectus in 
se suscipiat Christi minister, omnium per- 
sonas induat, quo se accommodet om- 
nibus,’ Calv. Olsh., after Emmerling, 
strangely understands, ‘ Who is weak, if 1 
am not weak? i.e.‘ Who can be called 
weak, if I am not 50 ἢ ἢ The ἀσθένεια 
of the τις may be in various ways; in faith, 
as Rom. xiv. 1 al., or in purpose, or in 
courage: that of the Apostle, see 1 Cor. 
ix. 22, was a sympathetic weakness, a lean- 
ing to the same infirmity for the weak 
brother’s sake, but also a veritable θορυ- 
βοῦμαι x. ταράσσομαι (as Chrys., p. 614) 
in himself, on the weak brother’s account. 

τίς oxavd.| “ Non priore, sed hac 
versiculi parte addit ego : nam illic infirmo 
se accommodat: hic dissimilem se scan- 
dalizantis fatetur, partes a scandalizante 
neglectas scandalizati causa 7pse suscipiens. 
Partes a scandalizante neglectz sunt amor, 
prudentia, &c. Idem tamen Paulus etiam 
partes scandalizati, sive incommodum 
quod scandalizatus sentit, in se suscipit.” 
Bengel. awupovpat,—with zeal, or with 
indignation. 30.] partly refers back 
to what has passed since ver. 23. The 
ἀσθένεια not being that mentioned in a 
different connexion in ver. 29, but that of 
ver. 21, to which all since has applied. 
But the words are not without a forward 
reference likewise. He will boast of his 
weaknesses—of (τὰ τῆς ἄσθ.) those things 
which made him appear mean and con- 
temptible in the eyes of his adversaries. 
He is about to adduce an instance of es- 
cape from danger, of which this is emi- 
nently the case: he might be scoffed at as 
6 capyavopdpntos, or the like—but he is 
carried on in his fervency of self-renun- 
ciation amidst his apparent self-celebration, 
and he will even cast before his enemies 
the contemptible antecedents of his career, 
boasting in being despised, if only for 
what Christ had done in him. The as- 
severation in ver. 81 may be applied to 
the whole, but I had rather view it as con- 
nected with the strange history about to 
be related :—‘I will glory in my weaknesses 


ZZ ἃ 


ΠΡΟΣ KOFINOIOTS B. ΧΙ. 31—35. 





ΕΞ ΄ e > . \ “ P 
_ 3 éoCeveras μου ἡ καυχήσομαι" 31 ὁ %* θεὸς καὶ ¥ πατὴρ τοῦ BNFKL 


1 Cor. ii. 3 , 3 a ΤΟΝ ἀπ ts δ ee Le See MPNab 

re, κυρίου Ἰησοῦ οἷδεν, ὁ ὧν * εὐλογητὸς 5 εἰς τοὺς * αἰῶνας, c dere 

_ hkima 
ref. Σ 


ο 17. 47 


2 Rom. ix. 5 


ὅτου οὐ ὑψεύδομαι. * ἐν Δαμασκῷ ὁ " ἐθνάρχης “Apéta 
ὁ τε ἀπά οῖς, TOD βασιλέως * ἐφρούρει τὴν πόλιν Δαμασκηνῶν * πιάσαι 
) FLOM. 1x. 
ett. ΄ ‘ \ We ve , > ΄ Β 2 
ἢ tee cnirt. μὲ [θέλων], 35 Kat διὰ θυρίδος ἐν 8 σαργάνῃ ἐχα- 
i acc. XIV, ,ὔ Ν Lal > A wn 
λάσθην ὃ διὰ τοῦ ὃ τείχους καὶ 'e€eduvyov tas χεῖρας αὑτοῦ. 


47. απ 1,2 
only. Jos. 


Antt.xiv.7' ΧΤ] 1* * Καυχᾶσθαι δὴ ob | συμφέρει mou ἐλεύσομαι 
ἃ Gal. iii. 23. 


Phil. iv.7. 1 Pet.i.Sonly+. Judith iii. 6. 
i. 15 g here only +. , ‘ 
I constr., but w. aor. inf., Matt. xix. 10. 


e Acts xii. 4 reff. 
h Acts ix. 25 (reff.). 
Esth. i. 8. 


f Acts xx. 9 only. Josh. 

ii. 15, 18. i Rom. ii. 3 reff. 
k absol., ch. xi. 16, 18, 30 

30. om μου B. 

31. ree aft κυρίου ins ἡμων, with DMP rel vulg(with [demid] fuld F-lat) Syr ecopt 
arm Thdrt [Euthal-ms Ambrst] Augyaticy: om ΒΕ ΚΙ δὲ e g h 1 m n 17 am syr goth eth 
Chr,[and 2-mss| Damase. ree aft ino. ins χριστου, with DK LMP rel vulg(with 
[demid] fuld F-lat) Syr copt eth Thdrt [Euthal-ms Damase Ambrst} Aug: om BFR 
m 17 am syr goth arm Chr{and ms]. 

32. rec δαμασκηνων bef πολιν, with D?[-gr] KLM rel Chr, Thdrt Damase: txt 
BD!3F PX a m 17 [latt arm]. om θελων B D}(and lat) vulg(and F-lat) Syr arm 
Procop, Ambrst Pel: ins D?[-gr] KLMPR rel goth Chr, { Euthal-ms Damase]| Thdrt, 
and (but bef πιασαι we) F[-gr(and G-lat)] syr copt eth. 

33. om ev σαργανὴ ΕἾ -51]. 


Cuap. XII. 1. * καυχᾶσθαι δεῖ οὐ συμφέρον μὲν ἐλευσομαι δὲ Bisee 
table) F(&) 17 vulg: so, but σναφερει, P: καυχασθαι δὴ ov συμφερει μοι ελευσομαι yap 
(D)KL rel Chr Thdrt [Thl] @e.—ins εἰ bef καυχ. &* 39 lect-17 vulg(and F-lat) 
[Euthal-ms Ambrst].—de: (on the confusion between ἡ and εἰ of Tischdf N. T. (ed. 7) 
prolegg. p. xxxvii) B D3fand lat] FLP de f g mno [17] vulg syrr goth [ Euthal-ms 
Ambrst]: δὲ D}{-gr] δὲ copt Thl: 5) KM 47 Ath, Chr Tndrt Damase [Ec }.—om μοι 


D!(-gr} Syr goth. (M uncert.)—add καὶ B 213. 


—yea, and I will yet more abase my- 
self—God knows that I am telling sober 
truth—&e.’ If the solemnity of the as- 
severation seem out of proportion to the 
incident, the fervid and impassioned cha- 
racter of the whole passage roust be taken 
into account. It will be seen that I differ 
from all Commentators here, and cannot 
but think that they have missed the con- 
nexion. Meyer supposes that vv. 32, 33 
were only the beginning of a catalogue 
of his escapes, which he breaks off at 
ch. xii. 1: and that the asseveration was 
meant to apply to the whole catalogue : 
but surely this is very unnatural. 

- 82, 33.] On the fact, and historical dif- 
ficulty, see note, Acts ix. 24. 32. | 
ἐν Aap. followed by Δαμασκηνῶν is pleo- 
nastic, but the pleonasm is common 
enough, especially when for any reason, 
our words are more than usually precise 
and formal. ἐθνάρχης Prefect, or 
governor, stationed there by the Arabian 
king. The title appears to have been 
variously used. The High Priest Simon, 
as a vassal of Syria, is so named in reff. 
1 Mace., and Jos. Antt. xiii. 6.7. It was 
bestowed by Augustus on Archelaus after 
his father’s death, Jos. Antt. xvii. 11. 4; 
B. J. ii.6. 3. The presidents of the seven 
districts into which Egypt was divided 


under the Romans, bore it (Strabo, xvii. 
798): as did a petty prince of the Bospo- 
rus under Augustus (Lucian, Macrob. 17). 
Also the chief magistrates of the Jews liv- 
ing under their own laws in foreign states 
had this title (Jos. Antt. xiv. 7. 2; xiv. 8. 
5. B. J. vii. 6.3). But apparently it must 
here be taken in its wider sense, and net 
in this latter: for the mere chief magis- 
trate of the Jews would not have had the 
power of guarding the city. Doubtless he 
was incited by the Jews, who would repre- 
sent Paul as a malefactor. σαργάνη.. 
κόφινος, Hesych.;—oi μέν, σχοίνιόν τι, 
οἱ δὲ πλέγμα τι ἐκ cxowiov. Suidas (see 
Wetst.), = σπυρίς, Acts ix. 25. Probably it 
is, as Stanley, a “rope-basket;” a net. 

Cuap. XII. 1—10.] He proceeds to speak 
of visions and revelations vouchsafed to 
him, and relates one such, of which however 
he will not boast, except in as far as it 
leads to fresh mention of infirmity, m 
which he will boast, as being a vehicle for 
the perfection of Christ's power. In order 
to understand the connexion of the follow- 
ing, it is very requisite to bear in mind the 
burden of the whole, which runs through it 


_—é€y ταῖς ἀσθενείαις καυχήσομαι. There 


is no break between this and the last chap- 
ter. He has just mentioned a passage of 
his history which might expose him to con- 





STs I, 2: 


ma , ᾿ 
οπτασίιας Kab 


γὰρ εἰς 


iii. 3. Sir. xliii. 2, 16 only. 
note}, Rev. i. 1 (Gal. i. 127) only. 
o see 2 Tim. 1.9. Tit.i.2. John xii. 1. 


aft es ins tas P: ra(sic) F. 


tempt and ridicule—this was one of the 
ἀσθένεια. He now comes to another: 
but that other inseparably connected with, 
and forming the sequel of, a glorious reve- 
lation vouchsafed him by the Lord. This 
therefore he relates, at the same time repu- 
diating it as connected with Azmse/f, aud 
fixing attention only °n the ἀσθένεια which 
followed it. 1. (I have in recent 
editions suspended the very difficult ques- 
tion of this reading, not finding it possible 
to decide whether of the two deserves a 
place in the text. Meantime, the ree. 
is left in, and on it the following note 
is written.) Let only the two readings 
καυχᾶσθαι δὴ oF συμφέρει μοι. ἐλεύσομαι 
yap, and καυχᾶσθαι δεῖ, οὐ συμφέρον μέν" 
ἐλεύσομαι δέ, be compared, and it would 
certainly seem as if the former more re- 
sembled the nervous elliptie irony of the 
great Apostle, and the latter the tame 
conventioral propriety of the grammatical 
correctors. ‘The other variations, δέ for 
δή, and the prefixing of ei, are too palpable 
emen:lations to require critical treatment. 
The difficulty however is considerably less- 
ened, when the right connexion is borne 
in mind. To boast, verily, is not to my 
advantage: for (i.e. it will be shewn to 
be so, byt the following fact of a correction 
administered to me ἵνα ph ὑπεραίρωμαι) 
(on the other reading, I must boast, 
though it is not to my advantage: but) 
I will proceed to visions and revelations 
of the Lord. δή in this sense implies a 
consciousness of a reason why the asser- 
tion is true, and is therefore naturally fol- 
lowed by γάρ, if the sentence is completed. 
The same sense is found in Plato, Phed. 
p- 60, ὦ Σώκρατες, ὕστατον δὴ σὲ zpos- 
ἐροῦσι νῦν οἱ ἐπιτήδειοι, καὶ σὺ τούτου-.-- 
the completion of the sense being,—‘ for 
you are to die to-night :᾿ -- πολλοὶ κακῶς 
πράσσουσιν, ov σὺ δὴ μόνος, Eur. Hee. 
464: i.e. οὐ σὺ δὴ μόνος κακῶς πράσσει, 
πολλοὶ γὰρ ἄλλοι. ... (See Hartung, 
Partikellehre i. 270, who however explains 
é7 in these examples somewhat differently.) 
The force of it here then, is: “Zam well 
aware that to beast is not good fur me: 
Sor I will come to an instance in which it 
was so shewn to me.” eis ὀπτ. κ. 
ἀπ. κυρ. q.d. ‘and the instances I will 
select are just of that kind in which, if 
boasting ever were good, it might be al- 
lowed ? thus the yap gives a more com- 
plete proof. ὀπτασία is the form or man- 


’ 
" ἀποκαλύψεις κυρίου. 


M 93 “ρο \ 3 ~ ὃ / yy 
ἄνθρωπον εν χρίστῳ 77 po ETD) εκατεσσαρων (εἴτε 
= Dan. ix. 23 al. Theod. 


Amos i. 1. iv. 7. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 709 


δ - 
=: οἶδα m Luke i. 22. 


5 xxiv.23. Acts 
Ρ εν — 15 only. 
L.Pj~ Mal 
n = 1 Cor. xiv. 6 reff. w. gen. subj. (see 
(obj., 1 Cor, i 7. 2 Thess. i. 7. 1 Pet. 3.7, 13. δε xke 2) 


pch.v.6. Heb. xiii. - 


for xup., χριστου ΕἾ not F-lat]. (P uncert.) 


ner of receiving ἀποκάλυψις, the revela- 
tion. There can hardly be an ὀπτασία 
without an ἀπυκάλυψις of some kind. 
Therefore Theophylact’s distinction is 
scarcely correct, 7 ἀποκάλυψις πλέον τι 
ἔχει τῆς ὀπτασίας:  pey yap μόνον 
βλέπειν δίδωσιν: αὕτη δὲ καί τι βαθύτερον 
τοῦ δρωμένου ἀπογυμνοῖ. κυρίου, 
gen. subj , vouchsafed me by the Lord,— 
not obj., ‘of [i.e. revealing] the Lord’ 
jas the subject of the vision], for such is 
not that which follows. No particular 
polemical reason, as the practice of par- 
ticular parties at Corinth to allege visions, 
&c. (Baur), need be sought forthe narration 
of this vision: Paul’s object is general, and 
the means taken to attain it are simply 
subordinate to it, viz. the vindication of his 
apostolic character. 2—4.) An ex- 
ample of such a vision and revelation. 
The adoption of the third person is re- 
markable: it being evident from ver. 7 that 
he himself is meant. It is plain that a 
contrast is intended between the rapt and 
glorified person of vv. 2, 4,—and himself, 
the weak and afflicted and almost despuair- 
ing subject of the σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί of vv. 
7 ff. Such glory delonged not to him, but 
the weakness did. Nay, so far was the 
glory from being Ais, that he knew not 
whether he was in or out of the body when 
it was put upon him: so that the ἐγὼ αὐτός, 
compounded of the νοῦς and σάρξ (Rom. 
vii. 25), clearly was not the subject of it, 
but as it were another form of his person- 
ality, analogous to that which we shall 
assume when unclothed of the body. 
It may be remarked in passing, as has been 
done by Whitby, that the Apostle here by 
implication acknowledges the possibility 
of consciousness and receptivity in @ 
disembodied state. Let it not be for- 
gotten, that in the context, this vision is 
introduced not so much for the purpose of 
making it a ground of boasting, which he 
does only passingly and under protest, but 
that he may by it introduce the mention 
of the σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί, which bore so 
conspicuous a@ part in his ἀσθένειαι, TO 
BOAST OF WHICH is his present object. 
2.) I know (not, ‘knew,’ as E. V.: 
which [is a mistake in grammar, and] in- 
troduces serious confusion, making it seem 
as if the πρὸ ἐτῶν δεκατ. were the date of 
the knowledge, not, as it really is, of the 
vision) ἃ man in Christ (ἐν xp. belongs to 
ἄνθρ., not to vida, as Beza; ἄνθ. ἐν xp.= 


710 


, b] HD v q > NE a , > nD) 
qicorviis Ῥ σώματι οὐκ οἶδα, εἴτε ἃ ἐκτὸς τοῦ σώματος οὐκ οἶδα, ὁ 
retf. > ΄ 
reh. αἱ. 11,81. 1 θεὸς 1 οἶδεν) ὅ ἁρπαγέντα 
Ν a "4 , 
ὃ καὶ olda ‘tov ' τοιοῦτον ἄνθρωπον (εἴτε Ρ ἐν 


Josh. xxii. 22. Ἢ 

s = John τὶ. = 
15. Acts vii, Οὐρανοῦ. 
39. 1 Thess. 
iv. 17. Rev. 
xii. 5. 

t Acts xxii. 22. 
1 Cor. v. 5,11. 
ch. ii. 5, 6. 
> a li Ὁ so Matt. xi. 23. Luke x. 15. 

xxiii, 43. Rey. ii. 7 only. Gen. ii. 8, and fr. 


2. ins tw bef σωματι D!. (P uncert.) 
ins Tov bef τριτου F. 
to τρυτου.) 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


Deut. iv. 11. 


XII. 


«ς 


ἐπ τον ee 7 De ΄ 
τον TOLOUTOV EWS TPLTOV 


/ ” ν \ a“ , > to ¢ t@ \ 
Ρσώματι εἴτε “χωρὶς τοῦ σώματος οὐκ οἶδα, ὁ * θεὸς 
> -“ , / Ν 4 
τ οἶδεν) 3 ὅτι "ἡρπάγη εἰς τὸν “ παράδεισον Kal ἤκουσεν 


v = Johni. 8 8]. w Luke 


om του bef σωματος Β ἃ [50 al next ver]. 


(for τριτου &! wrote τουτου, which he then altered 


3. rec (for xwpis) extos (from ver 2), with D?3FKLMPX [Chr, Euthal-ms Thdrt 


Damase: extra latt]: txt BD! Meth,. 


‘a Christian,’ ‘a man whose standing is in 
Christ : so οὗ καὶ mpd ἐμοῦ yéyovay ἐν 
χριστῷ, Rom. xvi. 7),—fourteen years 
ago (belongs not to οἶδα, nor to ἐν xp. as 
Grot.: ‘hominem talem, qui per 14 annos 
Christo serviat ;—but to ἁρπαγέντα. On 
the idiom see reft..—the date probably 
refers back to the time when he was at 
Tarsus waiting for God to point out his 
work, between Acts ix. 30 and xi. 25. See 
the chronological table in the Prolego- 
mena), Whether in the body, I know not, 
or out of the body, I know not: God 
knoweth (if in the body, the idea would be 
that he was taken up bodily : if out of the 
body, to which the alternative manifestly 
inclines,—that his spirit was rapt from the 
body, and taken up disembodied. Aug. de 
genesi ad litteram xii. 2—5 (83—14), vol. 
iii. pp. 455 ff, discusses the matter at 
length, and concludes thus, -- Proinde 
quod vidit raptus usque in tertium ccelum, 
quod etiam se scire confirmat, proprie 
vidit, non imaginaliter. Sed quia ipsa a 
corpore alienata utrum omnino mortuum 
corpus reliquerit, an secundum modum 
quendam viventis corporis ibi anima fuerit, 
sed mens ejus ad videnda vel audienda in- 
effabilia illius visionis arrepta sit, hoc in- 
certum erat,—ideo forsitan dixit, “sive 
in corpore sive extra corpus, nescio, Deus 
scit.”” And similarly Thom. Aq. and 
Estius: not, as Meyer thinks, making the 
alternative consist between reality and a 
mere vision, but between the anima, the 
life, being rapt out of the body, leaving it 
dead, and the mens, the intelligence or 
spirit, being rapt out of the body, leaving 
it ‘secundum modum quendam vivens’) ; 
such an one (so τὸν τοιοῦτον resumes after 
a parenthesis, 1 Cor. v. 5), rapt (snatched 
or taken up, reff.) as far as the third 
heaven. What is the third heaven? 
The Jews knew no such number, but com- 
monly (not universally: Rabbi Judah 
said, “Duo sunt celi, Deut. x. 147) 
recognized seven heavens: and if their 
arrangement is to be followed, the third 
heaven will be very low in the celestial 


om οὐκ 0152 B Meth,. 


scale, being only the material clouds. That 
the threefold division into the air (nubi- 
ferum), the sky (astriferum), and the 
heaven (angeliferum), was in use among the 
Jews, Meyer regards as a fiction of Grotius. 
Certainly no Rabbinical authority is given 
for such a statement: but it is put forward 
confidently by Grotius, and since his time 
adopted without enquiry by many Com- 
mentators. It is uncertain whether the 
sevenfold division prevailed so early as the 
Apostle’s time: and at all events, as we 
must not invent Jewish divisions which 
never existed, so it seems rash to apply 
here, one about whose date we are not 
certain, and which does not suit the con- 
text :—for to be rapt only to the clouds, 
even supposing ver. 4 to relate a further 
assumption, would hardly be thus solemnly 
introduced, or the preposition €ws used. 
The safest explanation therefore is, not 
to follow any fixed division, but judging . 
by the evident intention of the expression, 
to understand a high degree of celestial 
exaltation. I cannot see any cogency in 
Meyer’s argument, that ‘the third heaven 
must have been an idea well known and 
previously defined among his readers,’ see- 
ing that in such words as τρὶς μακάριος, 
&e. it is manifestly inapplicable. 

8, 4.] A solemn repetition of the fore- 
going, with the additional particular of 
his having had unspeakable revelations 
made to him. Some, as Clem. Strom. v. 
12 (80), p. 693 P., Iren. ii. 30. 7, p. 162, 
Athan, Apol. 20, vol. 1. p. 263, Orig. (or 
his interpreter) on Rom. xvi. lib. x. 43, 
vol. iv. p. 688, Gcum., al., think that this 
was a fresh assumption, ἕως τρίτου οὐρανοῦ 
κἀκεῖθεν εἰς τὸν παράδεισον, and with these 
Meyer agrees: but surely had this been 
intended, some intimation would have been 
given of it, either by καί, or by placing εἰς 
τὸν παράδεισον (as the stress would be 
then no longer on the fact ἁρπαγῆναι as 
before, but on the new place to which 
ἡρπάγη) in the place of emphasis before 
ἡρπάγη ;—or, by both combined,—37: καὶ 
εἰς τὸν παράδεισον ἡρπάγη. As it is, 








3—7. 


ew A ¥ “ 
χ ἄῤῥητα ῥήματα ἃ οὐκ ¥ ἐξὸν ἀνθρώπῳ λαλῆσαι. 


trop 


΄ ; > \ ] an a 2! Qe / 
»pouM. χήσομα!, εἰ μὴ ἐν ταῖς ὃ ἀσθενείαις [μου]. 


t Ί Ζ , 2 ὑπὲρ δὲ ἐ ὦ 
Τοιουτου “ καυχήσομαι, “ UTEP ε εμαύυτοῦυ OU “ Καυ- 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ 8. 711 


id \ 
5 2 UTT Ep x here only +. 
Lev. xvili. 23 
Symm. 
y Matt. xii. 4. 
6 23 \ Acts ii. 29 
εαν yap only. Esth. 
iv, 2. 


΄ , > ” Ὁ » - ec 2 s : vii 
θελήσω καυχήσασθαι, οὐκ ἔσομαι ὕ ἀφρων ἀλήθειαν τ". bose 


ach. xi. 30. 


nA , > \ f. a \ 
yap ἐρῶ" ἃ φείδομαι δέ, μή τις “ εἰς ἐμὲ fAoyionTtas 8 ὑπὲρ b oh, 31 10, 19 


25. Ps. xiv. 2. 
φείδον διδάσκειν, Eur. Orest. 387.) 
vii. 15.) g = 1 Cor. iv. 6. x. 13. 


[4. ανθρωπων L Ὁ 47. | 
5. om tov M. 
X}(corrd by XN! appy). 


for 2nd ὑπερ, περι D’. 
τοις ασθενημασιν D!, 


aA / xX > I 3 5) A \ “ ἢ ς Το, 
Α καιτη ὃ βλέπει με, ἢ ἀκούει [Tt] ἐξ ἐμοῦ. Ἷ καὶ τῇ ὃ ὕπερ- Rom. ix. 
ἃ =here only, (Rom. xi. 21 reff) Isa. liv. 3, Xen. Cyr. i. 6. 19,35. (μὴ 


é= ch..x. 13, 16 b. f = here only. (Hos. 
h Rom. vii. 13 reff. Jos. Antt. i. 13. 4, ii. 2.1. 


om ov (from preceding termination) 
om μου B D}(and lat) 17 


syrr copt arm: ins (from ch xi. 30?) D3[-gr] FKLMPN rel vulg goth eth Ath, 
[ Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase [Ambr, Ambrst ]. 


6. for yap, δε K: yap και P ({arm(Tischdf) Chr, ]. 


om τι (as. superfluous) 


B D3{-gr] F[-gr(and G-lat)] 8! m 17 am(with demid fuld! tol harl?) [ (Syr copt) | eth 
arm Orig,(-int,) [Euthal-ms]: ins D'(and lat) KLX? rel [vulg-clem F-lat harl!] syr 
goth Chrtajic] ‘Thdrt Damase ‘hl @e Ambrst. 


with the verb preceding in both clauses, 
and therefore no prominence given to thie 
places as distinguished from one another, I 
must hold ἕως τρίτου οὐρ. to be at least so 
far equivalent to εἰς τὸν παράδεισον, as to 
be a general local description of the situa- 
tion in which 6 παράδεισος is found. The 
repetition of εἴτε... . oidev is equally 
accountable on either explanation, being 
made for solemnity and emphasis. The 
παράδεισος cannot here be the Jewish 
Paradise, the blissful division or side of 
Hades (Scheol), where the spirits of the 
. just awaited the resurrection, see note on 
Luke xvi. 22,—but the Paradise of which 
our Lord spoke on the Cross,—the place of 
happiness into which He at His Death 
introduced the spirits of the just: see on 
ref. Luke. ἄρῥητα ῥήματα, i. 6. 
as explained below, words which it is 
not lawful to utter :—as Vulg., “ arcana 
verba, que non licet homini loqui.” The 
interpretation, “ que dici nequeunt,” as 
Beza, Estius, Calov., Olsh., al., is hardly 
consistent with the narrative ; for in that 
case, as Bengel remarks, ‘ Paulus non 
potuisset audire.’ The passages adduced 
by Wetst. mostly refer to the mysteries, 
or some secret rites: 6. σ΄. Demosth. contra 
Newram, p. 1369, αὕτη ἡ γυνὴ ὑμῖν ἔθυε 
τὰ ἄῤῥητα ἱερὰ ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως, καὶ 
εἶδεν, ἃ οὐ προφῆκεν αὐτὴν ὁρᾷν ξένην 
οὖσαν. ἃ οὐκ ἐξόν] which it is not 
lawful for a MAN to utter (see above) :— 
imparted by God, but not to be divulged 
to others: and therefore, in this case, in- 
tended, we may presume, for the Apostle’s 
own consolation and encouragement. Of 
what kind they were, or by whom uttered, 
we have no hint’ given, and it were worse 
than trifling to conjecture. ‘ Sublimitatis 
certe magne fuere: nam non omnia ceeles- 
tia sunt ineffabilia, v. gr. Ex. xxxiv. 6, 


Isa. vi. 3, quee tamen valde sublimia.” 
Bengel. 5.] Of such a man he will 
boast, but not (see above on ver. 1) of him- 
self, except it be in his infirmities. 

Tov τοιούτου must be mase. as before, not 
neuter, as Luth., al., take it. This is 
shewn by ὑπέρ, used of the person re- 
specting whom (reff.), whereas ἐν is said 
of the thing on account of which, a man 
boasts. He strikes here again the key- 
note of the whole—boasting in his in- 
firmities. He will boast of such a person, 
so favoured, so exalted; but this merely 
by the way: it is not his subject: it was 
introduced, not indeed without reference 
to the main point, but principally to bring 
in the infirmity following. 6.] For 
(supply the sentence for which γάρ renders 
a reason: ‘Not but that I might boast 
concerning myself if I would ’)—if I shall 
wish to boast (ὑπὲρ ἐμαυτοῦ), I shall not 
be a fool (I shall not act rashly or im- 
prudently, for I shall not boast without 
solid ground for it): for I shall speak 


the truth :—but I abstain (reff.), that no 


one may reckon of me (reff. and add 
εἰς μαλακίαν σκώπτων, Demosth. 308. 18) 
beyond (by a standard superior to that 
furnished by) what he sees me (to be), 
or hears (if τι form part of the text, or 
hears any thing: a pleonastic construc- 
tion = ἢ εἴ te ἀκούει) from me. Lest he 
should seem to undervalue so legitimate a 
subject of boasting, he alleges the reason 
why he abstains: not that he had not this 
and more such exaltations, truly to allege: 
but because he wished to be judged of by 
what they really had seen and heard of 
and from himself in person. 7—10.} 
He now comes to that for which the fore- 
going was mainly alleged: the infirmity 
in his flesh, which above others hindered 
his personal efficieacy in the apostoli¢ 


112 ΠΡΟΣ’ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΊΟΥΣ B. XII. 
An an : \ “, \ / 
ἔ ver. I. βολῇ τῶν ἱ ἀποκαλύψεων διὸ] * ἵνα μὴ | ὑπεραίρωμαι, 
karrangement |, e ᾿ = 7, A ἘΠῚ. 
of worissch. ἐδόθη μοι δ σκόλοψ» "TH σαρκί, ἄγγελος σατανᾶ ἵνα με 
rk bis. } / “ ‘ € f ᾿ 
"2 Thesis ὃ κολαφίζη [Piva μὴ | ὑπεραίρωμαι]. 8 «ὑπὲρ τούτου 
ly Ps. 
κοῦ 16. m here only. = Num. xxxiii.55. Ezek. xxviii. 24, ἢ dat., 1 Cor. vii. 28. see 
Gal. iv. 14. o Matt. xxvi. 67 || Mk. 1 Cor. iv. 11. 1 Pet. ii. 20 only t. p pleonasm., Rev 
ii. 5. Matt. v.18. Winer, edn. 6, ἢ 65. 6. q = ver. ὃ 


7. rec om 60, with DKLP rel [vulg F-lat syrr goth arm] Ath, Chr, Thdrt, 
[ Damasc] Iren-int, [Orig-int, Ambrst] Aug: ins AB F(-gr(and G-lat)] δὲ 17 [Euthal- 
nis]. utepatpouat DLP τη. (so P m [ Damase-ms!] below.) aft cape ins 
pov F yulg Orig-int, [ Bas-int, ] Cypry. rec (for catava) σαταν, with A2D23KLP 
3 appv) rel syr-ng-gr Orig, Ath, Mac, Chr, [Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase[and ms]: 
txt AIBD!FR! 17}(sic, Treg) (Orig, tov carava) [satane latt]. om 2nd wa μὴ 
υπεραιρωμαι (as superfluous: but the repetition has special emphasis) ADF! 17 latt 
zeth Chr, Iren-int Tert, Aug: ins BK LPN rel syrr copt goth [arm] Orig, Mac, (Chr, 
Kuthal-ms } Thdrt, Damase Bas[-int, Tert, Cypr, Hil, Ambrst ]. 

8. ins kat bef vrep A Orig Thdrt, lren-int,. 


ministry. 7.|] And that I might not, 
by the abundant excess of revelations 
(made to me), be uplifted (the order of 
the words is chosen to bring τῇ ὑπερβ. 
k.T.A. into the place of foremost emphasis: 
see reff. The διό can hardly stand with 
the present punctuation. If it forms part 
of the text, it must begin the sentence, and 
we must with Lachmann join καὶ τῇ ὕπερβ. 
τῶν amok. to the foregoing, as in apposition 
with ἀσθενείαις. But thus a very strange 
sense would be given), there was given me 
(‘by God: certainly not, as Meyer, al., 
by Satan, of whom such an expression as 
ἐδόθη would surely hardly be used: cf. 
ἢ χάρις ἡ δοθεῖσά μοι, so often said by 
the Apostle——Rom. xii. 3, 6; xv. 15 al., 
and the absolute use of ἐδόθη for bestowed, 
portioned out by God, 1 Cor. xi. 15; xii. 
7,8; Gal. iii. 21; James i. 5) a thorn 
(the word may signify a stake, or sharp 
pointed staff, ξύλον ὀξύ, Hesych.,—so in 
Hom. Il. σ. 176, κεφαλὴν .. . πῆξαι ava 
σκολόπεσσι; but in the LXX, reff., it is 
‘a thorn, and such is the more likely 
meaning here. Meyer cites from Artemid. 
iii. 38, ἄκανθαι καὶ σκόλοπες ὀδύνας on- 
μαίνουσι διὰ τὸ ὀξύ (compare ref. Ezek., 
σκόλοψ πικρίας καὶ ἄκανθα ὀδύνη5). See 
however Stanley’s note, who rejects the 
meaning ‘thorn,’ and supposes the figure 
to refer to the punishment of impalement) 
in my flesh (the expression used Gal. iv. 
14 of ths same affliction, τὸν πειρασμὸν 
ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου, seems decisive for 
rendering the dative thus, and not as a 
dativus incommodi: see also ref. 1 Cor.), 
the (or an) angel of Satan (even if we 
read gatay, it can only be the genitive. 
If taken as the nom., the expression would 
mean either, @ hostile angel, which would 
be contrary to the universal usage of 
Satan, as a proper name: or, the angel 
Satan, which is equally inconsistent with 
N.T. usage, according to which Satan, 
though once an angel, is now ἄρχων τῆς 


“ον kup. bef τρις D'[and lat] copt eth. 


ἐξουσίας τοῦ ἀέρος, Eph. ii. 2, and has his 
own angels, Matt. xxv. 41), that he (the 
angel of Satan,—not the σκόλοψ, which 
would be an unnecessary confusion of me- 
taphors. ‘ The continuation of a discourse 
often belongs to the word in apposition, 
not to the main subject,’ Meyer) may 
buffet me (xoAapi(y is best thus expressed, 
in the present. ‘The aorist would denote 
merely one such act of insult. Thus 
Chrys.: . . éste . . διηνεκοῦς δεῖσθαι τοῦ 
χαλινοῦ ov yap εἶπεν, ἵνα κολαφίσῃ, 
ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα Kodapi(n,—Theophyl., οὐχ ἵνα 
ἅπαξ με κολαφίσῃ, ἀλλ᾽ ἀεί,---ηὰ similarly 
(Ecum.), that I may not be uplifted (the 
repetition gives force and solemnity,—ex- 
pressing his firm persuasion of the divine 
intention in thus afflicting him). As 
regards the thorn itself, very many, and 
some very absurd conjectures have been 
hazarded. They may be resolved into three 
heads, the two former of which are, from 
the nature of the case, out of the question 
(see below): (1) that Paul alludes to 
spiritual solicitations of the devil (‘in- 
jectiones Satane ’), who suggested to him 
blasphemous thoughts,—so Gerson, Luther 
(how characteristically !), Calov..—or re- 
morse for his former life, so Osiander, 
Mosheim, &c.: or according to the Ro- 
manist interpreters, who want to find here 
a precedent for their monkish stories of 
temptations, —incilements to lust, —so 
Thom. Aq., Lyra, Bellarmin, Estius, 
Corn.-a-Lapide, al. (2) that he alludes to 
opposition from his adversaries, or some 
one adversary κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν; so many 
ancient Commentators, Cbhrys., Theophyl., 
(Ecumn., Theodoret,—Calvin, Beza, al., and 
more recently, Fritzsche, and Schrader. 
(3) that he points to some grievous 
bodily pain, which has been curiously 
specified by different Commentators. The 
ancients (Chrys., Theophyl., @cum., Je- 
rome on Gal. iv. 14 (lib. ii. 4, vol. vii. 
p- 460)) mention κεφαλαλγία: some 


ABDFK 
LPR ab 
cede fg 
hklmn 
Ὁ 17.47 





8—10. 


X X , r / ς (7 t , fal » ,’ 

τρὶς τὸν κύριον 'παρεκάλεσα "ἵνα ᾿ἀποστῇ ἀπ 
\ , ᾽ A ε ΄ 

9 καὶ εἴρηκέν ot" Ἀρκεῖ σοι ἡ χάρις μου ἡ γὰρ δύναμις 


Ψ “ 
ἐν ‘ ἀσθενείᾳ “ τελεῖται. 


y ᾽ lal Vv > θ / “ Fae / ’ 215) XX ΠΕ 
COMAL “ EV TALS ᾿ ADVEVELALS (LOU, LYA “ ETTLOKNVWON ET EME ἢ 


δύναμις τοῦ χριστοῦ. 


vi. 8. Heb. xiii. δ. 3 John 10) only. 
only. 
19. -διον, Sir. xxii. 11.) 


Polyb. iv. 18. 8. ach. ν. 8. 


9. for εἰρηκεν, εἰπεν F Chry. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


(See Luke ii. 39. Rom. ii. 27.) Eur. Bacch. 90. 
Rom. ii. 17 reff. 
Rom. xv. 26, 27 reff. 


713 


5) na 
εμου. r = Matt. xviii. 
So χανὶ. 5.9. 
Luke xv. 28, 
Acts xxv. 2. 
s 1 Cor. i. 10 


x ἥδιστα οὖν μᾶλλον Y καυχή- © rel. 


t = Acts v.38 


reff. 
u = Matt. xxv. 
\ b n b) 5) / > 9. 70] 
10 διὸ ὅὉ εὐδοκῶ ὃ ἐν ἡ ἀσθενείαις, ἐν xiv.s (Luke 
111,14. 1 Tim. 
Num. xi. 22. v= ch. xi. 30. w = here 


x ver. 15 only τ. (-δέως, ch. xi. 
> ’ x Ν ᾿ ΄ 
zhere only+. ἐπισκ. επὶ TAS οἰκίας, 
1 Cor. x. 5 reff. 


rec aft Suvauis ins μου (see note), with A? D?:3[-gr] 


KLPR® rel syrr Orig,[{-c, Ath, Euthal-ms] Chr, Thdrt Pallad [Damasc]: om 
[A!]BD!FN! [αἰ] goth wth Archel, Orig-int, Iren-int, Bas[-int, | Tert, Cypr, Ambrst 


Jer. 
Thdrt-p]: txt ABD!FN}. 


ree τελειουται, with D3K LPN rel Orig,[-c, Iren,} Ath [Chr, Euthal-ms 
om μου Β 672.71 harl syr copt [arm] Iren, (gr and int). 


10. aft ac@everas ins μου F vulg(not am [demid harl tol] F-lat). 


have supposed hypochondriac melancholy, 
which however hardly answers the con- 
ditions of a σκόλοψ, in which acute pain 
seems to be implied; alii aliter, see Pool, 
Synops. ad loc.; and Stanley’s note, which 
is important in other respects also, and 
full of interest. On the whole, putting 
together the figure here used, that of a 
thorn, occasioning pain, and the κολα- 
φισμός, buffeting or putting to shame, it 
seems quite necessary to infer that tke 
Apostle alludes to some painful and tedious 
bodily malady, which at the same time 
put him to shame before those among 
whom he exercised his ministry. Of such 
a kind may have been the disorder in his 
eyes, more or less indicated in several pas- 
sages of his history and Epistles (see notes 
on Acts xiii. 9; xxiii. 1 f.:—and Gal. iv. 
14 (15 ?); vi. 11 (?)). But it may also 
have been something besides this, and to 
such an inference probability would lead 
us; disorders in the eyes, however sad in 
their consequences, not being usually of a 
very painful or distressing nature iz them- 
selves. 8.1 In respect of this (angel 
of Satan, not σκόλοψ, see below) I thrice 
(τρίς, not indefinite as Chrys., Hom. xxvi. 
p. 621, τουτέστι, πολλάκις. Meyer well 
observes, ‘ At his first and second request, 
no answer was given tohim: on the third 
occasion, it came; and his faithful resig- 
nation to the Lord’s will prevented his 
asking again’) hesought the Lord (Christ, 
see ver. 9) that he might depart from me 
(the angel of Satan, see Luke iv. 13 [Acts 
Ἐπ 909}}}}- 9.1] And He said to me 
(this perf. can hardly in English be repre- 
sented otherwise than by the historical 
aorist ; in the Greek, it partakes of its own 
proper sense—‘ He said, and that answer 
is enough ; * He hath said, —but this last 
would not contain reference enough to the 
fact itself. The poverty of our language 
in the finer distinctions of the tenses 
often obliges us to render inaccurately, and 


fall short of, the wonderful language with 
which we have to deal. How this 
was said, whether accompanied by an 
appearance of Christ to him or not, must 
remain in obscurity), My grace (not,— 
‘My favour generally ;—‘ My tmparted 
grace’) is sufficient for thee (ἀρκεῖ, spoken 
from the divine omniscience, ‘ suffices, and 


‘shall suffice:’ α. ἃ. ‘ the trial must endure, 


untaken away: but the grace shall also 
endure, and never fail thee’), for (the 
reason lying in My ways being not as 
man’s ways, My Power not being brought 
to perfection as man’s power is conceived 
to be) (My) Power is made perfect 
(has its full energy and complete mani- 
festation) in (as the element in which 
it acts as observable by man) weakness. 
See ch. iv. 7, and 1 Cor. ii. 3, 4,—where 
the influence of this divine response on the 
Apostle, is very manifest. If I mistake 
not, the expression τῆς δυνάμεως, there, 
favours the omission of μου here, as in our 
text, and makes it probable that it was in- 
serted for perspicuity’s sake, and to an- 
swer to 7 Suv. τοῦ xp. below. Most 
gladly therefore will I rather (than that 
my afiliction should be removed from me, 
which before that response, I wished) 
boast (xavx. is in the emphatic place,— 
I will rather δοαδέ in mine infirmities. 
Had μᾶλλον signified ‘rather than ἐπ 
revelations, or ‘ rather than in any thiag 
else, it would have been μᾶλλον ἐν ταῖς 
ἀσθενείαις μου καυχήσομαι) in my in- 
firmities, that (by my ἀσθένειαι being 
not removed from me, but becoming 
my glory) the Power of Christ may have 
its residence in me (see ref. Polyb.—‘ may 
carry on in me its work unto completion,’ 
as above). 10.] Wherefore (because 
of this relation to human weakness and 
divine power) I am well content [cf. the 
same expression Matt. iii. 17] in infirmi- 
ties (four kinds of which are then specified, 
—all coming also, as well as ἄσθ. proper, 


714 


c=here (Acts δ ὕβρεσιν, ἐν 


xxvii. 10, 21) 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


d » / b] e ὃ nr 9 
ἀνώγκαις, ἐν © διωγμοῖς, ἐν 


XIT. 


‘ srevoxwpiats, 


\ rn - , , 
only. Prov. ὑχγὲρ χριστοῦ" ὅταν yap § ἀσθενῶ, τότε δυνατός εἰμι. 
— Ό . ii. / i φ op 5 
are pur, > έγονα ἰἄφρων' ὑμεῖς μὲ * ἠναγκάσατε. ἐγὼ yap 
ch. vi. 4. 12 re τὶ m , ‘ 50" \ n £ , 
eMarkiv.17 ἰὠφειλον up ὑμῶν συνίστασθαι" οὐδὲν yap ™ ὑστέρησα 

Act nines A ε > , > \ > ‘ 
αι. 9. αν τῶν οὑπερλίαν ἀποστόλων, εἰ καὶ οὐδέν εἰμι. 13 τὰ 

om, Vill. . ~~ -» / / A 
2Thess.is μὲν 4 σημεῖα τοῦ ἀποστόλου "κατειργάσθη ἐν ὑμῖν ἐν 

Im. 111. 

- an 7 \ / \ 
pisonly 4 ἢ πάσῃ ‘ ὑπομονῇ, ἃ σημείοις τε Kal "" τέρασιν καὶ ἃ“ δυνά- 
Lam. iii. 19. 1327 ΄ > x oye 40 ΠΡ ἢ δέν \ \ 
BMace. xii, LEU. τί yap ἐστιν “ὃ Y ἡσσώθητε * ὑπὲρ τὰς λοιπὰς 
23 only. 


f Rom. ii. 9 reff. == Rom. iv. 19 reff. 

k Acts xxvi. 11 reff. = Acts xvii. 29. 
Rom. iii. 23. ch. xi. 5. (i. 7 reff.) 
ii. 12. 2 Thess. iii. 17 al. 

Ὁ Acts ii. 22. Heb. ii. 4. 

x constr. acc., as Matt. xvi. 26. 

¥— ver. 6. 


r Rom. ii. 9 reff. 


1 Cor. xi. 7, 10. 
och. xi. 5 only t. 


v Acts vii. 36 reff. ? 
y here only. {(-ττᾶσθαι, 2 Pet. ii. 19, 20. Isa. viii. 9. xx. 5.) 


Ὦ ΞΞ 1 Cor χϑῖι. 1. 


ich. xi. 16, 19 reff. 
m = Rom. iii. 5 reff, 


n constr., 
q= Luke 
t Rom. ii.7 reff. 
1 Cor. xii. 10 al. 


p 1 Cor. vii. 19 reff. 
s = Acts xx. 19 reff. 
w = Matt. vii. 22. 


for ev αναγκαις, Kat evarykats X!(corrd by origl scribe to[ x. ] avaryk. [so Orig, |, by 83 to txt). 


om ev διωγμοις A. 
[PINS rel. ote F. 


for 5th ev, καὶ ΒΝ: καὶ ev a[arm(‘Tischdf) |: txt ADFKL 
duvatw (for -τος εἰμι) Εἰ not F-lat, G-lat has both]. 


11. rec aft appwy ins καυχωμενος, with LP rel syrr goth [Chr, Thdrt Damasc]: om 


ABDFKX 17 latt coptt φῦ} arm Orig[-c, Euthal-ms Ambr, Ambrst]. 


F[-gr]. om vg B!(Tischdf) D![-gr ]. 
aft ovdev yap ins τι B. 
12. at beg ins αλλα F [37(omg per) J. 


μειξ 


ἢ 
up μων A. for ovdev, ov ΕἾ ποῦ F-lat]. 


κατηργασθη BIE ἃ: κατηργασθην D. 


rec ins ev bef σημείοις (mechanical repetition from the foregoing), with 1)3- ον] 
KLP rel vulg-ed(with demid) Thdrt; καὶ F[-gr(and G-lat)] Syr Chr,: τε 83: om AB 
D'{and lat | &!.a 17 am(with fuld tol [ F-lat |) syr goth arm [ Euthal-ms ] Damase Ambrst, 

recom τε, with ADFKLP &-corr! rel: ins BX' a 17 [ Euthal-ms} Damase. 


13. (ησσωθητε, so ΒΝ 17[᾿σωθ.]: ἐλατωθηται FB.) 


under the category of ἀσθένειαι, as hin- 
drances and bafflings of human strength), 
—in insults, in necessities, in persecu- 
tions, in distresses,—on behalf of Christ: 
for whenever I am weak (applying to all 
five situations above), then I am mighty. 
Wetst. quotes from Philo, Vita Mosis, i. 
13, vol. ii. p. 92, μὴ ἀναπίπτετε. τὸ ἀσθενὲς 
ὑμῶν δύναμίς ἐστι. 11—18.] He 
excuses his boasting, and is thereby led 
to speak of the signs of an Apostle 
wrought among them, and to reassert his 
disinterestedness in preaching to them, on 
occasion of his past and intended visits. 

11.| I am Become (the emphasis 
on yéyova,—I am verily become a fool, 
viz. by this boasting, which I have now 
concluded. ‘Receptui canit?’ Bengel. 
But it is still ironical, spoken from the 
situation of his adversaries) a fool: ye 
compelled me (vuetsemphatic). For I (ἐγώ 
also emphatic, but more with reference to 
what has passed : ‘ye compelled me, it was 
no doing of mine, for I ἄς. The meaning 
is not, as De W., “JZ, not mine adver- 
saries,”’ who are an element foreign to the 
present sentence) ought to have been re- 
commended by you (emphatic, by you, not 
by himself): for I was nothing behind 
(when I was with you) these overmuch 
Apostles (see on ch. xi. 5: but here even 
more plainly than there, the expression 
cannot be applied to the other Apostles, 
secing that the aor. would in that case 


for ὑπερ, παρα 1). 


be inconsistent with the fact—-the Corin- 
thians never having had an opportunity 
of comparing him with them),even though 
Iam nothing (see similar expressions of 
humility, 1 Cor. xv. 9—11). 

12.] Confirmation of the οὐδὲν ὑστέρησα 
.... The signs indeed (the μέν is ellipti- 
cal,—see Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 411, 
—corresponding to a suppressed ὅμως δὲ 
-. 3 ‘in this case, the signs indeed &c., 
but, notwithstanding, I am not recom- 
mended by you. So Soph. Gd. Col. 526, 
ἤνεγκον κακότατ᾽, ὦ ξένοι, ἤνεγκ᾽, ἀέκων 
μέν, θεὸς ἴστω. It always throws out 
into strong emphasis the noun, pronoun, 
or verb to which it is attached, as here 
σημεῖα) of an Apostle (τοῦ generic,—‘ ejus 
qui Apostolus sit,’ Bengel) were wrought 
out among you (“the Apostle’s own per- 
sonality as the worker is modestly veiled 
behind the passive.” Meyer) in all (pos- 
sible) patience (endurance of opposition, 
which did not cause me to leave off work- 
ing. ὑπομονή is not one of the σημεῖα, as 
Chrys., Hom. xxvii. p.627: θέα ποῖον πρῶτον 
τίθησι, τὴν ὑπομονήν. τοῦτο yap ἀποστόλου 
δεῖγμα, τὸ φέρειν πάντα yevvalws,—but the 
element in which the σημεῖα were wrought 
out), by signs and wonders (onu. not as 
above, but as constantly found with τέρασι, 
as an intensitive synonym) and mighty 
works (see ref. Heb.). 13—15.| His 
disinterestedness, shewn in his past, and 
resolved in his future dealings with them. 


ABDFK 
LPR ab 
cedefg 
hkimn 
017,42 








11—15. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


715 


2 » / > Ve 3 oN ΘΝ 3% ἢ e a 
ἐκκλησίας, EL μὴ OTL AUTOS ἔγω οὐ ” KATEVAPKNTA ὑμῶν § a piur., Rom. 


c / θέ \ d iO / / 
χαρίσασθέ μοι τὴν 3 ἀδικίαν ταύτην. 
fe a f e / f yy ING lal \ e “ \ » 
τοῦτο] ΄ ἑτοίμως ᾿ ἔχω ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, καὶ οὐ 
/ > \ aA \ e “ > \ e rf 
vapknow ov yap 8 ζητῶ τὰ ὑμῶν, ἀλλὰ ὑμᾶς. 


πον \ , xvi. 16 reff. 
14 (500 © τρίτον υ ch. 34,8 only 
reff.). 
b 6 = ΟΕ τ 
10 reff. 
d = here only. 
Thue. iii. 66. 
e ch. xiii. 1 reff. 


KaTa- 


ov γὰρ 


/ / a r Ἢ e ᾿ 
"ὀφείλει τὰ τέκνα τοῖς γονεῦσιν ᾿' θησαυρίζειν, ἀλλ᾽ οἱ Acts καὶ. 13 


“ a , \ \ 5, 
γονεῖς τοῖς τέκνοις" 15 ἐγὼ δὲ * ἥδιστα | δαπανήσω καὶ ™ ἐκ- 


51 Cor. x. 24 
reff. 
h ver. 11. 


δαπανηθήσομαι ὑπὲρ τῶν ἃ ψυχῶν ὑμῶν, εἰ ° περισσοτέρως i 1Cor. xvi.2 


k ver. 9. 


1 Acts xxi. 24 reff. 
n = Heb. xiii. 17. i 


1 Pet. 11. 11. 


om οτι K 47. 


eyw bef avros F τὴ latt goth. 


m here only +. Polyb. xxv. 8. 4, exdatravav τὰς προςόδους. 
ο ch. i. 12 reff. 


αμαρτιαν F[-gr]. 


14. rec om τουτο, with KLP rel Thdrt Gc: ins ABFN ἃ Ὁ ὁ ἃ τὴ ο 17. 47 latt syr 
goth zth Chr, [Euthal-ms Thdrt] Damasc ΤῊ] Ambrst Pel, and (but bef τριτον) 


D[-gr] 93 (Syr?) copt [arm] Did,. (see note.) 


rec aft Katavapknow ins vuwy 


(from above; had υμων been in the text origly, it would never have been ejected, 


leaving the verb standing alone. 


This is further shewn by the var vuas), with 


D?3KLP rel [latt syrr coptt goth arm Chr, Thdrt]; vuas D'F: om ABN 17 wth 


[ Euthal-ms ] Damase. 
Damasc }.) adAa(2nd) AX 17. 


15. aft δαπανησω add καὶ exdatavnow Ὠϊ(απα lat) Ambrst. 
rec aft εἰ ins καὶ (to give (mistaken) emphasis: see notes), with 


G-lat Ambrst. 


(adAa(Ist), so ABDFLPR ἃ ἃ 6 ἐκ mn 47 [Euthal-ms 


om εἰ D!(and lat) - 


D?.3(-gr] KLP% rel syrr [eth] arm Chr Thdrt Damase Pel: om AB D![and lat] 


FR! 17 coptt goth [licet vulg F-lat]. 


The question τί yap «.7.A. is asked in 
bitter irony. It is an illustration of ἐν 
πάσῃ ὑπομονῇ, and of the distinction con- 
ferred on them by so long manifestation 
of the signs of an Apostle among them. 
‘ Was this endurance of working which I 
shewed, marred by the fact that I worked 
gratuitously among you?’ joo. ὑπέρ does 
not imply that all churches suffered loss, 
and that the loss of the Corinthians was 
only not greater than that of other 
churches: but the comparative, implied in 
joo. is carried out by the ὑπέρ, ---“ ye suf- 
Jered loss in comparison with the other 
Churches. 13. εἰ μὴ ὅτι] except that 
one point, in which of all others they had 
least reason to complain. This one is put 
forward to indicate their deep ingratitude, 
if they did complain, seeing that the 
only point of difference in their treatment 
had been a preference : ‘die tief getrantte 
Liebe redet,’ Meyer. On κατενάρκ. see 
ref. Xap. μ. τ. 28. ταύτην] ‘The irony 
here reaches its height. 14.] τρίτον 
(the τοῦτο, though so strongly attested, can 
hardly have been omitted, had it ever been 
in the text, and therefore has probably 
been inserted from ch. xiii. 1) ἕτ. ἔχω ἐλθ., 
must, from the context, mean, I am ready 
to come the third time ;—not, ‘J am the 
third time ready to come,’ i.e. ‘ this is the 
third time that I have been ready to come 
to you.’ This latter meaning has been 
adopted by Beza, Grot., Estius, al., Paley, 
al., and even De Wette, hesitatingly, in 
order to evade the difficulty of supposing 
Paul to have been before this twice at 
Corinth. But on this see Prolegomena to 


1 Cor. § v. Here, the context has abso- 
lutely nothing to do with his third pre- 
paration to come, which would be a new 
element, requiring some explanation, as in 
1 Thess. ii. 18. The natural, and, I am 
persuaded, only true inference from the 
words here is, "1 am coming to you a third 
time,—and I will not burden you this time, 
any more than I did at my two previous 
visits.’ Our business in such cases is, 
not to wrest plain words to fit our precon- 
ceived chronology, but to adapt our con- 
Jfessedly uncertain and imperfect history 
of the Apostle’s life, to the data furnished 
by the plain honest sense of his Kpistles. 
οὐ yap ζητῶ. .. .7 Wetst. quotes 
Cicero de Fin. ii. 26: ‘Me igitur ipsum 
ames oportet, non mea, si veri amici futuri 
sumus.’—pel(ova ἐπιζητῶ, ψυχὰς ἀντὶ χρη- 
μάτων, σωτηρίαν ἀντὶ χρυσίον, Clrys., p. 
629. ov yap ὀφείλει .. .1 Paul was the 
spiritual futher οἵ the Corinthian Church, 
1 Cor. iv. 14, 15: he does not therefore 
want to be enriched by them, his children, 
but rather to lay up riches for them, seck- 
ing to have them as his treasure, and thus 
to enrich them, as a loving father does his 
children. The θησαυρός is left indefinite : 
if pressed strictly, it cannot be earthly trea- 
sure in the negative part of the sentence, 
heavenly, in the positive ;—cf. next verse. 
Notice, ὀφείλει is not impersonal, but 
the common verb to τέκνα and γονεῖς, 
agreeing by proximity with the former. 
15.] ἐγὼ δὲ τῶν φύσει πατέρων Kal πλέον 
τι ποιεῖν ἐπαγγέλλομαι, Theodoret: and 
similarly Chrys. and Theophyl. They lay 
up treasures: J will spend them :—xa) τί 


716 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOT®S B. 


A Lal Ὁ > “Ὁ 
ὑμᾶς ἀγαπῶν ἧσσον ὠγαπῶμαι. 


ΧΙ 


16 Ἔστω δέ, ἐγὼ οὐ 
τὑπάρχων " πανοῦ ‘Sor 
px ανοῦργος * δόλῳ 


17 7 Ἢ e ’ / ἣν Ν e lal 
μῆ τινα ὧν ATTECTTAAKA T pos υμας, 


18 X παρεκάλεσα Τίτον, 

Ww 3 , 
ἐπλεονεκτῆσεν 

ἃ περιεπωτήσαμεν ; 


p = here 

(1 Cor. ai 17) ie con ᾽ \ 

yn! a C | Ie 

only. 2Mace. d κατεβάρησα ὑμᾶς. adda 
q here Sar +. ὑμᾶς u ἔλαβον 

vv ᾽ 8 

‘ap xiv. 40. y > ’ na w2 / ΘΛ 

2Kings xiii. ἡ ὃ, αὐτοῦ Ὗ ἐπλεονέκτησα VMAS ; 

20. oa , Χ > “ ΄ 
r Acts ὙΠ]. 16. καὶ Y συναπέστειλα * τὸν ἀδελφόν μή τι 
s here only. reer ͵ ᾽ A AY Ey 7 

ποῦν. 5. ὑμᾶς Τίτος ; ov τῷ αὐτῷ * πνεύματι 

(good sense, . Mi : Ἐπ τιν ra t 

Prove οὐ τοῖς αὑτοῖς "ἴχνεσιν ; 


(- γία, ch. xi. 


t Acts xiii. 10 


reff. u = ch. xi. 20. 
x = 1 Cor. xvi. 12. ch. viii. 6. v here only. 
18, 22. a constr., Acts xxi. 21 reff. 


44 (Matt. xi. 21. Luke x. 13. Heb. 1. 1. 
see 1 Cor. ix. 3. 


al.) Exod. xxxii.11 A Ald. 


e Acts xix. 33 reff. 


for ayarwv, wyarw ἕξ) Ὁ} ἃ 17 [coptt(Tischdf) ]. 


εἐλασσον F.) 
16. aft eyw ins δε ΕΓ ποῦ F-lat}] syr ΤῊ]. 


vuwv FR (a) 20-31. 39. 57. 73 Chr, [Euthal-ms]. 


[ Euthal-ms Damasc ].) 
17. om & αὐτου F. 


19 οἸΤάλαι δοκεῖτε ὅτι 4 ὑμῖν © ἀπολογούμεθα. 


v constr., Luke xxi. 6. 
Exod. xxxiii. 2, 12. 


2 Pet. i. 9. Jude 4) oly, 


f KaT- 


w ch. ii. 11 reff. 

z see ch. vill. 

c = (see note) Mark xv. 
{lsa. χα αν 26 only. d dat., 
=ch.ii.17. Rom. iv. 17 only. as xix. 30 


Rom. viii. 3. Gal. i. 20. 
Esdr. ν. 2 only. 
Rom. iv. 12 reff. 


(ησσον, so ABD!PR! 17[icov] : 


oux εβαρησα vuas D!: ov κατεναρκησα 


(adda, so ABD! F LPN a m 47 


18. quas L. 


19. rec (for παλαι) παλιν, with D-gr KLPR3 rel G-lat harl! syrr copt goth arm Chr, 


Thdrt [Damasc] : 


λέγω, χρήματα δαπανήσω ; ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐγὼ ἐκ- 
δαπανηθήσομαι" τουτέστι, κἂν τὴν σάρκα 
δέῃ δαπανῆσαι ὑπὲρ τῆς σωτηρίας τῶν 
ψυχῶν cre ov φείσομαι, Theophyl. Cf. 
Hor. Od. i. 12. 38: ‘animeque magne 
prodigum τὴ εἴν εἰ is less strong 
than εἰ καί, which has been apparently a 
gloss on it. It assumes the case, but does 
not bring out the contrast between the 
course of action and the state of circum- 
stances so strongly. Here, it appears as if 
ἧσσον ἀγαπῶμαι were by the εἰ connected 
with ἐκδαπανηθήσομαι, ---“ and will be spent, 
used up, 22 the service of your souls, if, the 
more abundantly I love you, the less I be 
loved :? implying, that such a return for 
his love was leading to, and would in time 
accomplish, the ἐκδαπανηθήσομαι. 

16—18.] He refutes a possible, perhaps 
an actual calumny,—that though he had 
acted disinterestedly towards them him- 
self, he had some side-way of pr ofiting by 
them, through others. 16.] ἔστω δέ 
—‘but let us suppose the former matter 
dismissed :’ let the fact be granted, that I 
myself (emphatic) did not burden (= κατ- 
ενάρκησα) you. ‘Then the sense breaks off, 
and the force of the concession goes no 
farther, the following words making a new 
hypothesis. Nevertheless, being (by habit 
and standing, ὑπάρχ.) crafty (unprincipled, 
and versatile in devices), [caught you with 
guile (with some more subtle way. Caught 
you, in order to practise upon you for my 
own ends; but ἔλαβον is not ἐπλεον- 
extnoa, as Chrys., Hom, xxviii. p. 633 :— 
see ref. and note). 17, 18.1] Specifica- 
tion, in refutation, of the ways in which this 
might be supposed to have taken place. 


txt ABFR! 17 vulg D-lat [Euthal-ms] Ambrst-comm Pel. 


The construction τινα ὧν... δὲ αὐτοῦ is 
an anacoluthon. He sets τινα ὧν ἀπέστ. 
mp. vu. forward in the place of emphasis ; 
how intending to govern τινα, is not plain: 
but drops the construction, and proceeds, 
δι αὐτοῦ «.7.A. See examples of the 
same in reff., and Winer, edn. 6, ὃ 63. i: 
“ἢ. 18.] παρεκάλεσα, 561]. ‘to go 
to you: see reff. ‘This journey of Titus 
cannot, of course, be the one spoken of 
ch. viii. 6, 17, 22, 24; but some previous 
mission to them before this Epistle was 
written: probably that from which he re- 
turned with the report of their penitence 
to Paul in Macedonia, ch. vii. 6 ff. We 
certainly have not elsewhere any hint of 
6 ἀδελφός having accompanied him on this 
journey : but this is no reason why it sbould 
not have been so. τὸν adeAov—per- 
haps, one of the two mentioned ch. viii. 
18, 22: some other, well known to the 
Corinthians, but absolutely unknown to us: 
but not, a brother, asin KE. V. It is plain 
from this and from what follows, that this 
brother was quite subordinate to Titus in 
the mission. τῷ αὐτῷ Trvevp. | dat. 
of the manner; see ref. ‘The Spirit in 
which they walked was the Holy Spirit : : 
τῷ αὐτῷ πνευματικῷ χαρίσματι" χάρισμα 
“γὰρ καλεῖ τὸ στενούμενον μὴ λαβεῖν, 
Theophyl. τοῖς αὖτ. txv.] in the 
same footsteps, viz. each as the other: 
οὐδὲ μικρόν. φησί, παρεξῆλθον THY ἐμὴν 
ὁδόν, Theophyl. The dative ἔχνεσιν, as 
in ref. = ἐν ixveow: see also Acts xiv. 
16; Jude 11. Meyer cites Pind. Pyth. x. 
20,—é€uBéRakev ἴχνεσιν πατρός, and Nem. 
vi. 27, ἔχνεσιν ἐν Πραξιδάμαντος ἑὸν πόδα 
νέμων. Cf. also Philo de Caritate, ὃ 2, 


ABDFK 
LPN ab 
ecdetg 
hkimna 
0 17. 47 





16—21. 


έναντι θεοῦ % ἐν χριστῷ λαλοῦμεν" 


/ j Ε A lal j c lal k 
πητοῖ, ‘UTEP τῆς Ἰυμων 


o / δ 
ἵπως ἐλθὼν οὐχ οἵους θέλω “ εὕρω, 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


> an 
οἰκοδομῆς. 


117 


bs 
τὰ δὲ πάντα, Νέων g Rom. ix. 1. 
20 1 πῇ ref. 
φοβοῦμαι γὰρ ἱ μή i= ch. i. 6. 
m κ΄ jposn.,1Cor. ix, 
ὑμᾶς, κἀγὼ ™ εὑρεθῶ "15. ὧν. 1.6 


bis, 24. vii. 7 
ΕἾ τα :- 5) ῇ ἡ] "ἢ 

ἢ ὑμῖν οἷον οὐ θέλετε" 1 μή 'ἱ πως 594 ἔρεις, Ῥ ζῆλος, Ρα᾽ θυμοί, 326. νἱ, 18, 
Ν ~ , ἢ , 5 Phil. . 19, 25. 
PS ἐριθεῖαι, ' καταλαλιαΐί, ἃ ψιθυρισμοί," φυσιώσεις, “ ἀκατα- 130. Col. i 

8. 1 Thess. 

/ \ / 3 , , ε oe, 

otaciat’ 31] μὴ πάλιν ἐλθόντος * wou " ταπεινώσει * we ὁ “θεός ti.7 (Rom. 
vii. 35. ch. vii. 15) only. k Rom. xiv. 19 reff. Ich. xi. 3. m = 1 Cor. iv. 2 
reff. n dat., Luke xxiv. 35 al. ΟἹ Cor. i. ἕν reff. p Gal. v. 20. 
4 as above (p). Rom. xiii. 13. "1 Cor. iii. 3. Sir. x1.5. = Eph. iv. 31 al. plur., Gal. v. 20 
only. (Wisd. vii. 20.) s Rom. ii. 8 reff. t 1 Pet. ii. τ only Τ. ὙΥΙβά. 1. 11 Ομ]. (-Aos, 
Rom. i. 30.) u here only. Eccles. x. 11 only. (- στής, Rom. 1. 29.) vy here 


only +. (-σιοῦν, 1 Cor. iv. Ὁ eal) 
y ch. xi. 7 reff. constr., Col. ii. 


w 1 Cor. xiv. 33 reff. 
z Rom. i. 8 reff. 


x constr., Acts xxi. 17 reff. 


rec (for κατεναντι) κατενωπιον, with DKLP rel [ Bas,] Thdrt ΤῊ] He: txt ABFX m 17 


{ Euthal-ms ] Damase. 
m(@ew) 17 [| Bas, Euthal-ms]. 
20. και eyw F. 


rec ins Tov bef θεου, with D?-3K LN? rel : 
for αγαπ., αδελφοι P. 
epis (ttacism ?) AR bdfghk17 Syr arm Chr Thi: 


om ABD!FPN} 


txt 


BDFKLP τ latt syr coptt goth [Euthal-ms Antch,] Thdrt εὐ σόν. [ic] Ambrst. 

. rec ζγλοι, with D?-3KLPR rel latt syr coptt Chr Thdrt [Euthal-ms Ambrst] : 
txt AB D![-gr] F[-gr] 17 Syr goth arm [Antch, ] Damase. 

21. rec ελθοντα με (grammatical correction), with DKLN3 rel goth [Chr, Thdrt. 


Damasc]: txt ABFPX! [Euthal-ms]. 
with AKN rel [Chr Thdrt Damasc]: 
rec om με, with D8KL rel: 


vol. ii. p. 385, τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἴχνεσιν ἐπακο- 
λουθῆσαι. 19—21.] He refutes the no- 
tion which might arise in the minds of his 
readers, that he was vindicating himself 
BEFORE THEM as judges, see 1 Cor. iv. 3 ; 
and assures them that he does all for ther 
good, fearing in what state he might find 
them on his arrival. 19.] πάλαι was 
misunderstood, and πάλιν appears to have 
been a conjectural emendation, from ch. iii. 
1; v.12. πάλαι does not suit the znter- 
rogative form of the sentence, which would 
throw it out into too strong emphasis. 

Lachmann, Tischdf. (ed. F | [and 8]), Meyer, 

De Wette read it as in text:—Ye have 
been some time imagining (i.e. during 
this my self-defence) that it is to you that 
Iam defending myself. Then the answer 
follows: the assumption being made, and 
elliptically answered, as in ver. 16. 

kat. θεοῦ is emphatic, and opposed to 
ὑμῖν. ἐν χρ. λαλοῦμεν, as in ch. 

ii. 17, which see. τὰ δὲ πάντα] 
supply either λαλοῦμεν, or better under- 
stand τὰ πάντα as ‘ all our things’ (1 Cor. 
xvi. 14), i.e. our words and deeds, and 
supply γίνεται, as there. Grot., Gries- 
bach, Scholz, and Olsh., would read rade 
πάντα, and join with λαλοῦμεν. But 
(1) Paul never uses the pronoun ὅδε: and 
(2) if he did, it must. apply to what follows, 
not to what has preceded. The insertion 
of the personal pronoun between the article 
and the noun, as in τῆς tp. οἰκοδομῆς, 
occurs, as A. Buttmann has correctly re- 
marked (see Moulton’s Winer, p. 193, 
note 4), in Paul only (see reff.), and with no 
other pronoun than ὑμῶν, 20.1 ‘ Edi- 


rec ταπεινωσὴ (gramml corrn or itacism ὮΝ 


txt BDFLP (c?)dfgkn [{Euthal-ms] Me. 
ins ABD!F[P]& d. 


fication, of which you stand in need, for, 
ἄς. He here completely and finally 
throws off the apologist and puts on the 
Apostle, leaving on their minds a very 
different impression from that which would 
have been produced had he concluded 
with the apoiogy. Lest, when I arrive, 
I should find you not such as I wish (in 
οὐχ οἵους θέλω is an indefinite possibility 
of aberration from οἵους θέλω, presently 
particularized, μή πως Epes, κιτ A.), and 
I should be found by you (ὑμῖν merely 
the dative of the agent after the passive 
verb. Meyer makes it ‘72 your judgment,’ 
but I much prefer the other: the passive 
form is adopted to bring out the ἐγώ into 
emphatic contrast), such as ye wish not 
(not οὐχ οἷον θέλετε, because there is now 
no indefiniteness ; Azs disposition towards 
them in such a case could be but of one 
kind, viz. severity: τουτέστι, τιμωρὸς K. κο- 
λαστής, Theophyl. Chrys.,p. 634, brings 
out another point,—ov« εἶπεν, οἷον οὐ θέλω. 
ἀλλὰ πληκτικώτερον,--- οἷον οὐ βούλεσθε). 

What follows, viz. μή πως ... ἔπραξαν, 
is an epexegesis of the last sentence, but in 
it the definiteness is on the side of the 
οὐχ οἵους θέλω, the indefiniteness on that 
of οἷον ov θέλετε, which latter is only 
hinted at by the mild expressions of being 
humbled, and lamenting the case of the 
zmpenitent. μή πως, scil. ὦσιν (or 
εὑρεθῶσιν) ἐν ὑμῖν. “The vehemence of 
his language has caused “him to omit the 
verb.” Stanley. ἐριθεῖαι, self-seek- 
ings, see note on ref. Rom. ψιθ. se- 
cret malignings,—«karakX. open slanders. 
ἀκαταστ., see refi. and note. 21.] 


718 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


XIII. 


1 a \ ΄ nr \ b θ , \ A c 
a =(? see note) 7 μου ὃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς, καὶ " πενθήσω πολλοὺς τῶν “προημαρ- 


1 Cor. xvi. 
6 reff. 

b 1 Cor. v. 2 
reff. constr., 
here only. Gen, xxxvii. 34 al. 

ehere only. Joel ii. 13, Amos vii. 3. 


[προς uu. bef tam. με o Geos D Syr copt Thdrt,. 


μή carries on the μή mws... μή πως, 
but with more precision, dropping the in- 
definite πως. The sentence loses much in 
force and, indeed, becomes inconsistent 
with the context, if with Lachmann (and 
Liicke, Conjectanea exeget.i. De W.) it be 
made interrogative (which it may be gram- 
matically with either reading, ταπεινώσει 
or -o7), in which case the answer would be 
negative. πάλιν here, as Meyer ob- 
serves, must belong to the whole ἐλθόντος 
μου ταπεινώσει με ὃ θ. μ. πρὸς ὑμ., because, 
ἐλθών having been used without πάλιν just 
before, the emphatic situation of πάλιν as 
applying to it would be unmeaning : see 
also the very different way in which it is 
connected with ἔλθω, ch. xiii. 2. 
ταπεινώσει) ‘ Nihil erat quo magis exul- 
taret apostolus, quam prospero suze preadi- 
cationis successu (1 Thess. ii. 20): contra 
nihil erat, unde tristiore et demissiore 
animo redderetur, quam quum cerneret, se 
frustra laborasse, Beza (Meyer). The 
fut. (ref.) indicates an assumption that the 
supposed case will really be. That this 
humbling, and not that of being obliged to 
punish, is intended, seems evident: the 
exercise of judicial authority being no hu- 
miliation, but the contrary. and humiliation 
being the natural result of want of success. 
6 θεός pov expresses the conviction 
that whatever humiliation God might 
have in store for him would be a part of 
His will respecting him. πρὸς ὑμᾶς] 
among you, as the generality of inter- 
preters: ‘in regard to you, in my relation 
to you, as Meyer. Either may be meant: 
but if we take the former, we must not 
join it, as Grot., al., with ἐλθόντος : it 
belongs at all events to ταπεινώσει. 
πενθήσω] Theophyl. explains, μὴ ἐλθὼν 
κολάσῃ αὐτούς, καὶ πενθήσῃ διὰ τοῦτο" 
τουτέστι, τὰ ἔσχατα λυπηθῇ : so also 
al. and Billroth, Riickert, Olsh., and De 
Wette. But punishment seems out of 
place in this verse, which expresses his fear 
lest he should be humbled for, and have 
to lament the case of the impenitent,— 
and then, as he declares ch. xiii. 2, be 
forced to proceed to discipline ; but this 
point is not yet introduced. I much 
prefer therefore taking it as Chrys., p. 635, 
-τοὺς μὴ μετανοοῦντας πενθεῖ, τοὺς τὰ 
ἀνίατα νοσοῦντας, τοὺς ἐν τῷ τραύματι 
μένοντας. ἐννόησον τοίνυν ἀποστολικὴν 
ἀρετήν, ὅταν μηδὲν ἑαυτῷ συνειδὼς πο- 
wnpdv, ὑπὲρ ἀλλοτρίων θρηνῇ κακῶν, καὶ 


ech. xiii. 2 only t. 
f = 1 Cor. xiv. 16. 


, ean) pany Oe 7 ef ἐπὶ τῇ 8 ἀκαθ " } 
THKOT@MV και μὴ μετανοήησαντων “᾿ ἔπι TI) ° AKA apola Και 


depp., here only. Acts ii. 38 reff. 
g Rom. i. 24 reff. 


om 3rd καὶ D}(and lat) goth Tert,.] 


ὑπὲρ τῶν ἑτέροις πλημμελημένων ταπει- 
νῶται. τοῦτο γὰρ μάλιστα τοῦ διδασκά- 
λου, τὸ οὕτω συναλγεῖν ταῖς τῶν μαθητῶν 
συμφοραῖς, τὸ κόπτεσθαι καὶ πενθεῖν ἐπὶ 
τοῖς τραύμασι τῶν ἀρχομένων. Similarly 
Calvin : ‘veri et germani Pastoris affectum 
nobis exprimit, qaum luctu aliorum pec- 
cata se prosequuturum dicit. Et sane ita 
agendum est, ut suam quisque Pastor Ec- 
clesiam animo inclusam gestet, ejus morbis 
perinde ac suis afficiatur, miseriis condoles- 
cat, peccato lugeat.’ So Estius, but per- 
haps too minutely fixing the meaning of 
πενθεῖν to mourning them as “ Deo mor- 
tuos:” and Calovius (Meyer): ‘non de 
pena hic Corinthiorum impeeritentium, sed 
de merore suo super impcenitentia :” and 
so likewise Meyer. πολλ. τ. προημ. 

Why πολλούς Why ποῦ αἰ 7 I bélieve 
he uses πολλοὺς τῶν προημαρτηκότων as ἃ 
mild expression for τοὺς πολλοὺς τοὺς 
προημαρτηκότας, and that we must not 
therefore press too closely the enquiry as 
to what the genus of rponu. is, of which the 
πολλοί are the species. Liicke (as above) 
cited by Meyer, explains—“ Cogitavit rem 
ita, ut primum poneret Christianorum ex 
ethnicis potissimum τῶν mponu. k. μὴ μετα- 
vonodvTwy genus universum, cujus generis 
homines essent ubique ecclesiarum, deinde 
vero ex isto hominum genere multos eos 
qui Corinthi essent, designaret definiret- 
que.” But this seems travelling quite out 
of the way. Meyer explains the genus to 
be all the sinners spoken of in ver. 20, 
the species (πολλούς) those designated by 
ἀκαθαρσ., πορν., and ἄσελγ. But this 
again is unnatural; and does not accu- 
rately fit ver. 20, in which not so much the 
mponuaptnueva as the present state at the 
Apostle’s coming, is the subject. The 
distinction between the two participles, 
προημ. and μετανοησάντων, should be ob- 
served. As Meyer well remarks, the perf. 
προημαρτηκότων denotes the permanence of 
the state from the time of the committal of 
the sin: whereas the aor. μετανοησάντων 
has the sense of the ‘ futurum exactum,’ 
--fand who at my coming shall not have 
repented.” To what does mpo- refer? to 
the time before their conversion? Hardly 
so: for the sins, of the incestuous person 
1 Cor. v., and of these also, which would 
give the Apostle such pain, must be con- 
ceived to have been committed in their 
Christian state: being in fact those against 
which we find such repeated cautions in 


1, 2. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 719 


h / ΤΣ: / ke 1 Im , 
πορνείᾳ καὶ 1 ἀσελγείᾳ ἢ ἡ ἔπραξαν. XIII. Τρίτον 51 Cor. v1 


πὶ τοῦτο ἔρχομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 


a / nw ta 
«al τριῶν 5 σταθήσεται πᾶν ῥῆμα. 


11 Cor. xii. 28 reff. 
n Matt. xviii. 16. 
p Matt. xxiv. 251, Mk. ch. vii. 3 al.t. 2 Macc. iii. 28 al. 


k attr., Acts i. 1 reff. 
28,32. Judg. xvi. 15. 
ol.c. A Ald. compl. Rom. xiv. 4. 


"éml στύματος δύο μαρτύρων ᾿ Mark vil. 22. 


Rom, xiii. 13. 
2p / . ΦΈΡΟΝ 
TT PO€lLpynKa KQt alt Wisd. 
᾿Ξ xiv. 26 only. 
τὴ (ch. xii, 14.) John xxi. 14. Num. xxii. 
1 Tim. v.19. Deru. xix.15. see Heb. χ, 28. 


Cap. XIII. 1. ins δου bef τριτον (from ch xii. 14) AN? ἃ Ὁ ο ἃ ἔο 17 vulg eth 


Damasc Pel Aug, Bede. 


[F-lat arm(Tischdf’)]} Dial,. 


for ἐρχομαι, ετοιμως exw ελθειν (from ch xii. 14) A Syr. 
ins wa bef em: &! 35 G-lat syrr [arm(Tischdf) ]. 


for και; ἡ XN 32. 46 vulg 


2. [aft προειρ. ins] yap D! ο 43, 113-marg [demid] Ambrst Pel Sedul Bede. 


1 Cor.,e.g. ch.v.11; vi. 15, 18; x. 8; xv. 33, 
34. 1 would therefore understand the προ- 
indefinitely, almost pleonastically—point- 
ing to the priority of sin implied in the idea 
of repentance.  petav. ἔπί} Meyer would 
join together mwevOqnow... ἐπί, and indi- 
cates this as the natural connexion of verb, 
object, and ground. But to say nothing of 
the harshness of πενθήσω πολλοὺς ἐπί, and 
the almost necessarily reflective form of 
μετανοησ. ἐπὶ THK... . ἣ Empatav,—I con- 
ceive the aorist ἔπραξαν to be fatal to this 
arrasgement. Thus taken, it would make 
the Apostle lament over these impenitents, 
on account of the impurity, &¢., which they 
émpatay—i.e. once practised, but which is 
now gone by. The sense would require 
πεπράχασι. Whereas if connected with 
μετανοησάντων, the aorist expresses ‘and 
shall not have (repented of the ἀκ., &e., 
which they practised),’ and would thus come 
rightly atter peravonc., implying the re- 
moval of the former state of sin. μεταν. 
is usually constructed with ἀπό, Acts viii. 
22 (Heb. vi. 1), or ἐκ, Rev. only,—ii. 21 f.; 
ix. 20 f.; xvi. 11: but as Paul only uses 
the word this once, and as the construction 
with ἐπί is perfectly legitimate and highly 
expressive (see reff. LXX), there can be no 
objection to it here. Cuap. XIII. 1— 
10.) He warns them of the severity which 

2 his arrival, if such be the case, he will 
surely exercise, and prove his apostolic 
authority. Tothis proof, however, he ex- 
horts them not to put him. 1.) This 
third time I am coming to you: i.e. 
‘this is the third visit, which I am now 
about to pay you.’ Had not chronological 
theories intervened, no one would ever have 
thought of any other rendering. The usual 
one, ‘This is the third time that I have 
been intending to come to you,’ introduces 
here, as also in ch. xii. 14, an element not 
only foreign to, but detrimental to, the 
purpose. The Apostle wishes to impress on 
them the certainty of this coming, and to 
prepare them for it by solemn self-examina- 
tion; and in order to this, he (on this 
interpretation) uses an expression which 
would only remind them of the charge of 
ἐλαφρία which had been brought against 


him, and tend to diminish the solemnity of 
the warning. Asanother chronological re- 

fuge, Beza, al., suppose his two Epistles to 

be meant by the two former ‘ profectiones 

ad illos’ In answer to all attempts τὸ 

give here any but the obvious sense, we 

may safely maintain that had any other 

been meant, we should certainly have had 

more indication of it, than -we have now. 

On τρίτον τοῦτο, Meyer compares Herod. 

v. 76, τέταρτον δὴ τοῦτο .. .. ἀπικόμενοι : 

see also reff.: and on Paul’s visit to Co- 

rinth, the Prolegomena to 1 Cor. § v. 

ἐπὶ στόμ..] i.e. “1 will not now, as before, 

be with you ἐν πάσῃ ὕπομονῇ as regards 

the offenders: but will come to a regular 
process, and establish the truth in a legal 
manner,’ see reff. This explanation, 

however, has not been the usual one: 

Chrys., Calvin, Estius, al., and recently 
Neander and Olsh. and Stanley, under- 

standing the two or three witnesses, of 
Paul’s two or three visits, as establishing, 

either (1) the truth of the facts, or (2) the 
reality of his threats: so Chrys., Hom. 

xxix. p.639 f.: ἅπαξ εἶπον κ. δεύτερον, ὅτε 

παρεγενόμην" λέγω καὶ νῦν διὰ γραμμάτων. 

καὶ μὴν ἐὰν ἀκούσητέ μου (al. ἐὰν μὲν 
ἀκούσητε), ὅπερ ἐπεθύμουν γέγονεν. ἐὰν 
δὲ παρακούσητε, ἀνάγκη λοιπὸν στῆσαι 
τὰ εἰρημένα, καὶ ἐπαγαγεῖν τὴν τιμωρίαν, 

—and Theophyl., πᾶν ῥῆμα ἀπειλητικὸν 
κατασταθήσεται. Butitis decisive against 
the whole interpretation,as Meyer remarks, 
that thus the sins committed since the 
Apostle’s last visit would remain altoge- 
ther unnoticed. Another view, connected 
with the rendering of ἔρχομαι “ am intend- 

ing to come,’ is given by Wetstein: “ Spero 
jam denique mihi successurum, ut vobis 
demonstrem, serio me desiderasse ad vos 
venire: sicut ea que trium hominum tes- 
timonio probantur, in judicio fidem fa-. 
ciunt.” Similarly Grotius and Le Clerc. 

But it is fatal to this, that according to it, 

the δύο μάρτυρες had failed to establish 
it. kal τρ., not for ἢ Tp..—two (where 
only two can be had), and three (where so 
muny can be obtained): ‘two and three 
respectively.’ μαρτύρων, the dual number 
not occurring in the N, T. 211 


790 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS. B. XIII. 

; Ὰ q XE : ς Τ \ 3 \ 86 / Bees A “ - 
«61.5.9... ἃ προλέγω, ὡς ᾿ παρὼν ὃ τὸ * δεύτερον καὶ * ἀπὼν νῦν, τοῖς ABDF 

1 Thess. i. 

only 5 t A x Ἂ ed μεν er 2\ ΣΙ. LPRa 

‘only. Is. Ἐπσγρρημαρτηκόσιν καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν, OTL ἐὰν ἔλθω cdef 

Cor. ¥. ¢ > \ / > , / rs 5 \ \ Qr a 
a's ἀξ ῤςς τὸ ἢ πάλιν οὐ " φείσομαι" > ἐπεὶ ¥ δοκιμὴν * ζητεῖτε τοῦ 617. 47 
s Jude 5. (Gen. a a ἃ > Cc ..a. > > a 
azn). ἐν ἐμοὶ λαλοῦντος χριστοῦ, ὃς εἰς ὑμᾶς οὐκ " ἀσθενεῖ, 

nly τ. as e's \ A 5 ΄ 
MR eo. beh : ἀλλὰ * δυνατεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν. * καὶ yap ἐσταυρώθη ἐξ ὃ ἀσθε- 

see Lidd. an 


Acts xx. 29. Ezek. xxxvi. 21. 


v = 2 Pet. ii. 4, 5. : 
z Rom. xiv. 4. ch, ix. 8 only t 


y = Rom. viii. 3. 


w Rom. v. 4 reff. 
a1Cor. ii. 3 reff. 


ἐσ ty 
Scott, sub εἰς, ll. 2. 
x = 1 Gor. iv. 2. 


om ws D!(and lat) syr arm. rec aft νυν ins ypapw, with D3[-gr] KLP rel syrr 
goth arm Chr, Thdrt Damase Ambrst ; λέγω copt wth-pl: om ABD! FR 17 latt eth-rom 
[ Euthal-ms | Aug, Sedul Bede. om εἰς τὸ F arm. 

8. for eres, ots F Ambr, Augaiic: εἰ Orig, Mac, [Cyr-p,] Thdrt,: #4 Orig, Dial 
[Cyr-p,] Thdrt,: aa [vulg F-lat] Orig-int, [Augsepe: quia D-lat Aug,: quia aut 
quoniam G-lat: quoniam Ambr,|: quid Ambr,: quomodo Ambrst: for ἐπεὶ doximny, 
er οικοδομην 93. λαλουντος bef ev ἐεμοι ΕἾ ποῦ F-lat]. 

4. rec aft Ist καὶ yap ins εἰ (see notes), with A D3[-gr] LX rel vulg(and F-lat) syrr 
goth [arm] Chrj(«a: yap nu. εἰ Chr-ms) Thdrt,;, Gc Orig-int; Ps-Ath-int, [Hil,]: 
om B D}{and lat | FK[PJ8' 1) 17 copt eth Eus, [Cyr-p, Euthal-ms] Damase ΤῺ] Paulin. 


have fcrewarned you, and I now fore- 
Warn you, as (I did, προείρηκα) when 
present the second time, so also (I do) 
now (προλέγω) when absent. It cer- 
tainly seems to me that this is the only 
natural way of taking the words. Grot., 
Est., Bengel, al., and De Wette, take os 
παρὼν τὸ δεύτ. to mean, ‘as if I were 
present the second time, meaning this 
next time. But is it possible that the 
Apostle should have written so confusedly, 
as to have said in the same sentence τρίτον 
τοῦτο ἔρχομαι, and ὡς παρὼν Td δεύτερον, 
both, according to these interpreters, with 
reference to the same journey? And would 
he not have even on such an hypothesis 
have said τὸ δεύτερον τοῦτοῦ But if we 
render as above, the προεΐρηκα (perf. 
because the warning yet endured in force) 
refers to his second visit (παρὼν τὸ δεύτ.), 
and the προλέγω to his present condition 
of absence (ἀπὼν viv), ὡς being as (“1 
did’ or ‘do,’ for it applies to both clauses), 
and καί the simple copula. τοῖς 
προημ.} the same persons as are thus de- 
signated above, ch. xii. 21. It is not ne- 
cessary to fix the προ- any more accurately. 

τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν] all the rest 
of you, who may not have actually sinned, 
but still require warning, on account of 
your own personal danger, connexion with 
the προημαρτηκότες, Ke. ἐὰν ἔλθω 
εἰς TO 7. | At My next coming. ‘This was 
what he προείρηκεν when he was last there, 
and now προλέγει: 8.1 ἐπεί gives 
the reason why he will not spare: they re- 
quired the exertion of discipline ; and they 
challenged him to the proof of his apos- 
tolic authority. δοκιμὴν... χριστοῦ] 
The genitive is either objective, a proof 
of Christ speaking in me, i.e. ‘that ( urist 
speaks in me,’—or subjective, a proof 
given by Christ speaking in me—‘a 


token of my authority vouchsafed by Christ 
speaking in me.’ This latter meaning is 
more suited to what follows, where Christ 
becomes the subject. Such proof would be, 
the immediate execution, by divine power, 
of some punishment denounced by Paul’s 
word, as in Acts xiii. 11. ὅς, 1. 6. 
Christ : see above. δυνατεῖ, to answer 
to ἀσθενεῖ, refers both to gifts and mira- 
cles, and to the Power of Christ which He 
would exert in punishment—eis ὑμᾶς and 
ev ὑμῖν differ—the eis being hypothetical, 
—the ἐν, matter of fact. The assertion 
tends to remind them of the danger of 
provoking Christ, who spoke by Paul. 

4.) Confirmation of the fore- 
going οὐκ ἀσθενεῖ, ἀλλὰ δυνατεῖ. The 
rec. text, καὶ γὰρ εἰ, would be quite beside 
the purpose, and would mean, ‘Yor even 
if He were crucified, ‘for even putting the 
case that He was crucified :’ καὶ εἰ cannot 
be = εἰ καί, though, as in Vulg. “ etsi,’— 
and E. V. Hartung, Partikellehre i. 139, 
shews that in καὶ εἰ, the climax belongs 
only to the hypothetical particle εἰ, not 
as in ef καί, to the fact presupposed : 
‘even if, not ‘if even,’ or ‘ although.’ 
Examples of καὶ εἰ are Plato, Sympos. 185, 
καὶ ἐὰν τοῦτο ποιήσῃς ἅπαξ ἢ δίς, καὶ 
εἰ πάνυ ἰσχυρά ἐστι, παύσεται. Eur. 
Androm. 266, καὶ γὰρ εἰ πέριξ σ᾽ ἔχει 
τηκτὸς μόλυβδος, ἐξαναστήσω σ᾽ ἐγώ. 
Sappho, καὶ γὰρ αἱ φεύγει, ταχέως διώξει. 
See more in Hartung, l. ο. For he was 
even crucified (that καὶ γάρ always means 
‘for... €0Ch” . . 5 OF Jone 
and never simply ‘for,’ see Hartung, 
i. 137 f., where he has collected many ex- 
amples, e.g.: Il. a. 63, καὶ γάρ τ᾽ ὄναρ ἐκ 
Διός éeoriv,—Herod. i. 77, καὶ yap πρὸς 
τούτους αὐτῷ ἐπεποίητο συμμαχίην from 
(as the source,—the conditional element,— 
by which His crucifixion became possible) 





3—7. 


/ 
VELAS, 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOYTS B. 


barra ζῇ ἐκ δυνάμεως θεοῦ" 


721 


Ν A e a i 
Kat Bai dee a - ot Lor. iv. 


© ἀσθενοῦμεν ἐν αὐτῷ, ἀνχλὰ 4 ζήσομεν σὺν αὐτῷ ἐκ a = 


© δυνάμεως “ θεοῦ [εἰς ὑμᾶς]. 
“Ὁ ΄ 
ἐστὲ " ἐν τῇ ἢ πίστει, 


" εἰ π μή ἃ τι 5 ἀδόκιμοί ἐστε. 


fe ye if ] 
ἑαυτοὺς ἱ δοκιμάζετε" * ἢ οὐκ | ἐπι- 
,ὔ f € 4 “ Ἶ “ \ = Πα » ς ΄“ ᾽ 3 
γινώσκετε ' ἑαυτούς, ὅτι Ἰησοῦς χριστὸς ™ ἐν ὑμῖν [ἐστιν ; ὅ 


5 { ἑαυτοὺς 8 πειράζετε εἰ el Gor, i. 18 


f 2nd pers., 
πον vii. 11 reff. 
= Rey. ii. 2. 
11; 10; ΕΣ 
xxv. 2. see 


2 ς ΄ “ 
6 ἐλπτίζω δὲ ὅτι γνώσεσθε ὅτι, Heb. xi. 17. 


1 Cor. xvi. 13, 


ε a ᾽ 5) \ 70. " 5. ΟὟ 1 Cor. iii 
ἡμεῖς οὐκ ἐσμὲν 5 ἀδόκιμοι. 7 Ῥὰ εὐχόμεθα δὲ 4 πρὸς τὸν 13 reff 
or. Vi. 2, 
95.16; 19, l constr., 1 Cor. xiv. 37 reff. m 1 Cor. xiv. 25. n Luke ix. 13. 10 or. 
vii. 5 only. o Rom. i. 28 reff. p Acts xxvii. 29 reff. q here only. Num, xi. 2. 


om 2nd yap F[-gr] 112 [Syr] arm. 


[612] ins xa bef ἡμεῖς (appy, as 


Meyer, the και yap was taken as merely = namque, and thus another και added to 


give the emphasis), withf g copt Chr, : 


[εἰ K tol:] txt ABD F[-gr(and G-lat) ] L[P]& 


rel latt syrr goth{mss vary] Cyr[-p, Euthal-ms] Thdrt Damase ΤῺ] Cc lat-ff. 


for ev, συν AF Syr copt goth. 
εν D}(and lat) 17 Chr. (mss vary). 
(so also D}-gr [simly G-lat]): 


rec ζησομεθα, with DKL rel Chr, Thdrt: txt 
ABD! 17 Damasc[, -σωμεν F Euthal-ms |.—om αλλα (no. συν avtw P. 


for συν, 


om ex δυναμεως θεου F[not F-lat]: om θεου K. 
om es ὑμας BD§ flor arm Chr, Sedul : 


in vobis joined with follg zpsis in D-lat 


ins ADIFKL[P]§ rel (bef εἰς δυναμ. θῦ g: ἡμας c d) 


[latt syrr copt goth Cyr-p, Euthal-ms Thdrt Damasc]. 


5. om eavtous δοκιμαζετε A, 


om ἢ N!: 


ει Po. xpioros bef tnoovs AFPR 


vulg copt arm Clem, [Euthal-ms] Damase Ambrst Bede: txt BDKL rel [tol] syrr 


goth Thdrt Jer,. 


om ἐστιν B D1[-gr] 17 2th Clem Chr-comm,: 


ins ΑΘ ΕΚ 


LPR rel latt goth arm [Chr-txt, Euthal-ms] Thdrt. 


6. for δε, yap F[-gr(om F- lat : 
marked for erasure by X!.) 


G-lat has both]. 


(aft ἡμεῖς € is written but 


7. rec evxouat (conformation to ελπιζω, ver 6 ?), with D3[-gr] KL rel Syr goth Chr, 


Thdrt Ambrst Cassiod, 
Damasce Aug). 


weakness, yet He lives by (source [of His 
life ]) the Power of God (which raised Him 
from the dead, Rom. vi. 4; viii. 11; Eph. 
i. 20; Phil. ii.9). For we also are weak 
in Him (i.e. in Him, in our communion 
with and imitation of Christ, we, as He 
did, lay aside our power and spare you: 
we partake of His voluntary abnegation of 
power which we might have used. The 
context requires this explanation, and 
refutes that of Chrys., p. 644, τί ἐστιν, 
acd. ἐν αὐτῷ ; Siwkducba, ἐλαυνόμεθα, τὰ 
ἔσχατα πάσχομεν,50 Theodoret, Theophyl., 
Grot., Estius, al.), but shall live (exercise 
our apostolic authority, in contrast to the 
ἀσθένεια above) with Him (as He now 
exercises His power in His glorified resur- 
rection life) from (source) the power of 
God [with respect to you (εἰς ὑμᾶς, if 
genuine, may belong either to δυνάμεως 
θεοῦ, = δυνάμ. θεοῦ τῆς εἰς ὑμᾶς, the art. 
being often omitted in such constructions, 
—or to ζήσομεν, ‘we shall live with re- 
spect to you, which agrees better with 
the parallelism, but not so well with the 
arrangement of the sentence. The sense 
seems to require the latter interpretation, 
for the δύναμις θεοῦ εἰς bp. would be rather 
the result, than the source of the apostolic 
energy indicated by ζήσομεν)].. I have 
taken ζήσομεν, as the context plainly 
requires, figuratively (see ref.): but many 
Vou. 11. 


: txt ABD'FPX m 17 latt syr copt eth arm [Euthal-ms] Isid, 


Commentators take it literally, of the 
resurrection: e.g. Grot.—‘vitam conse- 
quemur immortalem.’ 8: “ou 
want to prove Christ speaking in me ;—if 
you necessitate this proof, it will be given. 
But I will tell you whom rather to prove. 
Prove YOURSELVES; there let your atten- 
tion be concentrated, if you will apply 
tests.’ Notice the prominently emphatic 
ἑαυτούς : so Chrys., ib.: τί yap λέγω περὶ 
ἐμοῦ τοῦ διδασκάλου, φησί... . ὑμᾶς γὰρ 
αὐτοὺς ἐὰν βουλήθητε ἐξετάσαι .. 
ὄψεσθε ὅτι καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν ὃ χριστός. 
εἰ ἐστὲ ἐν τῇ π.1] ‘Whether you main- 
tain your Christian place and standing 
in Christ, which will be shewn by the 
power of Christ’s Spirit present and ener- 
gizing among you.’ ἐπιγιν. ἕαυτ., 
ὅτι} for the construction see reff. and 
Winer, edn. 6, § 66. 5. 1. a. εἰ μή 
τι, unless indeed... . see reff. 
ἀδόκιμοι, ‘not abiding the proof,’ worth- 
less,—i.e. in this case, ‘mere pretended 
Christians.’ 6.] But (however it 
may fall out with your proof of your- 
selves) I hope (or perhaps better, expect) 
that ye shall know that we are not 
worthless (unable to abide the proof 
to wich you put us. The verse is said, 
as Theodoret, ἀπειλητικῶς ;—and Chrys. 
remarks, ib., ἐπειδὴ yap ἐντεῦθεν βούλεσθε, 
φησί, διὰ τῆς εἰς ὑμᾶς κολάσεως THY 


3A 


7° 9 


\ Ἁ -» « - \ ’ , ied ΄ “ ΄ 
τ Rom. xiv. 18 θεὸν μὴ ποιῆσαι ὑμᾶς κακὸν μηδέν, οὐχ ἵνα ἡμεῖς " δόκι- ABDFK 
“- , ’ “ [ὦ - \ s \ "»“" « -“ Ἀ 
μοι φανῶμεν, ἀλλ᾽ Wa ὑμεῖς TO ὅ καλὸν ποιῆτε, ἡμεῖς δὲ 


reff. 

s — Rom. vil. 
18, 21 reff. 

t constr., Mark 
ix. 22. Luke 


2. ὡς ° ἀδόκιμοι ὦμεν. 
xil. 2 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


XIII. 


Sov yap 'δυνάμεθά τι κατὰ τῆς 


9 χαίρομεν γὰρ 


10 διὰ τοῦτο ταῦτα 


καταρτίζεσθε, “ παρα- 


- . κ \ “ Ε] / 
Ἢ ellips,1 Cor. ἀλῃθείας, ἃ ἀλλὰ ὑπὲρ THs ἀληθείας. 
Υ - εἰν πὶ: 21. o ε Am wd θ a ς - δὲ ὃ \ ¢ a Ν 
wpomvece ch. ὅταν ἡμεῖς " ἀσθενῶμεν, ὑμεῖς δὲ δυνατοὶ tre τοῦτο καὶ 
xi. rem, , Ἢ ε - , 
_indnote ΟΡ εὐχόμεθα, τὴν “ ὑμῶν * κατάρτισιν. 
(-τίζειν, τ ἀπὼν id Ὁ“ y a \ ‘ Ζ > , a ΄ 
som γράφω, wa ᾽ παρὼν μὴ “ ἀποτόμως * χρήσωμαι 
= ἧς, \ \ / a « 7, ’ > ᾽ 
nei) κατὰ τὴν ὃ ἐξουσίαν ἣν ὁ κύριος ὃ ἔδωκέν μοι εἰς " οἰκοδο- 
y ver. 2. \ \ ᾽ aan re 
z Tit. 1.13 . 
as wis μὴν καὶ οὐκ εἰς " καθαίρεσιν ᾿ ‘ 
v. 22 only. c 
aie nim, ἢ ὁ Λοιπόν, ἀδελφοί, χαίρετε, 
xi. 22.) 


a constr., Esth. i. 19. ix. 27. 
iv. 1. 2 Tim, iv. 8. 


(Acts xxvii. 3.) 
d 
for ovx wa, wa un KL [ut non D-iat]. 
ποιειτε ΚΙ δὝὲ ἃ [ Euthal-ms ]. 
8. om της (twice) F. 
9. om yap D3K 46. 108!-16 arm. 


b ch. x. 8 reff. 
= 1 Cor. i. 10 reff. see above (x). 


(aAAa, so DIFN. 


c 1 Cor. i. 16. iv. 2. 1 Thess. 


e = ch. i. 4 ἄς. reff. 


for υμ., ἡμεις N1(txt N-corr!(?)*) [m(Treg) ]. 


(homeeotel in ἃ 17 [47].)) 


ote F, rec ins δὲ bef kat, with 


D‘{-gr] KLN$ rel Syr [Chr,] Thdrt: om ABD!FPN! 17 latt copt 2th arm Damasc 


[ Euthal-ms Ambrst']. 


10. μη bef παρων DF c 47 latt: μη π. μὴ m. 


χρήσομαι DFP ς ἃ k! 47. 


ree ἐδωκε μοι bef ὁ κυριος, with KL rel syrr eth arm Chr, Thdrt Thl (Ες : txt ABDFPR 
a? m 17 latt copt goth Damasc [ Euthal-ms Ambrst ]. 


11. ins to bef λοιπ. D? f [Chr, Thl]: add ovy P. 


[Syr]. 
δοκιμὴν λαβεῖν, οὐκ ἀπορήσομεν τοῦ 
δοῦναι ὑμῖν τὴν ἀπόδειξιν). 1} 


Yet he prays God rather that they ma 

require no such demonstration of his apos- 
tolic power, even though he lose in reputa- 
tion by it. μὴ ποιῆσ. vp. Kak. pnd. | 
Not, as Grot., al., ‘that I may not have to 
inflict on you any evil’ (an extraordinary 
rendering of κακὸν ποιεῖν), but that ye 
may do no evil, corresponding to tva 
ὑμεῖς τὸ καλὸν ποιῆτε below. οὐχ 
iva ....] ‘And the purpose of this my 
prayer is not to gain any repute by your 
Christian graces, but that you may be 
highly endowed with them, and (if it so 
happen) we may be as of no repute (‘ho- 
minum scilicet judicio,’ Beza).’ That this 
is the sense, and that δόκιμοι is not in 
this verse to be applied to substantiation 
of power by punishment, is necessitated by 
the construction,—it being plainly shewn 
by the infin. after εὐχόμ., that ἵνα is not 
here meant to apply, even in part, to the 
purport of the prayer (as in Col. 1. 9; 
2 Thess. i. 11; see note on 1 Cor. xiv. 
13), but to its purpose. And that being 
settled,— we pray .... not in order that 
we may appear Sdéxipor,—it follows that 
the appearing δόκιμοι would be a result of 
the fulfilment of the prayer, viz. of your 
doing no evil, and this it could only be by 
their doing no evil bringing credit on the 
Apostle’s ministry. It is not for this end 
that we pray that you may do no evil, but 
For your own good, even if that tend to 


χαιρεσθε P. add και L 


the non-exercise, and so depreciation, of 
our apostolic power. 8.] For we 
have no power against the truth (of the 
Gospel, as Meyer; not of the facts, as 
Chrys., al., and De Wette, which might 
suit κατὰ τῆς GA., but comes in very 
lamely with ὑπὲρ τῆς aA.—‘ If you walk 
in the truth, we shall be at one with you 
and so have no opportunity of shewing our 
power’) but (only) on behalf of (in further- 
ance of the cause and spread of) the 
truth. 9.1 For (confirmation of 
ver. 8 by the still stronger assertion, 
WHEREIN his joy consists, and for what 
he prays) our joy is, when we are weak 
(have no opportunity for shewing our 
power in punishment) but ye are mighty 
(in Christian graces, and requiring no exer- 
cise of our authority): this (viz. that the 
state of the case may be as just mentioned) 
we also pray for, viz. your perfection 
(generally,—in all good things, see καταρ- 
τισμόν, Eph. iv. 12: not, as Bengel, ‘ne 
opus sit quenquam de corpore rescindere ;” 
the reference here being far more general). 
10.] διὰ τοῦτο, ‘because I wish and 
pray for your perfection” ταῦτα, ‘this 
Epistle’ ἀποτ., sharply. χρήσ., scil. 
ὑμῖν, See in reff. similar omissions of the 
dative. βούλομαι yap ἐν τοῖς γράμμασι 
κεῖσθαι τὴν ἀποτομίαν, ἀλλὰ μὴ ἐν τοῖς 
πράγμασι. Chrys., Hom. xxx. p. 649. 
κατὰ τ. ἐξ. Hv....] gives the reason why 
he did not wish to act a7toTauws,—because 
the power would seem to be exercised in 






LPR abil 
cdef ge 
0 17. 47 


8—13. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 723 


Lal “ » es ¢ 
καλεῖσθε, to αὐτὸ ® φρονεῖτε, ὃ εἰρηνεύετε, καὶ 1) ὁ θεὸς «ποι. xi. 1. 
xv. 0. ll. 
12 k 


a i , / \ j ’ ” θ᾽ ς A 5 , ait Oe 
τῆς ‘ayaTns Kat / εἰρηνης ἐσται μεῦ υμων. ἀσπά- 1.3. ἵν. 2. 


᾿Ξ / 
σασθε ἀλλήλους * ἐν ἁγίῳ * φιλήματι. 
οἱ | ἅγιοι πάντες. 


g Rom. viii. 5 
» / Oy τὰ reff. 
ἀσπάζονται ὑμᾶς h Mark ix. 50. 


Rom. xii. 18. 


13 only. 
2 Chron. xiv. 


13 Ἥ 4 A / Ἵ A A Ἁ ¢ m ᾽ / i 
χάρις τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ καὶ ἡ τ ἀγάπη ἔπ δ 
aA a a ΄, i here only. 
τοῦ τι θεοῦ καὶ ἡ " κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος μετὰ 
/ “ 
πάντων ὑμῶν. 


j Rom. xv. 33. 

k Rom. xvi. 16 
(reff.). 

1 = Acts ix. 13 
reff. Rom. i. 
8}. fh. 

m Rom. v. 5. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOTS B. 


Vili. 39. 
n=1Cor.i.9. Phil. ii. 1 al. 


om To αὐτο φρονειτε A. transp espyyns and αγαπης DL τῇ vulg(with fuld, agst am 
[demid] tol [F-lat]) goth arm Thdrt Thl Ambrst Pel: om ayamns και F[-gr(and G-lat) | 
17 veth-rom.—aft last καὶ ins της DLadfhkm. 

12. φιληματι bef ayiw AFL eg mn vulg Chr, Thl [Euthal-ms Ambrst], φιληματι 
ayarns f: txt BDKPR rel Thdrt Damase Cc. 

13. om χριστου B k? [ Cyr, J. om vuwy P. rec at end ins αμην, with 
DKPN3 rel vulg syrr copt goth arm-zoh [Chr, Damasec] Thdrt Ambrst : om ABFL[? δ} 
17 harl! [spec arm-usc] th Chr-mss [Euthal-ms]. 


SUBSCRIPTION, rec προς kop. Sevtepa ἐγραφὴ ato φιλιππων THs μακεδονιας δια τιτου 
k. λουκα, with Καὶ Syr copt Thdrt-ed Cc, and omg της waxed. 1, ἃ ἔξ ἢ 47: mp. Kop. 
8’ eypapn απο φιλιππων ΒΖ (d), and (adding στίχων pn) P: εγραφη απὸ φιλιππων δια 
τιτου kK. λουκα Ὁ Κὶ mo: πρ. κορ. β. eyp. απο. φιλ.. δια Titov βαρναβα κ. λουκα h 44. 
106-8-33: om 1: προς Kop. B’ επληρωθη" apxeTat mp. yar. D: ετελεσθὴ mp. Kop. B’ 


apxeTat mpos γαλ. F: txt AB! 17, and (adding στίχων x:8) &. 


a direction contrary to that intended by 
Him who gave it. 11—13.] Con- 
CLUSION. 11.] General exhorta- 
tions. ‘‘Severius scripserat Paulus in 
tractatione; nunc benignius, re tamen ipsa 
non dimissa.” Bengel. xaip., re- 
joice, scil. in the Lord, as Phil. iii. 1; 
iv. 4. So also 1 Thess. v. 16. 

KaTapT., τέλειοι γίνεσθε καὶ ἀναπληροῦτε 
τὰ λείποντα, Chrys., ἴθ. : amend “ your- 
selves,” Stanley. mapakal., take 
comfort; a recurrence in the end of the 
Epistle to the spirit with which it began ; 
see ch. i. 6, 7, and, for the need they had 
of comfort, ch. vii. 8—13. This is better 
than ‘comfort (or ‘exhort’) one another,’ 
which would more naturally be expressed 
by παρακαλεῖτε ἀλλήλους, or ἑαυτούς, 
see 1 Thess. iv. 18; v.11; Heb. iii. 13; 
also Heb. x. 25 and note. τὸ αὐτὸ 
dp. belongs to ἀγάπη, εἰρηνεύετε to εἰ- 
ρήνη. καί, ‘and then.’ 12.] 
Concluding greetings. ἐν ay. oud. | 
See on Rom. xvi. 16. ot ay. πάντες] 
viz. in the place whence the Epistle was 
written. 13.] Concluding benedic- 
_ tion; remarkable for the distinct recog- 
. hition of the Three Persons in the Holy 
Trinity, and thence adopted by the Chris- 
tian Church in all ages as the final 
blessing in her Services. The grace of 


END OF 


our Lord Jesus Christ is put first; “nam 
per gratiam Christi venitur ad Patris amo- 
rem.”  Bengel. κοινων. τ. Gy. 
av, | communion,—fellowship, gen. obj.— 
not ‘communicatio activa, gen. subj.— 
τουτέστι THY μετοχὴν αὐτοῦ K. THY μετά- 
ληψιν, καθ᾽ ἣν ἁγιαζόμεθα, τῇ ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς 
ἐπιφοιτήσει τοῦ παρακλήτου κοινωνοὶ αὐτοῦ 
γενόμενοι, καὶ πνεῦμα καὶ αὐτοί, οὐκ οὐσίᾳ, 
ἀλλὰ μεθέξει, ὄντες, Theophyl., and simi- 
larly eum. Chrys. adds, p. 652, οὕτω τὰ 
τῆ" τριάδος ἀδιαίρετα' καὶ ov τοῦ πνεύματός 
ἐστιν ἡ κοινωνία, εὑρέθη τοῦ υἱοῦ" καὶ οὗ 
τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐστιν ἣ χάρις, καὶ τοῦ πατρὸς κ. 
τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος. μετὰ πάντων 
ὑμῶν] “And this blessing he invokes, 
not on a few individuals, or on any one 
section of the Corinthian Church, but ex- 
pressly on every portion and every indi- 
vidual of those with whom, throughout 
these two Epistles, he had so earnestly and 
so variously argued and contended. Asin 
the first, so in the second Epistle, but still 
more emphatically, as being here his very 
last words, his prayer was, that this happi- 
ness might be ‘ with them all’ (μετὰ πάν- 
των ὑμῶν). Stanley. Compare, for the 
same emphatic πᾶς, Rom. i. 5, 8; iv. 16; 
[xvi. 24,] ἄς. : and for πᾶς following its 
substantive and unemphatic, ib. viii. 32, 
32; 1 Cor. vii. 17; x. 1, &c. 


VOL. It. 































4 γώ is . 

i 

7 a 

Ἣν» 

ayeay ἢ Ἶ ky Ἢ ῳ n τι ΓΝ ΕΟ, ΟΥ̓ 
ew (oe uel 
aD 
ε ἂν ἊΝ 

ol 
‘ Ε 4 . : ἵ j “ὠς 

e ii i δ᾿ ‘ « - t ι ἀξη 1 

ΔΎ ΝΜ J : in 5 
᾿ PRINTED BY Pet 
srorniswooDs AND CO., NEW-STREET bens ων 

dale oy Pelt ser ΤᾺ) steal Σ᾽ ΟΘΝΌΟΣ y: "εν abe 

- teeta’. fit 4 ts “2t) te 
avd Py Owe! OA « Σ οἷ : eo r 
ee ee “, ΐ ' ' » th 
‘ ‘ ‘ 
«Ὁ: rei se -¥% “a> » ; : ί ih 
δι. ; το ᾿ τὰ 

= eee <= ti. ; wae Ay am 
th ee, buy at ; ys Davia 


a 27, a wel. Ὁ Ai ; ‘ “νι. ADMeQw 
De ES SS ee ees 4. οὐ 34 fue 9S oie 
it oe, Stk 9x1 hyn a “rie a5 FA; sat Phi j in. 
νυν vee. Sha BRIE ᾧ τ... eee 1. hha aie 
Se a ee τὰν - i Pee 
Δ tbe WA, caf γνῶ << wad arid 

: 00 oe Gy ori il ἀν. de é 

a Pid Botan!) paddy ied) ad ΤΣ 

7 ἊΝ iv: ἀρι γεν», ἄγονα, neg 

πολ ame sie carb Yo Soh 

ἦρι μὰ Hind ek patsy k tele ὧὐ 
Asters Giotubnitt 
why ἃ μὰ εὐενΐ 











" ΠΝ 
Cae MR ak <9 ΡΥ ΩΝ 
a ote sa tag phic mt 
. - Ay . 


ihe ',t 





7 "δέ ͵ i 
> dA Fats 
7. 






Η͂ 


, ‘ 
ne 


heen. 


{ 


a 


* 
Vs 
¥ 


~) Aas 
is 
= 


Aisi ἣν 





Date Due 








il 


i 





